↓ Skip to main content

Intranasal oxytocin does not reduce age-related difficulties in social cognition

Overview of attention for article published in Hormones & Behavior, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Intranasal oxytocin does not reduce age-related difficulties in social cognition
Published in
Hormones & Behavior, February 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2018.01.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah A. Grainger, Julie D. Henry, Henriette R. Steinvik, Eric J. Vanman, Peter G. Rendell, Izelle Labuschagne

Abstract

Oxytocin is a neuropeptide that plays a key role in social processing and there are several studies suggesting that intranasally administered oxytocin may enhance social cognitive abilities and visual attention in healthy and clinical groups. However, there are very few studies to date that have investigated the potential benefits of intranasal oxytocin (iOT) on older adults' social cognitive abilities. This is a surprising omission, because relative to their younger counterparts, older adults also exhibit a range of social cognitive difficulties and also show differences in the way they visually attend to social information. Therefore, we tested the effect of iOT (24 IU) versus a placebo spray on 59 older and 61 younger adults' social cognitive abilities and visual attention using a double-blind placebo-controlled within-groups design. While iOT provided no overall age-related benefit on social cognitive abilities, the key finding to emerge was that iOT improved ToM ability in both age-groups when the task had minimal contextual information, but not when the task had enriched contextual information. Interestingly, iOT had gender specific effects during a ToM task with minimal context. For males in both age-groups, iOT reduced gazing to the social aspects of the scenes (i.e., faces & bodies), and for females, iOT eliminated age differences in gaze patterns that were observed in the placebo condition. These effects on eye-gaze were not observed in a very similar ToM task that included more enriched contextual information. Overall, these findings highlight the interactive nature of iOT with task related factors (e.g., context), and are discussed in relation to the social salience hypothesis of oxytocin.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 15 19%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 23 28%
Neuroscience 10 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 February 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Hormones & Behavior
#1,839
of 2,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#323,281
of 446,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hormones & Behavior
#20
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,295 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,427 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.