2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2022.108370
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sex differences in cognitive processing: An integrative review of electrophysiological findings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 161 publications
0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, different brain activations in men and women do not necessarily imply disparities in behavioral outcomes. It is possible that they rely on partly different cognitive strategies to execute a task while achieving comparable performances (Ramos-Loyo et al, 2022). In our study, both sexes might have employed different cognitive strategies during the assessment that were not reflected in our behavioral measures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, different brain activations in men and women do not necessarily imply disparities in behavioral outcomes. It is possible that they rely on partly different cognitive strategies to execute a task while achieving comparable performances (Ramos-Loyo et al, 2022). In our study, both sexes might have employed different cognitive strategies during the assessment that were not reflected in our behavioral measures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because sex differences in EEG measurements and sleep patterns/phases have been suggested by some recent studies (Cave & Barry, 2021; Ramos‐Loyo et al, 2022), we investigated sex differences in PTE during sleep transitions. But as mentioned in the Supplement, we did not find a significant difference between males and females, probably due to the small sample size.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on available data, the chosen control variables for this study included age (65–79, 80–89, 90–99, over 100), sex (male, female), marital status (living with/ without spouse), schooling years (No schooling, 1–6 years, and over 7 years), residence (urban, rural), financial support (sufficient/insufficient financial support), smoking status (smoking, no smoking) and alcohol consumption (drinking, no drinking). Among them, age ( 37 ), sex ( 38 ), marital status ( 39 ), schooling years ( 40 ), residence ( 30 ), and financial support ( 41 ) were common socio-demographic variables, which can reflect the basic characteristics and social background of older people, and are also important factors affecting the frequency of playing Mahjong and cognitive function. Smoking status ( 42 ) and alcohol consumption ( 43 ) serve as indicators of healthy habits, potentially impacting the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, thereby affecting the cognitive function and the frequency of playing Mahjong among older people.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%