Gender on the brain: a case study of science communication in the new media environment

Neuroscience explanations really do satisfy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the seductive allure of neuroscience

Extraneous neuroscience information improves ratings of scientific explanations, and affects mock juror decisions in many studies, but others have yielded little to no effect. To establish the magnitude of this effect, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis using 60 experiments from 28 publications. We found a mild but highly significant effect, with substantial heterogeneity. Planned subgroup analyses revealed that within-subjects studies, where people can compare the same material with and without neuroscience, and those using text, have stronger effects than between-subjects designs, and studies using brain image stimuli. We serendipitously found that effect sizes were stronger on outcomes of evaluating satisfaction or metacomprehension, compared with jury verdicts or assessments of convincingness. In conclusion, there is more than one type of neuroscience explanations effect. Irrelevant neuroscience does have a seductive allure, especially on self-appraised satisfaction and understanding, and when presented as text.

The political leaning of the neuroscience discourse about school education in the French press from 2000 to 2020

Political actors pay attention to newspapers because they stimulate them to address a topic, reflect public opinion, provide feedback to their decisions, and help them to generate effective messages. Previous surveys showed that this is true for scientific issues. It follows that the newspaper coverage of scientific issues should appear as politically oriented, as observed regarding climate change. Here, we tested this prediction regarding educational neuroscience. This scientific issue is interesting because it implies no major economic interest and because the relevance of neuroscience regarding teaching in the classroom is still highly controversial. As hypothesized, we observed that the French press appeared strongly polarized: the right-leaning press was mostly favorable to educational neuroscience, whereas critical opinions were mainly found in the social-democrat press. Although the relevance of neuroscience toward teaching was rarely discussed in scientific arguments, political actors often invoked educational neuroscience in the press to legitimate their decision.

Why and How to Account for Sex and Gender in Brain and Behavioral Research

Long overlooked in neuroscience research, sex and gender are increasingly included as key variables potentially impacting all levels of neurobehavioral analysis. Still, many neuroscientists do not understand the difference between the terms "sex" and "gender," the complexity and nuance of each, or how to best include them as variables in research designs. This TechSights article outlines rationales for considering the influence of sex and gender across taxa, and provides technical guidance for strengthening the rigor and reproducibility of such analyses. This guidance includes the use of appropriate statistical methods for comparing groups as well as controls for key covariates of sex (e.g., total intracranial volume) and gender (e.g., income, caregiver stress, bias). We also recommend approaches for interpreting and communicating sex- and gender-related findings about the brain, which have often been misconstrued by neuroscientists and the lay public alike.

Beyond "sex prediction": Estimating and interpreting multivariate sex differences and similarities in the brain

Previous studies have shown that machine-learning (ML) algorithms can "predict" sex based on brain anatomical/ functional features. The high classification accuracy achieved by ML algorithms is often interpreted as revealing large differences between the brains of males and females and as confirming the existence of "male/female brains". However, classification and estimation are different concepts, and using classification metrics as surrogate estimates of between-group differences may result in major statistical and interpretative distortions. The present study avoids these distortions and provides a novel and detailed assessment of multivariate sex differences in gray matter volume (GMVOL) that does not rely on classification metrics. Moreover, appropriate regression methods were used to identify the brain areas that contribute the most to these multivariate differences, and clustering techniques and analyses of similarities (ANOSIM) were employed to empirically assess whether they assemble into two sex-typical profiles. Results revealed that multivariate sex differences in GMVOL: (1) are "large" if not adjusted for total intracranial volume (TIV) variation, but "small" when controlling for this variable; (2) differ in size between individuals and also depends on the ML algorithm used for their calculation (3) do not stem from two sex-typical profiles, and so describing them in terms of "male/female brains" is misleading.

Teaching About Sex and Gender in Neuroscience: More Than Meets the "XY"

Offering courses on the neuroscience of sex and gender can help support an inclusive curriculum in neuroscience. At the same time, developing and teaching such courses can be daunting to even the most enthusiastic educators, given the subject's complexities, nuances, and the difficult conversations that it invites. The authors of this article have all developed and taught such courses from different perspectives. Our aim is to provide educators with an overview of important conceptual topics as well as a comprehensive, but non-exhaustive, guide to resources for teaching about sex/gender in neuroscience based on our collective experience teaching courses on the topic. After defining vital terminology and briefly reviewing the biology of sex and sex determination, we describe some common topics within the field and contrast our current nuanced understandings from outdated misconceptions in the field. We review how (mis)representation of the neuroscience of sex/gender serves as a case study for how scientific results are communicated and disseminated. We consider how contextualization of sex/gender neuroscience research within a broader historical and societal framework can give students a wider perspective on the enterprise of science. Finally, we conclude with a brief discussion on how to choose learning goals for your course and implementation notes.

Can Open Science be a Tool to Dismantle Claims of Hardwired Brain Sex Differences? Opportunities and Challenges for Feminist Researchers

Feminist scholars have long been concerned with claims of hardwired brain sex differences emanating from neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. Past criticisms of these claims have rightfully questioned the impact of this research on gender equality, pointing out how findings can be used to vindicate gender stereotypes. In this article, we appraise the brain sex differences literature through the lens of open science, a movement aimed at improving the robustness and reliability of science. In this discussion, we offer a feminist evaluation of the strategies (e.g., pre-registration, data sharing, and accountability) provided by open science, and we question whether these may be the novel and disruptive tools needed to dismantle claims about hardwired brain sex differences. We suggest that open science strategies can be useful in challenging some of these claims, and we note that promising initiatives are already being developed in neuroscience and allied fields. We end by acknowledging the distinct challenges that feminist researchers wishing to engage in open science face, particularly in the context of limited diversity. We conclude that open science presents considerable opportunity for feminist researchers, and that it will be crucial for feminists to be involved in shaping the future of this movement.

Media Representations of Science during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis of News and Social Media on the Island of Ireland

COVID-19 is arguably the most critical science communication challenge of a generation, yet comes in the wake of a purported populist turn against scientific expertise in western societies. This study advances understanding of science-society relations during the COVID-19 pandemic by analysing how science was represented in news and social media coverage of COVID-19 on the island of Ireland. Thematic analysis was performed on a dataset comprising 952 news articles and 603 tweets published between 1 January and 31 May 2020. Three themes characterised the range of meanings attached to science: 'Defining science: Its subjects, practice and process', 'Relating to science: Between veneration and suspicion' and 'Using science: As solution, policy and rhetoric'. The analysis suggested that the COVID-19 pandemic represented a platform to highlight the value, philosophy, process and day-to-day activity of scientific research. However, the study also identified risks the pandemic might pose to science communication, including feeding public alienation by disparaging lay understandings, reinforcing stereotypical images of scientists, and amplifying the politicisation of scientific statements.

The gender-binary cycle: the perpetual relations between a biological-essentialist view of gender, gender ideology, and gender-labelling and sorting

Gender inequality is one of the most pressing issues of our time. A core factor that feeds gender inequality is people's gender ideology-a set of beliefs about the proper order of society in terms of the roles women and men should fill. We argue that gender ideology is shaped, in large parts, by the way people make sense of gender differences. Specifically, people often think of gender differences as expressions of a predetermined biology, and of men and women as different 'kinds'. We describe work suggesting that thinking of gender differences in this biological-essentialist way perpetuates a non-egalitarian gender ideology. We then review research that refutes the hypothesis that men and women are different 'kinds' in terms of brain function, hormone levels and personality characteristics. Next, we describe how the organization of the environment in a gender-binary manner, together with cognitive processes of categorization drive a biological-essentialist view of gender differences. We then describe the self-perpetuating relations, which we term the gender-binary cycle, between a biological-essentialist view of gender differences, a non-egalitarian gender ideology and a binary organization of the environment along gender lines. Finally, we consider means of intervention at different points in this cycle. This article is part of the theme issue 'The political brain: neurocognitive and computational mechanisms'.

Women and men in orthopaedics

PURPOSE

To compare and discuss the gender disparities in the Orthopaedic specialty.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature to find the rates of women applying for an orthopaedic residency, fellowship, and academic career program, to understand the causes of the disparities in women in orthopaedics, and how this relates to orthopaedic surgical practice.

RESULTS

The idea that men and women are different and have different working styles and skills and the belief that males are more dominant and more status-worthy than females leads to gender barriers and stereotypes that restrict women from entering male-dominated specialties. It is important to mention that equivalent barriers restrict men from pursuing female-dominated specialties such as Gynecology. Economic disparities and gender stereotypes that divide medical specialties into masculine and feminine, creating a gender gap in health care are major concerns. However, the number of women in the health sector is expected to increase due to the growing amount of female students that are expected to soon graduate. A leadership gender gap also exists; although women consist of 70% of the health care workforce they occupy only 25% of leadership positions.

CONCLUSION

The existence of gender-based disparities in healthcare is multifactorial. The explanation behind the existence of a so-called gender gap lies in organizational and individual factors. Early development and family relations, the decision between work and life balance, personal choices and interests, as well as working conditions, absence of role models and mentorship and institutional policies make gender disparities even more evident.

"Mombrain and Sticky DNA": The Impacts of Neurobiological and Epigenetic Framings of Motherhood on Women's Subjectivities

The fields of epigenetics and neuroscience have come to occupy a significant place in individual and public life in biomedicalized societies. Social scientists have argued that the primacy and popularization of the "neuro" has begun to shape how patients and other lay people experience themselves and their lifeworlds in increasingly neurological and genetic terms. Pregnant women and new mothers have become an important new target for cutting edge neuroscientific and epigenetic research, with the Internet constituting a highly active space for engagement with knowledge translations. In this paper, we analyze the reception by women in North America of translations of nascent epigenetic and neuroscientific research. We conducted three focus groups with pregnant women and new mothers. The study was informed by a prior scoping investigation of online content. Our focus group findings record how engagement with translations of epigenetic and neuroscientific research impact women's perinatal experience, wellbeing, and self-construal. Three themes emerged in our analysis: (1) A kind of brain; (2) The looping effects of biomedical narratives; (3) Imprints of past experience and the management of the future. This data reveals how mothers engage with the neurobiological style-of-thought increasingly characteristic of public health and popular science messaging around pregnancy and motherhood. Through the molecularization of pregnancy and child development, a typical passage of life becomes saturated with "susceptibility," "risk," and the imperative to preemptively make "healthy' choices." This, in turn, redefines and shapes the experience of what it is to be a "good," "healthy," or "responsible" mother/to-be.

Effects of different intracranial volume correction methods on univariate sex differences in grey matter volume and multivariate sex prediction

Sex differences in 116 local gray matter volumes (GMVOL) were assessed in 444 males and 444 females without correcting for total intracranial volume (TIV) or after adjusting the data with the scaling, proportions, power-corrected proportions (PCP), and residuals methods. The results confirmed that only the residuals and PCP methods completely eliminate TIV-variation and result in sex-differences that are "small" (∣d∣ < 0.3). Moreover, as assessed using a totally independent sample, sex differences in PCP and residuals adjusted-data showed higher replicability ([Formula: see text] 93%) than scaling and proportions adjusted-data [Formula: see text] 68%) or raw data ([Formula: see text] 45%). The replicated effects were meta-analyzed together and confirmed that, when TIV-variation is adequately controlled, volumetric sex differences become "small" (∣d∣ < 0.3 in all cases). Finally, we assessed the utility of TIV-corrected/ TIV-uncorrected GMVOL features in predicting individuals' sex with 12 different machine learning classifiers. Sex could be reliably predicted (> 80%) when using raw local GMVOL, but also when using scaling or proportions adjusted-data or TIV as a single predictor. Conversely, after properly controlling TIV variation with the PCP and residuals' methods, prediction accuracy dropped to [Formula: see text] 60%. It is concluded that gross morphological differences account for most of the univariate and multivariate sex differences in GMVOL.

Sex differences in gray matter volume: how many and how large are they really?

Background

Studies assessing volumetric sex differences have provided contradictory results. Total intracranial volume (TIV) is a major confounding factor when estimating local volumes of interest (VOIs). We investigated how the number, size, and direction of sex differences in gray matter volume (GMv) vary depending on how TIV variation is statistically handled.

Methods

Sex differences in the GMv of 116 VOIs were assessed in 356 participants (171 females) without correcting for TIV variation or after adjusting the data with 5 different methods (VBM8 non-linear-only modulation, proportions, power-corrected-proportions, covariation, and the residuals method). The outcomes obtained with these procedures were compared to each other and to those obtained in three criterial subsamples, one comparing female-male pairs matched on their TIV and two others comparing groups of either females or males with large/small TIVs. Linear regression was used to quantify TIV effects on raw GMv and the efficacy of each method in controlling for them.

Results

Males had larger raw GMv than females in all brain areas, but these differences were driven by direct TIV-VOIs relationships and more closely resembled the differences observed between individuals with large/small TIVs of sex-specific subsamples than the sex differences observed in the TIV-matched subsample. All TIV-adjustment methods reduced the number of sex differences but their results were very different. The VBM8- and the proportions-adjustment methods inverted TIV-VOIs relationships and resulted in larger adjusted volumes in females, promoting sex differences largely attributable to TIV variation and very distinct from those observed in the TIV-matched subsample. The other three methods provided results unrelated to TIV and very similar to those of the TIV-matched subsample. In these datasets, sex differences were bidirectional and achieved satisfactory replication rates in 19 VOIs, but they were “small” (d < ∣0.38∣) and most of them faded away after correcting for multiple comparisons.

Conclusions

There is not just one answer to the question of how many and how large the sex differences in GMv are, but not all the possible answers are equally valid. When TIV effects are ruled out using appropriate adjustment methods, few sex differences (if any) remain statistically significant, and their size is quite reduced.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13293-019-0245-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Exploring the relationship between lay theories of gender and attitudes to abortion in the context of a national referendum on abortion policy

The relationship between lay theories of gender and attitudes to abortion policy has received minimal empirical attention. An ongoing theoretical debate in the psychological essentialism literature queries whether biological attributions causally influence social attitudes or primarily function to justify existing attitudinal commitments. The current research used the context of a national referendum on abortion in Ireland to investigate whether endorsement of certain gender theories is contingent on their rhetorical construction as supporting particular attitudes to abortion. Two experimental studies were conducted online in the three weeks preceding the Irish abortion referendum. The studies tested whether participants would adapt their causal gender beliefs after reading that biological (Study 1; N = 348) or social (Study 2; N = 241) accounts of gender supported or conflicted with their intended vote in the referendum. Both studies showed the opposite effect: causal gender theories presented as conflicting with participants' voting intentions subsequently showed elevated support, relative to theories that purportedly aligned with participants' voting intentions. While results confirm that lay theories of gender are mutable, the direction of effects does not support the proposition that gender theories are selectively endorsed to support existing socio-political attitudes to abortion. Potential mechanisms for the results observed are discussed.

Sex in Context: Limitations of Animal Studies for Addressing Human Sex/Gender Neurobehavioral Health Disparities

Many brain and behavioral disorders differentially affect men and women. The new National Institutes of Health requirement to include both male and female animals in preclinical studies aims to address such health disparities, but we argue that the mandate is not the best solution to this problem. Sex differences are highly species-specific, tied to the mating system and social ecology of a given species or even strain of animal. In many cases, animals poorly replicate male-female differences in brain-related human diseases. Sex/gender disparities in human health have a strong sociocultural component that is intimately entangled with biological sex and challenging to model in animals. We support research that investigates sex-related variables in hypothesis-driven studies of animal brains and behavior. However, institutional policies that require sex analysis and give it special salience over other sources of biological variance can distort research. We caution that the costly imposition of sex analysis on nearly all animal research entrenches the presumption that human brain and behavioral differences are largely biological in origin and overlooks the potentially more powerful social, psychological, and cultural contributors to male-female neurobehavioral health gaps.

'Appeals to nature' in marriage equality debates: A content analysis of newspaper and social media discourse

In May 2015, Ireland held a referendum to legalize same-sex marriage, which passed with 62% of the vote. This study explores the role played by 'appeals to nature' in the referendum debate. Little research has investigated how biological attributions are spontaneously generated in real-world discourse regarding sexual rights. Through content analysis of newspaper and Twitter discussion of the referendum, this study aims to (1) establish the frequency of appeals to nature and their distribution across the various 'sides' of the debate and (2) analyse the forms these natural claims took and the rhetorical functions they fulfilled. Appeals to nature occurred in a minority of media discussion of the referendum (13.6% of newspaper articles and .3% of tweets). They were more prominent in material produced by anti-marriage equality commentators. Biological attributions predominantly occurred in relation to parenthood, traditional marriage, gender, and homosexuality. The article analyses the rhetorical dynamics of these natural claims and considers the implications for marriage equality research and activism. The analysis suggests appeals to nature allow anti-marriage equality discourse adapt to a cultural context that proscribes outright disapproval of same-sex relationships. However, it also queries whether previous research has overemphasized the significance of biological attributions in discourse about groups' rights.

The Movement of Research from the Laboratory to the Living Room: a Case Study of Public Engagement with Cognitive Science

Media reporting of science has consequences for public debates on the ethics of research. Accordingly, it is crucial to understand how the sciences of the brain and the mind are covered in the media, and how coverage is received and negotiated. The authors report here their sociological findings from a case study of media coverage and associated reader comments of an article ('Does bilingualism influence cognitive aging?') from Annals of Neurology. The media attention attracted by the article was high for cognitive science; further, as associates/members of the Centre where it was produced, the authors of the research reported here had rare insight into how the scientists responsible for the Annals of Neurology article interacted with the media. The data corpus included 37 news items and 228 readers' comments, examined via qualitative thematic analysis. Media coverage of the article was largely accurate, without merely copying the press release. Analysis of reader comments showed these to be an important resource for considering issues of import to neuroethics scholars, as well as to scientists themselves (including how science communication shapes and is shaped by ethical, epistemic, and popular discourse). In particular, the findings demonstrate how personal experiences were vital in shaping readers' accounts of their (dis)agreements with the scientific article. Furthermore, the data show how scientific research can catalyse political discussions in ways likely unanticipated by scientists. The analysis indicates the importance of dialogue between journalists, laboratory scientists and social scientists in order to support the communication of the messages researchers intend.

The Impact of Personality Factors and Preceding User Comments on the Processing of Research Findings on Deep Brain Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Experiment in a Simulated Online Forum

Background

Laypeople frequently discuss medical research findings on Web-based platforms, but little is known about whether they grasp the tentativeness that is inherent in these findings. Potential influential factors involved in understanding medical tentativeness have hardly been assessed to date.

Objective

The research presented here aimed to examine the effects of personality factors and of other users’ previous contributions in a Web-based forum on laypeople’s understanding of the tentativeness of medical research findings, using the example of research on deep brain stimulation.

Methods

We presented 70 university students with an online news article that reported findings on applying deep brain stimulation as a novel therapeutic method for depression, which participants were unfamiliar with. In a randomized controlled experiment, we manipulated the forum such that the article was either accompanied by user comments that addressed the issue of tentativeness, by comments that did not address this issue, or the article was accompanied by no comments at all. Participants were instructed to write their own individual user comments. Their scientific literacy, epistemological beliefs, and academic self-efficacy were measured. The outcomes measured were perceived tentativeness and tentativeness addressed in the participants’ own comments.

Results

More sophisticated epistemological beliefs enhanced the perception of tentativeness (standardized β=.26, P=.034). Greater scientific literacy (stand. β=.25, P=.025) and greater academic self-efficacy (stand. β=.31, P=.007) were both predictors of a more extensive discussion of tentativeness in participants’ comments. When forum posts presented in the experiment addressed the issue of tentativeness, participants’ subsequent behavior tended to be consistent with what they had read in the forum, F_2,63=3.66; P=.049, η_p²=.092.

Conclusions

Students’ understanding of the tentativeness of research findings on deep brain stimulation in an online forum is influenced by a number of character traits and by the previous comments that were contributed to the forum by other users. There is potential for targeted modification of traits such as scientific literacy, epistemological beliefs, and academic self-efficacy to foster critical thinking in laypeople who take part in online discussions of medical research findings.

Perils and pitfalls of reporting sex differences

The idea of sex differences in the brain both fascinates and inflames the public. As a result, the communication and public discussion of new findings is particularly vulnerable to logical leaps and pseudoscience. A new US National Institutes of Health policy to consider both sexes in almost all preclinical research will increase the number of reported sex differences and thus the risk that research in this important area will be misinterpreted and misrepresented. In this article, I consider ways in which we might reduce that risk, for example, by (i) employing statistical tests that reveal the extent to which sex explains variation, rather than whether or not the sexes 'differ', (ii) properly characterizing the frequency distributions of scores or dependent measures, which nearly always overlap, and (iii) avoiding speculative functional or evolutionary explanations for sex-based variation, which usually invoke logical fallacies and perpetuate sex stereotypes. Ultimately, the factor of sex should be viewed as an imperfect, temporary proxy for yet-unknown factors, such as hormones or sex-linked genes, that explain variation better than sex. As scientists, we should be interested in discovering and understanding the true sources of variation, which will be more informative in the development of clinical treatments.

Validity and reliability analysis of the Chinese parent version of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scale (6-18 years)

This study aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of the Chinese parent version of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scale (ASRS, 6-18 years) for a general sample of Chinese children. The study involved assessing 1625 community-based subjects aged 6-12 years from four sites (Shanghai, Guangzhou, Changsha, and Harbin city) in China and 211 clinic-based participants aged 6-18 with a confirmed diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) ranged from 0.585 to 0.929, and the test-retest reliability (interclass correlations) ranged from 0.542 to 0.749, indicating no significant difference between the two tests at an interval of 2-4 weeks. The construct validity was relatively excellent, and the concurrent validity with the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS) (Pearson correlations) was 0.732 between the two total scores. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses showed excellent and comparable discriminant validity of the ASRS with respect to the SRS, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9507 (95% CI: 0.93-0.97) versus 0.9703 (95% CI: 0.96-0.98), respectively. Our data suggested a cutoff ≥60 for the Chinese version of the ASRS, with good accuracy in screening autism symptoms (sensitivity=94.2%, specificity=77%). The Chinese parent version of the ASRS is therefore a reliable and valid tool for screening autistic symptoms in Chinese children in general.

How the Public Engages With Brain Optimization: The Media-mind Relationship

In the burgeoning debate about neuroscience's role in contemporary society, the issue of brain optimization, or the application of neuroscientific knowledge and technologies to augment neurocognitive function, has taken center stage. Previous research has characterized media discourse on brain optimization as individualistic in ethos, pressuring individuals to expend calculated effort in cultivating culturally desirable forms of selves and bodies. However, little research has investigated whether the themes that characterize media dialogue are shared by lay populations. This article considers the relationship between the representations of brain optimization that surfaced in (i) a study of British press coverage between 2000 and 2012 and (ii) interviews with forty-eight London residents. Both data sets represented the brain as a resource that could be manipulated by the individual, with optimal brain function contingent on applying self-control in one's lifestyle choices. However, these ideas emerged more sharply in the media than in the interviews: while most interviewees were aware of brain optimization practices, few were committed to carrying them out. The two data sets diverged in several ways: the media's intense preoccupation with optimizing children's brains was not apparent in lay dialogue, while interviewees elaborated beliefs about the underuse of brain tissue that showed no presence in the media. This article considers these continuities and discontinuities in light of their wider cultural significance and their implications for the media-mind relationship in public engagement with neuroscience.