View

The Study

Investigating the effects of single-dose intranasal testosterone on economic preferences in a large randomized trial of men

In simple terms

This study gave some men a one-time nasal spray of testosterone and others a fake spray, then watched how they made choices in games. Because it was fair and random, we can say the spray didn't change their choices — but only for this one time and only for men like the ones in the study.

90%

Analysis score

90/ 90

Maximum 90 for a randomized controlled trial.

Where the score came from

Reporting60
Methodology100
Publication100
Statistical100
Study type (basis of the score)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Level 1b - Individual RCT
What’s the bottom line?

Scientists gave 1,000 men either a nasal spray with testosterone or a fake one, then watched how they made decisions about money, fairness, and competition.

Where does this study sit?

Reviews of RCTs (Meta-analyses)

Max 100

Randomized Trials

Max 90

Reviews of Cohort Studies

Max 85

Cohort Studies

Max 72

Reviews of Case-Control Studies

Max 63

Case-Control Studies

Max 58

Cross-Sectional & Case Series

Max 50

Expert Opinion

Max 5
StrongerWeaker
Randomized Trials
Level 1b
90

90 / 100

Quality score

Participants are randomly assigned to treatment or control groups, minimizing bias. The gold standard for testing whether an intervention causes an effect.

Can establish causation

Save studies & get personalized insights

Create a free account to save this study, track new evidence as it comes in, and get breakdowns of studies in the topics you care about.

Key takeaways

Summary

Based on the study abstract and findings.

  1. 1Even though testosterone is often blamed for bold or selfish behavior, this study shows that a single dose doesn’t make men act differently in money games.
  2. 2No difference between the testosterone and placebo groups — testosterone didn’t change how much they shared, risked, or competed, even though testosterone levels rose in the treatment group.

Score breakdown, methodology, conflicts of interest, evidence analysis & raw study data

Publication

Journal

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Year

2025

Authors

Anna Dreber, M. Johannesson, G. Nave, Coren L Apicella, S. Geniole, Taisuke Imai, Erik L Knight, Dylan Manfredi, Pranjal Mehta, Valentina Proietti, Steven J. Stanton, Alina Zeltikova, Francesca R Luberti, Triana L. Ortiz, J. M. Carré

Open Access
2 citations
Analysis v6
Fit Body Science verdict — we translate health studies into clear verdicts backed by peer-reviewed research.

Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.