Biomedical subjects

Donald A Dewsbury

Publications and source records attributed to Donald A Dewsbury.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

The Lashley Award.

The Karl Spencer Lashley Award for Distinguished Achievement in the Neurosciences has been bestowed upon 50 of the world's leading neuroscientists of the last half century but is not well known. It originated in 1953 when Lashley accumulated excess stock holdings and established a Fund for Neurobiology with 52,000 dollars to provide small grants for neurobiological research. Several years later the assets were transferred to the American Philosophical Society to administer and convert to an award for achievement in neurobiology The nature, amount, and format of the award have evolved ever since. These changes in the award and the characteristics of its recipients are described.

Awards and Prizes↗

PubMed2003

The conference on reproductive behavior: a history.

The Society for Behavioral Neuroendocrinology was, in part, an outgrowth of the Conference on Reproductive Behavior, which was, in turn, an outgrowth of the West Coast Sex Meetings. In this article I trace the history of these organizations. The West Coast meetings provided an opportunity for free and informal exchange among west coast researchers studying sexual behavior. The 29 meetings of the Conference on Reproductive Behavior began with a similar format that evolved as success and growth forced numerous changes. With time, the meetings became more structured and more dependent on time limits, and added invited addresses, symposia, workshops, roundtables, posters, tours, and papers presented by abstract only. The administrative structure was kept as simple as possible. With changing times, these informal meetings eventually were superseded by the Society for Behavioral Neuroendocrinology.

Animals↗

PubMed2003

The 1973 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine: recognition for behavioral science?

The Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for 1973 was awarded to 3 ethologists: Karl von Frisch, Konrad Lorenz, and Nikolaas Tinbergen. This was a landmark event in the history of the field of ethology and potentially for the behavioral sciences more broadly. For the first time, the prize was awarded for research of a purely behavioral nature. The language used in making the award emphasized the implications of ethological work for human health and appeared to suggest that more such awards might be forthcoming; few were. The author provides an overview of the 3 men, their work, the events surrounding the award, the controversy that arose, and the significance of the award as viewed in contemporary perspective.

Animals↗

PubMed2002

Constructing representations of Karl Spencer Lashley.

I compare, contrast, and analyze two published constructions, a straightforward approach and a social constructivist perspective, of the life and work of psychobiologist Karl S. Lashley (1890-1958). Although it is clear at a general level that scientific endeavors are affected by extrascientific factors, particular concern is directed at the issues involved in demonstrating that the scientific work of an individual, in this case Lashley, is affected by specific extrascientific influences. There is insufficient evidence to conclude that Lashley's work was driven predominantly by racial and genetic determinist positions and that he was something other than the scientist he represented himself as being. I then discuss an unpublished personality theory approach to Lashley that suggests the influence of some personality characteristics on his work and helps to provide balance and perspective in constructing representations of Lashley.

Behavior↗

PubMed1990

Differences in affiliative behavior, pair bonding, and vaginal cytology in two species of vole (Microtus ochrogaster and M. montanus).

Prairie voles (Microtus ochrogaster) and montane voles (M. montanus) display marked differences in social organization in the field. Trios of 1 male and 2 females were studied in a large enclosure for a 10-day period. Prairie voles spent 59% of the observation time in side-by-side contact, whereas montane voles spent only 7% of the time in contact. Vaginal smears indicated female-female suppression of estrus in prairie voles; female montane voles appeared to cycle in the presence of males. Male prairie voles preferentially paired and nested with 1 of the females, and vaginal estrus generally followed pair formation by 2 days. Male montane voles did not spend time preferentially with either female, even after mating. These results suggest that the contrasting mating systems of these species result from differences in the propensity for affiliative behavior and social bonding rather than from mate availability or female receptivity.

Animals↗