Sexual orientation is associated with 2D:4D finger length ratios in both sexes: an updated and expanded meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ratio of the lengths of the 2nd and 4th fingers (2D:4D) is a putative marker for prenatal gonadal hormone signaling and has been linked to human sexual orientation. Although 2D:4D is consistently found to be lower in males than females, the association with sexual orientation is variable across studies, with one meta-analysis finding lower (more masculine) digit ratios in lesbians than heterosexual females, but no overall association in males. However, this previous meta-analysis considered neither unpublished datasets nor bisexual individuals separately from homosexual and heterosexual individuals. Moreover, 17 datasets examining relationships between 2D:4D and sexual orientation have been published since that time, and we located an additional 11 unpublished datasets. We therefore conducted an updated and expanded meta-analysis comprising 51 studies, including 44 male and 34 female datasets, totaling 227,648 participants. This meta-analysis also explored whether 2D:4D differed between heterosexual and bisexual and/or non-exclusive individuals in both sexes. Results indicate lower (more male-typical) digit ratios in homosexual women (right hand g = 0.26, left hand g = 0.16; both adjusted following trim-and-fill), and higher (more female-typical) ratios in homosexual men (right hand g = −0.17, left hand g = −0.20; both adjusted) compared to heterosexual same-sex counterparts. Moderator analyses do not support publication bias for females. For males, positive findings were more likely to be published, but robustness tests, including trim-and-fill and leave-one-out, support the findings’ robustness. No significant differences were observed in 2D:4D between male or female bisexual and heterosexual individuals. These findings are consistent with evidence that prenatal androgens increase attraction to females and/or that prenatal estrogens increase attraction to males.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".