Impression Management in Sex and Gender Neuroscience Research Reporting: the MAGIC Guidelines
Overview
Overview
Authors
Authors
Affiliations
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Citing Articles
Impression management in research reporting: When effects are not really as pronounced as claimed.
Rippon G Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024; 121(49):e2421013121.
PMID: 39585995 PMC: 11626189. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2421013121.
References
1.
David S, Naudet F, Laude J, Radua J, Fusar-Poli P, Chu I
. Potential Reporting Bias in Neuroimaging Studies of Sex Differences. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):6082.
PMC: 5904173.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-23976-1.
View
2.
Rippon G, Eliot L, Genon S, Joel D
. How hype and hyperbole distort the neuroscience of sex differences. PLoS Biol. 2021; 19(5):e3001253.
PMC: 8136838.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001253.
View
3.
Corneille O, Havemann J, Henderson E, IJzerman H, Hussey I, Orban de Xivry J
. Beware 'persuasive communication devices' when writing and reading scientific articles. Elife. 2023; 12.
PMC: 10212555.
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.88654.
View
4.
Heidari S, Babor T, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M
. Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018; 1:2.
PMC: 5793986.
DOI: 10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6.
View
5.
Ellemers N
. Gender Stereotypes. Annu Rev Psychol. 2017; 69:275-298.
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011719.
View