ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2016
Sex differences in partner preferences in humans and animals.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structural, Functional, and Metabolic Brain Differences as a Function of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation: A Systematic Review of the Human Neuroimaging Literature.Archives of sexual behavior · 2021Pooled it
- The neural basis of sex differences in sexual behavior: A quantitative meta-analysis.Frontiers in neuroendocrinology · 2016Pooled it
- Sexual and Gender Diversity in Thailand: Associations with Recalled Childhood Sex-Typed Behavior and Adulthood Occupational Preferences.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025Article
- Accurate machine learning prediction of sexual orientation based on brain morphology and intrinsic functional connectivity.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- Sexual partner preference in animals and humans.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2020Review
- Male Ejaculatory Endophenotypes: Revealing Internal Inconsistencies of the Concept in Heterosexual Copulating Rats.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2020Article
- Neuroanatomy and function of human sexual behavior: A neglected or unknown issue?Brain and behavior · 2019Review
- Evidence for distinct biodevelopmental influences on male sexual orientation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- Fraternal birth order effect on sexual orientation explained.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018Article
- Multifaceted origins of sex differences in the brain.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016Review
- Social Monogamy in Nonhuman Primates: Phylogeny, Phenotype, and Physiology.Journal of sex researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A large number of morphological, physiological and behavioural traits are differentially expressed by males and females in all vertebrates including humans. These sex differences, sometimes, reflect the different hormonal environment of the adults, but they often remain present after subjects of both sexes are placed in the same endocrine conditions following gonadectomy associated or not with hormonal replacement therapy. They are then the result of combined influences of organizational actions of sex steroids acting early during development, or genetic differences between the sexes, or epigenetic mechanisms differentially affecting males and females. Sexual partner preference is a sexually differentiated behavioural trait that is clearly controlled in animals by the same type of mechanisms. This is also probably true in humans, even if critical experiments that would be needed to obtain scientific proof of this assertion are often impossible for pragmatic or ethical reasons. Clinical, epidemiological and correlative studies provide, however, converging evidence strongly suggesting, if not demonstrating, that endocrine, genetic and epigenetic mechanisms acting during the pre- or perinatal life control human sexual orientation, i.e. homosexuality versus heterosexuality. Whether they interact with postnatal psychosexual influences remains, however, unclear at present.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.