Is There Neurosexism in Functional Neuroimaging Investigations of Sex Differences?
- Cordelia FineAffiliated withPsychological Sciences, University of MelbourneCentre for Ethical Leadership, Melbourne Business School Email author
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
The neuroscientific investigation of sex differences has an unsavoury past, in which scientific claims reinforced and legitimated gender roles in ways that were not scientifically justified. Feminist critics have recently argued that the current use of functional neuroimaging technology in sex differences research largely follows that tradition. These charges of ‘neurosexism’ have been countered with arguments that the research being done is informative and valuable and that an over-emphasis on the perils, rather than the promise, of such research threatens to hinder scientific progress. To investigate the validity of these contrasting concerns, recent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) investigations of sex differences and citation practices were systematically examined. In line with the notion of neurosexism, the research was found to support the influence of false-positive claims of sex differences in the brain, to enable the proliferation of untested, stereotype-consistent functional interpretations, and to pay insufficient attention to the potential plasticity of sex differences in both brain and mind. This, it is argued, creates a literature biased toward the presentation of sex differences in the brain as extensive, functionally significant, and fixed—and therefore implicitly supportive of a gender essentialist perspective. It is suggested that taking feminist criticisms into account would bring about substantial improvement in the quality of the science, as well as a reduction in socially harmful consequences.
KeywordsSex/gender fMRI Gender stereotypes Publication bias Gender essentialism Citation bias
- Is There Neurosexism in Functional Neuroimaging Investigations of Sex Differences?
Volume 6, Issue 2 , pp 369-409
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Gender stereotypes
- Publication bias
- Gender essentialism
- Citation bias
- Cordelia Fine (1) (2)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Psychological Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia
- 2. Centre for Ethical Leadership, Melbourne Business School, 200 Leicester Street, Carlton, Victoria, 3053, Australia