OXYTOCIN: The Chemical Bonds of Love by Andrea E. Janda

1
Running Head: OXYTOCIN: THE CHEMICAL BONDS OF LOVE
Oxytocin
The Chemical Bonds of Love

Andrea E. Janda

Portland State University

SCI‐365U‐001
SCIENCE OF WOMENS BODIES
Janice Montgomery
Spring 2010

June 3, 2010
2
OXYTOCIN: THE CHEMICAL BONDS OF LOVE

Oxytocin Overview
Oxytocin (Oxt), also known as alpha-hypophamine (α–hypophamine), is a nonapeptide
hormone, (composed of nine amino acids) with a chemical formula represented as
C43H66N12O12S2. It is created and secreted by the hypothalamus and travels down the nerve
fibers to the posterior lobe of the pituitary gland where it is released into the circulatory system
(Uvnäs Moberg, 2003). Oxytocin acts both as a hormone through the bloodstream from nerve
endings to target organs and as a neurotransmitter, a signaling substance in the nervous system
reaching cell receptors and producing specific, localized effects (Du Vigneaud et al, 1953; Uvnäs
Moberg, 2003, Angier, 2009). Traveling along the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA or
HTPA axis), oxytocin’s effects are varied including its ability to modulate reactions to stress and
anxiety, to regulate mood, emotion, digestion, and immune function, and to facilitate sexual
response, orgasm, pair-bonding, trust, and maternal behaviors as well as social interaction and
function (Bales, Pfeifer, & Carter, 2004; Carter, Lederhendler, & Kirkpatrick, 1999; Fisher,
2004; Kuchinas, 2009; Leonie, 2008; Uvnäs Moberg, 2003; Pedersen, 2004; Young & Zuoxin,
2004).
Oxytocin was first discovered by Sir Henry Dale, an English scientist in 1909 who noted its
presence within the pituitary gland. Dale described its uterine-contracting properties and because it
sped up the birthing process, he named it oxytocin from the Greek words for “quick” and “birth”
(Uvnäs Moberg, 2003, p. 3) Oxytocin was also one of the very first hormones to have its
chemical construction mapped within the mid-twentieth century by Vincent du Vigneaud, who
subsequently received the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1955 (Du Vigneaud et al, 1953). Since
then, oxytocin has grown up—once thought to be solely associated with the feminine
reproductive domain of childbirth (uterine contractions) and breast feeding (milk letdown),

3

oxytocin’s functional roles are being explored and redefined in the human arenas of love, sex,
trust, and socialization.
“Fight or Flight” vs. “Calm and Connection”
Descriptively, oxytocin’s effect on the body runs the gamut between physiological states
and psychological processes. Indeed, the mind body-connection and the age-old “fight or flight”
response are related to the oxytocin response. Uvnäs Moberg proposes the “calm and
connection” system which she describes as the “other end of the seesaw” or the “opposite pole”
to the fight or flight reaction, associating it with trust and curiosity instead of fear, and with
friendliness instead of anger (Uvnäs Moberg, 2003, introduction, p. x). Juxtaposing the calm and
connection system with the stress system features oxytocin as the mirror opposite to adrenaline, a
stress hormone which acts in the short term and the antidote to cortisol, a stress hormone that has
long term effects (Grippo et al., 2007). After the rush of the stress response, oxytocin is partly
responsible for acting as a thermostat, dialing the body’s temperature, balancing the fluids in the
body, stimulating cell division and wound healing and regulating the levels of stress hormones,
namely cortisol. (Uvnäs Moberg, 2003; Kuchinas, 2009).
Oxytocin is closely related to another peptide hormone, the blood-pressure-raising
vasopressin (Kuchinas, 2009). In fact vasopressin differs only slightly from oxytocin by two
mere amino acids. Despite being so similar, in some ways, there’s still a bit of sexualized
hormonal action, reaction and association that oxytocin doesn’t escape in terms of evolutionary
adaptations. In women, Kuchinas (2009) discusses how oxytocin is “crucial for maternal
behavior” as well as forming the bonds between lovers and parent to child (p.17). Oxytocin
functions as an anxiolytic and allows for relaxation, growth and healing. In men, however,
Kuchinas (2009) flags the structurally similar vasopressin as being “central to male bonding,”
inspiring the paternal instinct, and acting as a motivator in men’s desire to defend the family (p.

4

17). Other than kidney, and cardiovascular function, vasopressin induces male aggression,
especially towards other males, and tends to increase anxiety and vigilance (Pitkow et al., 2001).
During times of stress and especially isolation, rather than showing a decrease in levels, the body
instead produces more oxytocin as a signal to seek physical and emotional connections and lower
stress (Kuchinas, 2009; Pitkow et al., 2001; Grippo et al., 2007).
Love, Attachment, & Intimacy
The research of Helen Fisher, Kerstin Uvnäs Moberg, Karen Bale, Sue Carter and Tom
Insel all provide evidence that oxytocin and vasopressin, produced in both the hypothalamus and
the gonads are responsible for producing many of the behaviors associated with love and
attachment. Young & Zuoxin (2004) corroborate this research, noting the interaction of the
oxytocin, vasopressin and dopamine systems within the brain’s reward circuitry. Again, here is
where evolutionary biology comes into play. Fisher (2004) describes how ancestral men and
women are driven to “prefer, choose, and pursue specific mating partners” while remaining
sexually faithful long enough to conceive a child, but after birth, the chemicals of attachment
dampen romantic ecstasy and replace it with a “deep sense of union with a mate” that is
“intricate, interesting and emotionally rewarding” (p. 92-93).
Oxytocin, described by Angier (2009) and others as the “cuddle hormone” invites us to
do just that. As oxytocin is involved in the contractions of the uterus, the flood of oxytocin
released during orgasm may also cause the rhythmic vaginal contractions during climax and the
similar contractions that eject sperm. Those vaginal contractions serve a fascinating, secondary
function as well—to draw sperm toward the ovary with the best egg (Kunz, Beil, Huppert &
Leyendecker, 2007). Oxytocin works in tandem with estrogen by prodding the fallopian tube on
the side where the dominant follicle is to contract more, propelling the sperm towards the egg
that’s ready to be fertilized. One could conclude that the better the intimate bond, the more

5

intense the sex, the more oxytocin is released, and the greater chance that conception will occur
(Kunz, et al., 2007).
Sexual pleasure exists to assure the human race of procreating and oxytocin plays an
important part in sexual function by travelling to the tissues that control erectile function and
engorgement of the clitoris (Kuchinas, 2009). During orgasm, oxytocin floods the brain and
spinal cord, stimulates the hippocampus, engages short-term and social memory and deactivates
the amygdala, rendering us calm and trusting (Kuchinas, 2009). In effect, we remember the
pleasure and trust associated with the object of our affections and crave repeat performances of
the act which brings us closer to our loved one.
There are so many various types of love: lust, romantic love, attachment . . . all in varying
degrees of intensity during different life phases and with different people. Most interesting and
important is our natural response to physical intimacy. The concept of neural plasticity, the
brain’s ability to develop, adapt and respond through ever-growing pathways, even after negative
impacts or damage is one of our grandest features. Our development is known to be both nature
and nurture; we are born with the basics and genetics but it is the extent to which our external
experiences shape us in ways that “activate, deactivate or modify” our genetic activity (Kuchinas
2009, p.12).
These outside experiences are called epigenetic and the development and sensitivity of
oxytocin receptors appear to be epigenetically influenced—in essence, we must learn to love
(Kuchinas 2009; Fisher, 2004). The patterns of intimacy and reward are established early in
infancy and persist into adulthood, influencing interpersonal relationships beyond the immediate
family (Kuchinas 2009). Oxytocin and vasopressin act on the developing nervous system with
life-long behavioral consequences. Trauma, abuse and neglect alter the neural scripts we play out
in the first years of life with our mothers and caretakers. Consequently, negative experiences can

6

affect our brain’s ability to use oxytocin, hindering our self-image, our attachment styles and
lock us down into hypervigilance—a perpetual fear state (Kuchinas 2009). But we can learn to
love and trust again with more experiences and positive social support.
Social Interaction and Trust
Supportive social interactions may be protective against stressors and certain
mental and physical illness, while social isolation may be a powerful stressor.
Prairie voles are socially monogamous rodents that model some of the behavioral
and physiological traits displayed by humans, including sensitivity to social
isolation. (Grippo et al., 2007)
Bates et al (2004) and Grippo et al (2007) studied prairie voles, considered highly social
mammals and a good translational animal model for humans. Kuchinas (2009) refers to this type
of social branch of neuroscience as social endocrinology and delineates significant differences
and changes in the brain’s chemical responses when we are with people or isolated from them
(p.53). As it turns out, Grippo et al. (2007) noted that disorders such as depression can be
induced or exacerbated by this isolation while Carter (2007) demonstrated that oxytocin acts an
anti-cortisol—a counter measure against stress.
Angier (2009) cites several recent studies that suggest oxytocin’s function as a social
lubricant, promoting trust between people. One experiment in particular found that oxytocin
inhaled through an intranasal spray allowed adults playing a ‘trust’ game “to retain their trust in a
stranger who was looking after their money, even though this trust was violated on many
occasions” (Leonie, 2008, p. 500). The subjects showed decreased activity in the amygdala and
the caudate nucleus, brain areas that are specifically involved in regulating fear, decision making,
and risk-taking (Leonie, 2008).

7

Future implications

Social phobia and autism spectrum disorders exhibit over activity in the amygdala but
oxytocin inhalation shows promising results in mitigating those factors by lowering amygdala
activity, making people feel more relaxed and promoting social approach, comprehension and
interaction (Gever, 2010; BBC News, 2008; Leonie, 2008; Jacob et al., 2007). Andari (2010)
summarizes that with oxytocin, “patients respond more strongly to others and exhibit more
appropriate social behavior and affect, suggesting a therapeutic potential of oxytocin through its
action on a core dimension of autism.” In people with social behavior deficits, observing and
understanding how people naturally form trust will give us a better understanding of mental
disorders which feature these symptoms and how to treat them more effectively (Gever, 2010;
Leonie, 2008).
There are many barriers to use of oxytocin as a medication. It is primarily used as a
solution under the name Pitocin, to stimulate contraction during child labor or as a nasal spray, to
stimulate milk expulsion in women who experience difficulty in nursing their children.
Noticeable effects are only noted though the non-friendly method of injection, as oxytocin breaks
down quickly in the bloodstream and is unable to cross the blood-brain barrier (Kuchinas, 2009;
Uvnäs Moberg, 2003). Thus, these isolated effects would be limited to analgesic, stress relief,
anti-inflammatory, wound healing, or growth enhancement as the oxytocin molecule appears to
be linked to these areas of building and repair (Kuchinas, 2009). Larry Young (2004) maintains
that reducing love to its component parts yields an understating of human sexuality, and may
lead to drugs that enhance or diminish our love for another. While the pharmacological approach
seems a futuristically feasible way to treat anxiety-related disorders in much the same way anti-
depressants have become so prevalent, there’s no love potion #9 or a simple pill enhancement to
passion (Viagra aside); and I certainly am not of the opinion that legions of lovelorn people will

8

be eager to invest in oxytocin nasal spray whose efficacy and distribution is not currently
regulated. Uvnäs Moberg, (2003) suggests instead that we think of our health as an inner
ecology, that we must respect, nurture and replenish our resources, and to do this we must
consciously choose to relax, love and heal in order to balance our stress-oriented culture.
Laughing, spending time with friends and family, making love, taking a walk in nature, enjoying
meditation or massage, taking time for our children and connecting to our fellow human will go
a long way to enervating the calm and connection system of oxytocin already built into our
biology and bringing more love into our lives.
References
Andari, E. (2010, March 3). Promoting social behavior with oxytocin in high-functioning autism
spectrum disorders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America (0027-8424), 107 (9), 4389.
Angier, N. (2009, November 23). The Biology Behind the Milk of Human Kindness. The New
York Times.
Bales, K. L., Pfeifer, L. A. & Carter, C. S. (2004). Sex differences and developmental
effects of manipulations of oxytocin on alloparenting and anxiety in prairie voles.
Developmental Psychobiology, 44(2), 123-131. doi: 10.1002/dev.10165.
Du Vigneaud, V., Ressler, C., Swan, C. J.M., Roberts, C.W., Katsoyannis, P.G., &
Gordon, S. (1953, October). J. Am. Chem. Soc, 75(19), 4879–4880.
doi:10.1021/ja01115a553
Carter, C. S. (2007). Sex differences in oxytocin and vasopressin: Implications for autism
spectrum disorders? Behavioral Brain Research, 176 (1), 170-186.
Carter, C. S., Lederhendler, I. I., & Kirkpatrick, B. (1999). The integrative neurobiology of
affiliation. Cambridge, MA MIT Press.
Fisher, H. (2004). Why we love: The nature and chemistry of romantic love. New York,
NY: Henry Holt and Company.
Gever, J. (2010, Februry 15). Oxytocin shows promise in autism. MedPage Today.
Retrieved from: http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/Autism/18483

9

Grippo, A.J., Gerena, D., Huang, J., Kumar, N., Shah, M., Raj Ughreja, R. & Carter, C.S.
(2007). Social isolation induces behavioral and neuroendocrine disturbances relevant
to depression in female and male prairie voles. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32 (8-10),
966.
Jacob, S., Brune C.W., Carter, C.S., Leventhal, B.L., Lord, C., Cook, E.H. (2007, April).
Association of the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) in Caucasian children and
adolescents with autism. Neuroscience Letters 417 (1), 6–9.
doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2007.02.001.
Kuchinas, S. (2009). The chemistry of connection: How the oxytocin response can help you
find trust, intimacy, and love. Oakland: CA. New Harbinger Publications, Inc.
Kunz, G., Beil, D., Huppert, P., & Leyendecker. (2007). Oxytocin, a stimulator of directed
sperm transport in humans. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 14(1), 32-39.
Leonie, W. (2008). Trust in oxytocin. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(7), 500.

doi:10.1038/nrn2446.
Pedersen, C. (2004). Unleashing the 'love' hormone. Nature Medicine, 10(2), 122.
doi:10.1038/nm0204-122.
Pitkow, L. J., Sharer, C.A., Ren, X, Insel, T.R., Terwilliger, E.F. & Young, L.J .(2001).
Facilitation of affiliation and pair-bond formation by vasopressin receptor gene transfer into the
ventral forebrain of a monogamous vole. Neuroscience, 21 (18), 7392–7396
Trust drug may cure social phobia. (2008, May 21). BBC News. Health. Retrieved from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7412438.stm
Uvnäs Moberg, K. (2003). The oxytocin factor: Tapping the hormone of calm, love, and healing.
Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.
Young, L., & Zuoxin, W. (2004). The neurobiology of pair bonding. Nature Neuroscience,
7(10), 1048-1054. doi:10.1038/nn1327.

10

Oxytocin
Survey

11

62 responses: Summary

Sex
Male 21 34%
Female 41 66%
Age
14-18 1 2%
19-25 12 19%
26-32 17 27%
33-39 21 34%
40-46 8 13%
47-53 1 2%
54-60 2 3%
60-66 0 0%
67-73 0 0%
74-80 0 0%
80 or older 0 0%
Prefer not to say 0 0%

12

Relationship Status
Single 16 26%
Married 20 32%
Coupled or Partnered 18 29%
Second Marriage 3 5%
Third Marriage or beyond 0 0%
Divorced 5 8%
Widowed 0 0%
Other 0 0%

Do you own any pets?

0 18 29%
1 or 2 33 53%
3 or 4 8 13%
5 or 6 1 2%
7 or more — my house is a zoo! 2 3%

I consider myself to be an emotional person
strongly disagree 0 0%
disagree 4 6%
agree somewhat 18 29%
agree 26 42%
strongly agree 14 23%

13

I consider myself to be a touchy-feely person
disagree 10 16%
agree 15 24%
How affectionate do you consider yourself with your family?
not affectionate at all 6 10%

moderately affectionate 29 47%
quite affectionate 21 34%
very affectionate 6 10%
How affectionate do you consider yourself with your friends?


How affectionate do you consider yourself with your love interest / partner / mate / spouse?


14

I tend to feel 'smothered' by overly affectionate people


disagree 19 31%
agree 8 13%

Physical expression of love in the form of affection is important to me
(i.e. touching, stroking, handholding, hugging, kissing)
disagree 2 3%
agree 21 34%

I enjoy meeting new people

disagree 1 2%
agree 33 53%

15

I enjoy new / interesting situations

disagree 0 0%
agree 35 56%

I take comfort in familiar routine and stability

disagree 8 13%
agree 23 37%

I attend social functions
(i.e. dinner with friends, concerts, parties, meetings with groups / organizations)

rarely 7 11%
often 31 50%
sometimes 23 37%
infrequently 1 2%
never 0 0%

16

I plan social functions

rarely 19 31%
often 15 24%
sometimes 19 31%
infrequently 8 13%
never 1 2%

I smile or laugh with my family & friends

rarely 1 2%
often 56 90%
sometimes 5 8%
infrequently 0 0%
never 0 0%

I smile or laugh with my love interest / partner / mate / spouse

rarely 0 0%
often 55 89%
sometimes 5 8%
infrequently 2 3%
never 0 0%

17

I do little special things for my love interest / partner / mate / spouse
(i.e. love notes, make something, plan a surprise, take care of something they've been
putting off)

rarely 1 2%
often 36 58%
sometimes 23 37%
infrequently 2 3%
never 0 0%

My love interest / partner / mate / spouse does little special things for me

rarely 4 6%
often 23 37%
sometimes 24 39%
infrequently 10 16%
never 1 2%

I enjoy cooking for others


disagree 3 5%
agree 12 19%
I don’t cook, but I would 3 5%

18

Sex is important in a healthy relationship

disagree 1 2%
agree somewhat 5 8%
agree 25 40%

If someone visited my home unannounced on a random day, they'd find it orderly
and clean


disagree 10 16%
agree 15 24%
strongly agree 1 2%

I believe that desire is chemically based (attraction, passion, lust)

disagree 5 8%
agree 15 24%

19

I believe that love is chemically based (pair‐bonding, intimacy, sustained relationship)


disagree 14 23%
agree 7 11%
strongly agree 4 6%

In general, I would describe my life as having . . .

plenty of love 20 32%

a good amount of love 23 37%
ample love 10 16%
a small sample of love 4 6%
not enough love 4 6%
a love deficit 1 2%
LOVE? bah! who needs
0 0%
it!?

Have you ever heard of or are you familiar with the word "oxytocin?"

Yes 47 76%
No 15 24%

20

If you could take a pill to encourage love and the emotional feelings associated with
love . . . (emotional enhancement, not sexual dysfunction)

I would definitely
7 11%
take it
I would consider
21 34%
taking it
I would not take it 21 34%
I would mistrust such
13 21%
a claim

21

Discussion:
I created this survey as a way to assess the following:
• measures of intimate/affectionate contact

• satisfaction with intimacy/affection levels
• outward displays and measures of happiness
• outward displays of affection and care-taking
• sociability and interest in new people / new experiences
• beliefs on chemical basis for desire and love
• familiarity with term oxytocin
• interest in medication/intervention to increase emotion
I began the questions with basic metrics on sex, age, marital status to establish my
population. Total sample n=62 with 41 female and 21 male respondents for 28 questions.
Respondents were invited to participate via email (sent to our class roster) and two social
networking sites online (Facebook and Twitter).
I then ran three, brief statistical analyses to see if there were any significant trends with
the following three questions:
1) Do respondents reply consistently regarding their affections levels between family and their
partners?
2) Does sociability level affect respondent’s opinions on whether they would take a pill to
encourage love and the emotional feelings associated with love? i.e.: would socially anxious
people be interested in self-correcting or drawing more love and emotion into their lives?
3) Is there a relationship between the amount of love respondents perceive as having in their
lives and their relationship status?

22

Respondent's affection towards family and partner (n=62)
90.0%
80.0%
How affectionate do you consider yourself
not affectionate at all

70.0% moderately affectionate
quite affectionate
60.0%
with your partner?
very affectionate
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
not at all (6) moderately (28) quite affectionate (21) very affectionate (5)
How affectionate do you consider yourself w ith your fam ily?

I wanted to see if affection levels were similarly reported for family and partners. This chart demonstrates a correlational
effect between respondents who answered about their levels of affection towards family and their partner. It would have
been interesting to ask a more temporal question to track affection over time; i.e., asking respondents to consider how
affectionate they recall their family being while growing up and follow with asking how affectionate they are with their
partner in order to examine if family upbringing affects the way later adults relate to their mates.

23

Happy pill preference by sociability
50.0%
not take
45.0%
mistrust
40.0%
consider
Happy pill preference
35.0% take
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
low sociability (7-10) n=8 medium sociability (11-14) n=21 high sociability(15-19) n=32
Sociability

For this test, I combined 5 questions related to social behavioral tendencies and willingness to engage in new experiences: 1) I
attend social functions, 2) I plan social functions, 3) I enjoy cooking for others, 4) I enjoy new / interesting situations, 5) I enjoy
meeting new people. Then I assigned a numbered rating scale from the qualitative data, combined them, and created a “Sociability
Index” from the sample minimum of 7 to the maximum of 19 with a range of 4, then ranking them by three categories of LOW,
MEDIUM, and HIGH sociability. From there I compared the respondent’s answer to “If you could take a pill to encourage love
and the emotional feelings associated with love . . .” with four possible answers. The results were quite the opposite of what I
expected. Those with a LOW Sociability Index, NONE reported a desire to take a “happy pill” and a reticence to take a pill were
reported amongst both HIGH and LOW Sociability Indexes.

24

Happy pill preference by sociability
70.0%
62.5%
59.4%
60.0% anti pill
pro pill 52.4%
47.6%
Happy pill preference
50.0%
43.8%
40.0% 37.5%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
low sociability (7-10) n=8 medium sociability (11-14) n=21 high sociability(15-19) n=32
Sociability
This chart represents the same results, merely condensed down into two groups for further clarity to reduce noise. Here—
respondents who reported “not take” and “mistrust such a claim” were grouped into the anti pill category and those reporting
“would consider” and “would take” into the pro pill category.

25

Respondent's self described love in life by relationship status (n=62)
70.0%
love deficit
60.0% not enough
Self described love in life
small sample
50.0% ample
good amount
40.0%
plenty
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
single (16) coupled (18) married (20) second marriage (3) divorced (5)
Relationship status

I wanted to see if the levels of love reported differed with respect to relationship status. Some of the results here were predictable:
there is some dissatisfaction or report of less love in single respondents, some in coupled/partnered relationships, and some in
divorced while the married and those on a second marriage generally report adequate levels.

26

Respondent's self described love in life by relationship status (n=62)
120.0%
deficit, not enough, small
100.0% ample, good, plenty
Self described love in life
80.0%
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
single (16) coupled (18) married (20) second marriage (3) divorced (5)
Relationship Status
This chart represents the same results, merely condensed down into two groups for further clarity to reduce noise. Here—
respondents who reported on the negative end of the spectrum “deficit, not enough, small” were slated against respondents who
reported on the positive end of the spectrum “ample, good, plenty.” Here, there’s an interesting effect in that the single and the
coupled respondents show a very similar pattern in the levels of deficit and plenty, while both married categories (weighted) show
no deficits and equal amounts of plenty, with divorced respondents rounding out the split at approximately 60 (plenty) – 40 (deficit)
spilt.

OXYTOCIN: The Chemical Bonds of Love by Andrea E. Janda

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OXYTOCIN: The Chemical Bonds of Love by Andrea E. Janda

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Running Head: OXYTOCIN: THE CHEMICAL BONDS OF LOVE

Oxytocin (Oxt), also known as alpha-hypophamine (α–hypophamine), is a nonapeptide

hormone, (composed of nine amino acids) with a chemical formula represented as

chemical construction mapped within the mid-twentieth century by Vincent du Vigneaud, who

trust, and socialization.

“Fight or Flight” vs. “Calm and Connection”

namely cortisol. (Uvnäs Moberg, 2003; Kuchinas, 2009).

Oxytocin is closely related to another peptide hormone, the blood-pressure-raising

stress (Kuchinas, 2009; Pitkow et al., 2001; Grippo et al., 2007).

Love, Attachment, & Intimacy

“intricate, interesting and emotionally rewarding” (p. 92-93).

(Kunz, et al., 2007).

the act which brings us closer to our loved one.

oxytocin receptors appear to be epigenetically influenced—in essence, we must learn to love

Social Interaction and Trust

Supportive social interactions may be protective against stressors and certain

and physiological traits displayed by humans, including sensitivity to social

isolation. (Grippo et al., 2007)

of social branch of neuroscience as social endocrinology and delineates significant differences

anti-cortisol—a counter measure against stress.

and risk-taking (Leonie, 2008).

There are many barriers to use of oxytocin as a medication. It is primarily used as a

anti-inflammatory, wound healing, or growth enhancement as the oxytocin molecule appears to

biology and bringing more love into our lives.

Leonie, W. (2008). Trust in oxytocin. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(7), 500.

How affectionate do you consider yourself with your family?

not affectionate at all 6 10%

not affectionate at all 3 5%

not affectionate at all 0 0%

strongly disagree 11 18%

strongly disagree 6 10%

I don’t cook, but I would 3 5%

strongly disagree 11 18%

strongly disagree 9 15%

plenty of love 20 32%

• measures of intimate/affectionate contact

networking sites online (Facebook and Twitter).

the following three questions:

lives and their relationship status?

Respondent's affection towards family and partner (n=62)

not affectionate at all

Happy pill preference by sociability

Happy pill preference by sociability

Respondent's self described love in life by relationship status (n=62)

Respondent's self described love in life by relationship status (n=62)

You might also like