. 2018 Jun 7;34:42–52. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2018.05.010

Table 4.

Within-twin correlations for MZ and DZ twins and full ACE model estimates with 95% confidence intervals for prosocial behavior and the ROIs associated with the possible experience of self-exclusion and prosocial behavior.

Outcome variable	r_MZ	r_DZ		A²	C²	E²
Behavior PCG	−.22*	−0	95% CI	† - 0.05	† - 0.05	0.95 - †
			ACE	0	0	1
Exclusion > Inclusion
left amygdala	.11	−.14	95% CI	† - 0.27	† - 0.19	0.73 - †
			ACE	0.02	0	0.97
IFG	.37*	.19	95% CI	0 - 0.54	† - 0.45	0.46 - 0.89
			ACE	0.29	0.05	0.66
smPFC	.36*	.12	95% CI	0 - 0.53	† - 0.40	0.46 - 0.91
			ACE	0.33	0	0.67
sgACC	.02	.26	95% CI	† - 0.29	† - 0.30	0.70 - †
			ACE	0	0.1	0.9

Inclusion > Exclusion
ACC	−.08	.07	95% CI	† - 0.21	† - 0.20	0.79 - †
			ACE	0	0	1
Striatum	−.08	.20	95% CI	† - 0.28	† - 0.27	0.73 - †
			ACE	0	0.07	0.93
Bilateral insula	.03	.31*	95% CI	† - 0.38	0 - 0.38	0.62 - 1
			ACE	0	0.19	0.81

Compensating > Tossing
PCC	.09	−.13	95% CI	† - 0.27	NA - 0.19	0.73 - †
			ACE	0.02	0	0.98

Whole brain regression
Bilateral Insula	−.13	−.06	95% CI	† - 0.15	0.82 - †	0.82 - †
			ACE	0	1	1

Control analysis
Total brain volume	.87*	.57*	95% CI	0.00-0.58	0.09-0.23	0.09-0.23
			ACE	0.26	0.14	0.14

r_MZ = within-twin correlation for monozygotic twins, r_DZ = within-twin correlation for dizygotic twins. Significant correlations and models are indicated by an asterisk (*) and bold font. ^† Due to relatively weak correlations, in combination with the sample size, the estimated likelihood function was too flat to accurately estimate 95% confidence interval bounds.