When it comes
to cooperation, the brains of men and women work differently, suggest
researchers.
When it
comes to social behavior, there are clear differences between men and women,
and a new study suggests cooperation with others is no exception.
Published
in the journal Scientific Reports, the study reveals that men and
women show significant differences in brain activity when working with others
in order to complete a task.
The
research team - co-led by Joseph Baker, Ph.D., a postdoctoral fellow at
Stanford University School of Medicine - says the findings may shed light on
the evolutionary differences in cooperation between men and women.
Additionally, they could help inform new strategies to
enhance cooperation, which could prove useful for people with disorders that
affect social behavior, such as autism.
This latest study is not the first to identify sex
differences in cooperation -
defined as "a situation in which people work together to do
something."
For
example, previous research has shown that a pair of men tend to cooperate
better than a pair of women. In mixed-sex pairs, however, women tend to
cooperate better than men.
While
a number of theories have been put forward to explain these differences, Baker
and colleagues note that there is limited data on the neurological processes at
play.
The cooperation
task
To
further investigate, the team enrolled 222 participants - of whom 110 were
female - and assigned each of them a partner.
Each
pair was made up of either two males, two females, or one male and one female.
The
pairs were required to engage in a cooperation task, in which each partner sat
in front of a computer opposite from one another. Each partner could see the
other, but they were instructed not to talk.
Each
individual was instructed to press a button when a circle on their computer
screen changed color; their goal was to try and press the button at the same
time as their partner.
The
pairs were given 40 tries to get the timing of their button presses as close to
each other as possible, and after each try, they were told which partner had
pressed the button first.
During
the task, the researchers recorded the brain activity of each participant
simultaneously using hyperscanning and functional near-infrared spectroscopy
(fNIRS).
"We
developed this test because it was simple, and you could easily record
responses," notes senior study author Dr. Allan Reiss, professor of
psychiatry and behavioral sciences and psychology at Stanford.
No 'interbrain
coherence' when opposite-sex pairs cooperate
Overall,
the team found that, compared with female-female pairs, male-male pairs were
better at timing their button pushes more closely.
From
the brain imaging results, however, the researchers noticed that both partners
in each of the same-sex pairs had highly synchronized brain activity during the
task - representing greater "interbrain coherence."
"Within
same-sex pairs, increased coherence was correlated with better performance on
the cooperation task," says Baker. "However, the location of
coherence differed between male-male and female-female pairs."
Interestingly,
the cooperation performance of male-female pairs was just as good as that of
male-male pairs, though opposite-sex pairs showed no evidence of interbrain coherence.
"It's not that either males or
females are better at cooperating or can't cooperate with each other. Rather,
there's just a difference in how they're cooperating."
Dr.
Allan Reiss
Baker
cautions that their study is "pretty exploratory," noting that it
does not look at all forms of cooperation.
What
is more, the researchers did not assess activity in all regions of
participants' brains, and they note that it is possible interbrain coherence in
opposite-sex pairs arose in these unmeasured areas.
Still,
they believe their findings may help researchers learn more about how
cooperation has evolved differently between men and women, and they may even
lead to new ways to boost cooperation, which could have clinical implications.
"There
are people with disorders like autism who have problems with social
cognition," says Baker. "We're absolutely hoping to learn enough
information so that we might be able to design more effective therapies for
them."
0 comments:
Post a Comment