Though many of people’s impressions about each other stem from qualities that are obvious or apparent, social perceptions also rely on a variety of subtle cues that guide judgment and behavior. For example, emerging work has increasingly elucidated the conditions and means by which individuals’ accuracy in judging others’ sexual orientation is better than chance. We discuss these here, focusing on four domains from which people draw cues to accurately perceive sexual orientation: how people adorn themselves (adornment), how they move (actions), how they sound (acoustics), and how they look (appearance). Moreover, we describe how certain factors, such as one’s own sexual orientation, can constrain or facilitate this accuracy and describe the various negative social and occupational consequences that may result from cues that someone is gay or straight.
AmbadyN.BernieriF. J.RichesonJ. A. (2000). Toward a histology of social behavior: Judgmental accuracy from thin slices of the behavioral stream. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 32, pp. 201–272). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. A thorough review of the classic research demonstrating that people can infer myriad pieces of information about others from subtle and minimal nonverbal cues.
2.
AmbadyN.HallahanM.ConnerB. (1999). (See References). The seminal article showing evidence that people can accurately perceive sexual orientation from subtle and minimal nonverbal information.
3.
RuleN. O. (in press). Perceptions of sexual orientation from minimal cues. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10508-016-0779-2. An extended and more technical discussion of how adornment, actions, acoustics, and appearance support perceptions of sexual orientation that addresses relevant controversies about the measurement of accuracy in judging sexual orientation.
4.
TskhayK. O.RuleN. O. (2013). (See References). An analysis and summary of all published and unpublished studies conducted before 2013 on the accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation (and other perceptually ambiguous traits) across a variety of channels of nonverbal information.
5.
TskhayK. O.RuleN. O. (2015). Sexual orientation across culture and time. In SafdarS.Kosakowska-BerzeckaN. (Eds.), Psychology of gender through the lens of culture: Theories and applications (pp. 55–73). New York, NY: Springer. A nontechnical summary of findings on the relationship between perceptions of sexual orientation and gender atypicality across cultures throughout much of recorded history.
6.
AmbadyN.HallahanM.ConnerB. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 538–547.
7.
BrambillaM.RivaP.RuleN. O. (2013). Familiarity increases the accuracy of categorizing male sexual orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 193–195.
8.
BuckD. M.PlantE. A. (2011). Interorientation interactions and impressions: Does the timing of disclosure of sexual orientation matter?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 333–342.
9.
ConronK. J.MimiagaM. J.LandersS. J. (2010). A population-based study of sexual orientation identity and gender differences in adult health. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 1953–1960.
10.
DingJ. Y. C.RuleN. O. (2012). Gay, straight, or somewhere in between: Accuracy and bias in the perception of bisexual faces. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 36, 165–176.
11.
EverlyB. A.ShihM. J.HoG. C. (2011). Don’t ask, don’t tell? Does disclosure of gay identity affect partner performance?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 407–410.
12.
HennenP. (2008). Faeries, bears, and leathermen: Men in community queering the masculine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
13.
JohnsonK. L.GhavamiN. (2011). At the crossroads of conspicuous and concealable: What race categories communicate about sexual orientation. PLoS ONE, 6, e18025. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0018025
14.
JohnsonK. L.GillS.ReichmanV.TassinaryL. G. (2007). Swagger, sway, and sexuality: Judging sexual orientation from body motion and morphology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 321–334.
15.
KrakauerI. D.RoseS. M. (2002). The impact of group membership on lesbians’ physical appearance. Journal of Lesbian Studies, 6, 31–43.
16.
LickD. J.JohnsonK. L.RuleN. O. (2015). Disfluent processing of nonverbal cues helps to explain anti-bisexual prejudice. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 39, 275–288.
17.
LinvilleS. E. (1998). Acoustic correlates of perceived versus actual sexual orientation in men’s speech. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, 50, 35–48.
18.
MackS.MunsonB. (2012). The influence of /s/ quality on ratings of men’s sexual orientation: Explicit and implicit measures of the “gay lisp” stereotype. Journal of Phonetics, 40, 198–212.
19.
MacraeC. N.BodenhausenG. V. (2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 93–120.
20.
MunsonB. (2010). Variation, implied pathology, social meaning, and the “gay lisp”: A response to Van Borsel et al. (2009). Journal of Communication Disorders, 43, 1–5.
21.
MunsonB.BabelM. (2007). Loose lips and silver tongues, or, projecting sexual orientation through speech. Language & Linguistics Compass, 1, 416–449.
22.
PierrehumbertJ. B.BentT.MunsonB.BradlowA. R.BaileyJ. M. (2004). The influence of sexual orientation on vowel production (L). The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116, 1905–1908.
23.
ReD. E.RuleN. O. (2015). Appearance and physiognomy. In MatsumotoD.HwangH.FrankM. (Eds.), APA handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 221–256). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
24.
RiegerG.LinsenmeierJ. A. W.GygaxL.BaileyJ. M. (2008). Sexual orientation and childhood gender nonconformity: Evidence from home videos. Developmental Psychology, 44, 46–58.
25.
RiegerG.LinsenmeierJ. A. W.GygaxL.GarciaS.BaileyJ. M. (2010). Dissecting “gaydar”: Accuracy and the role of masculinity-femininity. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 124–140.
26.
RiegerG.Savin-WilliamsR. C.ChiversM. L.BaileyJ. M. (2016). Sexual arousal and masculinity-femininity of women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 265–283.
27.
RuddN. A. (1996). Appearance and self-presentation research in gay consumer cultures: Issues and impact. Journal of Homosexuality, 31, 109–134.
28.
RuleN. O. (2011). The influence of target and perceiver race in the categorization of male sexual orientation. Perception, 40, 830–839.
29.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN. (2008). Brief exposures: Male sexual orientation is accurately perceived at 50-ms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1100–1105.
30.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN.AdamsR. B.Jr.MacraeC. N. (2007). Us and them: Memory advantages in perceptually ambiguous groups. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 687–692.
31.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN.AdamsR. B.Jr.MacraeC. N. (2008). Accuracy and awareness in the perception and categorization of male sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1019–1028.
32.
RuleN. O.AmbadyN.HallettK. C. (2009). Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1245–1251.
33.
RuleN. O.BjornsdottirR. T.TskhayK. O.AmbadyN. (2016). Subtle perceptions of male sexual orientation influence occupational opportunities. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/apl0000148
34.
RuleN. O.IshiiK.AmbadyN.RosenK. S.HallettK. C. (2011). Found in translation: Cross-cultural consensus in the accurate categorization of male sexual orientation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1449–1507.
35.
RuleN. O.RosenK. S.SlepianM. L.AmbadyN. (2011). Mating interest improves women’s accuracy in judging male sexual orientation. Psychological Science, 22, 881–886.
36.
RuleN. O.TskhayK. O.BrambillaM.RivaP.AndrzejewskiS. A.KrendlA. C. (2015). The relationship between anti-gay prejudice and the categorization of sexual orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 77, 74–80.
37.
SkorskaM. N.GenioleS. N.VrysenB. M.McCormickC. M.BogaertA. F. (2015). Facial structure predicts sexual orientation in both men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44, 1377–1394.
38.
SmythR.JacobsG.RogersH. (2003). Male voices and perceived sexual orientation: An experimental and theoretical approach. Language in Society, 32, 329–350.
39.
SulpizioS.FasoliF.MaassA.PaladinoM. P.VespignaniF.EysselF.BentlerD. (2015). The sound of voice: Voice-based categorization of speakers’ sexual orientation with and across languages. PLoS ONE, 10, e0128882. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128882
40.
SylvaD.RiegerG.LinsenmeierJ. A.BaileyJ. M. (2010). Concealment of sexual orientation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 141–152.
41.
TskhayK. O.KrendlA. C.RuleN. O. (2016). Age-related physical changes interfere with judgments of male sexual orientation from faces. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1217–1226.
42.
TskhayK. O.RuleN. O. (2013). Accuracy in categorizing perceptually ambiguous groups: A review and meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 72–86.
43.
TskhayK. O.RuleN. O. (2015). Emotions facilitate the communication of ambiguous group memberships. Emotion, 15, 812–826.
44.
TskhayK. O.RuleN. O. (2015). Internalized homophobia influences perceptions of men’s sexual orientation from photos of their faces. Archives of Sexual Behavior. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10508-015-0628-8
45.
UlrichsK. H. (1997). Araxes (J. Steakley, Trans.). In BlasiusM.PhelanS. (Eds.), We are everywhere: A historical sourcebook of gay and lesbian politics (pp. 63–65). New York, NY: Routledge. (Original work published 1870)
46.
ValentovaJ. V.RiegerG.HavlícˇekJ.LinsenmeierJ. A. W.BaileyJ. M. (2011). Judgments of sexual orientation and masculinity-femininity based on thin slices of behavior: A cross-cultural comparison. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1145–1152.
47.
Van BorselJ.De BruynE.LefebvreE.SokoloffA.De LeyS.BaudonckN. (2009). The prevalence of lisping in gay men. Journal of Communication Disorders, 42, 100–106.
