↓ Skip to main content

The female menstrual cycle does not influence testosterone concentrations in male partners

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 114)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The female menstrual cycle does not influence testosterone concentrations in male partners
Published in
Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1477-5751-11-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jakob O Strom, Edvin Ingberg, Emma Druvefors, Annette Theodorsson, Elvar Theodorsson

Abstract

The time of ovulation has since long been believed to be concealed to male heterosexual partners. Recent studies have, however, called for revision of this notion. For example, male testosterone concentrations have been shown to increase in response to olfactory ovulation cues, which could be biologically relevant by increasing sexual drive and aggressiveness. However, this phenomenon has not previously been investigated in real-life human settings. We therefore thought it of interest to test the hypothesis that males' salivary testosterone concentrations are influenced by phases of their female partners' menstrual cycle; expecting a testosterone peak at ovulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Czechia 1 1%
Unknown 67 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 14%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 26 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 September 2018.
All research outputs
#1,703,911
of 25,630,321 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#9
of 114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,354
of 251,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Negative Results in BioMedicine
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,630,321 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 251,335 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them