Institution
University of Nebraska Omaha
Education•Omaha, Nebraska, United States•
About: University of Nebraska Omaha is a education organization based out in Omaha, Nebraska, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 4526 authors who have published 8905 publications receiving 213914 citations. The organization is also known as: UNO & University of Omaha.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University of Kentucky1, Northwestern University2, Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis3, Harvard University4, University of Washington5, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center6, University of Wisconsin-Madison7, University of Nebraska Omaha8, University of New Mexico9, University of Minnesota10, State University of New York Upstate Medical University11, Brigham and Women's Hospital12, Vanderbilt University13, Washington University in St. Louis14, University of Michigan15
TL;DR: There is a sex-based difference in the autonomy granted to general surgery trainees and this gender gap may affect female residents' experience in training and possibly their preparation for practice.
83 citations
••
TL;DR: Testing the hypothesis that scent from female common marmosets contains chemical cues that permit discrimination between dominant females in the peri‐ovulatory versus luteal phase of the ovarian cycle and females holding dominant versus subordinate status found that it does.
Abstract: Social peer groups of callitrichid monkeys [marmosets and tamarins] exhibit intrasexual dominance hierarchies in captivity. This laboratory study employed two-choice behavioral discrimination bioassys to test the hypothesis that scent from female common marmosets contains chemical cues that permit discrimination between dominant females in the peri-ovulatory versus luteal phase of the ovarian cycle and females holding dominant versus subordinate status. When scent from only dominant females was presented, marmosets directed significantly greater amounts of investigatory behavior toward peri-ovulatory scent versus scent collected during the luteal phase of the ovarian cycle. Animals of both sexes demonstrated significant discriminatory behavior between scent deposited by dominant versus subordinate females, but only when the dominant female was in the peri-ovulatory phase of the ovarian cycle. Test animals directed equal amounts of investigative behavior toward scent from luteal-phase dominant females and subordinate females. Female test subjects deposited significantly more scent marks over presented scents than did male subjects, particularly when the scent had been donated by a peri-ovulatory female. Chemical odors specific to the peri-ovulatory and luteal phases of the ovarian cycle may play a role in mediating behavioral interactions among marmosets. Am. J. Primatol. 46:265–284, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
83 citations
••
Ludwig Boltzmann Gesellschaft1, Aarhus University2, University of Copenhagen3, University of California, Berkeley4, Polytechnic University of Milan5, Erasmus University Rotterdam6, University of Innsbruck7, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna8, Vienna University of Economics and Business9, Open University10, Copenhagen Business School11, University of Lausanne12, University of Passau13, RMIT University14, University of Manchester15, New York University16, CERN17, University of Gothenburg18, University of Vienna19, Ramon Llull University20, University of Agder21, European School of Management and Technology22, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign23, Imperial College London24, VU University Amsterdam25, Stockholm School of Economics26, University of Nebraska Omaha27
TL;DR: The Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Framework as discussed by the authors proposes a framework to capture the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of open and collaborative practices along the entire process of generating and disseminating scientific insights and translating them into innovation.
Abstract: Openness and collaboration in scientific research are attracting increasing attention from scholars and practitioners alike. However, a common understanding of these phenomena is hindered by disciplinary boundaries and disconnected research streams. We link dispersed knowledge on Open Innovation, Open Science, and related concepts such as Responsible Research and Innovation by proposing a unifying Open Innovation in Science (OIS) Research Framework. This framework captures the antecedents, contingencies, and consequences of open and collaborative practices along the entire process of generating and disseminating scientific insights and translating them into innovation. Moreover, it elucidates individual-, team-, organisation-, field-, and society‐level factors shaping OIS practices. To conceptualise the framework, we employed a collaborative approach involving 47 scholars from multiple disciplines, highlighting both tensions and commonalities between existing approaches. The OIS Research Framework thus serves as a basis for future research, informs policy discussions, and provides guidance to scientists and practitioners.
83 citations
••
TL;DR: Dominant females have traditionally been thought to gain reproductive advantages over subordinate females as a result of harassment-induced stress inhibiting ovulation in subordinate females, but recent studies have supported the principle that reproductive benefits accrue to socially dominant individual.
Abstract: Competition within a social group can have dramatic consequences for an individual's fertility and fecundity. Social competition is certainly one of the major environmental selection pressures determining individual reproductive success. ' Recently, increasing numbers of studies employing genetic criteria have supported the principle that reproductive benefits accrue to socially dominant individual^?,^ At the proximate level, dominant females have traditionally been thought to gain reproductive advantages over subordinate females as a result of (1) harassment-induced stress inhibiting ovulation in subordinate females (e.g., cynomolgus monkeys, Macacafascicularis)$ (2) harassment-related pregnancy loss or infant loss suffered by subordinates (e.g., yellow baboons, Papio cynocephalu~),~.~ or ( 3 ) exclusion of subordinate females from resources crucial for successful reproduction, such as food (e.g., red deer, Cervus e l e p h ~ s ) ~ or 'helpers' to raise offspring (e.g., saddle back tamarins, Saguinus fuscicollis).8 Such dominance-driven harassment or exclusion exploits the generalized inhibitory reproductive responses that most vertebrate species show to chronic physiological stress, whether it is derived psychologically (i.e., harassment) or environmen-
83 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, a review of the behavioral science literature and research on the negative and positive cultural effects of law enforcement culture is presented, and the implications for psychological services to LEOs are discussed.
Abstract: The unique nature of law enforcement has always fostered a distinct subculture that often pushes law enforcement officers (LEOs) to accept unique cultural tenets that are quite different from those held by average citizens. As a result. LEOs may isolate themselves from commonplace family and social relationships, with the byproducts of mental, physical, and behavioral problems. Despite the prominence of the police culture in modern life, there is a paucity of empirical research. On the basis of a review of the behavioral science literature and research, this article describes the negative and positive cultural effects that merit consideration by psychologists. The implications for psychological services to LEOs are discussed.
83 citations
Authors
Showing all 4588 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Darell D. Bigner | 130 | 819 | 90558 |
Dan L. Longo | 125 | 697 | 56085 |
William B. Dobyns | 105 | 430 | 38956 |
Eamonn Martin Quigley | 103 | 685 | 39585 |
Howard E. Gendelman | 101 | 567 | 39460 |
Alexander V. Kabanov | 99 | 447 | 34519 |
Douglas T. Fearon | 94 | 278 | 35140 |
Dapeng Yu | 94 | 745 | 33613 |
John E. Wagner | 94 | 488 | 35586 |
Zbigniew K. Wszolek | 93 | 576 | 39943 |
Surinder K. Batra | 87 | 564 | 30653 |
Frank L. Graham | 85 | 255 | 39619 |
Jing Zhou | 84 | 533 | 37101 |
Manish Sharma | 82 | 1407 | 33361 |
Peter F. Wright | 77 | 252 | 21498 |