Sex differences in human neonatal social perception

Connellan, Jennifer; Baron‐Cohen, Simon; Wheelwright, Sally; Bátki, Anna; Ahluwalia, Jag

doi:10.1016/s0163-6383(00)00032-1

Cited by 390 publications

(289 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

249

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, it has been observed that female neonates look more at faces compared to male neonates (Connelan, Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright, Batki, & Ahluwalia, 2000). Also, female infants look more at a human face on their first day of life whereas male infants look more at the mechanical mobile suspended above them (Connelan et al, 2000). Moreover, it has been found that higher prenatal testosterone levels diminish the amount of eye contact a child would make years later (Baron-Cohen, Knickmeyer, & Belmonte, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sex differences in the effects of visual contact and eye contact in negotiations

Swaab

2009

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Previous research has proposed that the ability to see others would benefit negotiations. We argue that this view is too narrow and that the impact of visual contact on negotiated agreements depends on the meaning individuals ascribe to either its presence or absence. Based on previous research showing that females are more likely to understand others in the presence of visual contact while males understand others better in the absence of visual contact, we explore how visual contact, eye contact, and sex affect the quality of negotiated agreements in a meta-analysis (Study 1) and a laboratory experiment (Study 2). The two studies combined show that because direct communication via the face facilitates a shared understanding for two unacquainted females, their agreements are of higher quality when they have visual contact compared to when they do not (Study 1), and if they have visual contact, their agreements are better when they have eye contact than when they do not (Study 2). Because communication via the face increases discomfort between two unacquainted males, their agreements are of higher quality when they do not have visual contact (Study 1), and if they do have visual contact, their agreements are better when they have no eye contact than when they do (Study 2)." [author's abstract

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex differences in the effects of visual contact and eye contact in negotiations

Swaab

2009

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We asked the proposer to assign a probability to the acceptance of the offer he or she actually proposed. 10 The proposer typed a single probability of acceptance (π k a ). Proposers were rewarded using a quadratic scoring rule described in Appendix B.…”

Section: Belief Elicitation Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Remember that these are the responder's belief that he or she will receive every potential offer (90, 80, 70, 60, 50,40,30,20,10). Since only one such amount will actually be sent, the payoff to player Y (the responder) when the amount m is chosen will be:…”

Section: Game Instructions Both Gamesmentioning

confidence: 99%

'The Devil is in the Details' - Sex Differences in Simple Bargaining Games

Mejía

Miller

2007

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractThe study of gender differences in social preferences has shown mixed results, preventing economists and other social scientists from drawing definitive conclusions on this topic. Several original investigations and experimental reviews have hypothesized that the main reason of this heterogeneity of results is the myriad of experimental designs used to study gender differences. In this paper we test this hypothesis by making male and female participants to face two different but related experimental games and two different information treatments. Through this 2x2 factorial design, we obtain results in line with some recent papers: women are sensitive to the design and context of the experiment in ways that men are not. In addition, we go further providing a well-grounded account on the importance of the context for female decision-making.

show abstract

“…Second, the way the mother interacts with the child may differ from the way the father interacts with the child (Achenbach et al, 1979). Another cause for different views in parent reports could be that men are more sensitive to different kinds of input from their children than women (Baron-Cohen & Hammer, 1997;Connelan et al, 2000;Rosenthal et al, 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic Influences on Thought Problems in 7-Year-Olds: A Twin-Study of Genetic, Environmental and Rater Effects

Abdellaoui¹,

Bartels

Hudziak³

et al. 2008

Twin Res Hum Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he Thought-Problem scale (TP) of the CBCL assesses symptoms such as hallucinations and strange thoughts/behaviors and has been associated with other behavioral disorders. This study uses parental reports to examine the etiology of variation in TP, about which relatively little is known, in 7-year-old twins. Parental ratings on TP were collected in 8,962 7-year-old twin pairs. Because the distribution of TP scores was highly skewed scores were categorized into 3 classes. The data were analyzed under a threshold liability model with genetic structural equation modeling. Ratings from both parents were simultaneously analyzed to determine the rater agreement phenotype (or common phenotype [TPc]) and the rater specific phenotype [TPs] that represents rater disagreement caused by rater bias, measurement error and/or a unique view of the parents on the child's behavior. Scores on the TP-scale varied as a function of rater (fathers rated fewer problems), sex (boys scored higher) and zygosity (DZ twins scored higher). The TPc explained 67% of the total variance in the parental ratings. Variation in TPc was influenced mainly by the children's genotype (76%). Variance in TPs also showed a contribution of genetic factors (maternal reports: 61%, paternal reports: 65%), indicating that TPs does not only represent rater bias. Shared environmental influences were only found in the TPs. No sex differences in genetic architecture were observed. These results indicate an important contribution of genetic factors to thought problems in children as young as 7 years.

show abstract

Sex differences in human neonatal social perception

Cited by 390 publications

References 12 publications

Sex differences in the effects of visual contact and eye contact in negotiations

Sex differences in the effects of visual contact and eye contact in negotiations

'The Devil is in the Details' - Sex Differences in Simple Bargaining Games

Genetic Influences on Thought Problems in 7-Year-Olds: A Twin-Study of Genetic, Environmental and Rater Effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About