Effects of Sex and Sexual Orientation on Self-Reported Attraction and Viewing Times to Images of Men and Women: Testing for Category Specificity
- 881 Downloads
In a paradigm that asked participants to rate the sexual attractiveness of male and female swimsuit models, Lippa, Patterson, and Marelich (2010) showed that heterosexual men’s category specificity exceeded heterosexual women’s in two ways: (1) Heterosexual men showed much larger differences in their attraction and viewing times to male versus female photo models than heterosexual women, and (2) heterosexual men’s attractions to female but not male models increased with model attractiveness whereas heterosexual women’s attractions to both sexes increased with model attractiveness. The current study used the same paradigm to study category specificity in homosexual and heterosexual participants. In addition to replicating previous findings for heterosexual men and women, the results showed that homosexual men were high on category specificity, like heterosexual men, whereas lesbians showed lower levels of category specificity than men, but sometimes higher levels than heterosexual women.
KeywordsSexual orientation Sexual attraction Category specificity Sex differences Gender differences
This research was supported by a generous grant from the American Institute of Bisexuality. Thanks go to Travis Patterson, Amy Steffes, and Ian Roberson for their assistance with this study. A version of this article was presented at the University of Lethbridge Workshop, “The Puzzle of Sexual Orientation: What Is It and How Does It Work?”, held in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, June 2010.
- Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Diamond, L. M. (2008). Sexual fluidity: Understanding women’s love and desire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Empirisoft Corporation. (2006). MediaLab Research Software. Users’ guide and reference MediaLab version 2006.2. New York: Author.Google Scholar
- Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior theory. New York: Appleton-Century.Google Scholar
- Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- LeVay, S. (2011). Gay, straight, and the reason why: The science of sexual orientation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Mathy, R. M., & Drescher, J. (Eds.). (2009). Childhood gender nonconformity and the development of adult homosexuality. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Pattatucci, A. M. L. (1998). Biopsychosocial interactions and the development of sexual orientation. In C. J. Patterson & A. R. D’Augelli (Eds.), Lesbian, gay, and bisexual identities in families: Psychological perspectives (pp. 19–39). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Wellings, K., Field, J., Johnson, A. M., & Wadsworth, J. (1994). Sexual behavior in Britain: The national survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
- Wilson, G., & Rahman, Q. (2005). Born gay: The psychobiology of sex orientation. London: Peter Owen.Google Scholar