Sex differences in reward-related decision processing under stress

Recent research indicates gender differences in the impact of stress on decision behavior, but little is known about the brain mechanisms involved in these gender-specific stress effects. The current study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to determine whether induced stress resulted in gender-specific patterns of brain activation during a decision task involving monetary reward. Specifically, we manipulated physiological stress levels using a cold pressor task, prior to a risky decision making task. Healthy men (n = 24, 12 stressed) and women (n = 23, 11 stressed) completed the decision task after either cold pressor stress or a control task during the period of cortisol response to the cold pressor. Gender differences in behavior were present in stressed participants but not controls, such that stress led to greater reward collection and faster decision speed in males but less reward collection and slower decision speed in females. A gender-by-stress interaction was observed for the dorsal striatum and anterior insula. With cold stress, activation in these regions was increased in males but decreased in females. The findings of this study indicate that the impact of stress on reward-related decision processing differs depending on gender.

Let's talk about sex(ism): cross-national perspectives on women partners’ narratives on equality and sexism at work in Germany and the UK

While the accounting academy has contributed in important ways to furthering our understanding of the relative absence of women in top positions in Professional Service Firms, in-depth empirical research that focuses specifically on sexism is rare, especially so from a cross-national perspective. Drawing on sixty interviews with women partners in public accountancy firms in Germany and the United Kingdom, this article examines how women partners talk about sexism and equal opportunities in the accountancy profession and considers how these narratives are patterned cross-nationally. Employing cultural theory, this study explores how elite women discursively relate to sexism and equal opportunities through their career histories and demonstrates the complex interrelation between the context in which these narratives are produced and the past and present positions of the respondents. Interestingly, it was the German respondents who drew on problematic notions of ‘choice’ and responsibility, where it was upon women to make a choice between their careers and home lives, while this decision-making process was not expected from men. This was in contrast to the accounts of the UK participants who, although also unveiling tensions in their talk, were more inclined to acknowledge continuing structural constraints.

Sex/gender differences and autism: setting the scene for future research

Objective The relationship between sex/gender differences and autism has attracted a variety of research ranging from clinical, neurobiological to etiological, stimulated by the male bias in autism prevalence. Findings are complex and do not always relate to each other in a straightforward manner. Distinct but interlinked questions on the relationship between sex/gender differences and autism remain under addressed. To better understand the implications from existing research and to help design future studies, we propose a four-level conceptual framework to clarify the embedded themes. Method We searched PubMed for publications before September 2014 using search terms “‘sex OR gender OR females’ AND autism.” 1,906 citations were screened for relevance, along with publications identified via additional literature reviews, resulting in 329 reports that were reviewed. Results Level 1 “Nosological and diagnostic challenges” concerns the question “How should autism be defined and diagnosed in males and females?” Level 2 “Sex/gender-independent and sex/gender-dependent characteristics” addresses the question “What are the similarities and differences between males and females with autism?” Level 3 “General models of etiology: liability and threshold” asks the question “How is the liability for developing autism linked to sex/gender?” Level 4 “Specific etiological-developmental mechanisms” focuses on the question “What etiological-developmental mechanisms of autism are implicated by sex/gender and/or sexual/gender differentiation?” Conclusions Using this conceptual framework, findings can be more clearly summarized, and the implications of the links between findings from different levels can become clearer. Based on this four-level framework, we suggest future research directions, methodology, and specific topics in sex/gender differences and autism.