Bonding Hormone

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Scientists have already established that the hormone oxytocin is a trigger for love and affection. Now they have discovered that babies raised for their first two years in orphanages do not produce the same levels of oxytocin as children raised by their biological parents.

In a test designed to elicit cuddling and affection, Seth D. Pollak and his colleagues at the University of Wisconsin–Madison recruited 18 toddlers adopted from places such as Russia and Romania and an equal number of children with biological parents. Each toddler sat on his or her mother's lap while playing an interactive game with instructions such as “tickle your partner's tummy” and “hug your partner.” The children completed the same game on the lap of a friendly female stranger. The biological children showed a rise in oxytocin after playing with their own mother but not after playing with the female stranger. Yet the adopted children showed no rise in either case.

Pollak does not want to alarm would-be adoptive parents but wants to inform the early childhood field so that measures can be found to help adopted children bond early on. “These are children who start their lives in some very horrendous conditions, and within a day, their world changes,” Pollak says. “It may be that the child's comfort system isn’t kicking in.” Psychiatry professor C. Sue Carter of the University of Illinois at Chicago says there are ways to improve bonding, adding that hormones “are not destiny.”

SA Mind Vol 17 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Bonding Hormone” in SA Mind Vol. 17 No. 1 (), p. 11
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0206-11a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe