4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

On the elusive nature of sex differences in cognition: Hormonal influences contributing, to within-sex variation

期刊

ARCHIVES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR
卷 31, 期 1, 页码 145-152

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1023/A:1014095521499

关键词

sex differences; cognition; functional cerebral asymmetry; testosterone estrogen

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We argue that within-sex variation resulting from the prenatal organizational and adult activational effects of gonadal steroid hormones has the potential to obscure between sex differences in cognitive performance and functional cerebral asymmetry, Two putative markers for prenatal testosterone, finger ridge count (FRC) asymmetry and the 2D:4D finger length ratio, have been linked to within-sex variation in cognitive performance. In particular, FRC allows the identification of men and women who show a reversal of the typical sex-related pattern of task performance. Three paradigms for the study of activational effects-seasonal, menstrual, and diurnal hormonal: cycles-have evaluated changes in task performance and functional cerebral asymmetry. The performance of sex-dimorphic, but not sex-neutral, tasks changes with estrogen across the menstrual cycle and with testosterone across its seasonal and diurnal cycles. Functional cerebral asymmetry also changes systematically across both the menstrual cycle and the diurnal testosterone cycle in such a way that suggests left hemisphere performance increases as testosterone levels decline whereas right hemisphere performance increases as estrogen levels decline. In studies of sex differences, such correlates of within-sex hormone-related differences are rarely measured or controlled. Whatever the explanation for the associations of putative markers and hormone cycles with differences in cognitive abilities and cerebral asymmetry, it is clear that these relationships have the potential to contribute to the elusive nature of sex differences in cognition and functional brain organization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据