Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis.
Does a woman's cognitive performance change throughout her menstrual cycle? Menstruation continues to be a taboo topic, subject to myths about how it affects women. Despite the considerable number of empirical studies, there have been few quantitative summaries of what is known. To address this...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318576 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849686658817982464 |
|---|---|
| author | Daisung Jang Jack Zhang Hillary Anger Elfenbein |
| author_facet | Daisung Jang Jack Zhang Hillary Anger Elfenbein |
| author_sort | Daisung Jang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Does a woman's cognitive performance change throughout her menstrual cycle? Menstruation continues to be a taboo topic, subject to myths about how it affects women. Despite the considerable number of empirical studies, there have been few quantitative summaries of what is known. To address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of cognitive performance across the menstrual cycle, including the domains of attention, creativity, executive functioning, intelligence, motor function, spatial ability, and verbal ability. We included studies that measured women's performance at specific points in the cycle for tasks that have objectively correct responses. Our analysis examined performance differences across phases using Hedges' g as the effect size metric. Across 102 articles, N = 3,943 participants, and 730 comparisons, we observe no systematic robust evidence for significant cycle shifts in performance across cognitive performance. Although two results appeared significant with respect to differences in spatial ability, they arise from a large number of statistical tests and are not supported in studies that use robust methods to determine cycle phase. Through the use of Egger's test, and examination of funnel plots, we did not observe evidence of publication bias or small-study effects. We examined speed and accuracy measures separately within each domain, and no robust differences across phases appeared for either speed or accuracy. We conclude that the body of research in this meta-analysis does not support myths that women's cognitive abilities change across the menstrual cycle. Future research should use larger sample sizes and consistent definitions of the menstrual cycle, using hormonal indicators to confirm cycle phase. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-b802616463544362a10becee4371a34b |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj-art-b802616463544362a10becee4371a34b2025-08-20T03:22:38ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032025-01-01203e031857610.1371/journal.pone.0318576Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis.Daisung JangJack ZhangHillary Anger ElfenbeinDoes a woman's cognitive performance change throughout her menstrual cycle? Menstruation continues to be a taboo topic, subject to myths about how it affects women. Despite the considerable number of empirical studies, there have been few quantitative summaries of what is known. To address this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of cognitive performance across the menstrual cycle, including the domains of attention, creativity, executive functioning, intelligence, motor function, spatial ability, and verbal ability. We included studies that measured women's performance at specific points in the cycle for tasks that have objectively correct responses. Our analysis examined performance differences across phases using Hedges' g as the effect size metric. Across 102 articles, N = 3,943 participants, and 730 comparisons, we observe no systematic robust evidence for significant cycle shifts in performance across cognitive performance. Although two results appeared significant with respect to differences in spatial ability, they arise from a large number of statistical tests and are not supported in studies that use robust methods to determine cycle phase. Through the use of Egger's test, and examination of funnel plots, we did not observe evidence of publication bias or small-study effects. We examined speed and accuracy measures separately within each domain, and no robust differences across phases appeared for either speed or accuracy. We conclude that the body of research in this meta-analysis does not support myths that women's cognitive abilities change across the menstrual cycle. Future research should use larger sample sizes and consistent definitions of the menstrual cycle, using hormonal indicators to confirm cycle phase.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318576 |
| spellingShingle | Daisung Jang Jack Zhang Hillary Anger Elfenbein Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE |
| title | Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. |
| title_full | Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. |
| title_fullStr | Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. |
| title_full_unstemmed | Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. |
| title_short | Menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis. |
| title_sort | menstrual cycle effects on cognitive performance a meta analysis |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0318576 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT daisungjang menstrualcycleeffectsoncognitiveperformanceametaanalysis AT jackzhang menstrualcycleeffectsoncognitiveperformanceametaanalysis AT hillaryangerelfenbein menstrualcycleeffectsoncognitiveperformanceametaanalysis |