Detection of Sexual Orientation by Heterosexuals and Homosexuals

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine if sexual orientation can be correctly identified under controlled conditions. A series of 24 brief videotaped interviews with homosexual and heterosexual men and women were presented to a sample of 143 subject raters divided into four sexual preference and gender groups. None of the groups were able to exceed levels of correct detection. Approximately 20% of the total subject pool did exceed chance levels. There were significantly more women than men in this sub-sample and homosexual women were represented disproportionately. Although there were some differences in the types of behavioral cues used by the different sexual preference groups to make their judgments, with the possible exception of homosexual women, these cues were unrelated to accurate identification of sexual orientation. The relatively better performance of female raters is discussed in terms of differences in the socialization process of men and women.

Dissecting “Gaydar”: Accuracy and the Role of Masculinity–Femininity

“…In contrast to some other studies (Ambady et al, 1999;Berger et al, 1987;Sylva et al, 2007), homosexual raters were not generally more accurate. As we noted, however, the accuracy advantage of homosexual raters found in those studies was modest and somewhat inconsistent.…”

“…Some studies of thin slices of behavior have included relevant data for evaluating this belief. One study found that homosexual people were better than heterosexuals at accurately judging sexual orientation from brief videotaped interviews (Berger, Hank, Rauzi, & Simkins, 1987;results reported in Ambady et al, 1999). Ambady et al (1999) found inconsistent results across two studies regarding the relative accuracy of heterosexual and homosexual raters; in general, results did not reveal that either was superior.…”

Probabilistic National Stereotypes

“…Biased social categorization is likely when there are no salient categorical features defining a person's group membership. For example, the categorization of a person as 'Jewish' or 'gay' is less reliable than the categorization of a person as black or white, male or female (Berger, Hank, Rauzi & Simkins, 1987;Elliott & Wittenberg, 1955). Suppose an observer uses attributes of uncertain cue validity (e.g.…”

Accuracy in Categorizing Perceptually Ambiguous Groups

“…Thus, identifying someone who is gay holds numerous social implications, such as rejection, discrimination, and prejudice (Herek, 2004), with a high potential impact for the target's safety and well-being (e.g., Herek, Cogan, & Gillis, 2002). Berger, Hank, Rauzi, and Simkins (1987) set out to investigate if sexual orientation could be identified at better than chance levels. Video stimuli were created from brief interviews with 24 gay and straight men and women (i.e., 6 targets in each gender × sexual preference combination) presented to 143 judges.…”