1. Religious Worship as Oxytocin-Mediated Signals of Cooperative Commitment
Myvy Ngo
Jeff Schloss & Hillary Lenfesty, Faculty Advisors
Department of Biology, Westmont College, Santa Barbara, CA
Introduction
Methods
Methods (cont’d)
Results
Conclusion
Acknowledgements
Longstanding sociological and emerging biological
theories of religious belief and ritual understand
them to be adaptations for human cooperation.
This study investigated the theory that religious
worship that may be attended by high degrees of
autonomic arousal promote cooperative
generosity and also function as signals of
commitment that generate trust.
In all games, participants in charismatic worship
gave higher initial offers, accepted lower offers,
and gave more in return (Figs. 1-3; 5). Amount of
offers across all subjects was positively correlated
with oxytocin change before and after group
activity (Fig. 4), however, levels of oxytocin change
did not significantly differ by experimental
conditions. Neither oxytocin nor the presence of
ecstatic/hard-to-fake displays (typical of
charismatic groups) were associated with in-
group/out-group differences in pro-social
behavior.These findings suggest that more
intensively experiential modes of religious
worship serve to overcome commitment barriers
to cooperation, but that pro-social behaviors
following ecstatic or hard-to-fake displays are not
uniquely mediated by oxytocin.Analysis of survey
data will further illuminate the emotional
cognitive aspects of how religious worship
contributes to pro-sociality within and across
social groups.
We would like to thank our participants, student research assistants,
Karina Guerra and Lucy Nava CPTs from SB Cottage Hospital, Dr.
Gregg Afman fromWestmont’s Kinesiology Department, and the
Center for Neuroeconomics Studies at Claremont University.
This project was graciously funded by the JohnTempleton Foundation
and the Issachar Foundation.
Figure 1. Mean initial offers in
U.S. dollars by Decision Maker 1
(DM1) to “in-group” and “out-
group” members by condition in
the Dictator Game. Error bars
represent standard errors.
Dictator Game: Offers
G
am
eFolk
Singing
EvangelicalW
orship
PentecostalW
orship
2
4
6
8
Amount($USD)
In-Group Offer
Out-Group Offer
Red or Blue
Sticker
Blood Draw #1
& “Before”
Surveys
Religious or
Nonreligious
Group
Exercise
Blood Draw #2
& “After”
Surveys
In/Out Group
Trust,
Generosity &
Altruism Tasks
Subjects were assigned ID numbers and color-
coded stickers upon arriving at the experiment
site.The two subject groups were then put into
separate rooms where they took surveys that
included but were not limited to: Inclusion of the
Self in Other1, Positive and Negative Affectivity
Survey “PANAS”2, Daily Spiritual Experiences
Survey3, and Autism Quotient4. Each subject had
approximately 12-24 mL of blood drawn before
participating in one of the four following
group activities: Charismatic or Evangelical worship,
folk singing, or a board game (control). Following
approximately 15 minutes of the selected activity,
the subjects completed more surveys and had the
same amount of blood drawn.Then, the subjects
went to a computer lab to make a series of
decisions regarding distribution of real money
(economic transfer experiments) to either members
of their own group (“in-group”) or members of the
other group (“out-group”) which aimed to measure
trusting, generous, and altruistic (generally pro-social
– behavior). These experiments were conducted via
Z-TREE (ZurichToolbox for Readymade Economic
Experiments) open-source software in the form of
theTrust, Dictator, and Ultimatum “games.”
During this time, the blood samples were kept cold
using crushed ice and then were centrifuged in a
Eppendorf 5702R for 12 minutes at 1.6 rpm and
4°C.After the cycle, the plasma layer of the two
blood sample tubes per subject was pipetted into
three 2 mL microtubes and stored at -80°C until
sent to the lab for assay of levels of free oxytocin.
Figure 2. Mean initial offers by
Decision Maker 1 (DM1) in U.S.
dollars to “in-group” and “out-
group” members by condition in
the Trust Game. Error bars
represent standard errors.
Trust Game: Initial Offers
G
am
eFolk
Singing
EvangelicalW
orship
PentecostalW
orship
6
7
8
9
10
Amount($USD)
In-Group Offer
Out-Group Offer
Results (cont’d)
Trust Game: % of Total Returned
(Total = Amt. Received + Initial $10)
G
am
e
Folk
Singing
EvangelicalW
orship
PentecostalW
orship
20
30
40
50
60
70
PercentReturned
In-Group
Out-Group
Figure 3. Percent of total
holding returned by Decision
Maker 2 (DM2) to Decision
Maker 1 (DM1) by condition
in the Trust Game. Error bars
represent standard errors.
In Group Return in Trust Game
vs. OT Change
-1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500
0
50
100
150
200
Normalized OT Change
(% Assay Avg)
In-GroupReturninTrustGame
(%ofOfferReceived)
Y = 0.02154*X + 50.44
R2
= 0.040
p = .0064
Figure 4. Regression of
Normalized OT Change to
In-Group Return as (DM2) in
the Trust Game.
Participants
Approximately 250 college-age subjects
participated in non-religious group activities,
evangelical worship, and charismatic worship.
0 5 10
0
20
40
60
Amount Received ($USD)
PercentTotalReturned
Group Game
Y = 2.657*X + 11.06
R2= 0.245
p < 0.0001
0 5 10
0
20
40
60
Amount Received ($USD)
PercentTotalReturned
Folk Singing
Y = 2.052*X + 16.07
R2= 0.1238
p = 0.0039
0 5 10
0
20
40
60
Amount Received ($USD)
PercentTotalReturned
Worship (Evangelical)
Y = 3.056*X + 7.050
R2= 0.162
p = 0.0005
0 5 10
0
50
100
Amount Received ($USD)
PercentTotalReturned
Worship (Pentecostal)
Y = 0.8010*X + 44.72
R2= 0.007
p = 0.677
Figure 5. Regressions of Amount Received (as DM1) to
Percent of Total holdings returned (as DM2) in the Trust
Game.
References
1.Aron,A.,Aron E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the
self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.
2.Watson, D., Clark, L.A., &Tellegen,A. (1988). Development and
validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS
scales. Journal of personality and social psychology, 54(6), 1063.
3. Underwood, L. G. &Teresi, J. (2002).The Daily Spiritual Experience
Scale: Development, theoretical description, reliability, exploratory
factor analysis, and preliminary construct validity using health related
data.Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 24, 22-33.
4. Baron-Cohen, S.,Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R., Martin, J., & Clubley, E..
(2001). “The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): evidence from
Asperger Syndrome/high-functioning autism, males and females,
scientists and mathematicians.” Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 31, 5-17.