21 research outputs found
Gene expression patterns in the hippocampus and amygdala of endogenous depression and chronic stress models
The etiology of depression is still poorly understood, but two major causative hypotheses have been put forth: the monoamine deficiency and the stress hypotheses of depression. We evaluate these hypotheses using animal models of endogenous depression and chronic stress. The endogenously depressed rat and its control strain were developed by bidirectional selective breeding from the Wistar–Kyoto (WKY) rat, an accepted model of major depressive disorder (MDD). The WKY More Immobile (WMI) substrain shows high immobility/despair-like behavior in the forced swim test (FST), while the control substrain, WKY Less Immobile (WLI), shows no depressive behavior in the FST. Chronic stress responses were investigated by using Brown Norway, Fischer 344, Lewis and WKY, genetically and behaviorally distinct strains of rats. Animals were either not stressed (NS) or exposed to chronic restraint stress (CRS). Genome-wide microarray analyses identified differentially expressed genes in hippocampi and amygdalae of the endogenous depression and the chronic stress models. No significant difference was observed in the expression of monoaminergic transmission-related genes in either model. Furthermore, very few genes showed overlapping changes in the WMI vs WLI and CRS vs NS comparisons, strongly suggesting divergence between endogenous depressive behavior- and chronic stress-related molecular mechanisms. Taken together, these results posit that although chronic stress may induce depressive behavior, its molecular underpinnings differ from those of endogenous depression in animals and possibly in humans, suggesting the need for different treatments. The identification of novel endogenous depression-related and chronic stress response genes suggests that unexplored molecular mechanisms could be targeted for the development of novel therapeutic agents
Die Entwicklung des sozialen Bewusstseins der Kinder: Studie zur Psychologie und Pädagogik der Kindheit
Avoiding bias when inferring race using name-based approaches
Racial disparity in academia is a widely acknowledged problem. The quantitative understanding of racial-based systemic inequalities is an important step towards a more equitable research system. However, few large-scale analyses have been performed on this topic, mostly because of the lack of robust race-disambiguation algorithms. Identifying author information does not generally include the author’s race. Therefore, an algorithm needs to be employed, using known information about authors, i.e., their names, to infer their perceived race. Nevertheless, as any other algorithm, the process of racial inference can generate biases if it is not carefully considered. When the research is focused on the understanding of racial-based inequalities, such biases undermine the objectives of the investigation and may perpetuate inequities. The goal of this article is to assess the biases introduced by the different approaches used name-based racial inference. We use information from US census and mortgage applications to infer the race of US author names in the Web of Science. We estimate the effects of using given and family names, thresholds or continuous distributions, and imputation. Our results demonstrate that the validity of name-based inference varies by race and ethnicity and that threshold approaches underestimate Black authors and overestimate White authors. We conclude with recommendations to avoid potential biases. This article fills an important research gap that will allow more systematic and unbiased studies on racial disparity in science