However, this breakthrough could help them adapt to the effects of climate change.
They describe the neural circuits involved in the social transfer of painful and distressing experiences.
For decades, astronomers debated whether a certain spot in the sky was close and small, or distant and immense. A new X-ray map supports the second option.
This may explain some of the more unexpected symptoms.
A analysis of published studies in 145 journals from various research fields, including approximately 1.7 million authors and 740,000 reviewers, has found no evidence of bias against female authors in the peer review process.
Academic journals are often blamed for a gender gap in publication rates, but it is unclear whether peer review and editorial processes contribute to this.
A tangle of biases
In it cited study They focused on analyzing three possible sources of bias:
- The editorial selection of the reviewers
- Reviewers' recommendations
- Editorial decisions
The results showed that studies written by women as sole authors or co-authors were treated even more favorably by reviewers and editors. Although there were some differences between the research fields, the findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes do not penalize articles written by women.
However, as has been said, there are great differences between fields. And even when the review is double-blind, the reviewers can know or guess who the authors are, or gender bias may arise because the editor knows who the authors are. True double-blinding is difficult because of the difficulty in concealing the identities of the main authors (revealed by style, perspective, and citations).
For example, women's studies generally received worse reviews in social science journals through single-blind peer review, but these journals are the minority in a field typically dominated by double-blind peer review.
Increasing gender diversity in editorial teams and reviewer groups could help journals inform potential authors about their attention to these factors and thus encourage women's participation. However, we face a complex tangle of biases, and shortcutting some could be hiding others, and vice versa:
–
The news
An analysis of 145 scientific journals finds no evidence of bias against female authors in the peer review process
was originally published in
Xataka Science
by
Sergio Parra
.
According to this Fickr photo analysis It seems that women prefer small dogs and men opt for larger dogs is mostly true, although the dogs preferred by both sexes are medium-small ones.
For the purpose of this study, images showing a single human and enough of a dog to allow estimation of its size or identification of its breed were tracked.
Partially true stereotype
In the study, images with multiple dogs were not scored (unless they were of the same race) and images with multiple humans were not scored. Images in which the dog looked like a puppy were also removed. Also removed were any images in which the dogs were involved in any type of service activity, or hunting, or were obviously part of military or police functions.
Images of homeless people with dogs were also left out, as they could be casual connections rather than based on considered choice.
The dogs in the photos too they had to look like they really belonged to the human in the photo, instead of being part of the background.
Images that obviously involved studio models photographed for commercial reasons were also not taken into account. Finally, the human being had to be an adult man or woman.
The tabulation of dog size by sex is, for women: 33% small, 43% medium-small, 19% medium-large and 4% large. For men, the results were: 16% small, 42% medium-small, 36% medium-large and 7% large.
Almost half of women prefer smaller dogs compared to men (76.3% vs 57.7%), while men were almost twice as likely to have larger dogs (42.3% vs 23.7% ). However, this data also shows that, overall, the most popular size dog, regardless of the sex of the owner, are medium-small dogs.
–
The news
Is it true that women prefer small dogs and men prefer larger dogs?
was originally published in
Xataka Science
by
Sergio Parra
.