Perceptions of Sexual Orientation From Minimal Cues

Abstract

People derive considerable amounts of information about each other from minimal nonverbal cues. Apart from characteristics typically regarded as obvious when encountering another person (e.g., age, race, and sex), perceivers can identify many other qualities about a person that are typically rather subtle. One such feature is sexual orientation. Here, I review the literature documenting the accurate perception of sexual orientation from nonverbal cues related to one's adornment, acoustics, actions, and appearance. In addition to chronicling studies that have demonstrated how people express and extract sexual orientation in each of these domains, I discuss some of the basic cognitive and perceptual processes that support these judgments, including how cues to sexual orientation manifest in behavioral (e.g., clothing choices) and structural (e.g., facial morphology) signals. Finally, I attend to boundary conditions in the accurate perception of sexual orientation, such as the states, traits, and group memberships that moderate individuals' ability to reliably decipher others' sexual orientation.

Who wants to sound straight? Sexual majority and minority stereotypes, beliefs and desires about auditory gaydar

“…Researchers have also recently debated whether people with different SOs intentionally present themselves in different ways in social situations creating confounds in gaydar research (Cox et al, 2016;Rule, 2017). Our research does not resolve this debate but suggests that it should be conducted in a way that pays attention to the fact that heterosexual people want to signal their sexual identities which may translate into both habitual and consciously chosen attempts to communicate their SO to others.…”

“…Conceptualized as a process of distinguishing gay/lesbian and straight individuals (Rule, 2017), gaydar research has often assumed that every individual belongs to, and identifies with, one and only one of these two sexual orientation categories. However, research has taken less account of why such categorization might matter in everyday life, or whether people desire to be so categorized by others at all (Fasoli, Maass, & Sulpizio, 2016).…”

Gay- and Lesbian-Sounding Auditory Cues Elicit Stereotyping and Discrimination

“…Yet, people categorize individuals as gay or heterosexual on the basis of indirect cues, including their physical appearance, their body language, and their vocal characteristics (Rieger, Linsenmeier, Gygax, Garcia, & Bailey, 2010; Rule, 2017; Shelp, 2002). Whereas people may find it relatively easy to monitor their appearance and body language, voice may be less controllable than other cues (Fasoli, Maass, & Sulpizio, 2016).…”

Voice and Prejudice: The Social Costs of Auditory Gaydar

“…Based on his review of the existing literature, Rule (2017) concluded that auditory gaydar has a 63% accuracy rate. Given that chances of correct recognition are generally 50% (with most VOICE AND PREJUDICE 6 studies using an equal number of LG vs. straight stimuli), this means that performance exceeds chance by about 13%.…”