In intercourse between men, one of the partners typically assumes the role of an insertive partner (top) while the other assumes a receptive role (bottom). Although some research suggests that the perceptions of potential partners’ sexual roles in gay men’s relationships can affect whether a man will adopt the role of top or bottom during sexual intercourse, it remains unclear whether sexual roles could be perceived accurately by naïve observers. In Study 1, we found that naïve observers were able to discern men’s sexual roles from photos of their faces with accuracy that was significantly greater than chance guessing. Moreover, in Study 2, we determined that the relationship between men’s perceived and actual sexual roles was mediated by perceived masculinity. Together, these results suggest that people rely on perceptions of characteristics relevant to stereotypical male–female gender roles and heterosexual relationships to accurately infer sexual roles in same-sex relationships. Thus, same-sex relationships and sexual behavior may be perceptually framed, understood, and possibly structured in ways similar to stereotypes about opposite-sex relationships, suggesting that people may rely on these inferences to form accurate perceptions.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Three faces were removed due to a technical error.
Data for the outlier whose score was more than 3 SDs away from the sample mean were removed. The response bias data were further transformed using the negative reciprocal transformation to successfully approximate normality prior to inferential statistical tests (W = .92, p = .09). The means and SDs are presented here as raw scores to ease interpretation.
We did not find any significant differences in the magnitude of the relationship between masculinity and perceived sexual role when examining the model including the interaction between the two predictor variables (i.e., actual sexual role and perceived masculinity).
Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 538–547.
Bailey, J. M., Kim, P. Y., Hills, A., & Linsenmeier, J. A. W. (1997). Butch, femme, or straight acting? Partner preferences of gay men and lesbians. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 960–973.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Buhrmester, M. D., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.
Carballo-Diéguez, A., Dolezal, C., Nieves, L., Diaz, F., Decena, C., & Balan, I. (2004). Looking for a tall, dark, macho man: Sexual-role behavior variations in Latino gay and bisexual men. Culture, Health, & Sexuality, 6, 159–171.
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.
Gil, S. (2007). A narrative exploration of gay men’s sexual practices as a dialectical dialogue. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 22, 63–75.
Hart, T. A., Wolitski, R. J., Purcell, D. W., Gómez, C., & The Seropositive Urban Men’s Study Team. (2003). Sexual behavior among HIV-positive men who have sex with men: What’s in a label? Journal of Sex Research, 40, 179–188.
Jeffries, W. L. (2009). A comparative analysis of homosexual behavior, sex role preference, and anal sex proclivities in Latino and non-Latino men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 765–778.
Johnson, K. L., Gill, S., Reichman, V., & Tassinary, L. G. (2007). Swagger, sway, and sexuality: Judging sexual orientation from body motion and morphology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 321–334.
Kippax, S., & Smith, G. (2001). Anal intercourse and power in sex between men. Sexualities, 4, 413–434.
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Moskowitz, D. A., & Hart, T. A. (2011). The influence of physical body traits and masculinity on anal sex roles in gay and bisexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 835–841.
Moskowitz, D. A., Rieger, G., & Roloff, M. E. (2008). Tops, bottoms and versatiles. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 23, 191–202.
Moskowitz, D. A., Rieger, G., & Seal, D. W. (2009). Narcissism, self-evaluation, and partner preferences among men who have sex with men. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 725–728.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 717–731.
Rieger, G., Linsenmeier, J. A. W., Gygax, L., Garcia, S., & Bailey, J. M. (2010). Dissecting “gaydar”: Accuracy and the role of masculinity–femininity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 124–140.
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.
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.
Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., & Hallett, K. C. (2009a). Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1245–1251.
Rule, N. O., Macrae, C. N., & Ambady, N. (2009b). Ambiguous group membership is extracted automatically from faces. Psychological Science, 20, 441–443.
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, 843–848.
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.
Wegesin, D. J., & Meyer-Bahlburg, H. F. L. (2000). Top/bottom self-label, anal sex practices, HIV risk and gender role identity in gay men in New York City. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 12, 43–62.
Wei, C., & Raymond, H. F. (2011). Preference for and maintenance of anal sex roles among men who have sex with men: Sociodemographic and behavioral correlates. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 829–834.
Weinrich, J. D., Grant, I., Jacobson, D. L., Robinson, S. R., McCutchan, J. A., & The HNRC Group. (1992). Effect of recalled childhood gender non-conformity on adult genitoerotic role and AIDS exposure. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 21, 559–585.
Zhou, C., Raymond, H. F., Ding, X., Lu, R., Xu, J., Wu, G., et al. (2012). Anal sex role, circumcision status, and HIV infection among men who have sex with men in Chongqing, China. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0008-6.
About this article
Cite this article
Tskhay, K.O., Rule, N.O. Accurate Identification of a Preference for Insertive Versus Receptive Intercourse from Static Facial Cues of Gay Men. Arch Sex Behav 42, 1217–1222 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0092-2
- Gender roles
- Person perception
- Sexual orientation
- Nonverbal behavior