Related Experiment Videos
Methods for obtaining menstrual-cycle data in menstrual-synchrony studies: commentary on Schank (2001)
1Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction, Indiana University Bloomington, 47405, USA. cygraham@indiana.edu
Journal of Comparative Psychology (Washington, D.C. : 1983)
|September 18, 2002
Summary
This commentary critiques J. C. Schank's (2001) claims about recall biases in menstrual synchrony research. It argues that Schank’s criticisms are unfounded, as most studies utilize prospective menstrual calendars, a valid data collection method.
Area of Science:
- Human physiology
- Psychology
- Sociology
Background:
- J. C. Schank (2001) identified measurement error and recall biases in menstrual synchrony studies.
- Schank specifically criticized the use of menstrual-cycle-onset calendars, suggesting potential recall biases.
Discussion:
- This commentary refutes Schank's claims regarding recall biases in menstrual synchrony research.
- It highlights that the majority of studies employ prospective menstrual calendars, a method accepted in various research fields.
- The commentary argues that Schank's assumptions about recall bias lack empirical evidence.
Key Insights:
- Schank's critique of menstrual calendar methodology is misapplied to studies predominantly using prospective data.
- Prospective menstrual calendars are a reliable and low-demand method for participants.
- The validity of menstrual synchrony research using calendars is not undermined by unsubstantiated recall bias arguments.
Outlook:
- Further research should focus on the established validity of prospective menstrual calendars.
- Future critiques of menstrual synchrony methodology must be evidence-based.
- Clarifying methodological standards will strengthen the field of menstrual synchrony research.