MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145629355 · doi:10.1037/a0018764

Sexual orientation and the second to fourth finger length ratio: A meta-analysis in men and women.

2010· review· en· W2145629355 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Grimbos, Khytam Dawood, Robert P. Burriss, Kenneth J. Zucker, David A. Puts

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Neuroscience · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSexual Differentiation and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual orientationPsychologyDigit ratioHeterosexualityModerationDevelopmental psychologySocializationEthnic groupHomosexualityLesbianNormativeTestosterone (patch)Social psychologyMedicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ratio of the lengths of the second and fourth fingers (2D:4D) may serve as a marker for prenatal androgen signaling. Because people are typically unaware of their 2D:4D, its use allows possible effects of early sex hormone regimes and socialization to be disentangled. We conducted a meta-analysis on relationships between 2D:4D and sexual orientation in men and women in 18 independent samples of men and 16 independent samples of women. Collectively, these samples comprised 1,618 heterosexual men, 1,693 heterosexual women, 1,503 gay men, and 1,014 lesbians. In addition to identifying the normative heterosexual sex difference in 2D:4D for both hands, we found that heterosexual women had higher (more feminine) left- and right-hand 2D:4D than did lesbians, but we found no difference between heterosexual and gay men. Moderator analyses suggested that ethnicity explained some between-studies variation in men. These results add to a literature suggesting that early sex hormone signaling affects sexual orientation in women, and highlight the need for further research exploring the relationships among 2D:4D, sexual orientation, and ethnicity in men.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.009
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations259
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral NeuroscienceSame topicSexual Differentiation and DisordersFrench-language works237,207