The aim of the study was to ascertain whether disagreement between GPs and patients on advice given on nutrition, exercise and weight loss is related to patient—doctor gender discordance. Our hypothesis is that a patient interacting with a physician of the same gender may perceive more social proximity, notably on health care beliefs and may be more inclined to trust them.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Conceived and designed the experiments: Contributed to the writing of the manuscript: Received May 30; Accepted Sep 2. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. However, there has been little empirical investigation of how information about neurobiological sex difference is interpreted within wider society.
This paper presents a case study that tracks the journey of one high-profile study of neurobiological sex differences from its scientific publication through various layers of the public domain.
A content analysis was performed to ascertain how the study was represented in five domains of communication: Analysis suggested that scientific research on sex difference offers an opportunity to rehearse abiding cultural understandings of gender.
In both scientific and popular contexts, traditional gender stereotypes were projected onto the novel scientific information, which was harnessed to demonstrate the factual truth and normative legitimacy of these beliefs.
The paper suggests that embedding these stereotype patterns in neuroscience may intensify their rhetorical potency by lending them the epistemic authority of science.
It argues that the neuroscience of sex difference does not merely reflect, but can actively shape the gender norms of contemporary society.
In the days following its release, this article provoked a flurry of coverage in the international print and electronic media. These discussions afford an illuminating example of how neuroscience research on sex differentiation is interpreted and employed in contemporary society.
The current paper traces how the ideas introduced in the original PNAS article evolved as they moved from the scientific into the public sphere. In so doing, it seeks to elucidate how the science of sex difference can influence public understandings of gender, as well as furnish insight into the dynamics of science communication in the new media environment.
Neuroscience and sex difference The Ingalhalikar et al. Analysis detected significant differences between the connectivity patterns of males and females: The authors suggested that this difference might underpin a range of sex differences in cognitive and behavioural abilities.
The methodology and results of the study are elaborated in greater detail below. The Ingalhalikar et al. Social scientific analyses of this cultural trend have shown that neuroscientific concepts surface particularly frequently within efforts to articulate and explain intergroup differences  — .
There are several sound reasons for screening neuroscientific data for sexual differentiation, chief among them remediating the historical underrepresentation of females in biomedical research, which has disadvantaged women in respect to disease understanding and treatment  — .
However, neuroscientific research on sexual dimorphism has recently elicited intense criticism from scholars in both natural and social sciences.
These critics contend that the evidence-base for many claims of sex difference is plagued by bias and methodological weakness  — .
Fine  and other critics allege that much sex difference research ultimately functions to sanction and sustain traditional gender relations.
They argue that as these scientific ideas percolate through lay society, they reinforce stereotypes, reify gender binaries, legitimise the differential treatment of men and women in educational and professional contexts, and make gender inequalities appear natural and inevitable  — .
These posited societal repercussions are lent empirical support by social psychological research, which indicates that exposure to biological explanations of gender differences fosters greater endorsement of gender stereotypes stereotype-consistent behaviour  — sexist attitudes acceptance of gender inequality and support for discriminatory practices .
This evidence suggests that the social stakes of advances in the science of sex difference are high.Gender Differences in Face & Emotion: A major item of expression via face is the expression of emotions.
Facial expressions of emotions are very specific in a sense that there are specific conventions for their interpretation. analysis was used to code the physical description categories gender, height, weight, empirical studies of Internet communication soon revealed gender differences in mailing lists, chat, and discussion forums that resembled those in offline communication (Herring, , ).
gender differences online, this study investigates gender. Women’s Studies in Communication, (): Richardson, Brian K., and Juandalynn Taylor. “Sexual Harassment At The Intersection Of Race And Gender: A Theoretical Model Of The Sexual Harassment Experiences Of Women Of Color.”. Guide for health communication programs?
Gender-based analysis needs to be conducted at every step of the program cycle: analysis, strategic design, development, Profiles should include differences in women’s and men’s knowledge, attitudes, and practices related.
jeffersonian republicans vs jacksonian democrats essay berlioz romeo and juliet analysis essay narrative essay on a life changing event.
Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulun rhetorical essay Maanpuolustuskorkeakoulun rhetorical essay merits and demerits of democracy government essay jonathan swift essay modern education revising an essay for coherence trailer multicultural teaching .
Gender Differences in Political Discourse which has quickly become an issue of everyday communication. Study of gender is relatively new, but views and perceptions of gender, gender differences and Syntactical level of analysis shows no differences between male and female.