Cited by 79Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorGaze Tracking and Assistive TechnologyVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Differential Gaze Behavior towards Sexually Preferred and Non-Preferred Human Figures

Open access
Hall, Charlotte, Hogue, Todd, Guo, Kun·2011·The Journal of Sex Research

Abstract

The gaze pattern associated with image exploration is a sensitive index of our attention, motivation, and preference. To examine whether an individual's gaze behavior can reflect his or her sexual interest, this study compared gaze patterns of young heterosexual men and women (M = 19.94 years, SD = 1.05) while they viewed photographs of plain-clothed male and female figures aged from birth to 60 years old. The analysis revealed a clear gender difference in viewing sexually preferred figure images. Men displayed a distinctive gaze pattern only when viewing 20-year-old female images, with more fixations and longer viewing times dedicated to the upper body and waist-hip regions. Women also directed more attention at the upper body on female images in comparison to male images, but this difference was not age-specific. Analysis of local image salience revealed that observers' eye-scanning strategies could not be accounted for by low-level processes, such as analyzing local image contrast and structure, but were associated with attractiveness judgments. The results suggest that the difference in cognitive processing of sexually preferred and non-preferred figures can be manifested in gaze patterns associated with figure viewing. Thus, eye-tracking holds promise as a potential sensitive measure for sexual preference, particularly in men.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00224499.2010.521899

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hall, C., Hogue, T., & Guo, K.
Affiliations
University of Lincoln (GB)
Corresponding author
Guo, Kun
Venue
The Journal of Sex Research
Published
2010-10-20
Volume
48
Issue
5
Pages
461-469
ISSN
  • 0022-4499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-8519
OpenAlex
W2020028197
Cited by
79
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • The Journal of Sex Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Gaze Tracking and Assistive Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
gaze behavior, sexual preference, sexual interest, eye scanning, attractiveness judgments, gender differences, heterosexuals, eye tracking, visual attention, waist-to-hip ratio
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Analysis of Variance, Body Composition, Child, Child, Preschool, Cognition, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Judgment, Male, Middle Aged, Photic Stimulation, Sex Characteristics, Sex Factors, Students, Universities, Visual Perception, Human Body, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review