• The Journal of Neuroscience Research adopted robust guidelines for authors: “Addressing Sex as a Biological Variable,” November 7, 2016.
  • “Journal of neuroscience research policy on addressing sex as a biological variable: Comments, clarifications, and elaborations”
  • In December, I and some colleagues published “Editorial policies for sex and gender analysis” in The Lancet
  • Canadian colleagues have suggested how funding agencies can support these editorial policies and excellence in research: “Funding agency mechanisms to increase sex and gender analysis”
  • Gender diversity leads to better science. “Pick up any recent policy paper on women’s participation in science and you will find assurances that gender diversity enhances knowledge outcomes. Universities and science-policy stakeholders, including the European Commission and the US National Institutes of Health, readily subscribe to this argument (1–3). But is there, in fact, a gender-diversity dividend in science?” by Mathias Nielsen et al. Read the article:
  • The Dutch Organization for Health Research and Development (ZonMw) organised a Symposium for science funders to engage them in integrating sex and gender analysis in their funding policies. Their report (in Dutch) is here:
  • Cara Tannenbaum’s presentation in English is here:
  • Elsevier has developed a comprehensive report, entitled Gender in the Global Research Landscape, as an evidence-based examination of the outputs, quality, and impact of research worldwide through a gender lens.  Intended as a vehicle for understanding the role of gender within the structure of the global research enterprise, the public report covers 20 years, 12 geographies and 27 subject areas, providing powerful insight and guidance on gender research and gender equality policy for governments, funders and institutions worldwide. In addition to global results and trends, the report includes comparisons across the full range of research disciplines. The report launch is in Washington, DC on March 31, 2017.
  • Is the gender gap narrowing in science and engineering?
  • Watch our NEW 3-minute video on gendered innovations in product design:
  • For more Case Studies on gender in product design, see:
  • Attached is a popular article on Gendered Innovations published in the AWIS magazine.
  • This link leads to a popular article about sex in cells:
  • An article by Daphna Joel and Margaret M. McCarthy on “Incorporating sex as a biological variable in neuropsychiatric research: where are we now and where should we be?”:
  • International conference “Science, Innovation and Gender” 24-25 November 2011 Vilnius, Lithuania
  • A global perspective on science, technology and innovation (STI):
  • ‘Multifaceted origins of sex differences in the brain,’ compiled and edited by Margaret M. McCarthy:
  • Women In Science And Research (EPRS)
  • GenderNET reports
  • Sex Beyond The Genitalia: The Human Brain Mosaic
  • Gender Pay Gap in Europe
  • Mapping Gender in the German Research Arena. A report conducted by Elsevier. Starting on p. 27, they find: In subject areas with skewed gender ratios in favor of males, female researchers are more likely to focus on similar topics as their male counterparts. In contrast, in subject areas with more balanced gender distributions, women tend to focus on different. I find this interesting. Of course, Gendered Innovations attempts to provide tools so that both men and women can “see” new gender dimensions in research. topics.Free download.
  • The NordForsk Board has decided to establish a programme on gender in the Nordic research and innovation area. Details here.
  • DG CONNECT, the digital department of the European Commission, says “no” to all-male panels in tech.
  • Dietary Assessment Method: Analyzing How Sex and Gender Interact
  • Colorectal Cancer: Analyzing How Sex and Gender Interact
  • Recommendations by the Horizon 2020 Advisory Group on Gender, chaired by Professor Ineke Klinge. Advice on integrating gender analysis into research and innovation with particular attention to the H2020 calls for proposals. Download here.
  • GenderCC, UN Habitat, and the German development agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit) have released a comprehensive new guidebook on gender-sensitive urban climate policies for low- and middle-income countries. Authored by GenderCC’s Gotelind Alber, the guidebook seeks to assist local governments integrate the gender dimensions of climate change into the various stages of policy-making. The handbook introduces gender concepts and gender dimensions of climate change as well as resources, tools and ideas for action to climate policy decision-makers, consultants, and practitioners in local governments. You can download the handbook here.
  • The Importance of Gendered Innovations in DiscoverHER.
  • The Swedish gender-neutral pronoun “hen” entered the Swedish dictionaries in April, joining “hon” (she) and “han” (he). At the end of July, Facebook introduced new options for their Swedish sites, allowing users to choose between 70 different gender identities. Here is a newspaper report:
  • Distinguish between and define sex and gender in biomedical research. Identify sex/gender differences in the mechanism, disease, or treatment under study. Assess a research protocol based on the integration or omission of sex and/or gender. See here.
  • Gender balance: Women are funded more fairly in social science
  • Sex differences in structural organization of motor systems and their dissociable links with repetitive/restricted behaviors in children with autism by Kaustubh Supekar and Vinod Menon
  • Background: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is diagnosed much less often in females than males. Emerging behavioral accounts suggest that the clinical presentation of autism is different in females and males, yet research examining sex differences in core symptoms of autism in affected children has been limited. Additionally, to date, there have been no systematic attempts to characterize neuroanatomical differences underlying the distinct behavioral profiles observed in girls and boys with ASD. This is in part because extant ASD studies have included a small number of girls.
  • Sex differences in the brain: a whole body perspective by Geert J. de Vries and Nancy G. Forger.
  • Abstract: Most writing on sexual differentiation of the mammalian brain (including our own) considers just two organs: the gonads and the brain. This perspective, which leaves out all other body parts, misleads us in several ways. First, there is accumulating evidence that all organs are sexually differentiated, and that sex differences in peripheral organs affect the brain. We demonstrate this by reviewing examples involving sex differences in muscles, adipose tissue, the liver, immune system, gut, kidneys, bladder, and placenta that affect the nervous system and behavior. The second consequence of ignoring other organs when considering neural sex differences is that we are likely to miss the fact that some brain sex differences develop to compensate for differences in the internal environment (i.e., because male and female brains operate in different bodies, sex differences are required to make output/function more similar in the two sexes). We also consider evidence that sex differences in sensory systems cause male and female brains to perceive different information about the world; the two sexes are also perceived by the world differently and therefore exposed to differences in experience via treatment by others. Although the topic of sex differences in the brain is often seen as much more emotionally charged than studies of sex differences in other organs, the dichotomy is largely false. By putting the brain firmly back in the body, sex differences in the brain are predictable and can be more completely understood.
  • Gender-Heterogeneous Working Groups Produce Higher Quality Science by Lesley G. Campbell, Siya Mehtani, Mary E. Dozier,  Janice Rinehart
  • Abstract: Here we present the first empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that a gender-heterogeneous problem-solving team generally produced journal articles perceived to be higher quality by peers than a team comprised of highly-performing individuals of the same gender. Although women were historically underrepresented as principal investigators of working groups, their frequency as PIs at the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis is now comparable to the national frequencies in biology and they are now equally qualified, in terms of their impact on the accumulation of ecological knowledge (as measured by the h-index). While women continue to be underrepresented as working group participants, peer-reviewed publications with gender-heterogeneous authorship teams received 34% more citations than publications produced by gender-uniform authorship teams. This suggests that peers citing these publications perceive publications that also happen to have gender-heterogeneous authorship teams as higher quality than publications with gender uniform authorship teams. Promoting diversity not only promotes representation and fairness but may lead to higher quality science
  • Vera Regitz-Zagrosek and her international team have published a excellent review gender in cardiovascular disease. Free download.
  • Mapping Gender in the German Research Arena. A report conducted by Elsevier. Starting on p. 27, they find: In subject areas with skewed gender ratios in favor of males, female researchers are more likely to focus on similar topics as their male counterparts. In contrast, in subject areas with more balanced gender distributions, women tend to focus on different. I find this interesting. Of course, Gendered Innovations attempts to provide tools so that both men and women can “see” new gender dimensions in research. topics.Free download.
  • Psychosomatic Medicine’s editorial policies on reporting sex and gender in peer-reviewed research. Psychosomatic Medicine requires all articles to specifically report sex, age, and ethnic/racial characteristics of the study samples. They write: “To further clarify the issue, if subgroup analyses are reported, we require authors to report the statistical interaction term(s). Specifically, we will evaluate manuscripts as follows: 1) if there is an a priori reason to examine (sex-specific) subgroups then we a) require that the relevant interaction term is reported, but b) this interaction term does not have to be statistically significant for the subgroup analyses to be presented, and 2) if there is not an a priori reason for (sex-specific) subgroup analysis, then we will require the statistical interaction term to be significant if authors wish to present subgroup analyses.” They do not, however, require reporting sex-disaggregated data as a minimum standard. Download 1download 2.
  • Sex and Gender have been integrated into the medical curriculum at Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin.

© Lyčių studijų centras 2013
Proudly powered by WordPress