Elsevier

Brain and Language

Volume 108, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 175-183
Brain and Language

Putative sex differences in verbal abilities and language cortex: A critical review

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2008.07.001Get rights and content

Abstract

This review brings together evidence from a diverse field of methods for investigating sex differences in language processing. Differences are found in certain language-related deficits, such as stuttering, dyslexia, autism and schizophrenia. Common to these is that language problems may follow from, rather than cause the deficit. Large studies have been conducted on sex differences in verbal abilities within the normal population, and a careful reading of the results suggests that differences in language proficiency do not exist. Early differences in language acquisition show a slight advantage for girls, but this gradually disappears. A difference in language lateralization of brain structure and function in adults has also been suggested, perhaps following size differences in the corpus callosum. Neither of these claims is substantiated by evidence. In addition, overall results from studies on regional grey matter distribution using voxel-based morphometry, indicate no consistent differences between males and females in language-related cortical regions. Language function in Wada tests, aphasia, and in normal ageing also fails to show sex differentiation.

Introduction

Sex is interesting, and the mass media and the general public are captivated by findings of differences between men and women. The book Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, by John Gray (1992), which argued for large psychological differences between the sexes, has been translated into more than 40 languages and has sold over 30 million copies (http://www.marsvenus.com).

When cognitive neuroscientists are approached by the mass media, it is often with questions related to sex differences.

Textbooks routinely cite sex differences in language competence, usually regarding verbal fluency, as established fact (e.g. Kolb and Whishaw, 2001, Mildner, 2008, Pinker, 2007). Unfortunately, it is often difficult to see where these findings come from; this is not only the case in textbooks, but can also be found in research papers on the topic. For instance, in a study on sex differences (Weiss, Kemmler, Deisenhammer, Fleischhacker, & Delazer, 2003), one can find the following statement, without any data or references to back the claim:

Women tend to be better than men in rapidly identifying matching items, a skill called perceptual speed. Common linguistic skills, in which females have been found to be superior, are verbal fluency, speech articulation, grammatical skills, and use of more complex and longer sentences.

Similar statements are found in all of the above citations.

A large number of studies reporting sex differences in brain structure and function underlying language processes have also been published (e.g. Shaywitz et al., 1995). The article by Shaywitz and colleagues, suggesting differences in language lateralization, has been cited more than 500 times, indicating the impact that these types of results have on the scientific community, not to mention the broader public opinion.

Most neuroimaging studies, however, do not distinguish between males and females. But if sex differences are real, they may possibly confound results from language studies obtained using neuroimaging techniques such as PET and fMRI. If so, measures must be taken to address the problem.

This review presents a broad overview of the multiple existing approaches to the investigation of sex differences in language performance and in the underlying brain structure and processing as well as in language-related disorders. An enormous number of such papers exist (e.g. Burman et al., 2008, Clements et al., 2006, Frost et al., 1999, Grabowski et al., 2003, Haut and Barch, 2006, Jaeger et al., 1998, Kaiser et al., 2007, Kansaku et al., 2000, Knecht et al., 2000, Plante et al., 2006, Schirmer et al., 2004, Shaywitz et al., 1995, Springer et al., 1999, van der Kallen et al., 1998, Weiss et al., 2003 to name but a few). It is not possible to cover all here and at the same time present studies from many fields. This review therefore relies primarily on results either from meta-analyses or from studies with a large number of participants (n > 100) when they exist.

Before we look at the evidence it is interesting to ask why anyone thinks that there could be differences between the language systems for males and females at all. Two theories exist that include this hypothesis.

The “hunter-gatherer”-hypothesis (e.g. see Kolb and Whishaw, 2001, Mildner, 2008) states that putative sex differences in cognitive abilities arose from a division of labour between the sexes in prehistoric humans. Men were predominantly hunters, whereas women were predominantly gatherers. According to this line of thinking, males explored larger territories during hunting than females would do during gathering, which in turn made males develop better skills for navigation, whereas the females left behind in social groups would have benefited more from developing fine-tuned tools for social interaction, one of which is language. This theory therefore predicts that women are better at language than men.

Another possible evolutionary origin of cognitive sex differences has been suggested by Miller (2000). According to this theory, language may have evolved at least partly for purposes of sexual display. This means that language ability is used in sexual selection as a fitness-indicator. Individuals displaying a large capacity for language are considered fitter by potential partners compared to less eloquent individuals. According to this theory, language is the human equivalent of peacock feathers. Due to the special dynamics of sexual selection there are great differences between the feathers of a male peacock and those of a female. Sexual selection dynamics require that males, at great costs, try to display fitness, e.g. by walking around dressed in dangerously visible colours, while females have the power to decide which male to mate with and must therefore be good detectors of fitness. Evoking such a theory about human language therefore predicts great differences between male and female language capabilities. Only fit males will have the means and the time to develop and produce inciting language. The prediction is thus that males will be better at producing language and will try at great costs to exhibit this, while females, on the other hand, are better at understanding language in order to distinguish good talkers from bad talkers (Miller, 2000). Anecdotal evidence for this theory includes the observation that acclaimed writers are still predominantly male, whereas women are known to buy and read more books than men (e.g. Halpern, 2000).

When applied to language, however, both of these theories suffer from fact that this unique part of human behaviour per definition leaves very little room for cross-species comparison. This makes the theories very difficult to falsify or even investigate scientifically (Gannon, 2002). They are, nevertheless, part of the background for most of the research conducted on sex differences in language and therefore deserve to be mentioned.

Section snippets

Verbal fluency

The task perhaps most cited as yielding sex differences is the verbal fluency task (e.g. Kolb and Whishaw, 2001, Mildner, 2008, Pinker, 2007, Sommer et al., 2004). The verbal fluency task is usually conducted in two parts, a “lexical” and a “categorical”. In both conditions, subjects are asked to come up with as many words in a minute as possible. In the lexical conditions the words have to start with a particular letter, like F, A or S, and in the categorical condition subjects have to name as

Whole brain results

Though not linked to language it is worth mentioning that a sex difference in overall brain size of around 8.0% (approx. 100 ml) favouring males is well established in the literature (Chen et al., 2007, Good et al., 2001, Kruggel, 2006). Males also have a greater global grey matter volume (Chen et al., 2007, Good et al., 2001, Kruggel, 2006, Lemaitre et al., 2005) and 16% more neurons (Pakkenberg & Gundersen, 1997). The significance of this, however, is not clear.

Regional grey matter differences

Voxel-based morphometry (VBM)

Sex and language in developmental disorders

Often-cited language-related developmental disorders that affect the sexes differently include: stuttering (Halpern, 2000), dyslexia (Halpern, 2000, Mildner, 2008), autism (Frith, 2001) and schizophrenia (Crow, 2000).

Discussion

Certain language-related deficits exhibit clear sex differences, such as stuttering, dyslexia, and autism. But it is unclear whether these deficiencies are really caused by a problem in the systems for language processing, or whether the language deficit is a by-product of something else.

A small but consistent female advantage is found in early language development. But this seems to disappear during childhood. In adults, sex differences in verbal abilities, and in brain structure and function

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by The Faculty of Humanities at the University of Aarhus, by The Danish Research Council for Culture and Communication and by The Danish National Research Foundation’s grant to Center of Functionally Integrative Neuroscience. The author wishes to thank Lone Frank from Weekend-avisen for inspiring and provoking the making of this paper. Also thanks to Torben Ellegaard Lund, Chris Frith, Dorthe Bleses, Ethan Weed, Kristian Tylén, and Andreas Roepstorff for help and

References (113)

  • R.J. Compton et al.

    Interhemispheric integration during the menstrual cycle: Failure to confirm progesterone-mediated interhemispheric decoupling

    Neuropsychologia

    (2004)
  • T.J. Crow

    Schizophrenia as the price that Homo sapiens pays for language: A resolution of the central paradox in the origin of the species

    Brain Research Reviews

    (2000)
  • P. Easterbrook et al.

    Publication bias in clinical research

    Lancet

    (1991)
  • U. Frith

    Mind blindness and the brain in autism

    Neuron

    (2001)
  • C.D. Frith et al.

    The neural basis of mentalizing

    Neuron

    (2006)
  • C.D. Good et al.

    Cerebral asymmetry and the effects of sex and handedness on brain structure: A voxel-based morphometric analysis of 465 normal adult human brains

    NeuroImage

    (2001)
  • T.J. Grabowski et al.

    Effects of gender on blood flow correlates of naming concrete entities

    NeuroImage

    (2003)
  • S. Gustard et al.

    Influence of baseline hematocrit on between-subject BOLD signal change using gradient echo and asymmetric spin echo EPI

    Magnetic Resonance Imaging

    (2003)
  • M. Hausmann et al.

    Functional cerebral asymmetries during the menstrual cycle: A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis

    Neuropsychologia

    (2002)
  • M. Hausmann et al.

    Steroid fluctuations modify functional cerebral asymmetries: The hypothesis of progesterone-mediated interhemispheric decoupling

    Neuropsychologia

    (2000)
  • K.M. Haut et al.

    Sex influences on material-sensitive functional lateralization in working and episodic memory: Men and women are not all that different

    NeuroImage

    (2006)
  • C. Helmstaedter et al.

    Patterns of language dominance in focal left and right hemisphere epilepsies: Relation to MRI findings, EEG, sex, and age at onset of epilepsy

    Brain and Cognition

    (1997)
  • M. Hines

    Sexual differentiation of human brain and behavior

  • A.I. Jack et al.

    Introspection and cognitive brain mapping: From stimulus-response to script-report

    Trends in Cognitive Sciences

    (2002)
  • A. Kaiser et al.

    On females’ lateral and males’ bilateral activation during language production: A fMRI study

    International Journal of Psychophysiology

    (2007)
  • K. Kansaku et al.

    Imaging studies on sex differences in the lateralization of language

    Neuroscience Research

    (2001)
  • F. Kruggel

    MRI-based volumetry of head compartments: Normative values of healthy adults

    NeuroImage

    (2006)
  • H. Lemaitre et al.

    Age- and sex-related effects on the neuroanatomy of healthy elderly

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • C.L. Ludlow et al.

    Stuttering: A dynamic motor control disorder

    Journal of Fluency Disorders

    (2003)
  • T.E. Lund et al.

    Non-white noise in fMRI: Does modelling have an impact?

    NeuroImage

    (2006)
  • T.E. Lund et al.

    Motion or activity: Their role in intra- and inter-subject variation in fMRI

    NeuroImage

    (2005)
  • S.E. Medland et al.

    Lateralization of speech production using verbal/manual dual tasks: Meta-analysis of sex differences and practice effects

    Neuropsychologia

    (2002)
  • T.A. Mulderink et al.

    On the use of caffeine as a contrast booster for BOLD fMRI studies

    NeuroImage

    (2002)
  • H.F. Mulligan et al.

    Tics and developmental stuttering

    Parkinsonism & Related Disorders

    (2003)
  • E. Plante et al.

    Sex differences in the activation of language cortex during childhood

    Neuropsychologia

    (2006)
  • R. Rosenthal

    The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1979)
  • A. Schirmer et al.

    Gender differences in the activation of inferior frontal cortex during emotional speech perception

    NeuroImage

    (2004)
  • L.S. Allen et al.

    Sex differences in the corpus callosum of the living human being

    Journal of Neuroscience

    (1991)
  • D.M. Amodio et al.

    Meeting of minds: The medial frontal cortex and social cognition

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience

    (2006)
  • J. Ashburner et al.

    Voxel-based morphometry

  • S. Baron-Cohen et al.

    Sex differences in the brain: Implications for explaining autism

    Science

    (2005)
  • A. Basso

    Prognostic factors in aphasia

    Aphasiology

    (1992)
  • J.B. Becker et al.

    Strategies and methods for research on sex differences in brain and behavior

    Endocrinology

    (2005)
  • E. Berglund et al.

    Communicative skills in relation to gender, birth order, childcare and socioeconomic status in 18-month-old children

    Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

    (2005)
  • D. Bleses et al.

    The Danish Communicative Developmental Inventory: Validity and main developmental trends

    Journal of Child Language

    (2008)
  • D.B. Boles

    A large-sample study of sex differences in functional cerebral lateralization

    Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

    (2005)
  • M.H. Bornstein et al.

    Specific and general language performance across early childhood: Stability and gender considerations

    First Language

    (2004)
  • P. Broca

    Remarques sur le siége de la faculté du langage articulé; suives d’une observation d’aphemie

    Bulletin de la Société Anatomique de Paris

    (1861)
  • W. Byne et al.

    Variations in human corpus callosum do not predict gender: A study using magnetic resonance imaging

    Behavioral Neuroscience

    (1988)
  • L. Cahill

    Why sex matters for neuroscience

    Nature Reviews Neuroscience

    (2006)
  • Cited by (301)

    • Sex/gender differences in cognitive abilities

      2023, Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text