Blog of the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research

Menstrual Synchrony: Do Girls Who Go Together Flow Together?

September 8th, 2011 by Elizabeth Kissling

Guest Post by Harriet Hall, M.D.

When women live together, do their menstrual cycles tend to synchronize? It’s been a long time since I first heard that claim. I didn’t believe it, for a number of reasons. I had never observed it myself, I saw no plausible mechanism to explain how it could happen, I thought the statistics to prove it would be problematic and complicated, and I suspected that confirmation bias and selective memory might have persuaded people that a spurious correlation existed. How often do women say “Oh, look! We’re having our periods at the same time”? How often do they say “Oh, look! We’re having our periods at different times”?  Now that many years have passed since my first encounter, I thought it would be fun to revisit the claim and see whether science has supported it or rejected it.

A perusal of PubMed and other Internet sources left me confused and amused.

Synchrony Is Difficult to Define

Consider that the normal menstrual cycle can vary from 21 to 35 days and can last 2 to 7 days. Consider that some women are regular and consistent, while others have variable patterns, even “regularly irregular” patterns. Consider that anovulatory cycles and other conditions often lead to menstrual irregularities that fall outside the normal range. Consider that strenuous exercise and other life events can affect menstruation. Put all that together, and you can see that often cycles will overlap simply by chance, and that it is difficult to define synchrony.

If two women have regular 28 day cycles and 7 day periods, the maximum number of days they could not overlap is 14. On average, their periods will be 7 days apart, and half the time they will be closer.

How could a 21 day cycle ever “synchronize” with a 35 day cycle? For example if you compare a woman with a regular 35 day cycle who starts on January 1 to a woman with a 21 day cycle who starts two weeks later on January 15, their next periods will coincide almost perfectly (Feb 4-10 and Feb 5-11) but they will diverge after that. Would it count if the last day of one woman’s period overlapped with the first day of another woman’s? What if half the periods coincide and half don’t? The whole thing is problematic.

What Does the Literature Say?

It all started with Martha McClintock. In a paper published in Nature in 1971 she found that “social interaction” in a college dormitory setting could have a strong effect on the menstrual cycle. A follow-up study in 1998 tended to support the hypothesis that pheromones were involved: smelling armpit secretions of other women could either lengthen or shorten cycles depending on what part of her cycle the donor was in.

I’ll summarize rather than trying to cover everything published on the subject.  A Scientific American article did a good job of reviewing the literature as of 2007. Suffice it to say that about half the published papers support the synchronization hypothesis and half don’t; and the half that do have been harshly criticized for their poor design and poor statistical analyses. So we haven’t reached a consensus, but it’s looking more likely that synchronization is a myth.

A study in a nursing journal assumes that synchronization occurs and addresses the subjective meaning of the experience to

assist nurses to understand the holistic aspects of this everyday experience of women and to design effective strategies and techniques to help women gain knowledge about their cycle functions, promote healthy attitudes toward menstruation as a process, and acknowledge and honor this natural, healthy aspect of their menstrual cycle.

Are you ready?

May 29th, 2010 by Elizabeth Kissling

EvoPsych BINGOReady to play Evo-Psych bingo, that is. I don’t know quite what else to do with a study like this: Women’s preferences for masculinity in male faces are highest during reproductive age range and lower around puberty and post-menopause.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Menstrual Cycle and Competitive Bidding

August 18th, 2009 by Elizabeth Kissling

This is an interesting study, in a “Whoa! Somebody actually thought to do a study of that” kind of way. And that’s saying something, coming from someone who studies discourses of menstruation. Two economists designed a study to try to demonstrate that women bid differently in auctions depending on the phase of their menstrual cycle. They found that women bid significantly higher than men in their menstrual and premenstrual phases, but do not bid significantly differently in other phases of the menstrual cycle. They extrapolate from this that women are greater risk-takers during the fertile phase of their cycle.

The detailed statistical modeling and analysis is beyond my expertise as a humanities scholar, but I find the underlying premises of the study and its conclusions problematic. First, they assess which phase of her cycle their research participants are in by self-report and the assumption of a 28-day cycle: “We distinguish the menstrual phase (days 1 to 5), the follicular phase (days 6 to 13), the peri-ovulatory phase (days 14 to 15), the luteal phase (days 16 to 23), and the premenstrual phase (days 24 to 28).” As my colleagues at CeMCOR will tell you, one cannot assess ovulation merely from self-report of date of last menstrual period and projected date of next period. Regular menstruation ≠ ovulation. And pretty much any menstruator can tell you that the average 28-day cycle is just that, an average. The researchers also noted that 15% of their participants used hormonal birth control, but

Specifications (5), (10), (13), (16), (19), and (22) reveal that our results remain robust when controlling for hormonal methods of birth control. Hormonal methods of birth control do not have a significant effect on bids.

Since hormonal contraceptives (such as the birth control pill, ring, or patch) suppress the hypothalamic-pituitary axis, these women do not ovulate or experience the five phases of the cycle the researchers enumerate.

Additionally, the participants in this study appear to be students at UC Davis; college-aged women often have irregular, anovulatory cycles due to their youth and other factors, such as poor diet, stress, and irregular sleep patterns. Even age at menarche (the first menstrual period) affects whether a young woman ovulates regularly.One must always be suspect of sweeping generalizations from a such small, elite sample.

And I find the whole evo-psych approach and conclusions troubling. While I cannot deny that hormones exert an influence on behavior, I think it takes an awful lot of inferential leaps to get from the data in this study that “that women bid significantly higher than men in their menstrual and premenstrual phase but do not bid significantly different in other phases of the menstrual cycle” to “an evolutionary hypothesis according to which women are genetically predisposed by hormones to generally behave more riskily during their fertile phase of their menstrual cycle in order to increase the probability of conception, quality of offspring, and genetic variety.” So many factors could influence the higher bids that it’s an extraordinary reach to attribute it to phases of the menstrual cycle, especially given the unscientific way the cycles were charted.

Post to Twitter Post to Plurk Post to Yahoo Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to MySpace Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Readers should note that statements published in re: Cycling are those of individual authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Society as a whole.