Behavioral Neuroscience

Manuscript version of

Beyond Romance: Neural and Genetic Correlates of Altruism in Pair-Bonds

Bianca P. Acevedo, Michael J. Poulin, Lucy L. Brown

Funded by:
• National Science Foundation

© 2019, American Psychological Association. This manuscript is not the copy of record and may not exactly
replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors’ permission.
The final version of record is available via its DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bne0000293

This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
 Beyond Romance:
Neural and Genetic Correlates of Altruism in Pair-Bonds

Bianca P. Acevedo1, Michael Poulin2, and Lucy L. Brown3

1
Neuroscience Research Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA

93106, USA
2
Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, Park Hall 208, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA
3
Department of Neurology, Einstein College of Medicine, 1300 Morris Park Ave., Room 117,

Bronx, NY10461, USA

Corresponding author
Bianca P. Acevedo
Neuroscience Research Institute
University of California, Santa Barbara
Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5060
Email: Bianca.acevedo@lifesci.ucsb.edu

1
 Abstract

Altruism is an evolutionarily conserved neurobehavioral mechanism for responding to others’

needs, even at a cost to the self. It is thought to be rooted in offspring care and is most
prominent in kin and close relationships, but also extends to others. We investigated the neural
and genetic (OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3) correlates of altruism (with the Agape scale) in
newlywed pair-bonds. Using functional MRI, 18 participants were scanned (T1) while viewing
happy or sad face images of the partner; of a stranger; or a highly familiar, neutral acquaintance
(HFN). Thirteen returned for another scan 11-months later (T2) and the additional control of a
neutral expression of the partner and stranger was added. At both time points, the right ventral
pallidum (VP), ventral tegmental area and caudate showed significant response to Partner
(romantic) vs HFN images. At T2, altruism scores, OXTR rs53576 G alleles, and AVPR1a rs3
long alleles showed positive correlations with activity in the left VP/accumbens, amygdala and
septum for both Happy and Sad Partner expressions compared to neutral expressions, but not
for strangers. However, when the Happy or Sad partner was compared to a Happy or Sad
stranger, positive correlations were limited mainly to the amygdala/entorhinal cortex region.
This study localized neural and genetic correlates of altruism in pair-bonds, including the VP
and amygdala. But also, responsivity in the VP showed increases or decreases as a function of
OXTR and AVPR1a variants. These variations may contribute to behavioral heterogeneity and
diverse strategies observed in complex social behaviors. In conclusion, the neural and
hormonal basis of altruism in pair-bonds may be phylogenetically conserved, yet genetically
variable, and promote pair-bond stability and enhance survival and cooperation of the species.

Key words: altruism, emotion, empathy, oxytocin, vasopressin, ventral pallidum, pair-bonding,

fMRI

2
Pair-bonding, or monogamy, is the tendency to stay with one partner for mating, reproduction,

child-rearing, and attachment throughout life. In both humans and other monogamous species,

pair-bonds are characterized by partner preference (over others), proximity-seeking, bi-parental

care of offspring, sharing of a nest (or cohabitation), aggression towards strangers, and highly

coordinated behaviors between male-female pairs such as the tendency to travel together (e.g.,

Curtis, Liu, Aragona, & Wang, 2006; Getz et al., 1981; Mendoza & Mason, 1986). Other

behaviors that characterize attachment bonds are caregiving and altruistic acts which are

thought to ultimately promote species fitness (Batson, 2011; deWaal, 2008; Preston & deWaal,

2011). It is proposed that altruism and its corresponding neural systems evolved for the care of

helpless offspring, but may also be observed in the aid of other kin and non kin recipients

(Preston, 2013).

Extensive research with voles and primates has established subcortical anatomical and

neurochemical correlates of pair-bonding (Bales et al., 2007; Carter, 1998; Lim et al., 2004a;

Lim et al., 2004b; Lim and Young, 2004 ), as well as empathy and consolation (de Waal, 1979;

Langford et al., 2006; Jeon et al., 2010; Burkett et al., 2016). Direct injections of hormones into

the brains of voles and receptor autoradiography showed that the density of oxytocin (OT) and

arginine vasopressin (AVP) receptors in the ventral pallidum (VP) differentiated pairs that

established partner preference after mating (Lim et al., 2004a; Lim et al., 2004b; Lim and

Young, 2004). Using c-fos and viral vector gene transfer methods, Lim and Young (Lim et al.,

2004b) identified the VP and nucleus accumbens (NAcc) as the critical brain regions mediating

monogamous behaviors. Studies with primates also established the VP as specifically active in

pair-bonds (Bales et al., 2007), and OT and AVP release in pair-bonds, including in long-term

pairs (Hinde et al., 2016).

3
 Research suggests that the VP and NAcc are part of a social decision-making network

that is phylogenetically conserved, but variable, in vertebrates including fish (e.g., teleosts),

reptiles, and mammals (O'Connell and Hofmann, 2012). This putative social network, partially

identified in voles and primates, involves several other brain regions such as the septum,

amygdala, hippocampus/entorhinal cortex, periaqueductal gray (PAG), ventral tegmental area

(VTA), and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), thus including the reward system

(Johnson and Young, 2015; O'Connell and Hofmann, 2012). Studies with humans have

suggested that OT, AVP and some of these neural structures may also mediate maternal

attachment, pair-bonding, and complex social behaviors such as trust, eye contact, and increased

partner empathy during sex (Carter, 1998; Unkelbach et.al., 2008; Behnia et al., 2014; review

Kelly & Goodson, 2014).

OT and AVP are important neurohormones as they control diverse functions, from water

balance and reproduction to attachment, pair-bonding, and social recognition (Insel, 2010;

Numan and Young, 2016; Meyer-Lindberg et al., 2011). OT and AVP are easy to administer

intranasally to humans, directly affecting the brain. Thus, a number of human functional MRI

(fMRI) studies have used this experimental approach for hormone delivery to examine OT’s

role in empathy, altruism, negative emotion, social reward, and parenting (Bartz et al., 2010;

Groppe et al., 2013; Hu et al., 2016; Riem et al., 2011). In mothers shown happy and sad infant

face images, intranasal OT was associated with increased activation in the insular cortex,

amygdala, and the globus pallidus (GP) (Rocchetti et al., 2014). These regions are involved in

emotion, response to emotional faces (Fusar-Poli et al., 2009), reward, and motor behavior

(Hong & Hikosaka, 2008). AVP also has been implicated in nurturing, and social and

cooperative behaviors (Brunnlieb et al., 2016; Stoop et al., 2015). A recent study examined

plasma levels of OT and AVP and found associations with activation of the amygdala in

4
response to negative images (Motoki et al., 2016). However, circulating plasma levels may not

reflect brain levels, and intranasal administration may not affect brain receptors equally or in all

regions of interest (Freeman et al., 2016). Also, intranasal OT’s effects can be modulated by

OT gene polymorphisms (Feng et al., 2015). Indeed, the use of gene polymorphisms to

determine the functional effects of OT and AVP has major advantages over intranasal

administration and plasma levels because the genetic markers are an endogenous variable that

can apply to brain substrates. Also, attention to gene polymorphisms in fMRI studies—

“imaging genetics”— may reduce the variability of experimental effects and localize

endogenous, normally acting mechanisms without an invasive approach.

Thus we used two frequently-examined genetic markers believed to correspond to

endogenous OT and AVP receptor function: OXTR rs53576 (Rodrigues et al., 2009) and

AVPR1a rs3 (Knafo et al., 2008), respectively. The marker rs53576 is a single-nucleotide

polymorphism (SNP) of the OT receptor gene (OXTR) that results in individuals having zero,

one, or two G alleles (versus A alleles). Individuals with a greater number of G alleles express

more emotional empathy (Buffone and Poulin, 2014; Uzefovsky et al., 2015), and exhibit less

stress and greater empathic accuracy when attending to others’ feelings (Rodrigues et al., 2009).

They also display more sensitive parenting behaviors (Bakermans-Kranenburg & van

IJzendoorn 2008) and greater responsiveness to infant crying (Riem et al. 2011), and also

engage in more charitable behaviors under conditions of perceived social threat (Poulin et al.,

2012). Meta-analyses of OXTR rs53576’s role in sociality showed that the homozygous variant

(GG alleles) was associated with greater empathic ability (Gong et al., 2017) and sociality (Li et

al., 2015). However, one meta-analysis suggested that effects were limited to general sociality

(18 studies), versus no significant results for sociality within close relationships (10 studies).

This may reflect the complexity of behaviors affected by OT, needing a range of behavioral

5
measurements in experiments. Also, most of the close relationship studies measured attachment

style security, with only two studies examining pair-bonding behaviors.

The marker AVPR1a rs3 is a section of an AVP 1a-type receptor gene (AVPR1a) that

can repeat a number of times, varying in length across individuals. Humans with longer versus

shorter versions of rs3 exhibit more cognitive empathy (Uzefovsky et al., 2015), greater

generosity towards strangers in laboratory studies (Knafo et al., 2008), and more stable pair-

bonds (Walum et al., 2008). We examined these alleles in the current study with pair-bonded

participants because they represent hormone activity associated with pair-bonding and pro-

social behaviors across species.

Also, we investigated brain and gene interactions with self-reported altruism towards the

partner, measured with Agape scale (subscale from the Love Attitudes Scale (LAS); Hendrick

& Hendrick, 1986). Altruism is defined as a rudimentary and evolutionarily conserved

neurobehavioral mechanism for responding to others’ needs (Preston, 2013), even at a cost to

the self. It is thought to be adaptive, especially towards kin and close others (Wilson, 1975), as

it grants benefits to the “giver” such as increased mating success, social standing, and sharing of

resources (Fehr & Rockenbach; Trivers, 1971). Thus, “altruistic” traits would prevail as the

genes that they shared with kin would be passed on (Nowak, 2006). However, across species,

altruistic behaviors appear to occur without deliberation or expectation of reciprocity. Thus, the

origins of altruism are still a topic of debate.

The aim of this study was to identify subcortical regions associated with altruism in

human pair-bonds compared with strangers and familiar non-kin individuals. We also examined

whether the OXTR and AVPR1a genes, identified as being involved in pair-bonding (Walum et

al 2008; Acevedo et al., 2011), altruism (Knafo et al., 2008), and other complex social

behaviors (such as caregiving), activate corresponding subcortical sites that are rich in OT and

6
AVP 1a receptors. Thus, we measured for the first time in early-stage, marital pair-bonds the

subcortical neural correlates of altruism (measured with the Agape scale) and OXTR and

AVPR1a gene variants. While being scanned, participants viewed face images of a partner that

were selected for evoking feelings of romantic love; and in a separate session they viewed

happy and sad (as well as neutral) face images of the partner and a stranger to evoke empathy.

Because only 13 participants returned for a second scan, we investigated similarities across time

and thus report replications. We predicted that OXTR rs53576 (G alleles) and AVPR1a rs3

(long alleles)—implicated in empathy, altruism and social behaviors—would show associations

with the VP, NAcc septum, amygdala and midbrain due to their role in social behaviors,

emotion response, and binding sites for OT and AVP. We also predicted that these associations

would be present to a greater extent for individuals reporting greater feelings of altruism

towards the partner, and would be stronger (or unique to) associations in response to partner

(versus stranger or acquaintance) face images.

Method

Participants

Participants provided informed consent and received payment in accordance with the

IRB procedures of the University of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) and Albert Einstein

College of Medicine. Participants were eighteen (7 females) healthy, right-handed individuals,

ages 22-33 (M =27.4 years ±3.4) in first-time marriages (M relationship length = 5.8 years±2.9;

range 2-12), and with no children. The sample was comprised of 15 White, 2 Hispanic and 1

Asian individuals. All but two participants had a college-education and the mean household

income ranged from $16,000 to $110,000 (M=62,000±27,000). Before scanning, subjects were

interviewed to assess eligibility including non-use of anti-depressants, and no fMRI

contraindications. Thirteen participants (8 females, 6 White, 1 Asian and 1 Hispanic) ages 22-

7
33 (M age = 27.5±3.6 years, married M = 10.8months ±4.0) returned for a second scan 11.3±1.3

months (range 9.0-13.5 months) after the T1 scan (range), using identical procedures.

Procedure

Upon recruitment, all participants were interviewed to assess their relationship quality

and to determine appropriate highly familiar neutral controls. They also completed

questionnaires and visited the laboratory with their spouse, and at this time photographs of the

spouse were taken by the experimenter. Photos were rated by independent coders (matched to

participants for age and gender) to assess whether partner and controls did not differ

systematically with respect to facial attractiveness. During the scan, participants completed two

consecutive experimental sessions. The first (“romance”) condition was intended to elicit

feelings of “romantic love” using face pictures (self-selected by participants) of the spouse

while recalling romantic events. This procedure was verified in a previous study (Mashek,

2000) showing that face images elicited the most intense romantic love feelings. Participants

also viewed images of a self-selected familiar neutral acquaintance. For both conditions, each

face image was followed by a countback task, where participants were shown a 4-digit number

and instructed to mentally count back by 7s, to reduce carryover effects from viewing affective

facial images. All photos were digitized, according to standard procedures where only the face

was shown. Stimuli were displayed using Presentation software (Psychological Software Tools,

Inc., Pittsburgh, PA). This protocol has been used in previous fMRI studies of early-stage (Aron

et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2011, 2012) and long-term romantic love and marital satisfaction

(Acevedo et al., 200, 2012) using the Passionate Love Scale (Hatfield & Sprecher, l986).

The second (“empathy”) session was adapted from research on maternal responsiveness

to own-infant and other-infant facial cues (Strathearn et al., 2008). Participants are shown

happy, sad and neutral face images of one’s own versus other infants, and it has been used in

8
research on sensory processing sensitivity with adults measuring neural responses a partner’s

and strangers negative and positive affective facial expressions (Acevedo et al., 2014).

After each session, while participants were still in the scanner participants provided

emotion ratings for each image they viewed. After the scan, participants completed in-depth

“Exit Interviews” to confirm that they recalled events with the partner.

Self-report scales. Subjects completed a battery of questionnaires including the Agape

sub-scale (from LAS, Hendrick et al., 1998) measure of six love styles) which assesses selfless,

altruistic love towards a romantic partner. Sample items are, “I am usually willing to sacrifice

my own wishes to let my partner achieve his/hers” and “I would rather suffer myself than let my

partner suffer.” Participants also completed the Relationship Assessment Scale (Hendrick,

1988) for general relationship satisfaction and the Passionate Love Scale (PLS; Hatfield &

Sprecher, l986), 15-item version, assessing cognitive, emotional and physical symptoms of

passionate love. All scales were measured using 1-7 item Lickert-ratings.

Stimuli. For the “romantic love” condition, participants were shown face images of the

Partner and a highly familiar, neutral acquaintance (HFN) matched to the partner by age, sex,

and length of time known. For the “empathy” condition at T1 and T2, subjects were shown

happy and sad face images of the partner (taken by the experimenter during the laboratory

session) and a stranger’s face image (selected from the data base) matched to Partners’ for age,

sex, and ethnicity. At T2, the empathy condition also included neutral Partner and Stranger face

images.

Additionally, for the “empathy” condition, context descriptions were shown (see

Acevedo et al., 2014) prior to each face image because context plays an important role in

emotion processing (Gross & John, 2003), thus reducing cognitive ambiguity and enhancing

emotion-specific effects as suggested by emotion researchers (e.g., McRae et al. 2011). Each

9
face image was preceded by a corresponding contextual description, such as “Your partner is

feeling very happy because something wonderful has happened to them” or “Your partner is

feeling very sad and they are suffering because something terrible has happened to them.

fMRI task. For the romantic love condition, the fMRI task utilized an alternating block

design where subjects viewed alternating face images of the Partner versus HFN, interspersed

with a countback task. Participants were asked to recall events with each person (not sexual in

nature) while viewing the respective face image. Each stimulus was presented for 20-seconds,

for 9 repetitions (total 12 minutes). Identical procedures and stimuli were used at T1 and T2.

The fMRI task for the empathy condition consisted of a randomized block design such

that no two conditions could follow each other. At T1, the fMRI four conditions were shown:

partner happy, partner sad, stranger happy, and stranger sad. At T2, two targets were added to

measure within target emotion responses: partner neutral and stranger neutral. Each condition

included the following stimuli in sequential order: contextual description (6-s), face image (12-

s), and a countback task (12-s). Each trial was presented randomly six times. Immediately after

each scanning session (romantic love and empathy), participants provided emotion ratings.

Gene Analysis

Subjects provided saliva samples for DNA extraction via Oragene test tubes

(http://www.dnagenotek.com). Genotyping of the OXTR rs53576 SNP was conducted using

MassARRAY Compact system, Assays-by-Design on a panel of custom SNP assays designed

using RealSNP and MassARRAY Assay Designer (Sequenom Inc). The protocol involved PCR

amplification of 10ng DNA using SNP specific primers followed by a base extension reaction

using iPLEX Gold chemistry (Sequenom Inc.). The final base extension products were treated

and spotted on a 384-pad SpectroCHIP using a ChipSpotter LT nanodispenser (Samsung). A

MassARRAY Analyzer Compact MALDI-TOF-MS was used for the data acquisition process

10
from the SpectroCHIP. The resulting genotypes were called using MassARRAY Typer

Analyzer v4.0 (Sequenom Inc.), and the number of G alleles was used as a continuous variable

in our analyses.

For the AVPR1a rs3 genotype, the number of repeat sequences was identified via

fragment analysis. In this technique, a repeat sequence is specified using a sequence-specific

primer congregated to a fluorescent probe and amplified for detection using polymerase chain

reaction (PCR). Microsatellite fragment analysis of AVPR1a rs3 was conducted through

capillary electrophoresis (Sequenom, Inc.). For AVPR1a analysis, 6-FAM and HEX labeled

PCR products were mixed and analyzed in multiplex. Samples were denatured at 92°C for 2

minutes and then cooled to 4°C on a MJ Research PT-100 Peltier Thermal Cycler. Samples

were transferred to a 96-well sequencing plate and assigned well coordinates using Applied

Biosystems Foundation Data Collection Version 3.0. Electrophoresis of the samples was

performed with the Applied Biosystems 3130xl Prism Genetic Analyzer, using dye/filter set,

DS-30. The data was processed and analyzed using Applied Biosystems GeneMapper Software

Version 3.7. Control samples were sequenced to determine the repeat size based on total

fragment length. A left and right offset of 0.4 was used in the bin set parameter of the

GeneMapper software to set the limits for acceptable fragment migration for each repeat. The

number of repeat sequences was split at the median to designate each allele as “long” versus

“short,” and the number of long alleles was used as a continuous variable in our analyses.

Imaging Data Acquisition and Analysis

A 3.0 T Siemens Trio with a 12-channel phased-array head coil was used for the

acquisition of Blood Oxygenation Level Dependent (BOLD) responses. A single-shot echo

planar imaging sequence that is sensitive to BOLD contrast was used to acquire 37 slices per

repetition time (TR = 2000 ms, 3 mm thickness, 0.5 mm gap), echo time (TE) of 30 ms, flip

11
angle of 90 degrees, field of view (FOV) of 192 mm, and 64 x 64 acquisition matrix. Prior to

the acquisition of BOLD responses, a high-resolution T1-weighted sagittal sequence image of

the whole-brain was obtained (TR =15.0 ms; TE = 4.2 ms; flip angle = 9 degrees, 3D

acquisition, FOV = 256 mm; slice thickness = 0.89 mm, acquisition matrix = 256 x 256).

Imaging data processing. Functional images were subjected to standard preprocessing

procedures using SPM5 but viewed in SPM 12 (Wellcome Department of Cognitive

Neurology). First, functional echoplanar images were realigned to the first volume, smoothed

with a Gaussian kernel of 6mm, and then normalized to the T1.nii image template. No

participant showed movement greater than 3 mm (whole-voxel). After preprocessing, contrasts

were created at T1 and T2 for the “romance” condition: Partner vs. HFN; and the “empathy”

condition: Partner Happy vs. Stranger Happy and Partner Sad vs. Stranger Sad; and T2 only

added: Partner Happy vs. Partner Neutral, Partner Sad vs. Partner Neutral, Stranger Happy vs.

Stranger Neutral, and Stranger Sad vs. Stranger Neutral.

Multiple regression data analysis. Second-level regression analyses were carried out to

estimate group brain activity during each condition: Partner (Happy or Sad), entering Agape

scores and genotype (either AVPR1a or OXTR). The effects of AVPR1a rs3and OXTR rs53576

were tested in separate models because the impact of these polymorphisms in OT and AVP

receptor function is still unclear, as OT and AVP sometimes bind to similar receptors making it

difficult to discern their distinct function and binding sites (Song & Albers, 2017). Results are

for each regression. For the purposes of this report, the significance of the negative versus the

positive correlations will not be discussed in detail. A brain response correlation, positive or

negative, localizes a functional change, which is the purpose of this study.

Region of interest (ROI) and whole-brain analysis. ROIs were based on previous

studies of empathy, emotion, OT, OXTR, AVP, and AVPR1a (Table 1). We adopted a false

12
discovery rate (FDR) for multiple comparisons correction (Genovese, Luzar & Nichols, 2002)

at p < .05. ROIs occupied a 3-10-mm radius with a 3-voxel minimum, depending on the size of

the brain area. For exploratory purposes, we conducted whole-brain analyses, at p < .001

(uncorrected for multiple comparisons), minimum spatial extent of > 5 contiguous voxels. We

do not report cluster size, because there are questions about the statistical significance of cluster

sizes (Eklund et al., 2016).

Neuroantomical identification. All regions were confirmed using the human brain

atlas by Mai, Majtanik and Paxionos (2016). The VP was examined further using the visible

high-iron concentrations that were shown in the GP and substantia nigra (SN) echo-planar

images of the fMRI data (Fig 1B,C). In vole studies, iron was also used in histological sections

to identify the VP (Lim et al., 2004a).

Results

Descriptive Statistics

Relationship satisfaction. Relationship Assessment Scale (RAS), scores: M = 6.4 ±0.6

at T1 and T2 on a 1-7 scale, indicating high satisfaction for all participants. The RAS was

significantly correlated with AVPR1a rs3 long alleles (r = 0.6, p < .05).

Passionate Love Scale. Passionate Love Scale (PLS) scores: M = 5.9±0.7 at T1 and

5.8±1.0 at T2 on a 1-7 scale. The PLS was not significantly correlated with OXTR or AVPR1a.

Altruism in the pair-bond. Agape scores: M = 5.3± 0.7 at T1 and 5.3± 1.1 at T2 on a 1-

7 scale. Agape was significantly correlated with OXTR G alleles (r = 0.7, p < .05) and the PLS

(r = 0.5, p < .05), but not AVPR1a.

Stimuli emotion ratings. Emotional ratings in the scanner right after viewing the faces

confirmed that the subjects felt emotions consistent with the partner’s, HFN’s, or stranger’s

facial emotional displays. T-tests confirmed that emotions were more intense for Partners

13
compared with Strangers (Figures and results reported in Acevedo et al., 2014). Below, we

report correlations with OXTR, AVPR1a, and Agape/altruism scores.

For the romantic love condition, emotion ratings (on a 1 to 4 scale, 1= not at all and 4 =

a great deal) for the Partner: love at T1 (M=3.7±0.6) and T2 (M=3.6±0.7), indifferent at T2

(M=1.4±0.7). HFN: love at T1 (M=1.4±0.5) and T2 (M=1.1±0.4), indifferent at T2

(M=2.9±1.1). Only AVPR1a rs3 was significantly correlated with love scores for the Partner (r

= 0.6, p < .05). No significant correlations emerged for OXTR, altruism scores, or affective

ratings for the HFN.

For the empathy condition, emotion ratings (on a 1 to 4 scale, 1= not at all and 4 = a

great deal) for the Happy Condition, Partner: joy at T1 (M=3.9±0.4) and T2 (M=3.7±0.5),

friendship at T1 (M=3.8±0.5) and T2 (M=3.8±0.4) and excitement at T2 (M=3.5±0.5).

Stranger: joy at T1 (M=2.0±0.9) and T2 (M=1.9±0.8), friendship at T1 (M=1.7±0.6) and T2

(M=1.6±0.8) and excitement at T2, (M=1.3±0.5). For the Partner, altruism scores were

significantly correlated with friendship ratings (r = 0.6, p < .05), no significant correlations

emerged with OXTR or AVPR1a. For the Stranger, only AVPR1a rs3 was negatively correlated

with friendship ratings (r = -0.6, p < .05).

Sad Condition, Partner: sadness at T1 (M=3.2±0.5) and T2 (M=3.3±0.8), compassion at

T1 (M=3.5±0.6) and T2 (M=3.5±0.7). For the Partner, no significant correlations emerged with

OXTR, AVPR1a, or altruism scores. Stranger: sadness at T1 (M=1.8±0.9) and T2 (M=1.8±0.8),

compassion at T1 (M=2.0±0.9) and T2 (M=2.4±0.8). For the Partner and Stranger, no

significant correlations emerged with OXTR or AVPR1a, and with Partner altruism scores.

Neutral Condition, Partner at T2: indifferent (M=2.2±1.1), calm (M=2.6±0.8) and

bored (M=2.3±1.1). Stranger: indifferent (M=3.5±0.7), calm (M=2.5±1.2) and bored

14
(M=3.1±1.2). No significant correlations emerged with OXTR, AVPR1a, or altruism scores for

the Partner or Stranger.

Correlations across the various stimuli (happy or sad, partner or stranger) suggest that

pair-bonded individuals report stronger affective ratings in response to a partner’s happy or sad

events. Importantly, OXTR (G-alleles) was significantly correlated with altruism towards the

partner, while AVPR (long-alleles) was significantly correlated with love ratings for the partner.

Genotype polymorphism frequencies. Genotype polymorphism distributions for the

sample were as follows: OXTR rs53576 (AA=1, AG=6, GG=6); AVPR1a rs3 (short=4,

short/long=6; long=3).

Neuroimaging Results

Romantic love condition. In response to Partner’s facial expression, for which

romantic thoughts and memories were evoked, subjects showed responses in the same area of

the right VP at both time points (Fig 1). However, the VP response was not significantly

correlated with OXTR rs53576 G alleles, AVPR1a rs3 allele length or Agape scores. Also post-

scanner affective ratings showed no significant correlations with Agape scores. As such, we did

not proceed with interaction analyses for this condition. Subjects showed other significant

romance responses at T1 and T2 in the VTA/SN, caudate nucleus, and hypothalamus (Table 2).

Empathy condition. Partner Happy or Sad vs. Neutral expression and Stranger

Happy or Sad vs. Neutral. Partner Happy or Sad vs. Stranger Happy or Sad.

Altruism scores and OXTR interactions, partner condition. Interactions of OXTR

rs53576 (G alleles) and Agape scores for both Happy and Sad Partner (versus Partner Neutral)

conditions showed significant responses in the left VP (multiple regression: Happy: r= .62,

p=.02; Sad: r=.64, p=.02, Fig. 2A-D, I; Table 3). The correlations showed negative or zero

neural responses for AA and AG allele participants, and zero or positive responses for GG allele

15
 2
participants (Fig. 2I [2] = 4.28, p =

.12).

For the Happy Partner (versus Partner Neutral) condition, other significant activations

were shown in sub-regions of the NAcc (ventral striatum) adjacent to the VP (Fig. 2D), the

basolateral amygdala (Fig. 2E), septum (Fig. 2A), PAG (Fig. 2F); as well as for the Partner

Happy (versus Stranger Happy condition).

For the Sad Partner (versus Partner Neutral) condition, effects were shown in the

amygdala in areas similar to and distinct from (i.e., the c. amygdala) that shown for the Happy

condition; however no significant subcortical activations were shown for the Sad Partner versus

Sad Stranger condition. Interestingly, for the Sad Partner condition, there was a negative

response in the VTA in association with OXTR rs53576 G alleles and altruism scores (Fig. 2G).

Altruism and OXTR interactions, stranger condition. Interactions of OXTR rs53576 (G

alleles) and Agape scores for the Stranger Happy (versus neutral) condition, were significant in

the right caudate, amygdala and the left hypothalamus. For the Stranger Sad (versus neutral)

condition, interactions of OXTR rs53576 (G alleles) and Agape scores were significant in the

bilateral amygdala and the right hypothalamus. Notably, for both Stranger Happy and Sad

conditions vs. Neutral (Fig. 2H), there was no activation in the VP, and activations did not

overlap with results for the Partner condition.

Altruism and AVPR1a interactions, partner condition. Interactions of AVPR1a rs3

(long alleles) and Agape scores were significant in the left VP for the Sad Partner (versus

neutral) condition (multiple regression: r=.58, p=.04, Fig. 3C, D, and I; Table 4); for the Happy

Partner (versus neutral) interactions were significant in the medial part of the internal segment

of the left GP, adjacent to the VP (Fig. 3 A, B, and F). The VP showed negative or zero neural

response for shorter allele participants, and zero or positive response for longer allele

16
 2
participants (Fig. 3I). There were no significant male/female differences [3] = 3.95, p =

.27). For both Happy and Sad Partner (versus neutral) conditions the interaction of AVPR1a rs3

and Agape scores were significant in the basolateral amygdala, bilaterally (Fig. 3E); as well as

on the left side for the Partner Happy versus Stranger Happy condition.

For the Sad Partner (versus neutral) condition, significant activation was shown in the

anterior basal hypothalamus and the central nucleus of the amygdala (Table 4); and deactivation

was shown in the median Raphe/VTA (Fig. 3G). The Partner Sad versus Stranger Sad condition

showed significant activation in the right amygdala/entorhinal cortex.

For the Happy Partner (versus neutral) condition, the interaction of AVPR1a rs3 and

Agape scores showed significant activations in the PAG (Fig. 3F), inferior colliculus and the

septum (Table 3); and deactivations were shown in the medial dorsal nucleus of the thalamus.

Altruism and AVPR1a interactions, stranger condition. For both Stranger Happy and

Sad (versus neutral) conditions, the interaction of AVPR1a rs3 long alleles and Agape scores

were not significant in subcortical regions; notably, there was no activation in the VP (Fig. 3H).

There were no overlapping results for Partner and Stranger contrasts.

Comparison of OXTR and AVPR1a Results

For the Happy Partner (versus neutral) condition and Happy Partner (versus happy

stranger), interactions of both OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3 with altruism scores were

significant in the left amygdala (lateral/basolateral area, Fig. 4A), and the VP, but in different

regions (Figs. 2A, 3A) OXTR rs53576 showed positive correlations within the VP and in the

adjacent NAcc; while for AVPR1a rs3, positive correlations were shown in the GP internal

segment, and not in the NAcc. Also, both Happy Partner (versus stranger and partner neutral)

interactions with OXTR rs53576 and Agape scores showed significant activations in the PAG

and septum/fornix, as well as the Happy Partner (versus neutral) AVPR1a rs3 interactions. In the

17
Happy Stranger condition both OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3 also showed significant

activation in the left basolateral amygdala. The interaction of AVPR1a rs3 with Agape scores

also showed unique localization in the inferior colliculus.

For the Sad Partner (versus neutral) condition, the interactions of both OXTR rs53576

and AVPR1a rs3 with Agape scores were significant in the left VP, basolateral

amygdala/entorhinal cortex (Figs. 2E, 3E) the left central amygdala (Fig. 4B), and the

entorhinal/parahippocampal area. and deactivations were shown in the VTA/ median Raphé

(Tables 3 and 4).

Comparison of Partner versus Stranger Results

For the Partner Happy vs. Stranger Happy and Partner Sad vs. Stranger Sad interactions

with OXTR rs53576 or AVPR1a rs3 and altruism scores, there were fewer significant subcortical

activations in comparison with Partner emotion versus neutral conditions. Most notably, the VP

was not significantly activated for most of the Partner versus Stranger comparisons, except for a

the Partner Happy versus Stranger Happy condition at T2. Inspection of the time courses of the

responses suggested that there was a large enough neural response to the Stranger emotion

conditions, and more so for the Sad Stranger condition, which resulted in weaker effects for the

Partner vs. Stranger comparisons.

Discussion

The present study showed, for the first time, significant activation in the VP region of

the human brain in association with romantic and altruistic feelings among individuals in

established pair-bonds around the time of the wedding and one-year later. This effect was not

found in previous studies of early-stage romantic love (Bartels and Zeki, 2004), but was

reported in association with relationship length among newly in-love individuals (Aron et al.,

18
2005). Thus, as in other mammals, the VP appears to be part of a subcortical attachment

system.

The left VP showed a significant multiple correlation with altruism scores (Agape

scale), and OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3 in response to a partners’ distressed and joyful

facial images. We did not see VP activation in response to the Stranger emotion conditions

compared to the Neutral Stranger, but the effect was not entirely specific to the Partner as

Partner Sad versus Stranger Sad comparisons did not show significant activation in the VP.

However, in response to the Happy Partner versus Happy Stranger condition, the left VP did

show significant activation at T2. These findings lend support to research implicating the VP in

pair-bonding in rodents (Wang et al., 1998; Young & Wang, 2004) and primates (Bales, 2007;

Hinde 2016), but also show that this system is used for empathic and altruistic feelings for

strangers. This is consistent with theories suggesting that cooperative social bonds to

genetically unrelated individuals may have played a central role in the evolution of humans

(Boyd, Richerson, & Heinrich, 2011). However, for positive emotional stimuli we showed a

bias for the partner (versus the stranger), consistent with research showing preferential biases

for in-group altruistic motivations (Telzer et al., 2015), especially for groups with strong

motivational importance (Hackel, Zaki, & Bavel, 2017), as well as for self-positivity among in-

love individuals (Meixner & Herbert, 2018). Here we add to this body of work on altruism by

showing that in-group/out-group neural responsivity to a partner’s and stranger’s emotions may

also vary as a function of the individuals’ genotype and the emotional context of a situation.

The VP is part of a subcortical network that has been identified as important for

attachment and social behavior across mammalian species. We show that humans also utilize

this phylogenetically conserved system for pair-bonding and complex social behaviors, such as

altruism, which enhance fitness and survival of the species through cooperation and care

19
(Carter, 1998; Numan and Young, 2016; Brunnlieb et al., 2016; Wilson, 1975). These

processes are also critical for healthy pair-bonds as responsiveness to a partner’s emotional

events, both positive and negative, are associated with increased relationship satisfaction and

stability (Gable et al., 2004; Waldinger et al., 2004). Moreover, altruism (measured with the

Agape) was highest in established relationships compared to developing and dissolved ones

(Hammock, 2011), highlighting its role in pair-bond stability.

The human VP is particularly interesting as it contains high-density binding sites for OT

(Loup et al., 1991) and to a lesser extent for AVP (Young et al., 1999). Lim et al. (2004b)

showed that genetic manipulation of AVPR1a receptors in the VP resulted in pair-bonding

behaviors in promiscuous male voles. Also, a study with humans showed that the same AVP1a

rs3 gene variant examined herein, showed significant associations with male pair-bonding

behaviors and partner reports of marital satisfaction (Walum et al., 2008).

The VP is part of the subcortical, mesolimbic reward system whose afferents from the

NAcc, and efferents to the thalamus, suggest organization of responses for social decision-

making and responsivity (Numan & Young, 2016; Root et al., 2015). In addition, the NAcc,

VTA and SN were activated in this study, further implicating the reward, motivation system in a

vertebrate “social network” (Groppe et al., 2013; O'Connell and Hofmann, 2012; Stott and

Redish, 2014). In the present study we further characterized the function of these genetic and

hormonal markers, and the VP, as described in a large body of laboratory animal studies as well

as human studies on pair-bonding and romantic love, to now also include altruism in pair-bonds,

which involves “caregiving” and has been proposed to be evolutionarily rooted in the need for

offspring care (Preston, 2013).

Other brain areas implicated in pair-bonding, empathy and cooperation across species

were also identified herein in the context of empathic responding and altruism in pair-bonds

20
Notably, the septum and amygdala, known for their role in affective-processing (Davis &

Whalen, 2000) and social decision-making (Johnson and Young, 2015; O'Connell and

Hofmann, 2012) were significantly activated in response to partners’ affective images and in

association with OXTR and AVPR1a variants. The septum, for example, has been identified in

studies of monogamous voles (Liu, Curtis, and Wang, 2001), and is rich in OT and AVP

receptors, (Loup et al., 1991; Young et al., 1999). Also, it appears to process approach-related

behaviors in humans (Morelli et al., 2015). It’s also interesting to note that the amygdala and

connectivity between the VP and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex were shown in a study where

males were given intranasal administration of AVP and showed increased cooperation

(Brunnlieb et al., 2016).

It’s also important to note that although happy and sad partner face images elicited

significant activation of the amygdala in association with altruism scores, and with OXTR and

AVPR1a variants, activations were in anatomically distinct and overlapping areas. The results

are consistent with a meta-analysis showing that the central amygdala is specifically implicated

in responses to negative visual stimuli (Garcia-Garcia et al., 2016), as we show for the Sad

condition in Fig. 3B. Also, replication of the amygdala localization in correlation with the

AVPR1a rs3 variant and selfless love, as reported herein, supports research linking the AVPR1a

variant with human amygdala function in response to social/ emotional stimuli and cooperation

(Brunnlieb et al., 2016; Meyer-Lindenberg et al., 2009). Other studies have also shown that

altruism and charitable acts are associated with AVPR1a rs3 long alleles (Buffone and Poulin,

2014; Knafo et al., 2008; Poulin et al., 2012). The present results suggest that altruism in pair-

bonds (which may be characterized as responding to a partner’s needs, even at a sacrifice to the

self, (Post, 2005) may also be mediated by the AVPR1a variant.

21
 However, negative and positive brain responses in the same regions varied across

individuals with AVPR1a rs3 long alleles. This is consistent with evidence that AVPR1a’s

effects may vary as a function of receptor binding sites, and may underlie variation in social

traits and disorders, such as autism and anxiety. Many of the activity effects were localized to

the left hemisphere, notably in the VP. Hemispheric effects are found in many fMRI studies,

and we have found a significant functional left-right difference in the VTA for early stage

romantic love: left side activity was correlated with facial attractiveness, while right side

activity was associated with passionate love scores (Aron et al., 2005). However, we do not

have enough data or information from the literature to speculate about the meaning of these

lateralized effects.

Activation of the VP in response to a partner’s joyful or distressing emotional display

was in opposite direction for OXTR rs53576 as a function of G alleles (Fig 1J, 2J). The result is

interesting in light of the large literature on OT administration that implicitly assumes that OT

will work the same way for all recipients. If diverse OXTR genotypes differentially affect brain

and binding sites, then whether endogenous or exogenous, OT (as well as AVP and other

hormones that may be readily administered) may not work the same way for everyone. This is

consistent with evidence that OT administration can result in opposite behavioral effects among

individuals depending on attachment style, relationship status, and social context (Bartz et al.,

2010; Olff et al., 2013).

Also, it is interesting to highlight that in a meta-analysis of the OXTR rs53576 genotype

variant (homozygous GG) it was found to be correlated with general social behaviors, and not

romantic relationships (Li et al., 2015). For close relationships, the meta-analysis included a

variety of relationships (parent-child, romantic) and measures such as attachment style or

conflict. Here, we also did not see VP activation in association with OXTR rs53576 for the

22
romantic partner condition, but we did see its significant activation in association with greater

self-reported altruism towards a romantic partner across happy and sad conditions, and to a

greater extent for OXTR rs53576 (G-alleles). Thus, it may be that this variant mediates complex

positive social behaviors.

Limitations

Although these results are novel, multidisciplinary and expand our knowledge of neural

and behavioral functions related to OXTR and AVPR1a function with corresponding subcortical

neural targets for altruism in pair-bonds, further investigation is needed as our sample was

modest in size and mostly homogenous. Thus, future research may benefit from sampling

individuals with varying levels of relationship quality, lengths, commitment, and

social/demographic backgrounds. Also, cortical effects and differences across time (requiring a

larger sample) may be examined in future reports.

Although the sample size was modest, we reduced variability of the sample by recruiting

first-time newlyweds with no children. Also, the effect for the VP and other subcortical regions

was replicated for Partner empathy and the romantic partner conditions. Replication is the best

statistical test, and we can conclude with some confidence that the human VP is involved in

pair-bonding in the early-stage marital bonds, as well as in a positive behavior, altruism—which

ultimately strengthens the attachment bond, and increases the fitness of the species. The genetic

and empathic response study meets only the minimum sample size (David et al., 2013; Friston,

2013) as only a subset of participants returned for the second scan (at this time we obtained the

genetic samples). Nevertheless, we examined multiple conditions—happy and sad emotion

conditions for both partners and strangers—thus providing evidence of effects for positive and

negative affect, as well as for close and non-kin relationships. Also, the VP correlations were

found within the same group for two genetic markers, replicating effects for two closely-related

23
hormone receptors. Further, the rationale for the ROIs, and especially for the VP, was very

strong as laboratory animal studies implicate functional effects of OT and AVP in the VP. In

sum, the regions and genes examined herein were hypothesis-driven, with a strong rationale of

established findings in a large body of animal research. Also, importantly, other brain regions

we report as activated in the brainstem replicated effects from other fMRI studies examining

OT’s and AVP’s effects on social behaviors (Groppe et al., 2013; Meyer-Lindenberg et al.,

2009; Riem et al., 2011). This field could certainly benefit from additional research as the

present findings do not establish the circuits identified herein, however they do provide a good

foundation for future experiments. It’s also noteworthy that this research applied an

endogenous, natural variable, not exogenously applied hormones or unusual behavioral

challenges.

Conclusion

In summary, this research provides novel evidence for neural, behavioral, and genetic

factors underlying an evolved system for altruism in pair-bonds which may further sustain the

bond through attachment and fitness of the couple (Burkett et al., 2016; Carter, 1998; Lim et al.,

2004a; Lim et al., 2004b; Lim and Young, 2004; Williams et al., 1992). But also, these factors

appear to be at work in response to strangers. We show that associations with AVPR1a and

OXTR, and altruism activate key subcortical regions, such as the VP, accumbens, septum and

the amygdala, in the context of empathic/emotional responsiveness. These regions are critical

to pair bonds in other mammals and part of a vertebrate social network (O'Connell and

Hofmann, 2012). The use of these structures and hormones for social processes through

evolution appears to be conserved across highly social species, such as humans. Like other

vertebrates, key physiological systems for human pair-bonding may use the VP for attachment.

Also, AVP and OT binding in the VP may mediate emotion-driven, relationship and partner-

24
preserving behaviors. In addition, genetic variability was expressed by both increased and

decreased responses in the VP. Thus, genetic variation influences the direction of neural effects

in individuals reacting to the same stimulus type, helping to account for the observed variability

in the measurements of behavioral and emotional responsivity. This and future studies of

subcortical attachment systems may inform treatments for couples, parents, and related

disorders such as autism, anxiety, and addiction.

The correlations of altruism with local brain activations and hormone function reported

here also highlight the role of “other-centered” processes, where the well-being of the other

person is the priority, sometimes even at a cost to the self. Thus, we highlight the subcortical

systems and corresponding genetic markers that may influence a complex behavior that may

benefit the pair-bond and their kin, as well as others. Together, the results provide a basis for

further research on the neural and genetic factors that mediate the complex attachment

behaviors and pro-social behaviors, which ultimately serve survival and thriving of the species.

25
 Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation (No. 0958171).

We thank Nancy Collins, PhD and Scott Grafton, PhD, professors in the Department of

Psychological and Brain Sciences at UCSB for providing support which made this research

possible. We also thank our research assistants Lauren Baker, Rafael Cruz, Janet Ferrer,

Cynthia Gonzales, Alexis Goswitz, Robert Marhenke, Flannery Rogers, Stephanie O’Keefe,

Jonathan Vogel, and Sheerin Zarinafsar for their assistance with this research.

26
 References

Acevedo, B.P., Aron, E.N., Aron, A., Sangster, M.D., Collins, N., &Brown, L.L. (2014). The highly

sensitive brain: an fMRI study of sensory processing sensitivity and response to others'

emotions. Brain Behav 4, 580-594.

Acevedo, B., Aron A., Fisher, H., Brown, L. (2011). Neural correlates of long-term intense romantic

love. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience Journal, doi: 10.1093/scan/nsq092.

Acevedo, B., Aron A., Fisher, H., Brown, L. (2012). Neural correlates of marital satisfaction and well-

being: Reward, empathy, and affect. Journal of Clinical Neuropsychiatry, 9, 20-31.

Aron, A., Fisher, H., Mashek, D. J., Strong, G., Li, H., & Brown, L. L. (2005). Reward, motivation, and

emotion systems associated with early-stage intense romantic love. J Neurophysiol, 94(1), 327-

337. doi:10.1152/jn.00838.2004

Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Pijlman, F. T. A., Mesman, J., & Juffer, F.

(2008). Experimental evidence for differential susceptibility: Dopamine D4 receptor

polymorphism (DRD4 VNTR) moderates intervention effects on toddlers' externalizing

behavior in a randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 44(1), 293-300.

Bales, K. L., Mason, W. A., Catana, C., Cherry, S. R., & Mendoza, S. P. (2007). Neural correlates of

pair-bonding in a monogamous primate. Brain Res, 1184, 245-253.

Bartels, A. & Zeki, S. (2004). The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage 21,

1155-1166.

Bartz, J.A., Zaki, J., Ochsner, K.N., Bolger, N., Kolevzon, A., Ludwig, N., & Lydon, J.E. (2010).

Effects of oxytocin on recollections of maternal care and closeness. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

107, 21371-21375.

Batson, C. D. (2011). Altruism in Humans. New York, Oxford University Press

27
Behnia, B., Heinrichs, M., Bergmann, W., Jung, S., Germann, J., Schedlowski, M., Hartmann, U., &

Kruger, T.H. (2014). Differential effects of intranasal oxytocin on sexual experiences and

partner interactions in couples. Horm Behav 65, 308-318.

Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J. & Henrich, J. (2011). Rapid cultural adaptation can facilitate the

evolution of large-scale cooperation. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 65, 431–444.

Brunnlieb, C., Nave, G., Camerer, C.F., Schosser, S., Vogt, B., Munte, T.F., & Heldmann, M. (2016).

Vasopressin increases human risky cooperative behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 2051-

2056.

Buffone, A.E., Poulin, & M.J. (2014). Empathy, target distress, and neurohormone genes interact to

predict aggression for others-even without provocation. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 40, 1406-1422.

Burkett, J.P., Andari, E., Johnson, Z.V., Curry, D.C., de Waal, F.B., & Young, L.J. (2016). Oxytocin-

dependent consolation behavior in rodents. Science 351, 375-378.

Carter, C.S. (1998). Neuroendocrine perspectives on social attachment and love.

Psychoneuroendocrinology 23, 779-818.

Curtis, J. T., Liu, Y., Aragona, B. J., & Wang, Z. (2006). Dopamine and monogamy. Brain Res,

1126(1), 76-90. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.07.126

Davis, M. & Whalen, P. J. (2001). The amygdala: vigilance and emotion. Molecular Psychiatry, 6, 13-

34.

David SP, Ware JJ, Chu IM, Loftus PD, Fusar-Poli P, Radua J, et al. (2013) Potential reporting bias in

fMRI studies of the brain. PLoS ONE 8(7): e70104.

de Waal, F. B. (2008). Putting the altruism back into altruism: the evolution of empathy. Annu Rev

Psychol, 59, 279-300. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093625

de Waal, F.B., & van Roosmalen. A. (1979). Reconciliation and consolation among chimpanzees.

Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 5(1), 55-66.

28
Eisernberger, N., Lieberman, M. (2004). Why rejection hurts: a common neural alarm system for

physical and social pain. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 294-300.

Eklund, A., Nichols, T.E., & Knutsson, H. (2016). Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial

extent have inflated false-positive rates. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 7900-7905.

Fehr, E., & Rockenbach, B. (2004). Human altruism: economic, neural, and evolutionary perspectives.

Curr Opin Neurobiol, 14(6), 784-790. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2004.10.007

Feng, C., Lori, A., Waldman, I.D., Binder, E.B., Haroon, E., & Rilling, J.K. (2015). A common

oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) polymorphism modulates intranasal oxytocin effects on the

neural response to social cooperation in humans. Genes Brain Behav 14, 516-525.

Freeman, S.M., Samineni, S., Allen, P.C., Stockinger, D., Bales, K.L., Hwa, G.G., & Roberts, J.A.

(2016). Plasma and CSF oxytocin levels after intranasal and intravenous oxytocin in awake

macaques. Psychoneuroendocrinology 66, 185-194.

Friston K., Schwartenbeck P., FitzGerald T., Moutoussis M., Behrens T., Raymond R.J., Dolan J. The

anatomy of choice: active inference and agency. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2013;7:598.

Fusar-Poli, P., Placentino, A., Carletti, F., Landi, P., Allen, P., Surguladze, S., Benedetti, F.,

Abbamonte, M., Gasparotti, R., Barale, F., Perez, J., McGuire, P., & Politi, P. (2009).

Functional atlas of emotional faces processing: a voxel-based meta-analysis of 105 functional

magnetic resonance imaging studies. J Psychiatry Neurosci 34, 418-432.

Gable, S.L., Reis, H.T., Impett, E.A., & Asher, E.R. (2004). What do you do when things go right? The

intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology 87, 228-245.

Garcia-Garcia, I., Kube, J., Gaebler, M., Horstmann, A., Villringer, A., & Neumann, J. (2016). Neural

processing of negative emotional stimuli and the influence of age, sex and and task-related

characteristics. Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews.

29
Genovese, C. R., Lazar, N. A., & Nichols, T. (2002). Thresholding of statistical maps in functional

neuroimaging using the false discovery rate. Neuroimage, 15(4), 870-878.

doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.1037

Getz, L.L., Carter, S., Gavish, L. (1981). The mating system of the prairie vole, Michrotus ochrogaster:

Field and laboratory evidence for pair-bonding, Behav Ecol Sociobiol 8:189-194.

Groppe, S.E., Gossen, A., Rademacher, L., Hahn, A., Westphal, L., Grunder, G., & Spreckelmeyer,

K.N. (2013). Oxytocin influences processing of socially relevant cues in the ventral tegmental

area of the human brain. Biol Psychiatry 74, 172-179.

Gong, Y., Zhu, Y., Zou, Y., Ma, B., Nussinov, R., Zhang, Q. (2017). Human Neuronal Calcium Sensor-

1 Protein Avoids Histidine Residues To Decrease pH Sensitivity. J Phys Chem B, 121(3), 508-

517.

Gross, J.J., John, O.P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications

for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol, 85(2), 348-62.

Hackel, L.M., Zaki, J., & Van Bavel, J. (2017). Social identity shapes social valuation: evidence from

prosocial behavior and vicarious reward, Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 2,

1219–1228.

Hammock, G. (2011). Love attitudes and relationship experience. The Journal of social psychology

151, 608-624.

Hatfield, E., Sprecher, S. (1986). Measuring passionate love in intimate relationships. Journal of

Adolescence, 9(4), 383-410.

Hendrick, C. & Hendrick, S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 50(2), 392-402.

Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S.S., & Dicke, A. (1998). The Love Attitudes Scale: Short form. Journal of

Social and Personal Relationships 15, 147-159.

30
Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A Generic Measure of Relationship Satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the

Family, 50, 93-98.

Hinde, K., Muth, C., Maninger, N., Ragen, B. J., Larke, R. H., Jarcho, M. R., Mendoza, S. P., Mason,

W.A., Ferrer, E., Cherry, S.R., Fisher-Phelps, M. L., & Bales, K. L. (2016). Challenges to the

pair bond: Neural and hormonal effects of separation and reunion in a monogamous primate.

Front Behav Neurosci, 10, 221. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00221

Hong S, Hikosaka O. (2008). The globus pallidus sends reward-related signals to the lateral habenula.

Neuron, 60(4):720-9.

Hu, Y., Scheele, D., Becker, B., Voos, G., David, B., Hurlemann, R., & Weber, B. (2016). The Effect

of Oxytocin on Third-Party Altruistic Decisions in Unfair Situations: An fMRI Study. Scientific

reports 6, 20236.

Insel, T. et al. Research domain criteria (RDoC): toward a new classification framework for research on

mental disorders. Am. J. Psychiatry 167, 748–751 (2010).

Jeon, D., Kim, S., Chetana, M., Jo, D., Ruley, H. E., Lin, S. Y., Rabah, D., Kinet, J. P., & Shin, H. S.

(2010). Observational fear learning involves affective pain system and Cav1.2 Ca2+ channels in

ACC. Nat Neurosci, 13(4), 482-488. doi:10.1038/nn.2504

Johnson, Z.V. & Young, L.J. (2015). Neurobiological mechanisms of social attachment and pair

bonding. Current opinion in behavioral sciences 3, 38-44.

Kelly AM, Goodson JL. (2014). Hypothalamic oxytocin and vasopressin neurons exert sex-specific

effects on pair bonding, gregariousness, and aggression in finches. Proc Natl Acad Sci;

111(16):6069-74.

Knafo, A., Israel, S., Darvasi, A., Bachner-Melman, R., Uzefovsky, F., Cohen, L., Feldman, E., Lerer,

E., Laiba, E., Raz, Y., Nemanov, L., Gritsenko, I., Dina, C., Agam, G., Dean, B., Bornstein, &

G., Ebstein, R.P. (2008). Individual differences in allocation of funds in the dictator game

31
 associated with length of the arginine vasopressin 1a receptor RS3 promoter region and

correlation between RS3 length and hippocampal mRNA. Genes Brain Behav 7, 266-275.

Langford, D. J., Crager, S. E., Shehzad, Z., Smith, S. B., Sotocinal, S. G., Levenstadt, J. S., Chanda, M.

L., Levitin, D. J., & Mogil, J. S. (2006). Social Modulation of Pain as Evidence for Empathy in

Mice. Science, 312(5782), 1967-1970. doi:10.1126/science.1128322

Li, J., Zhao, Y., Li, R., Broster, L.S., Zhou, C., & Yang, S. (2015). Association of Oxytocin Receptor

Gene (OXTR) rs53576 Polymorphism with Sociality: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One 10,

e0131820.

Lim, M.M., Murphy, A.Z., & Young, L.J. (2004a). Ventral striatopallidal oxytocin and vasopressin

V1a receptors in the monogamous prairie vole (Microtus ochrogaster). J Comp Neurol 468,

555-570.

Lim, M.M., Wang, Z., Olazabal, D.E., Ren, X., Terwilliger, E.F., & Young, L.J. (2004b). Enhanced

partner preference in a promiscuous species by manipulating the expression of a single gene.

Nature 429, 754-757.

Lim, M.M. & Young, L.J. (2004). Vasopressin-dependent neural circuits underlying pair bond

formation in the monogamous prairie vole. Neuroscience 125, 35-45.

Liu, Y., Curtis, J. T., & Wang, Z. (2001). Vasopressin in the lateral septum regulates pair bond

formation in male prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster). Behavioral Neuroscience, 115(4), 910-

919. doi:10.1037/0735-7044.115.4.910

Loup, F., Tribollet, E., Dubois-Dauphin, M., & Dreifuss, J.J. (1991). Localization of high-affinity

binding sites for oxytocin and vasopressin in the human brain. An autoradiographic study. Brain

Res 555, 220-232.

Mai JK, Matjtanik M, Paxinos G. Atlas of the Human Brain. 4th Ed. Academic Press/Elsevier, San

Diego 2016.

32
McRae, J.J., Gross, J., Weber, E.R., Robertson, P., Sokol-Hessner, R.D., Ray. (2012). The development

of emotion regulation: an fMRI study of cognitive reappraisal in children, adolescents and

young adults. Social Cogn. Affect. Neuroscience, 7, 11-22.

Meixner, F., Herbert, C. (2018). Whose emotion is it? Measuring self-other discrimination in romantic

relationships during an emotional evaluation paradigm. Plos one.

Mendoza SP, Mason WA. Parental division of labour and differentiation of attachments in a

monogamous primate (Callicebus cupreus) Anim. Behav. 1986;34:1336–1347

Meyer-Lindenberg A, Domes G, Kirsch P, Heinrichs M. Oxytocin and vasopressin in the human brain:

social neuropeptides for translational medicine. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2011 Aug 19;12(9):524-38.

Meyer-Lindberg, A., Kolachana, B., Gold, B., Olsh, A., Nicodemus, K.K., Mattay, V., Dean, M., &

Weinberger, D.R. (2009). Genetic variants in AVPR1A linked to autism predict amygdala

activation and personality traits in healthy humans. Mol Psychiatry 14, 968-975.

Morelli, S.A., Sacchet, M.D., & Zaki, J. (2015). Common and distinct neural correlates of personal and

vicarious reward: A quantitative meta-analysis. Neuroimage 112, 244-253.

Motoki, K., Sugiura, M., Takeuchi, H., Kotozaki, Y., Nakagawa, S., Yokoyama, R., & Kawashima, R.

(2016). Are Plasma Oxytocin and Vasopressin Levels Reflective of Amygdala Activation

during the Processing of Negative Emotions? A Preliminary Study. Front Psychol 7, 480.

Nowak, M.A. (2006). Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science 314, 1560-1563.

Numan, M. & Young, L.J. (2016). Neural mechanisms of mother-infant bonding and pair bonding:

Similarities, differences, and broader implications. Horm Behav 77, 98-112.

O'Connell, L.A. & Hofmann, H.A. (2012). Evolution of a vertebrate social decision-making network.

Science 336, 1154-1157.

Olff, M., Frijling, J.L., Kubzansky, L.D., Bradley, B., Ellenbogen, M.A., Cardoso, C., Bartz, J.A., Yee,

J.R., & van Zuiden, M. (2013). The role of oxytocin in social bonding, stress regulation and

33
 mental health: an update on the moderating effects of context and interindividual differences.

Psychoneuroendocrinology 38, 1883-1894.

Poulin, M.J., Holman, E.A., & Buffone, A. (2012). The neurogenetics of nice: receptor genes for

oxytocin and vasopressin interact with threat to predict prosocial behavior. Psychol Sci 23, 446-

452.

Post, S.G. (2005). Altruism, happiness, and health: it’s good to be good. International Journal of

Behavioral Medicine, 12(2), 66-77.

Preston, S. D. (2013). The origins of altruism in offspring care. Psychol Bull, 139(6), 1305-1341.

doi:10.1037/a0031755

Preston, S. & de Waal, F., 2011. Altruism. In J. Decety & J. T. Cacioppo (Eds.), The Oxford handbook

of social neuroscience (pp. 565-585). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Riem, M.M., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M.J., Pieper, S., Tops, M., Boksem, M.A., Vermeiren, R.R., van

Ijzendoorn, M.H., & Rombouts, S.A., 2011. Oxytocin modulates amygdala, insula, and inferior

frontal gyrus responses to infant crying: a randomized controlled trial. Biol Psychiatry 70, 291-

297.

Rocchetti, M., Radua, J., Paloyelis, Y., Xenaki, L.A., Frascarelli, M., Caverzasi, E., Politi, P., & Fusar-

Poli, P., 2014. Neurofunctional maps of the 'maternal brain' and the effects of oxytocin: a

multimodal voxel-based meta-analysis. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci 68, 733-751.

Rodrigues, S.M., Saslow, L.R., Garcia, N., John, O.P., & Keltner, D., 2009. Oxytocin receptor genetic

variation relates to empathy and stress reactivity in humans. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106,

21437-21441.

Root, D.H., Melendez, R.I., Zaborszky, L., & Napier, T.C., 2015. The ventral pallidum: Subregion-

specific functional anatomy and roles in motivated behaviors. Prog Neurobiol 130, 29-70.

34
Song, Z. & Albers, H. E., 2017. Cross-talk among oxytocin and arginine-vasopressin receptors:

Relevance for basic and clinical studies of the brain and periphery. Front Neuroendocrinol.

Strathearn, L., Li, J., Fonagy, P., Montague, P.R. (2008). What's in a smile? Maternal brain responses

to infant facial cues. Pediatrics, 122(1), 40-51.

Stoop, R., Hegoburu, C., & van den Burg, E., 2015. New opportunities in vasopressin and oxytocin

research: a perspective from the amygdala. Annu Rev Neurosci 38, 369-388.

Stott, J.J. & Redish, A.D., 2014. A functional difference in information processing between

orbitofrontal cortex and ventral striatum during decision-making behaviour. Philos Trans R Soc

Lond B Biol Sci 369.

Telzer, E. H., Ichien, N. & Qu, Y. (2015). The ties that bind: Group membership shapes the neural

correlates of in-group favoritism. Neuroimage 115, 42–51.

Trivers, R.L. (2012). The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1),

35-57.

Unkelbach, C. G., Adam J.; Forgas, J. P., 2008. Oxytocin Selectively Facilitates Recognition of

Positive Sex and Relationship Words. Psychological Science, 19(11), 1092-1094.

Uzefovsky, F., Shalev, I., Israel, S., Edelman, S., Raz, Y., Mankuta, D., Knafo-Noam, A., & Ebstein,

R.P., 2015. Oxytocin receptor and vasopressin receptor 1a genes are respectively associated

with emotional and cognitive empathy. Horm Behav 67, 60-65.

Waldinger, R.J., Schulz, M.S., Hauser, S.T., Allen, J.P., & Crowell, J.A., 2004. Reading Others'

Emotions: The Role of Intuitive Judgments in Predicting Marital Satisfaction, Quality, and

Stability. Journal of Family Psychology 18, 58-71.

Walum, H., Westberg, L., Henningsson, S., Neiderhiser, J.M., Reiss, D., Igl, W., Ganiban, J.M., Spotts,

E.L., Pedersen, N.L., Eriksson, E., & Lichtenstein, P., 2008. Genetic variation in the

35
 vasopressin receptor 1a gene (AVPR1A) associates with pair-bonding behavior in humans. Proc

Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 14153-14156.

Wang, Z., Young, L., De Vries, G., Insel,T.R. (1988). Voles and vasopressin: A review of molecular,

cellular, and behavioral studies of pair bonding and paternal behaviors, Editor(s): I.J.A. Urban,

J.P.H. Burbach, D. De Wed, Progress in Brain Research,339-349.

Williams, J.R., Catania, K.C., & Carter, C.S., 1992. Development of partner preferences in female

prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster): the role of social and sexual experience. Horm Behav 26,

Zuoxin

Wilson, D.S. (1975). A theory of group selection. Proc Nat Acad Sci, 72, 143-146.

Xu, X. et al. (2011). Reward and motivation systems: A brain mapping study of early-stage intense

romantic love in Chinese partcipants. Human Brain Mapping, 32, 249-257.

Xu, X. et al. (2012). Regional brain activity during early-stage intense romantic love predicted

relationship outcomes after 40 months: an fMRI assessment. Neuroscience letters, 526,33–38.

Young, L.J., Toloczko, D., & Insel, T.R., 1999. Localization of vasopressin (V1a) receptor binding and

mRNA in the rhesus monkey brain. J Neuroendocrinol 11, 291-297.

Young, L. J. & Wang, Z., 2004. The neurobiology of pair bonding. Nat Neurosci, 7(10), 1048-1054.

doi:10.1038/nn1327.

36
 Author Note

Data from these participants’ fMRI scans have been presented elsewhere (e.g. Acevedo et al.,

2014), though no analyses in the present research are redundant with any published findings.

37
 Tables

Table 1

Regions of Interest from Human and Animal Studies of Pair-bonding and Empathy
Brain Region x y z Reference(s)
Ventral pallidum* ** ** ** *1
Nucleus accumbens* ** ** ** 1
Ventral tegmentum 0-9 -12 -11/-24 2,3
Caudate ** ** ** 2, 3, 4
Putamen ** ** ** 2, 3, 4
Globus pallidus ** ** ** 2, 4
Periaqueductal gray 0 -31 -13 2, 4, 5
Hypothalamus* 0 0 -10 2, 6
Amygdala ±18 -3 -20 2,3,4,7,8
Hippocampus ± 30 -10 -18 2, 3
Parahippocampal gyrus ± 17 -11 -19 2, 4
Lateral septum/fornix area 0 -31 -13 1,2, 3, 4
Thalamus, dorsomedial n. ±5 -21 11 2, 4

Note. All regions are MNI coordinates. *Human brain regions were identified using Mai,
Paxinos and Voss, 2008. ** Extrapolated from a meta-analysis or composed of extensive
regions. References: 1. Groppe et al., 2013. 2. Acevedo et al., 2011. 3. Aron et al., 2005.
4. Bartels & Zeki, 2004. 5. Brunnlieb et al., 2016. 6. Eisenberger and Lieberman, 2004.
7. Satpute et al., 2015. 8. Ruby and Decety, 2001.

38
Table 2
Regional Brain Activations in Early-Stage Marital Pair-Bonds for the Romance Condition (Partner vs. Familiar
Face), at T1(Around the Wedding) and Replicated at T2 (One-year after the Wedding)

Time 1 Time 2
Brain Region Side x y z T p T p
Region of Interest (ROI) Activations

Ventral tegmental area R 3 -15 -18 2.84 0.02 2.35 0.03

Ventral pallidum R 9 6 -7 2.63 0.04 3.35 0.02
Nucleus accumbens,
R 9 6 -9 2.63 0.02 3.35 0.003
anterior hypothalamus
Caudate body, dorsal L -14 -3 22 3.49 0.01 2.80 0.05
Caudate tail R 36 -42 0 2.80 0.02 2.44 0.04

Note. MNI coordinates (x,y,z) are at the maximum value for the cluster, which may be elongated in any direction.
For ROIs, p values are for small volume correction (FDR).

39
 Table 3

Regional Brain Activations Correlated with OXTR rs53576 (G Alleles) and Altruism scores
in Response to Viewing Happy or Sad (vs. Neutral) Partner Face Images

Brain region Left Right

x y z p x y z p
Partner Happy vs. Neutral:
Positive Correlations
Ventral pallidum (VP) *,+,x -9 6 -8 0.01
Accumbens/VP -3 6 -8 0.01
Accumbens, anterior -9 15 -10 0.01
Substantia nigra -9 -7 -12 0.01
Septum/fornix area 3 0 6 0.01
Amygdala (basolateral)/
-18 0 -21 0.01 21 0 -24 0.01
Entorhinal cortex *,+,x
Periaqueductal gray + -3 -27 -10 0.03
Partner Happy vs. Stranger
Happy: Positive Correlations
Substantia nigra2 -7 -10 -14 0.05
Septum/fornix area+1,2 3 0 6 0.03
Amygdala (basolateral)/
-18 0 -24 0.03 18 0 -24 0.03
Entorhinal cortex *,+,x, 2
Periaqueductal gray +,2 -3 -27 -9 0.02 3 -27 -9 0.03
Partner Sad vs. Neutral:
Positive Correlations
VP *, x -10 7 -9 0.04
+, x
Amygdala, basolateral -19 -3 -21 0.01
x
Amygdala, central -18 -9 -15 .01
Amygdala/entorhinal cortex * -15 0 -21 0.05 15 0 -24 0.01
Entorhinal/parahippocampal
-12 -3 -22 0.01
cortex x
Partner Sad vs. Neutral:
Negative Correlations
Ventral tegmental area
0 -21 -21 0.003
(VTA)/Raphe, median*
MNI coordinates (x,y,z) are at the maximum value for the cluster, which may be elongated in any
direction. For ROIs, p values are for FDR small volume correction at p < .05.
Legend: * overlapping with OXTR rs53576, Sad; + overlapping with AVPR1a rs3, Happy; x
40
overlapping with AVPR1a rs3, Sad. For the Partner versus Stranger contrasts: 1 shown at T1, 2 shown
at T2.

41
Table 4

Regional Brain Activations Correlated with AVPR1aRS3 (long alleles) and Altruism Scores in
Response to Viewing Happy or Sad (vs. Neutral) Partner Face Images.

Brain region Left Right

x y z p x y z p

Partner Happy vs. Neutral:

Positive Correlations
Ventral pallidum/Globus pallidus
+ -12 0 -3 0.01

Substantia nigra 6 -9 -18 0.01

Septum/fornix 3 -6 12 0.02
Amygdala,basolateral/
-18 0 -21 0.04 21 0 -24 0.02
Entorhinal cortex *, +
Periaqueductal gray + -3 -27 -9 0.04
Inferior colliculus -3 -33 -15 0.01
Thalamus, medial dorsal -6 -18 3 < .001
Partner Happy vs. Stranger
Happy: Positive Correlations
Amygdala,basolateral/
-18 0 -21 0.02
Entorhinal cortex *, +,1
Amygdala1 -21 -9 -24 0.01
Partner Sad vs. Neutral:
Positive Correlations
Ventral pallidum +, x -12 6 -9 0.02
x
Amygdala, basolateral -18 0 -21 0.004 27 -6 -18 0.03
Amygdala, central -18 -9 -15 0.001
Entorhinal/Parahippocampal
-12 -3 -22 0.03
cortex x
Hypothalamus, anterior basal 6 0 -9 0.03
Partner Sad vs. Neutral:
Negative Correlations
VTA/Raphe, medianx 0 -21 -21 0.01
Caudate, tail 30 -39 18 <.001
Partner Sad vs. Stranger Sad:
Positive Correlations
Amygdala/entorhinal cortex1 12 0 -24 0.03

42
MNI coordinates (x,y,z) are at the maximum value for the cluster, which may be elongated in
any direction. For ROIs, p values are for FDR small volume correction at p < .05. For Whole
Brain Analyses, p < .001 (unc). Legend: * overlapping with AVPR1a rs3, Sad; + overlapping
with OXTR rs53576, Happy; x overlapping with OXTR rs53576, Sad.

43
 Figure Captions

Figure 1. Partner Love vs. HFN contrast: VP activation (arrow) in newly-married individuals
viewing face images of a partner (vs. familiar acquaintance) replicated around the time of the
wedding (T1) and one-year after (T2). Red, T1; Green, T2; Yellow, overlapping activation at
T1 and T2. The VP voxel clusters are ROIs, predicted regions of change, at p<.05, corrected.

Figure 2. Colored voxels show neural localization for OXTR rs53576 G-alleles and altruism
score interactions in response to affective face images of the Partner (A-G) or a Stranger (H).

(A) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: The location of the VP and NAcc responses (left arrow)
and septum responses (right arrow) to Happy face images, shown on a template anatomical
image.
(B) Partner Love vs. HFN contrast: Raw data echo planar image of a subject showing the
VP/accumbens cluster as seen in Figure 1a. Brain iron (black) is a marker for the GP and VP in
voles and humans.
(C) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrast: The location of the VP cluster for Sad faces (arrow)
overlaps with the black iron marker.
(D) Partner Happy vs. Neutral and Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: An enlargement of the VP
activation showing unique effects for Happy (yellow) and Sad (blue), and their overlap
(magenta). Happy included the NAcc (right arrow, yellow). Crosshairs mark the VP.
(E) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: The basolateral amygdala/entorhinal cortex regions
where correlations were localized (left and right arrows).
(F) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: PAG (arrow)
(G) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrast: VTA (arrow) shows negative correlation.
(H) Stranger Happy vs. Neutral and Stranger Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: No VP activation in
response to Stranger emotion face images (arrow).
(I) Partner Happy vs. Neutral and Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: VP effects in each
participant correlated with their number of OXTR rs53576 G-alleles and altruism (Agape) scores
for Happy (yellow) and Sad (blue) partner events.

Figure 3. Colored voxels show neural localization for AVPR1a rs3 long alleles and altruism
score interactions in response to affective face images of the Partner (A-G) or a Stranger (H)

(A) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: The location of the GP response (arrow, yellow) shown
on an anatomical template image.
(B) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: Raw data echo planar image of a subject showing the
GP cluster. This cluster is in a low iron concentration area (compared to the VP for Sad, shown
in 2c). Brain iron (black) is a marker for the GP and VP in voles and humans.
(C) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrast: The location of the VP cluster (arrow) overlaps with the
iron marker for the VP.
(D) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrast: An enlargement of the VP brain region showing positive
response to a partner’s sad events.
(E) Partner Happy vs. Neutral and Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: The basolateral
amygdala/entorhinal cortex regions show localized effects for happy and sad partner events (left

44
and right arrows).
(F) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrast: PAG (top arrow) and SN region (bottom arrow) show
positive response.
(G) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrast: Raphé, median (arrow) shows negative correlation.
(H) Stranger Happy vs. Neutral and Stranger Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: No VP activation in
response to Stranger happy or sad face images (arrow).
(I) Partner Happy vs. Neutral and Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: VP/GP effects of each
participant correlated with their AVPR1a rs3 allele length and altruism (Agape) scores for
Happy (yellow) and Sad (blue) conditions.

Figure 4. Colored voxels show the location of neural and altruism score correlations
overlapping for both OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3.

(A) Partner Happy vs. Neutral contrasts: Positive correlations to Happy Partner face images are
shown in the basolateral amygdala region and entorhinal cortex (arrows).
Red = OXTR rs53576; Orange = overlap of OXTR rs53576 and AVPR1a rs3.
(B) Partner Sad vs. Neutral contrasts: Positive correlation responses to Sad Partner face images
are shown in the left posterior central amygdala nucleus region (arrow).
Green = AVPR1a rs3; Blue= OXTR rs53576. Magenta= overlap between OXTR rs53576 and
AVPR1a rs3.

45