↓ Skip to main content

Olfactory exposure to males, including men, causes stress and related analgesia in rodents

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Methods, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#2 of 3,823)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
307 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
989 Mendeley
citeulike
5 CiteULike
Title
Olfactory exposure to males, including men, causes stress and related analgesia in rodents
Published in
Nature Methods, April 2014
DOI 10.1038/nmeth.2935
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert E Sorge, Loren J Martin, Kelsey A Isbester, Susana G Sotocinal, Sarah Rosen, Alexander H Tuttle, Jeffrey S Wieskopf, Erinn L Acland, Anastassia Dokova, Basil Kadoura, Philip Leger, Josiane C S Mapplebeck, Martina McPhail, Ada Delaney, Gustaf Wigerblad, Alan P Schumann, Tammie Quinn, Johannes Frasnelli, Camilla I Svensson, Wendy F Sternberg, Jeffrey S Mogil

Abstract

We found that exposure of mice and rats to male but not female experimenters produces pain inhibition. Male-related stimuli induced a robust physiological stress response that results in stress-induced analgesia. This effect could be replicated with T-shirts worn by men, bedding material from gonadally intact and unfamiliar male mammals, and presentation of compounds secreted from the human axilla. Experimenter sex can thus affect apparent baseline responses in behavioral testing.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 482 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 989 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 25 3%
Germany 11 1%
United Kingdom 10 1%
France 7 <1%
Canada 6 <1%
Spain 5 <1%
Switzerland 4 <1%
Netherlands 4 <1%
Brazil 4 <1%
Other 27 3%
Unknown 886 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 277 28%
Researcher 201 20%
Student > Master 131 13%
Student > Bachelor 98 10%
Unspecified 53 5%
Other 228 23%
Unknown 1 <1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 429 43%
Neuroscience 159 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 90 9%
Unspecified 86 9%
Psychology 62 6%
Other 162 16%
Unknown 1 <1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1010. 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 10 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,883
of 13,532,508 outputs
Outputs from Nature Methods
#2
of 3,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35
of 189,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Methods
#1
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,532,508 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 189,374 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.