ArticleNature communications2025
Human newborns spontaneously attend to prosocial interactions.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Bottom-up and generative computations uniquely explain neural responses across the social brain.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- When revealed after the fact, selfish intentions undermine prosocial actions in 5-year-olds.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans establish and maintain complex cooperative interactions with unrelated individuals by exploiting various cognitive mechanisms, for instance empathic reactions and a preference for prosocial actions and individuals over antisocial ones. The key role played by these features across human sociomoral systems suggests that core processes underpinning them may be evolved adaptations. Initial evidence consistent with this view came from studies on preverbal infants, which found a preference for prosocial over antisocial individuals. In this study, 5-day-old neonates were shown pairs of looping video interactions in which a prosocial event (approach in Experiment 1, helping in Experiments 2 and 3) appeared on one side of the display and an antisocial event (avoidance in Experiment 1, hindering in Experiments 2 and 3) appeared on the other; newborns' attention to each event type was measured. Across 3 experiments, newborns consistently looked longer at the prosocial than the antisocial events, but only during socially interactive versions of the stimuli. Together, these findings suggest that basic mechanisms to distinguish simple prosocial versus antisocial acts, and to prefer prosocial ones, emerge with very limited experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.