Ecological Invalidity of Existing Gaydar Research: In-Lab Accuracy Translates to Real-World Inaccuracy: Response to Rule, Johnson, & Freeman (2016)
- PMID: 28276940
- DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2017.1278570
Ecological Invalidity of Existing Gaydar Research: In-Lab Accuracy Translates to Real-World Inaccuracy: Response to Rule, Johnson, & Freeman (2016)
Abstract
In recent years, several empirical studies have claimed to provide evidence in support of the popular folk notion that people possess "gaydar" that enables them to accurately identify who is gay or lesbian (Rule, Johnson, & Freeman, 2016). This conclusion is limited to artificial lab settings, however, and when translated to real-world settings this work itself provides evidence that people's judgments about who is gay/lesbian are not pragmatically accurate. We also briefly review evidence related to the consequences of perpetuating the idea of gaydar (i.e., "the gaydar myth"). Although past claims about accurate orientation perception are misleading, the work that gave rise to those claims can nevertheless inform the literature in meaningful ways. We offer some recommendations for how the evidence in past "gaydar" research can be reappraised to inform our understanding of social perception and group similarities/differences.
Comment on
-
Evidence for the Absence of Stimulus Quality Differences in Tests of the Accuracy of Sexual Orientation Judgments: A Reply to Cox, Devine, Bischmann, and Hyde (2016).J Sex Res. 2017 Sep;54(7):813-819. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1205547. Epub 2016 Aug 2. J Sex Res. 2017. PMID: 27485535
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Miscellaneous
