Previous research has demonstrated that women can correctly distinguish between gay and heterosexual men’s faces significantly better than chance. This ability appears to be heightened during the most fertile portion of their ovulatory cycle. Here, we sought to replicate and extend these findings in a large sample of undergraduate women (N = 1960). Although women correctly identified men’s sexual orientation significantly better than chance (62% average accuracy), a subsample of naturally cycling women (n = 426) did not judge men’s sexual orientation from faces more accurately when in the fertile phase of their ovulatory cycle. These results further replicate the visibility of male sexual orientation, but do not show that this ability has strong links to estimated fertility.
This is a preview of subscription content,to check access.
Access this article
These studies also typically examine detection of women’s sexual orientation, but we have not reviewed these in detail here because we focus on male sexual orientation in the present work.
Out of the present sample, 1847 individuals were also included in Semenyna and Vasey (2021). Data cleaning procedures differed slightly for the present sample and included additional participants who did not complete the trust tasks included in that study.
For participants with fewer than five missing face ratings, the missing value was imputed using the modal response (0.15% of all face ratings total).
Participants’ gender identity was not assessed separately from their sex. Although we are unable to detect the presence of transgender individuals in our sample, their possible presence is unlikely to affect our results given that transgender men (i.e., natal females who identify as men) are generally rare in the population (Zucker, 2017).
Relationship length did not correlate with accuracy or response bias (all |rs|≤ .04, all ps ≥ .20) and is only used here to describe the sample.
Bailey, J. M., Vasey, P. L., Diamond, L. M., Breedlove, S. M., Vilain, E., & Epprecht, M. (2016). Sexual orientation, controversy, and science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17, 45–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616637616
Benjamin, D. J., Berger, J. O., Johannesson, M., Nosek, B. A., Wagenmakers, E. J., Berk, R., Bollen, K. A., Brembs, B., Brown, L., Camerer, C., Cesarini, D., Chambers, C. D., Clyde, M., Cook, T. D., De Boeck, P., Dienes, Z., Dreber, A., Easwaran, K., Efferson, C., & Johnson, V. E. (2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2, 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z
Blake, K. R., Dixson, B. J., O’Dean, S. M., & Denson, T. F. (2016). Standardized protocols for characterizing women’s fertility: A data-driven approach. Hormones and Behavior, 81, 74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2016.03.004
Brewer, G., & Lyons, M. (2017). Is gaydar affected by attitudes toward homosexuality? Confidence, labeling bias, and accuracy. Journal of Homosexuality, 64, 1241–1252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2016.1244443
Brinsmead-Stockham, K., Johnston, L., Miles, L., & Neil Macrae, C. (2008). Female sexual orientation and menstrual influences on person perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 729–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2007.05.003
Bull, J. R., Rowland, S. P., Scherwitzl, E. B., Scherwitzl, R., Danielsson, K. G., & Harper, J. (2019). Real-world menstrual cycle characteristics of more than 600,000 menstrual cycles. Npj Digital Medicine, 2, 83. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-019-0152-7
Burke, D., & Sulikowski, D. (2010). A new viewpoint on the evolution of sexually dimorphic human faces. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 573–585.
Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408
Cox, W. T., Devine, P. G., Bischmann, A. A., & Hyde, J. S. (2016). Inferences about sexual orientation: The roles of stereotypes, faces, and the gaydar myth. Journal of Sex Research, 53, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1015714
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
Faust, L., Bradley, D., Landau, E., Noddin, K., Farland, L. V., Baron, A., & Wolfberg, A. (2019). Findings from a mobile application-based cohort are consistent with established knowledge of the menstrual cycle, fertile window, and conception. Fertility and Sterility, 112, 450–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.05.008
Freeman, J. B., Johnson, K. L., Ambady, N., & Rule, N. O. (2010). Sexual orientation perception involves gendered facial cues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1318–1331. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210378755
Gangestad, S. W., Haselton, M. G., Welling, L. L. M., Gildersleeve, K., Pillsworth, E. G., Burriss, R. P., Larson, C. M., & Puts, D. A. (2016). How valid are assessments of conception probability in ovulatory cycle research? Evaluations, recommendations, and theoretical implications. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37, 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.09.001
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Garver-Apgar, C. E. (2005). Adaptations to ovulation: Implications for sexual and social behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 312–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00388.x
Geary, R. S., Tanton, C., Erens, B., Clifton, S., Prah, P., Wellings, K., Mitchell, K. R., Datta, J., Gravningen, K., Fuller, E., Johnson, A. M., Sonnenberg, P., & Mercer, C. H. (2018). Sexual identity, attraction and behaviour in Britain: The implications of using different dimensions of sexual orientation to estimate the size of sexual minority populations and inform public health interventions. PLoS ONE, 13, e0189607. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189607
Gelman, A., Mattson, G., & Simpson, D. (2018). Gaydar and the fallacy of decontextualized measurement. Sociological Science, 5, 270–280. https://doi.org/10.15195/v5.a12
Gildersleeve, K., Haselton, M. G., & Fales, M. R. (2014). Do women’s mate preferences change across the ovulatory cycle? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 1205–1259. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035438
Hays, R. D., Hayashi, T., & Stewart, A. L. (1989). A five-item measure of socially desirable response set. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49, 629–636.
Hughes, S. M., & Bremme, R. (2011). The effects of facial symmetry and sexually-dimorphic facial proportions on assessments of sexual orientation. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 5, 214–230.
Jones, B. C., Hahn, A. C., Fisher, C. I., Wang, H., Kandrik, M., & DeBruine, L. M. (2018a). General sexual desire, but not desire for uncommitted sexual relationships, tracks changes in women’s hormonal status. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 88, 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.12.015
Jones, B. C., Hahn, A. C., Fisher, C. I., Wang, H., Kandrik, M., Han, C., Fasolt, V., Morrison, D., Lee, A. J., Holzleitner, I. J., O’Shea, K. J., Roberts, S. C., Little, A. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2018b). No compelling evidence that preferences for facial masculinity track changes in women’s hormonal status. Psychological Science, 29, 996–1005. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797618760197
Kinsey, A. C., Pomeroy, W. B., & Martin, C. E. (1948). Sexual behavior in the human male. Saunders.
Lick, D. J., & Johnson, K. L. (2016). Straight until proven gay: A systematic bias toward straight categorizations in sexual orientation judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 801–817. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000052
Lyons, M., Lynch, A., Brewer, G., & Bruno, D. (2014). Detection of sexual orientation (“gaydar”) by homosexual and heterosexual women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0144-7
Marcinkowska, U. M., Rantala, M. J., Lee, A. J., Kozlov, M. V., Aavik, T., Cai, H., & Dixson, B. J. W. (2019). Women’s preferences for men’s facial masculinity are strongest under favorable ecological conditions. Scientific Reports, 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-39350-8
Morrison, M. A., & Morrison, T. G. (2003). Development and validation of a scale measuring modern prejudice toward gay men and lesbian women. Journal of Homosexuality, 43, 15–37. https://doi.org/10.1300/J082v43n02_02
Nagoshi, J. L., Adams, K. A., Terrell, H. K., Hill, E. D., Brzuzy, S., & Nagoshi, G. T. (2008). Gender differences in correlates of homophobia and transphobia. Sex Roles, 59, 521–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-008-9458-7
Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.113
Pinsof, D., & Haselton, M. (2016). The political divide over same-sex marriage: Mating strategies in conflict? Psychological Science, 27, 435–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615621719
Plöderl, M. (2014). Bayesian advice for gaydar-based picking up: Commentary on Lyons, Lynch, Brewer, and Bruno (2013). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0178-x
Rahman, Q., Xu, Y., Lippa, R. A., & Vasey, P. L. (2019). Prevalence of sexual orientation across 28 nations and its association with gender equality, economic development, and individualism. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49, 595–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01590-0
Richard, F. D., Bond, C. F., & Stokes-Zoota, J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology quantitatively described. Review of General Psychology, 7, 331–363. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2618.104.22.1681
Rieger, G., Linsenmeier, J. A., Gygax, L., Garcia, S., & Bailey, J. M. (2010). Dissecting “gaydar”: Accuracy and the role of masculinity-femininity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9405-2
Robertson, J. M., Kingsley, B. E., & Ford, G. C. (2019). Psychometric and faciometric support for observable facial feminization in gay men. Journal of Homosexuality, 66, 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2017.1411692
Rule, N. O. (2017). Perceptions of sexual orientation from minimal cues. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 46, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-016-0779-2
Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2008). Brief exposures: Male sexual orientation is accurately perceived at 50 ms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1100–1105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2007.12.001
Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., Adams, R. B., & Macrae, C. N. (2008). Accuracy and awareness in the perception and categorization of male sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1019–1028. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013194
Rule, N. O., Johnson, K. L., & Freeman, J. B. (2017). Evidence for the absence of stimulus quality differences in tests of the accuracy of sexual orientation judgments: A reply to Cox, Devine, Bischmann, and Hyde (2016). Journal of Sex Research, 54, 813–819. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1205547
Rule, N. O., Rosen, K. S., Slepian, M. L., & Ambady, N. (2011). Mating interest improves women’s accuracy in judging male sexual orientation. Psychological Science, 22, 881–886. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611412394
Rule, N. O., Tskhay, K. O., Brambilla, M., Riva, P., Andrzejewski, S. A., & Krendl, A. C. (2015). The relationship between anti-gay prejudice and the categorization of sexual orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.038
Semenyna, S. W., & Vasey, P. L. (2021). Women’s trust in gay men: An experimental study. Personality and Individual Differences, 175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110727
Skorska, M. N., Geniole, S. N., Vrysen, B. M., McCormick, C. M., & Bogaert, A. F. (2015). Facial structure predicts sexual orientation in both men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 1377–1394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0454-4
Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31, 137–149.
Stern, J., Gerlach, T. M., & Penke, L. (2020). Probing ovulatory-cycle shifts in women’s preferences for men’s behaviors. Psychological Science, 31, 424–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619882022
Stern, J., Kordsmeyer, T. L., & Lars Penke, L. (2021). A longitudinal evaluation of ovulatory cycle shifts in women’s mate attraction and preferences. Hormones and Behavior, 128, 104916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2020.104916
Sylva, D., Rieger, G., Linsenmeier, J. A., & Bailey, J. M. (2010). Concealment of sexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9466-2
Tabak, J. A., & Zayas, V. (2012). The roles of featural and configural face processing in snap judgments of sexual orientation. PLoS ONE, 7, e36671. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036671
Tinbergen, N. (1963). On aims and methods of ethology. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 20, 410–433.
Tskhay, K. O., Krendl, A. C., & Rule, N. O. (2016). Age-related physical changes interfere with judgments of male sexual orientation from faces. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1217–1226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216653585
Tskhay, K. O., & Rule, N. O. (2013). Accuracy in categorizing perceptually ambiguous groups: A review and meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312461308
Valentova, J., Rieger, G., Havlíček, J., Linsenmeier, J. A., & Bailey, J. M. (2011). Judgments of sexual orientation and masculinity-femininity based on thin slices of behavior: A cross-cultural comparison. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1145–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9818-1
Varella Valentova, J., Kleisner, K., Havlíček, J., & Neustupa, J. (2014). Shape differences between the faces of homosexual and heterosexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 353–361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0194-x
Wang, Y., & Kosinski, M. (2018). Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114, 246–257. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000098
Wood, W., Kressel, L., Joshi, P. D., & Louie, B. (2014). Meta-analysis of menstrual cycle effects on women’s mate preferences. Emotion Review, 6, 229–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073914523073
Zucker, K. J. (2017). Epidemiology of gender dysphoria and transgender identity. Sexual Health, 14, 404–411. https://doi.org/10.1071/SH17067
The authors would like to thank P. Lynne Honey for her assistance in facilitating data collection.
SWS was funded by a Joseph-Armand Bombardier Canada Graduate Scholarships (Doctoral) from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada (Grant Number 767-2016-2485). PLV was supported by grants awarded by the University of Lethbridge Research Development Fund (Grant Number 13261), and an Insight Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada (Grant Number 435-2017-0866). These funding sources played no role in study design, data collection, analysis or interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The materials and methodology for this study were approved by the Human Subject Research Committee of the University of Lethbridge (#2016-046), as well as the MacEwan University Research Ethics Board (REB Reference No. 16-17-081). All study measures and procedures were approved by the local research ethics office at each institution where data were collected.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Semenyna, S.W., Rule, N.O. & Vasey, P.L. Fertility Status Does Not Facilitate Women’s Judgment of Male Sexual Orientation. Arch Sex Behav 51, 3351–3360 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-022-02356-x