Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Does Testosterone Affect Cognitive Reflection? Evidence From a Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Study of 1,000 Participants. |
| Authors: |
Knight, Erik L. (AUTHOR), Nave, Gideon (AUTHOR), Shaw, Steven D. (AUTHOR), Apicella, Coren (AUTHOR), Bonin, Pierre L. (AUTHOR), Dreber, Anna (AUTHOR), Geniole, Shawn N. (AUTHOR), Johannesson, Magnus (AUTHOR), Manfredi, Dylan (AUTHOR), Mehta, Pranjal (AUTHOR), Proietti, Valentina (AUTHOR), Stanton, Steven J. (AUTHOR), Luberti, Francesca R. (AUTHOR), Ortiz, Triana (AUTHOR), Carré, Justin M. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: |
Psychological Science (0956-7976). Jul2026, Vol. 37 Issue 7, p463-476. 14p. |
| Subjects: |
Testosterone, Cognitive ability, Replication (Experimental design), Critical thinking, Statistical reliability, Insufflation, Medical research, Randomized controlled trials |
| Abstract: |
The cognitive reflection test (CRT) measures reliance on intuitive thinking versus deliberate reasoning and predicts important real-world outcomes. Prior research has suggested that testosterone administration impaired CRT performance, but follow-up studies produced null results. To provide a rigorous test, we conducted a large, preregistered, double-blind, placebo-controlled experiment, unprecedented in size, with 1,000 adult men, as part of an adversarial collaboration. Participants received a single dose of intranasal testosterone or placebo, completed the CRT, and rated their confidence level. We found an insignificant treatment effect on the CRT, with the point estimate in the opposite direction of the original hypothesis (βLOGIT = 0.118, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [−0.099, 0.335]). In a second primary test, we found a significant negative treatment effect on confidence (βLOGIT = −0.329, 95% CI = [−0.558, −0.100]), which is also the opposite of our prediction. Our findings challenge earlier claims about testosterone's cognitive effects and highlight the importance of high-powered replications. Long-term or developmental testosterone effects remain potentially important but difficult to study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Psychological Science (0956-7976) is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
