Males and females are subject to differences in cognitive processing strategies, i.e. the way males and females solve cognitive tasks. So far primarily reported for younger adults, this seems to be especially important in older adults, who also show sex differences in cognitive impairments. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to examine the older adult population with respect to cognitive profiles derived from a large variety of cognitive functions. Using an exploratory component analysis with consecutive confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 676 older adults, neuropsychological performance data in a variety of cognitive domains was decomposed into cognitive components. A general cognitive profile based on the whole group fits unequally well on the two sexes. Importantly, cognitive profiles based on either males or females differ in terms of their composition of cognitive components, i.e. three components in males versus four components in females, with a generally better model fit in females. Thus, related to the established differences in processing styles between males and females the current study found a rather decomposed (or local) cognitive profile in females while males seem to show a holistic (or global) cognitive profile, with more interrelations between different cognitive functions.

Hemispheric asymmetries, i.e., differences between the two halves of the brain, have extensively been studied with respect to both structure and function. Commonly employed pairwise comparisons between left and right are suitable for finding differences between the hemispheres, but they come with several caveats when assessing multiple asymmetries. What is more, they are not designed for identifying the characterizing features of each hemisphere. Here, we present a novel data-driven framework—based on machine learning-based classification—for identifying the characterizing features that underlie hemispheric differences. Using voxel-based morphometry data from two different samples (n = 226, n = 216), we separated the hemispheres along the midline and used two different pipelines: First, for investigating global differences, we embedded the hemispheres into a two-dimensional space and applied a classifier to assess if the hemispheres are distinguishable in their low-dimensional representation. Second, to investigate which voxels show systematic hemispheric differences, we employed two classification approaches promoting feature selection in high dimensions. The two hemispheres were accurately classifiable in both their low-dimensional (accuracies: dataset 1 = 0.838; dataset 2 = 0.850) and high-dimensional (accuracies: dataset 1 = 0.966; dataset 2 = 0.959) representations. In low dimensions, classification of the right hemisphere showed higher precision (dataset 1 = 0.862; dataset 2 = 0.894) compared to the left hemisphere (dataset 1 = 0.818; dataset 2 = 0.816). A feature selection algorithm in the high-dimensional analysis identified voxels that most contribute to accurate classification. In addition, the map of contributing voxels showed a better overlap with moderate to highly lateralized voxels, whereas conventional t test with threshold-free cluster enhancement best resembled the LQ map at lower thresholds. Both the low- and high-dimensional classifiers were capable of identifying the hemispheres in subsamples of the datasets, such as males, females, right-handed, or non-right-handed participants. Our study indicates that hemisphere classification is capable of identifying the hemisphere in their low- and high-dimensional representation as well as delineating brain asymmetries. The concept of hemisphere classifiability thus allows a change in perspective, from asking what differs between the hemispheres towards focusing on the features needed to identify the left and right hemispheres. Taking this perspective on hemispheric differences may contribute to our understanding of what makes each hemisphere special.

Brain size differs substantially between human males and females. This difference in total intracranial volume (TIV) can cause bias when employing machine-learning approaches for the investigation of sex differences in brain morphology. TIV-biased models will likely not capture actual qualitative sex differences in brain organization but rather learn to classify an individual's sex based on brain size differences, thus leading to spurious and misleading conclusions, for example when comparing brain morphology between cisgender- and transgender individuals. Here, TIV bias in sex classification models applied to cis- and transgender individuals was systematically investigated by controlling for brain size either through featurewise confound removal or by matching training samples for TIV. Our results provide evidence that non-TIV-biased models can classify the sex of both cis- and transgender individuals with high accuracy, highlighting the importance of appropriate modelling to avoid bias in automated decision making.

No abstract

No abstract