Oxytocin and shared intentionality are positively associated with cooperation in children.

While humans cooperate with unrelated individuals to an extent that far outstrips any other species, we also display extreme variation in decisions about whether to cooperate or not. A diversity of cognitive, affective, social, and physiological mechanisms interact to shape these decisions. For example, group membership, shared intentionality talk (i.e. talk about shared goals), and natural initial oxytocin levels are linked to cooperation in adults in an optimal foraging paradigm that is loosely modelled on the iterated prisoner's dilemma. In this 'egg hunt', shared intentionality talk was key to achieving cooperation, and it drove cooperation more between participants who shared the same group membership (and who also had higher initial oxytocin levels). Such complex interactions raise the question of the age at which humans develop the necessary mechanisms to cooperate effectively in the egg hunt game. Here, we tested children in secondary school aged between 10 and 14 years. We found that, as for adults, shared intentionality talk was crucial for successful cooperation. Furthermore, initial oxytocin levels correlated with cooperation through shared intentionality talk. In contrast, group membership did not affect behaviour. Finally, pre- and post-experiment oxytocin levels showed various interactions with group membership and sex. Thus, children's performance was relatively similar to adults while showing some differences with respect to underlying mechanisms. Our study is a rare contribution to further our understanding of the role of oxytocin in early adolescent social behaviour.

Endogenous oxytocin predicts helping and conversation as a function of group membership.

Humans cooperate with unrelated individuals to an extent that far outstrips any other species. We also display extreme variation in decisions about whether to cooperate or not, and the mechanisms driving this variation remain an open question across the behavioural sciences. One candidate mechanism underlying this variation in cooperation is the evolutionary ancient neurohormone oxytocin (OT). As current research focuses on artificial administration of OT in asocial tasks, little is known about how the hormone in its naturally occurring state actually impacts behaviour in social interactions. Using a new optimal foraging paradigm, the 'egg hunt', we assessed the association of endogenous OT with helping behaviour and conversation. We manipulated players' group membership relative to each other prior to an egg hunt, during which they had repeated opportunities to spontaneously help each other. Results show that endogenous baseline OT predicted helping and conversation type, but crucially as a function of group membership. Higher baseline OT predicted increased helping but only between in-group players, as well as decreased discussion about individuals' goals between in-group players but conversely more of such discussion between out-group players. Subsequently, behaviour but not conversation during the hunt predicted change in OT, in that out-group members who did not help showed a decrease in OT from baseline levels. In sum, endogenous OT predicts helping behaviour and conversation, importantly as a function of group membership, and this effect occurs in parallel to uniquely human cognitive processes.

The language of cooperation: shared intentionality drives variation in helping as a function of group membership.

While we know that the degree to which humans are able to cooperate is unrivalled by other species, the variation humans actually display in their cooperative behaviour has yet to be fully explained. This may be because research based on experimental game-theoretical studies neglects fundamental aspects of human sociality and psychology, namely social interaction and language. Using a new optimal foraging game loosely modelled on the prisoner's dilemma, the egg hunt, we categorized players as either in-group or out-group to each other and studied their spontaneous language usage while they made interactive, potentially cooperative decisions. Both shared group membership and the possibility to talk led to increased cooperation and overall success in the hunt. Notably, analysis of players' conversations showed that in-group members engaged more in shared intentionality, the human ability to both mentally represent and then adopt another's goal, whereas out-group members discussed individual goals more. Females also helped more and displayed more shared intentionality in discussions than males. Crucially, we show that shared intentionality was the mechanism driving the increase in helping between in-group players over out-group players at a cost to themselves. By studying spontaneous language during social interactions and isolating shared intentionality as the mechanism underlying successful cooperation, the current results point to a probable psychological source of the variation in cooperation humans display.

Cross-cultural regularities in the cognitive architecture of pride.

Pride occurs in every known culture, appears early in development, is reliably triggered by achievements and formidability, and causes a characteristic display that is recognized everywhere. Here, we evaluate the theory that pride evolved to guide decisions relevant to pursuing actions that enhance valuation and respect for a person in the minds of others. By hypothesis, pride is a neurocomputational program tailored by selection to orchestrate cognition and behavior in the service of: (i) motivating the cost-effective pursuit of courses of action that would increase others' valuations and respect of the individual, (ii) motivating the advertisement of acts or characteristics whose recognition by others would lead them to enhance their evaluations of the individual, and (iii) mobilizing the individual to take advantage of the resulting enhanced social landscape. To modulate how much to invest in actions that might lead to enhanced evaluations by others, the pride system must forecast the magnitude of the evaluations the action would evoke in the audience and calibrate its activation proportionally. We tested this prediction in 16 countries across 4 continents (n = 2,085), for 25 acts and traits. As predicted, the pride intensity for a given act or trait closely tracks the valuations of audiences, local (mean r = +0.82) and foreign (mean r = +0.75). This relationship is specific to pride and does not generalize to other positive emotions that coactivate with pride but lack its audience-recalibrating function.

Recommendations and best practices for reference standards and reagents used in bioanalytical method validation.

The continued globalization of pharmaceutics has increased the demand for companies to know and understand the regulations that exist across the globe. One hurdle facing pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies developing new drug candidates is interpreting the current regulatory guidance documents and industry publications associated with bioanalytical method validation (BMV) from each of the different agencies throughout the world. The objective of this commentary is to provide our opinions on the best practices for reference standards and key reagents, such as metabolites and internal standards used in the support of regulated bioanalysis based on a review of current regulatory guidance documents and industry white papers for BMV.

Group membership affects spontaneous mental representation: failure to represent the out-group in a joint action task.

Predicting others' actions is crucial to successful social interaction. Previous research on joint action, based on a reaction-time paradigm called the Joint Simon Task, suggests that successful joint action stems from the simultaneous representation of the self with the other. Performance on this task provides a read-out of the degree of intrusion from a partner that participants experience from acting jointly compared to acting alone, which in turn is a measure of the degree to which participants mentally represent their co-actors during the task. To investigate the role of perceived group membership in this type of joint action and its influence on the representation of others, we first subjected participants to a minimal group paradigm while manipulating differences in social competition. We then asked participants to do the Joint Simon Task in pairs with an in-group or out-group member. Only participants who acted with an "in-group" partner on the joint task showed altered reaction times compared to when acting alone, presumably a change caused by the simultaneous and automatic representation of their in-group partner. In contrast, participants who acted with an out-group partner were unaffected in their reactions when doing the joint task, showing no evidence of representation of their out-group partner. This effect was present in both the high-competition and low-competition conditions, indicating that the differential effects of group membership on representation during joint action were driven by perceived group membership and independent of the effects of social competition. We concluded that participants failed to represent out-group members as socially relevant agents not based on any personality or situational characteristics, but in reaction only to their status as "other". In this way group membership appears to affect cognition on a very immediate and subconscious level.