Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Effects of oral contraceptives and natural menstrual cycling on  environmental learning  
 
Version: 0 Date: 12 Jan 2018  
 
Reviewer: Lawrence Patihis  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Review for: Effects of oral contraceptives and natural menstrual cycling on environmental 
learning  
 
 
Summary: the authors found that women taking oral contraceptives performed better on the 
Walking Corsi Test, a test of spatial memory  
 
 
This appears to be a well researched and written article.  
 
 
Abstract: this is commendably written clearly, and a relief gi ven some obscure academic writing, 
though the first sentence of the conclusions in the abstract is a bit clunky.  
 
 
Introduction: Something appears amiss in the pdf, and the introduction appears to start on page 8 
of the pdf. The introduction is well writte n. In addition to all the evidence cited, other researchers 
have found a similar memory benefit of lower false memory rates in those women on oral 
contraception (Petersen, Patihis, & Nielsen, 2015):  
 
 
Petersen, N., Patihis, L., & Nielsen, S. E. (2015). Decre ased susceptibility to false memories 
from misinformation in hormonal contraception users. Memory, 23, 1029¬ -1038.  
 
 
The authors cite a limited number of related research, but perhaps could add more citations if 
word limits allow.  
 
 
Page 9, top: "Being hormon al fluctuations controlled in OC users [36],…" I don't really 
understand, do you mean "Given that…"  
. 
 
Method: Is a little different to the structure we use in some psychological science style guides (it 
may be influenced of how they do methods sections in  biology, or another field, which is fine), 
but it is well written and well done.  
Figure 1 could be a little higher resolution, especially B. The figure 1 legend should specify 
whether the error bars are SE or 95% CI.  
 
 
Results: the repeated measures miced  ANOVA was the right choice. Good results section.  
 
 
However, the English is unconventional in places, and I wonder if a native English speaker could 
help copy -edit the article. For example, on page 11, line 41, the sentence starts "Differently," 
should per haps be "In contrast…"  
 
 
Discussion: I agree that no other study has likely tested oral contraceptive women vs natural 
cycling women on topographical memory, and they cite converging studies (but missed Petersen 
et al, 2015). I also wonder if there are any evolutionary explanations?  
 
 
Another English usage, on page 13, line 22: "Furthermore, to our advice these results may be 
useful", I don't really know what "to our advice" means.  
 
 
Perhaps: "Furthermore, these results may be useful"  
 
 
Overall a good short paper, which might be expanded if word limits allow. Nevertheless, worthy 
of publication with some added references and revised English usage (I may have missed some 
English usage mistakes, so worth checking further).  
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, p lease specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what  aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some langua ge corrections before being published  
 
 
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publi cation of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you curr ently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any  other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named rep ort 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creativ e Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understa nd that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editor s, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal