Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Language of Love: Sex, Sexual Orientation, and Language Use in Online Personal Advertisements

  • Published:
Sex Roles Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Stereotypes and biological theories suggest that psychological gender differences found in predominantly heterosexual samples are smaller or reversed among gay men and lesbians. Computerized text analysis that compares people’s language style on a wide range of dimensions from pronoun use to body references offers a multivariate personality marker to test such assumptions. Analysis of over 1,500 internet personal advertisements placed by heterosexual men, heterosexual women, gay men, and lesbians found little evidence that orientation alters the impact of gender on linguistic behaviors. Previously reported gender differences were replicated in the gay as well as the heterosexual advertisements studied. Main effects of sexual orientation indicated that gay people of both sexes apparently felt less need to differentiate themselves from potential mates than did heterosexual people. Virtually no crossover sexual orientation by sex interactions emerged indicating that several popular models of sexual orientation are not supported on a linguistic level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. M., Nothnagel, J., & Wolfe, M. (1995). Retrospectively measured individual differences in childhood sex-typed behavior among gay men: Correspondence between self- and maternal reports. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24, 613–622.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. M., & Zucker, K. J. (1995). Childhood sex-typed behavior and sexual orientation: A conceptual analysis and quantitative review. Developmental Psychology, 31, 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bem, D. J. (1996). Exotic becomes erotic: A developmental theory of sexual orientation. Psychological Review, 103, 320–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlow, S., Rosamond, J. A., & Parker, J. A. (2003). Gender differences in linguistic behavior during televised interviews. Sex Roles, 49, 121–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicerello, A., & Sheehan, E. P. (1995). Personal advertisements: A content analysis. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 751–756.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collear, M. L., & Hines, M. (1995). Human behavioral sex differences: A role for gonadal hormones during early development? Psychological Bulletin, 118, 55–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deaux, K., & Randel, H. (1984). Courtship in the personals column: The influence of gender and sexual orientation. Sex Roles, 11, 363–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist, 50, 145–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54, 408–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A. H., Wood, W., & Diekman, A. (2000). Social role theory of sex differences and similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes & H. M. Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social psychology of gender (pp. 123–174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Epel, E. S., Spanakos, A., Kasl-Godley, J., & Brownell, K. D. (1996). Body shape ideals across gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, race and age in personal advertisements. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 19, 265–273.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freud, S. (1973/1905). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. London: Pelican.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzales, M. H., & Meyers, S. A. (1993). “Your mother would like me”: Self-presentation in the personals ads of heterosexual and homosexual men and women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 131–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goode, E. (1996) Gender and courtship entitlement: Responses to personal ads. Sex Roles, 34, 141–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groom, C. J., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Words. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 615–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatala, M. N., & Prehodka, J. (1996). Content analysis of gay male and lesbian personal advertisements. Psychological Reports, 78, 371–374.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jason, L. A., Moritsugu, J. N., & DePalma, D. M. (1992). Advertising as a strategy for meeting people. Psychological Reports, 71, 1311–1314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppel, M., Argamon, S., & Shimon, A. R. (2002). Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 17, 401–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laner, M. R., & Kamel, G. L. (1977). Media mating I: Newspaper “personals” ads of homosexual men. Journal of Homosexuality, 3, 149–162.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lindesay, J. (1987). Laterality shift in homosexual men. Neuropsychologia, 25, 965–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D., & Pasanen, E. G. (1999). Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions in heterosexuals, homosexuals, and bisexuals. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 105, 2403–2413.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merskin, D., & Huberlie, M. (1996). Companionship in the classifieds: The adoption of personal advertisements by the daily press. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 219–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Money, J. (1970). Sexual dimorphism and homosexual gender identity. Psychological Bulletin, 74, 425–440.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mustanski, B. S., Bailey, J. M., & Kaspar, S. (2002). Dermatoglyphics, handedness, sex, and sexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 113–122.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, M. L., Groom, C. J., Stone, L. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2005). Sex differences in language use: An analysis of text samples from 70 studies [University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX]. Manuscript under review.

  • Newman, M. L., Pennebaker, J. W., Berry, D. S., & Richards, J. M. (2003). Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 665–675.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parekh, R., & Bersesin, E. V. (2001). Looking for Love? Take a cross-cultural walk through the personals. Academic Psychiatry, 25, 223–233.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W., Francis, M. E., & Booth, R. J. (2001). Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC 2001. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W., & King, L. A. (1999). Linguistic styles: Language use as an individual difference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1296–1312.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. (2003). Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pennebaker, J. W., & Stone, L. D. (2003). Words of wisdom: Language use over the lifespan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 291–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Phua, V. C. (2002). Sex and sexuality in men’s personal advertisements. Men and Masculinities, 5, 178–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pillard, R. C. (1991). Masculinity and femininity in homosexuality: “Inversion” revisited. In J. C. Gonsiorek & J. D. Weinrich (Eds.), Homosexuality: Research implications for public policy (pp. 32–43). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridgeway, C. L., & Smith-Lovin, L. (1999). The gender system and interaction. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 191–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C. (1978). A pronoun is a small world. Chicago Review, 29, 9–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirman, S. W., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2001). Word use in the poetry of suicidal and non-suicidal poets. Psychosomatic Medicine, 63, 517–522.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Swim, J. K. (1994). Perceived versus meta-analytic effect sizes: An assessment of the accuracy of gender stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1991). Doing gender. In J. Lorber & S. A. Farrell (Eds.), The social construction of gender (pp. 13–36). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Texas, Austin, Texas

    Carla J. Groom & James W. Pennebaker

  2. Department of Psychology, A8000, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas, 78712

    James W. Pennebaker

Authors
  1. Carla J. Groom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. James W. Pennebaker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James W. Pennebaker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Groom, C.J., Pennebaker, J.W. The Language of Love: Sex, Sexual Orientation, and Language Use in Online Personal Advertisements. Sex Roles 52, 447–461 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3711-0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-3711-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation