Analyses were performed with SPSS .First, mean cooperation prices for every participant in each condition had been determined.A single subject had to become excluded from further analyses due to a technical error, which prevented the completion with the second experimental session.Repeatedmeasures ANOVA was utilised to test for an effect or interaction with the variables “team” and “context” on the cooperation prices.Wilcoxonrank tests have been performed as post hoc comparisons.To determine feasible associations between testosterone and cooperationFIGURE Experimental paradigm.Each and every trial started with a start off frame informing the subject that now there is going to be a new interaction.Next, subjects saw a male silhouette representing the second player in conjunction with two modest soccer group logos also because the written name with the team to indicate the second player’s favourite team.The PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21531787 first name and initial of the last name ofthe opponent was presented to improve plausibility of a actual person.After this, subjects were asked to determine regardless of whether or not they would prefer to cooperate with the opposing player.They indicated their response through ideal or left button press.The second player’s choice was then revealed together with feedback on the outcome in line with the subject’s selection.Frontiers in Neuroscience www.frontiersin.A-196 Purity & Documentation orgJune Volume ArticleReimers and DiekhofTestosterone enhances male parochial altruismrates Spearman rank correlations have been applied.Additionally, testosterone levels had been compared among subjects displaying a higher or low parochial pattern with independent tTests.For this purpose, the ingroup bias for every subject was determined by calculating the distinction involving the cooperation prices with all the ingroup and the antagonistic outgroup in the course of the competition.Accordingly, a high worth of ingroup bias indicated additional cooperation with the ingroup relative for the antagonistic outgroup, whereas a low worth represented the opposite.Mediansplit was then used to divide the sample in two groups subjects with an ingroup bias above the median of (i.e the “parochialists,” n ; all subjects in this group had an ingroup bias of ) and subjects beneath the median (i.e the “individualists,” n ; ingroup bias [mean sem] .).Significances are reported twotailed if not otherwise indicated and onetailed in case of directed a priori hypotheses.ResultsFirst, we investigated the impact of group membership and context on cooperative behavior.A (group ingroup, neutral outgroup, unknown outgroup, antagonistic outgroup) (context neutral session, competition) repeatedmeasures ANOVA revealed hugely substantial effects for context [F p .] and team [F p p p .] at the same time as an interaction among the things group and context [F p .].Posthoc p Wilcoxon signedrank tests showed that cooperation prices were reduced inside the competitive context than for the duration of the neutral session (Z p n ; cooperation rate [mean sem] neutral session . competition .).Further, cooperation prices elevated with increasing social distance resulting in significant differences amongst the cooperation together with the distinct teams except for the comparison between the neutral and also the unknown group, which only reached statistical trend level (Z p n ).The “team” “context” interaction was mostly accounted for by substantial higher cooperation prices with ingroup members throughout the competition than in the course of the neutral session (Z p n ) and considerably decrease cooperation rates with neutral, unknown, and antagonistic outgro.