A new animal study suggests the hormone oxytocin does more than make us feel warm and trusting: it helps friendships form quickly and helps animals favor familiar companions while avoiding strangers. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, found that prairie voles genetically engineered to lack oxytocin receptors took far longer to prefer peers and were less selective in group settings, pointing to a dual role for oxytocin in promoting in-group affiliation and out-group avoidance (Neuroscience News summary of the study). The findings offer a clearer picture of the neurobiology behind friendship and raise cautious questions about how this knowledge might inform understanding of human social disorders and community wellbeing in Thailand and beyond (UC Berkeley news release).
Scientists study prairie voles because, like humans, they form selective and long-lasting social bonds; this makes them a useful model for probing the mechanisms of friendship. The new peer-focused experiments show oxytocin receptor function affects three things: the speed of forming selective peer attachments, the maintenance of those attachments in more complex social environments, and the motivational value (social reward) that animals place on known companions. In practical terms, voles without functioning oxytocin receptors eventually formed friendships in many cases, but they were slower to do so, often failed to prioritize friends in group settings, and did not expend extra effort to access familiar peers—behaviors that indicate reduced social selectivity (Current Biology paper abstract and details).
This matters for Thai readers because selective peer relationships—friendships—are central to mental health, school success and social cohesion in family-oriented societies like Thailand. Difficulties forming or maintaining friendships are linked to loneliness, anxiety and poorer long-term physical and mental health outcomes. The vole results therefore provide a biological framework for why some individuals or groups struggle with social selectivity, and they underline the need to support social-skill development and inclusive community structures in Thai schools, workplaces and elder-care settings (World Health Organization country mental health profile for Thailand).
Key findings from the study include consistent behavioral shifts when oxytocin receptor signaling was absent. In experiments where normally wired (wild-type) prairie voles form a clear peer preference within 24 hours of co-housing, oxytocin-receptor-deficient voles showed no preference at that time point and required up to a week to show similar selective partner preferences. When placed in multi-chamber group environments resembling social “parties,” wild-type voles initially favored their known companions before gradually mingling; receptor-deficient voles instead mixed freely and did not demonstrate the same partner loyalty. Finally, in effort-based tests where animals pressed levers to access either a friend or a stranger, wild-type females pressed more for friends in both peer and mate contexts, whereas mutants did so for mates but not for peers—suggesting mate bonds depend on additional reward pathways while peer bonds rely more on oxytocin-mediated selectivity (Neuroscience News summary; Current Biology abstract).
Lead investigators framed the finding not as oxytocin being absolutely required for friendship, but as a facilitator: “Oxytocin seems to be particularly important in the early formation phase of relationships and especially in the selectivity of those relationships,” said a UC Berkeley associate professor of integrative biology and neuroscience, who is senior author on the paper. She and colleagues observed that while receptor-deficient voles could eventually develop bonds that looked similar to wild-types, they were slower to do so and their attachments proved less stable in dynamic social contexts. The researchers also noted that mutant voles were less avoidant and less aggressive toward strangers—highlighting oxytocin’s paradoxical role in both promoting affiliation with known others and supporting boundary-setting against unfamiliar individuals (Neuroscience News coverage quoting the senior author; UC Berkeley press release).
The study used advanced tools to probe the neurochemical consequences of receptor loss, including a novel oxytocin nanosensor developed in a UC Berkeley chemical and biomolecular engineering lab. That sensor—built from carbon nanotubes and DNA sequences tuned to fluoresce when oxytocin binds—showed that receptor-deficient voles did not compensate by producing more oxytocin. Instead, oxytocin release in the nucleus accumbens, a brain area central to social reward, was lower in mutants, suggesting a disruption of feedback mechanisms that normally support selective social attachment (Neuroscience News on the nanosensor collaboration; Current Biology abstract).
Experts caution against over-generalising animal results to humans, and the authors themselves framed their work as a step toward understanding mechanisms that may be relevant to human psychiatric conditions where social selectivity is altered, such as autism spectrum disorders and schizophrenia. The vole model offers a focused way to separate different components of social bonds—initial approach, selective preference, reward valuation and maintenance under social challenge—components that are harder to isolate in human studies. Still, translating rodent neurobiology into human therapies requires careful clinical research and ethical oversight (Current Biology abstract and discussion of translational relevance).
For Thailand, the translational question is practical and immediate. Schools, community centres and mental health services can benefit from clearer biological models of how friendships form and fail. Public health data show that social isolation and loneliness are important contributors to mental health burdens, and that social-skill interventions and inclusive school climates can reduce risks for vulnerable children and adolescents. A country-level perspective on mental health emphasises community-based supports and early interventions—measures that would dovetail with the study’s implication that speeding and stabilising social bonding in early phases could improve longer-term social outcomes (WHO Thailand mental health country resources; recent reviews on social-skills interventions for adolescents with autism and social difficulties in Asia (systematic review on social skills interventions)).
Historical and cultural context in Thailand can shape how these neurobiological insights are applied. Thai society places strong emphasis on group harmony, family ties and respect for hierarchy—values that both help and sometimes complicate peer relationships in schools and workplaces. Buddhist social norms encourage compassion and non-attachment, which could influence how communities choose to promote social inclusion rather than exclusion. Programs that leverage culturally resonant practices—group volunteering in temples, community sports, music and arts programmes, and intergenerational activities—may enhance oxytocin-linked social rewards naturally, without medicalisation. At the same time, the study’s finding that oxytocin can also reinforce in-group/out-group distinctions is a reminder to design interventions that avoid strengthening exclusionary behaviours or group-based bias (Neuroscience News study summary and discussion of in-group/out-group effects).
Looking ahead, the research opens several likely lines of future work that are relevant to Thailand’s scientists, educators and policymakers. First, human studies are needed to test whether early social environments that boost natural oxytocin release—through safe physical contact, cooperative play, and predictable caregiving—have measurable effects on the speed and selectivity of friendship formation in children and adolescents. Randomised trials of school-based social-skills curricula with biomarkers and behavioural endpoints could bridge the animal-human gap. Second, the nanosensor technology used in the vole study points to new tools for mapping neurochemical dynamics in vivo; Thai neuroscience labs and regional collaborators might explore partnerships to adapt such sensors for non-invasive or minimally invasive research in clinical populations. Third, because oxytocin signaling appears to influence both affiliation and social rejection, interventions must be evaluated for both positive bonding effects and potential side effects on social tolerance and aggression (Current Biology paper and methodological notes).
Policy makers and practitioners should take a cautious, evidence-based approach. The current study does not support using oxytocin injections or drugs to “create” friendships; medical manipulation of social hormones carries risks and ethical concerns. Instead, practical measures align with enhancing natural pathways of social reward: support for early childhood programmes that prioritise secure caregiving and cooperative peer play, teacher training in social-emotional learning, community spaces for intergenerational mixing, and mental health services that screen for social isolation and provide group-based therapies. For people with neurodevelopmental conditions such as autism—where social bonding can be challenging—evidence suggests culturally adapted social-skills training, peer-mediated programmes and school inclusion strategies are safer and better studied than pharmacological shortcuts (systematic review of interventions in Asia and clinical guidance; Thailand-focused mental health infrastructure reviews (development of community mental health infrastructure in Thailand)).
There are also research and funding implications for Thailand. The study underscores the value of basic animal research for revealing social-brain mechanisms, but it also highlights the need for regionally relevant human research. Thai universities, medical schools and research funders could prioritise longitudinal studies of peer bonding, social reward and mental health outcomes in children and adolescents. Cross-disciplinary grants that connect neuroscience, education, and community health would help translate mechanistic insights into programmes that fit Thai cultural norms. Importantly, research ethics boards must consider cultural contexts and the potential for unintended consequences if neurobiological findings are used to justify coercive or non-consensual social engineering.
In short, the UC Berkeley study reframes oxytocin as a facilitator of social selectivity: a chemical that helps animals rapidly prioritise known companions while maintaining wariness of strangers. For Thailand, the practical lesson is not to seek hormonal quick fixes but to build environments that naturally support social bonding in safe, inclusive ways. Schools can encourage structured cooperative play and peer-mentoring; families and communities can create predictable, trust-building experiences for children and elders; and mental health services can screen for social isolation and offer evidence-based group interventions. At the policy level, investing in social-emotional learning, community centres and research partnerships will better position Thailand to translate neurobiological insights into culturally appropriate supports that strengthen friendships and reduce loneliness—without losing sight of ethical boundaries or social complexity (Neuroscience News summary of the study; UC Berkeley press release; Current Biology abstract).
Readers should note the study’s limitations: it was conducted in prairie voles and while these animals are among the best models for social bonding, human social behaviour is shaped by far more complex cultural, cognitive and linguistic factors. The study’s authors themselves emphasise that oxytocin accelerates and shapes selectivity but is not strictly required for attachment—mutant voles often formed bonds eventually—so social systems and learning remain powerful. Any translation into human interventions will require careful clinical trials and culturally informed programme design (Current Biology discussion and caveats).
Practical recommendations for Thai families, schools and health services based on current evidence are straightforward. Encourage consistent, predictable social routines for young children that include cooperative play and supervised physical contact (when culturally appropriate and safe). Train teachers in social-emotional learning and peer mediation to help students form and sustain friendships. Expand group-based community mental health activities that reduce isolation among adolescents and older adults. Fund local translational research that measures both behavioural outcomes and, where appropriate and ethical, biological markers in partnership with international labs. Above all, prioritise inclusion and avoid policies that might amplify in-group/out-group divisions while seeking to strengthen social bonds naturally and respectfully (WHO Thailand mental health resources; recent regional reviews of social-skills interventions (systematic review link)).
The vole findings are a timely reminder that friendship is both a social practice and a biological process. Understanding that biology can shape how quickly and selectively bonds form gives educators, clinicians and policy makers another tool for designing environments that nurture social belonging. For Thai communities that prize harmony and supportive networks, the message is clear: invest in early, inclusive social experiences and evidence-based supports—these are the safest and most culturally compatible ways to help people form the kinds of friendships that sustain health and wellbeing.