Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Socioemotional Experience and Gender Development01:30

Socioemotional Experience and Gender Development

110
Social-emotional experiences and cultural influences play significant roles in shaping gender development. During middle childhood, from ages 6 to 11, peer groups become dominant in reinforcing gender norms. Children in this age group often align with same-gender peer groups, which actively encourage behaviors that conform to traditional gender roles. For instance, boys may be discouraged from engaging in activities perceived as feminine, reinforcing culturally dictated norms about masculinity...
110
Self-Discrepancy Theory02:45

Self-Discrepancy Theory

18.5K
One influential perspective on what motivates people's behavior is detailed in Tory Higgin's self-discrepancy theory (Higgins, 1987). He proposed that people hold disagreeing internal representations of themselves that lead to different emotional states.  
18.5K
Regression Toward the Mean01:52

Regression Toward the Mean

6.6K
Regression toward the mean (“RTM”) is a phenomenon in which extremely high or low values—for example, and individual’s blood pressure at a particular moment—appear closer to a group’s average upon remeasuring. Although this statistical peculiarity is the result of random error and chance, it has been problematic across various medical, scientific, financial and psychological applications. In particular, RTM, if not taken into account, can interfere when...
6.6K
Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective01:23

Criticisms of the Evolutionary Perspective

182
In a study where individuals posing as strangers offered compliments and proposed casual sex to students, the responses differed significantly based on gender. Not a single woman accepted the proposal, while 70% of the men agreed. This outcome provides a useful scenario to explore through the lens of evolutionary psychology and social learning theory, highlighting the diverse perspectives on human sexual behaviors.
Evolutionary psychology provides one explanation for these findings, suggesting...
182
Deindividuation00:57

Deindividuation

28.2K
Deindividuation is a form of social influence on an individual’s behavior such that the individual engages in unusual or non-normal behavior while in a group setting. Why? Because in these group settings, the individual no longer sees themselves as an individual anymore, disinhibiting their behavior and personal restraint.
28.2K
The Y Chromosome Determines Maleness02:19

The Y Chromosome Determines Maleness

7.1K
The Y chromosome is a sex chromosome found in several vertebrates and mammals, including humans. In addition to 22 pairs of autosomes, the human males have one X chromosome and one Y chromosome. In these organisms, the presence or absence of the Y chromosome determines the development of male traits.
Evolution
Around 300 million years ago, the two sex chromosomes diverged from two identical autosomal chromosomes. Over time, the Y chromosome has lost most of its genes, shrinking in size....
7.1K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

[Accurate health information: A requirement for safety and social cohesion].

Medecine sciences : M/S·2026
Same author

When it comes to health misinformation, inaction is not an option

La Revue du praticien·2026
Same author

Attitudes and perceptions of biomedical journal editors in chief towards the use of artificial intelligence chatbots in the scholarly publishing process: a cross-sectional survey.

Research integrity and peer review·2025
Same author

FAIRification of biomedical research data.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2025
Same author

A Bundle of Interventions to Prevent Pressure Ulcers During Prone Position in Adult Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Results of a French Stepped-Wedge Randomized Controlled Trial.

Nursing in critical care·2025
Same author

BEST study: one-year descriptive follow-up of bevacizumab treatment in hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia post-BABH interventional study.

Therapeutic advances in hematology·2025
Same journal

Correction.

Accountability in research·2026
Same journal

Development, validity, and reliability of the pre-attendance conference evaluator (PACE) tool for identifying predatory conferences.

Accountability in research·2026
Same journal

Managing manuscripts with potential dual-use research of concern: A thematic analysis of life science journal policies.

Accountability in research·2026
Same journal

Researching retraction: Do we need more rules or more honesty?

Accountability in research·2026
Same journal

Accountability in evidence syntheses: On the need for rigorous peer review and reporting guidelines.

Accountability in research·2026
Same journal

Shared responsibility to address questionable research practices? - A study of perceived efficacy of organizational research integrity policies.

Accountability in research·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 17, 2025

Protocol for Studying Extinction of Conditioned Fear in Naturally Cycling Female Rats
09:07

Protocol for Studying Extinction of Conditioned Fear in Naturally Cycling Female Rats

Published on: February 23, 2015

13.6K

Retraction according to gender: A descriptive study.

Evelyne Decullier1,2, Hervé Maisonneuve1,2

  • 1Service recherche épidémiologique et clinique, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Pôle Santé publique, Lyon, France (Decullier).

Accountability in Research
|October 7, 2021
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Women authors retract publications less often due to fraud and plagiarism compared to men. This study analyzed retraction reasons, revealing gender differences in scientific misconduct. Further research is needed to understand these patterns.

Keywords:
Misconductgenderretraction

More Related Videos

Quantification of Levator Ani Hiatus Enlargement by Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Males and Females with Pelvic Organ Prolapse
07:41

Quantification of Levator Ani Hiatus Enlargement by Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Males and Females with Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Published on: April 17, 2019

10.1K
Assessment of Sexual Behavior of Male Mice
04:38

Assessment of Sexual Behavior of Male Mice

Published on: March 5, 2020

21.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 17, 2025

Protocol for Studying Extinction of Conditioned Fear in Naturally Cycling Female Rats
09:07

Protocol for Studying Extinction of Conditioned Fear in Naturally Cycling Female Rats

Published on: February 23, 2015

13.6K
Quantification of Levator Ani Hiatus Enlargement by Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Males and Females with Pelvic Organ Prolapse
07:41

Quantification of Levator Ani Hiatus Enlargement by Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Males and Females with Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Published on: April 17, 2019

10.1K
Assessment of Sexual Behavior of Male Mice
04:38

Assessment of Sexual Behavior of Male Mice

Published on: March 5, 2020

21.0K

Area of Science:

  • Bibliometrics
  • Research Integrity
  • Gender Studies in Science

Background:

  • The underrepresentation of women in scientific publications is well-documented.
  • However, little is known about gender-based patterns in research retractions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if the reasons for scientific paper retractions differ between male and female first authors.
  • To analyze the gender distribution in a cohort of retractions and explore associated causes.

Main Methods:

  • A cohort of 120 retractions was previously identified.
  • The gender of the first author was manually determined for 113 retractions (94.2%).
  • Reasons for retraction were analyzed and compared between male and female authors.

Main Results:

  • Women authors accounted for 42 (37.2%) of the retractions.
  • Significant differences were observed in retraction reasons based on author gender.
  • Fraud and plagiarism constituted 28.6% of women-authored retractions versus 59.2% of men-authored retractions.

Conclusions:

  • Gender disparities exist in the reasons for scientific retractions, with women less frequently retracting for fraud or plagiarism.
  • Findings suggest potential implications for training in responsible research conduct.
  • Further investigation with larger cohorts is necessary to confirm these patterns and understand underlying mechanisms.