Search

Science is among humanity's greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

It is well known that far fewer men than women enroll in tertiary education in the United States and other Western nations. Developed nations vary in the degree to which men are underrepresented, but the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average lies around 45% male students. We use data from the OECD Education at a Glance statistical reports, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the World Values Survey to explain the degree to which men are underrepresented. Using a multiple regression model, we show that the combination of both the national reading proficiency levels of 15-y-old boys and girls and the social attitudes toward girls attending university can predict the enrollment in tertiary education 5 y later. The model also shows that parity in some countries is a result of boys' poor reading proficiency and negative social attitudes toward girls' education, which suppresses college enrollment in both sexes, but for different reasons. True equity will at the very least require improvement in boys' reading competencies and the liberalization of attitudes regarding women's pursuit of higher education. At this time, there is little reason to expect that the enrollment gap will decrease, given the stagnating reading competencies in most countries., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest., (Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.)

Competing Interests: The author declares no conflict of interest.

Exposure to endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs), such as bisphenol A (BPA), may cause adverse health effects in wildlife and humans, but controversy remains as to what traits are most sensitive to EDCs and might serve as barometers of exposure. Expression of sexually selected traits that have evolved through intrasexual competition for mates and intersexual choice of mating partner are more dependent on developmental and physical condition of an animal than naturally selected traits and thus might be particularly vulnerable to disruption by developmental exposure to EDCs. We have used the deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) as a model to test this hypothesis. Adult male-male competition for mates in this species is supported by enhanced spatial navigational and exploratory abilities, which enable males to search for prospective, widely dispersed females. Male deer mice exposed to BPA or ethinyl estradiol (EE) through maternal diet showed no changes in external phenotype, sensory development, or adult circulating concentrations of testosterone and corticosterone, but spatial learning abilities and exploratory behaviors were severely compromised compared with control males. Because these traits are not sexually selected in females, BPA exposure predictably had no effect, although EE-exposed females demonstrated enhanced spatial navigational abilities. Both BPA-exposed and control females preferred control males to BPA-exposed males. Our demonstration that developmental exposure to BPA compromises cognitive abilities and behaviors essential for males to reproduce successfully has broad implications for other species, including our own. Thus, sexually selected traits might provide useful biomarkers to assess risk of environmental contamination in animal and human populations.