{ "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1", "concept": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set", "url": "https://datasetpapers.com/papers/preferred-vs-target-gender-attractiveness/", "title": "Preferred gender does not raise facial-attractiveness ratings: target-gender favouring of female faces in the London Face Set", "source_dataset": { "title": "Face Research Lab London Set", "doi": "10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5", "license": "CC BY 4.0" }, "verification": { "method": "re_execution", "status": "matched", "reproduced": true, "ran_at": "2026-07-13T08:41:07Z", "record": "verification.json" }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "gate-0.1", "novelty_grade": "B", "failed": [] }, "claims": [ { "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/claim-1", "n": 1, "triple": { "subject": "raters who report a preferred gender (prefers men or women)", "predicate": "do not rate their preferred-gender faces as more attractive than non-preferred-gender faces", "object": "per-rater attractiveness contrast d = mean(preferred) − mean(non-preferred)" }, "assertion_text": "Across n=1990 raters with a stated preferred gender, the per-rater contrast d = mean(preferred-gender) − mean(non-preferred-gender) attractiveness was negative (median d = -0.286, 95% bootstrap CI [-0.330, -0.238]; Wilcoxon signed-rank W = 743661, p = 9.27e-21; matched-pairs rank-biserial r = -0.242, Cohen's dz = -0.148); only 38.0% of raters rated their preferred gender higher. The pre-registered expectation of a positive preferred-gender contrast was not supported.", "novelty_grade": "C", "mode": "confirmatory", "confidence": 0.95, "self_reported_status": "unverified", "independent_reexecution": "matched", "entities": [], "relations": [ { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/fig-1" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/tbl-1" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/analysis" }, { "predicate": "wasDerivedFrom", "target": "https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5" }, { "predicate": "isPartOf", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1" } ] }, { "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/claim-2", "n": 2, "triple": { "subject": "the primary preferred-gender contrast", "predicate": "is directionally robust but attenuated to the median under a median-aggregation sensitivity analysis", "object": "per-rater contrast computed with per-rater median rather than mean face-set ratings" }, "assertion_text": "Under the pre-registered sensitivity analysis (per-rater median instead of mean; n=1990), the contrast remained negatively signed by rank (rank-biserial r = -0.263, Wilcoxon p = 1.86e-17, 22.0% of raters with d>0), although the median contrast itself was 0.000 because per-rater medians of integer 1–7 ratings frequently tie. The direction of the primary result is therefore not an artefact of mean aggregation.", "novelty_grade": "D", "mode": "confirmatory", "confidence": 0.85, "self_reported_status": "unverified", "independent_reexecution": "matched", "entities": [], "relations": [ { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/tbl-1" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/analysis" }, { "predicate": "wasDerivedFrom", "target": "https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5" }, { "predicate": "isPartOf", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1" } ] }, { "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/claim-3", "n": 3, "triple": { "subject": "the preferred-gender contrast within the four rater sex × orientation subgroups", "predicate": "flips sign with which gender is preferred rather than with sexual orientation", "object": "Holm-corrected per-subgroup Wilcoxon signed-rank tests of the per-rater contrast" }, "assertion_text": "Splitting preferred-gender raters into the 2×2 of sex × orientation, the median contrast was negative for both groups preferring men — heterosexual females (n=1096, median d = -0.677, CI [-0.709, -0.649], Holm p = 1.63e-164, r = -0.955) and homosexual males (n=145, median d = -0.406, CI [-0.487, -0.318], Holm p = 1.02e-13, r = -0.728) — and positive for both groups preferring women — heterosexual males (n=664, median d = 0.582, CI [0.542, 0.641], Holm p = 3.37e-87, r = 0.891) and homosexual females (n=83, median d = 0.774, CI [0.574, 0.887], Holm p = 1.02e-13, r = 0.958). The sign is determined by the preferred (hence target) gender, not by orientation.", "novelty_grade": "B", "mode": "confirmatory", "confidence": 0.92, "self_reported_status": "unverified", "independent_reexecution": "matched", "entities": [], "relations": [ { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/fig-2" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/tbl-2" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/analysis" }, { "predicate": "wasDerivedFrom", "target": "https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5" }, { "predicate": "isPartOf", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1" } ] }, { "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/claim-4", "n": 4, "triple": { "subject": "raters with no preferred gender (rater_sexpref = 'either')", "predicate": "nonetheless rate female faces as more attractive than male faces", "object": "per-rater contrast d = mean(male faces) − mean(female faces)" }, "assertion_text": "In the negative-control group of n=213 raters reporting no preferred gender, faces of women were rated markedly higher than faces of men (median d = mean(male) − mean(female) = -0.722, 95% bootstrap CI [-0.774, -0.646]; Wilcoxon W = 296, p = 6.57e-35; rank-biserial r = -0.974, Cohen's dz = -1.417; 96.2% of these raters rated female faces higher). Because these raters express no preference, this rules preference out as the driver and identifies a target-gender effect favouring female faces.", "novelty_grade": "B", "mode": "confirmatory-test-negative", "confidence": 0.9, "self_reported_status": "unverified", "independent_reexecution": "matched", "entities": [], "relations": [ { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/fig-3" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/tbl-3" }, { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/analysis" }, { "predicate": "wasDerivedFrom", "target": "https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5" }, { "predicate": "isPartOf", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1" } ] }, { "id": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/claim-5", "n": 5, "triple": { "subject": "the 102 London Set faces as rated by all 2513 raters", "predicate": "show higher mean attractiveness for female than male faces at the dataset level", "object": "grand mean attractiveness rating by face gender" }, "assertion_text": "Pooled across all 2513 raters and 102 faces (complete matrix, 0 missing cells, 1–7 scale), the grand mean attractiveness rating was 3.380 for female faces versus 2.685 for male faces, consistent with the target-gender effect. This is an associational description of these stimuli and raters, not a causal or population claim.", "novelty_grade": "D", "mode": "confirmatory", "confidence": 0.99, "self_reported_status": "unverified", "independent_reexecution": "matched", "entities": [], "relations": [ { "predicate": "supportedByEvidence", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1/analysis" }, { "predicate": "wasDerivedFrom", "target": "https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5047666.v5" }, { "predicate": "isPartOf", "target": "ark:/99999/dp-face-research-lab-london-set.v1" } ] } ] }