Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 35, No. 3, June 2006, pp.

279286 (

C 2006)

DOI: 10.1007/s10508-006-9032-8

Pubertal Onset and Sexual Orientation in an Adolescent

National Probability Sample

Ritch C. Savin-Williams, Ph.D.1,3 and Geoffrey L. Ream, Ph.D.2

Received January 26, 2005; revisions received June 15, 2005 and November 7, 2005; accepted November 7, 2005
Published online: 27 June 2006

Using 6-year longitudinal data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health (Add
Health) and multiple measures of puberty as it occurs and of sexual orientation (romantic attraction,
sexual identity), the present study attempted to replicate previous research which reported that
homosexuals and heterosexuals differed in their age of pubertal onset. The study hypotheses were not
confirmed for either males or females: on most pubertal measures, same-sex oriented groupings did
not differ from heterosexuals. The only significant findings regarding homosexual males indicated
that they were more likely to report having a later rather than an earlier onset of puberty, and the
significant findings regarding homosexual females were contradictorythey tended to have an earlier
onset of puberty. These findings are attributed to methodological improvements in the present study
that reduced retrospective bias, used multiple indicators of sexual orientation and puberty timing, and
assessed less eroticized measures of puberty.

KEY WORDS: puberty; sexual orientation; adolescence; gay.

INTRODUCTION distinguish sexual orientation groupings. Thus, homo-

The onset of puberty during the second decade of
life signals significant biosocial status differentiation as
individuals move from biologic and social childhood
toward adulthood. Although individuals vary in their
pubertal timing based primarily on their genetic predis-
positions and severe challenges in nutrition and health
that alter the expression of genes, group differences in
the timing of pubertal onset are relatively rare (Archibald,
Graber, & Brooks-Gunn, 2003; Eveleth & Tanner, 1990;
Katchadourian, 1977, 1990). Exceptions include ethnic/
racial (not addressed here) and sex differences, with
females beginning earlier.
Previous research hypothesized that the genetic,
neuroanatomic, endocrine, and morphologic differences
that distinguish the sexes in age of pubertal onset also
1 Department of Human Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.
2 Medical and Health Research Association of New York City and
National Development and Research Institutes, New York, New York.
3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at Department of Human
Development, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853; e-mail:
rcs15@cornell.edu.
sexual individuals will be more similar to the opposite
than their own sex in their onset of pubertal maturation.
Homosexual males should be female-typical (an earlier
age of puberty relative to heterosexual males) because
relevant structures in the nervous system (e.g., sites
in the anterior hypothalamus) have been feminized or
demasculinized relative to heterosexual men (Bogaert,
Friesen, & Klentrou, 2002, p. 78). Although data sup-
porting a sexual orientation group difference in timing of
puberty have been forthcoming for males, they have not
for females (Bogaert et al., 2002; Mustanski, Chivers, &
Bailey, 2002), perhaps because females follow a different
trajectory with regard to processes that affect their sexual
orientation and pubertal timing (Bogaert et al., 2002;
Pattatucci & Hamer, 1995; Tenhula & Bailey, 1998).
A number of methodological problems have plagued
investigations of pubertal timing among sexual orientation
groups: small sample sizes, volunteer sample composi-
tion, absence of heterosexual control groups, restricted
definitions of sexuality and puberty, and retrospective
reporting bias. The last may be a particularly impor-
tant explanatory factor accounting for sexual orientation
differences. Three investigations based on the pubertal

279
0004-0002/06/0600-0279/0

C 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
280
onset reports of adolescent/young adult male samples
have not found a significant sexual orientation group
difference (Cohen, 1999; Savin-Williams, 1995; Schmidt,
1997). These participants were considerably closer in age
to pubertal onset (less than 10 years) than previous adult
samples one to five decades removed from adolescence.
The impact of retrospective biases on pubertal onset
reports is unknown but likely not negligible (Gilger,
Geary, & Eisele, 1991). The potential for retrospective
reporting bias might be greater for males because, unlike
menses for females, male puberty lacks a discrete event
that designates pubertal onset with precision (Mustanski
et al., 2002).
A second methodological problem with previous
investigations has been their reliance on a singular
assessment of puberty or on a questionable criterion of
puberty (e.g., age of first masturbation, first ejaculation,
first sexual behavior, first sexual feeling). Compared to
heterosexual males, Bell, Weinberg, and Hammersmith
(1981) found that homosexual males had an earlier onset
of self-reported first ejaculation. However, when asked
about the source of first ejaculation, unlike heterosexuals,
homosexual males were more likely to report active (mas-
turbation, sexual relations) rather than passive (nocturnal
emissions) sourcesthe latter elicited a later age of
ejaculatory onset. Thus, particular measures of pubertal
age (e.g., onset of ejaculation and sexual behavior) might
be assessing sexual libido or sensitivity to ones own
biologic development rather than pubertal onset. A related
problem concerns global measures of pubertal timing:
How old were you when you reached puberty? By
puberty, I mean when your voice changed or when you
began growing pubic hair? (Bogaert et al., 2002). Not
only was this assessment of pubertal onset asked of men
on average 25 years after it occurred, the two events
that defined pubertal onset themselves are discrepant
on average by 3 years (age 15 and 12, respectively) in
terms of when they first become manifest (Katchadourian,
1990).
Given the methodological shortcomings in the empir-
ical literature, the most comprehensive data are provided
by Bogaert et al. (2002). In their retrospective study of a
large national probability sample, they addressed several
methodological problems: a heterosexual control group
and multiple measures of sexual orientation (attraction,
behavior, and identity) were included, volunteer bias was
reduced, and the sample size was relatively large. Consis-
tent with previous reports, they found that homosexual/
bisexual men reported a pubertal onset significantly earlier
(about 6 months) than did heterosexual men; women did
not vary significantly by sexual orientation in reported age
of pubertal onset.
Savin-Williams and Ream
Hypotheses
The present study replicated several of the method-
ological advancements of Bogaert et al. (large national
probability sample, control group, three sexuality do-
mains) and corrected several of its limitations: subjects
were adolescent participants assessed with multiple mea-
sures of sexuality and puberty over a 6-year period of time.
Two hypotheses that have been investigated in previous
reports were proposed here as well: homosexual males
will have an earlier and homosexual females will have a
later onset of puberty than will heterosexual members of
their sex.
METHOD
Participants
Data for this study were drawn from the on-going
National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health (Add
Health) (Udry & Bearman, 1998a, 1998b). Add Health
was designed to assess the health status of U.S. adoles-
cents and the contextual determinants of it. The sampling
frame was school-based, with a nationwide sample of
80 high schools with a 70% response rate. Comparable
replacement schools were then selected for schools that
declined to participate. If the recruited high school was
not for all grades 7 through 12, younger students were
included from middle and junior high schools that fed
into the sample high schools. A total of 132 public and
private schools, including high schools and junior high
and middle schools that fed into them, in a total of 80
communities participated.
In selecting students to participate in the in-home
interviews, the within-school sample was split into sex
by grade strata and a random sample was taken within
each stratum. Roughly 17 students per stratum per school
pair were selected for a total of 12,105 students in the
core sample. At this point in time, three waves have been
collected. The total Wave 1 in-home interview sample,
including core sample and special-purpose over-samples,
numbered 20,747 individuals (M age = 15.8 years). At
Wave 2, one year later, 14,738 participants who had not
been in the 12th grade at Wave 1 and who were not part of
the special disabled sample were re-interviewed (M age =
16.7 years). Wave 3 data were follow-up interviews with
15,170 of the original Wave 1 respondents located by field
interviewers between August 2001 and April 2002 when
participants were between the ages of 18 and 26 years
(M age = 21.7 years). To be included in this studys
analyses, cases had to have valid data for all three waves
Puberty and Sexual Orientation
plus a valid grand sample weight value (n = 10,828), in-
dicating a positive probability, however small, of inclusion
in a national probability sample of American adolescents
and young adults.
Measures
Participants listened to recorded interview questions
read to them via headphones plugged into a laptop
computer and then entered responses (audio computer-
assisted self-interviews).
Sexual Orientation
Because self-attribution of sexual orientation in the
Add Health data set varies over time and across measures
(Savin-Williams & Ream, 2006), to test for any possible
relationship between sexual and pubertal status to emerge,
sexual orientation was assessed over three time periods
and with two measures: romantic attraction at Waves
1, 2, and 3 and sexual identity at Wave 3. Thus, even
though pubertal onset and relative timing was assessed at
and between Waves 1 and 2, participants sexual status
was determined during both of these time periods as
well as how they would eventually identify their sexual
orientation 5 and 6 years later as young adults.
Romantic Attraction
Based on responses to the questions in Waves 1 and
2, Have you ever had a romantic attraction to a female?
and Have you ever had a romantic attraction to a male?
and in Wave 3, Since (time of Wave 2 interview), have
you had a romantic attraction to a (male/female)? par-
ticipants attraction was classified as either opposite-sex,
both-sex, or same-sex. For purposes of consistency with
previous research, which does not distinguish between
developmental precursors of bisexual and exclusively
same-sex attraction, and for ease of analysis, attraction
was dichotomized into same-sex (including bisexual
and exclusively same-sex) and exclusively opposite-sex.
Individuals reporting no sexual attraction were excluded.
Sexual Identity
At Wave 3, participants were given six possible
responses to the statement Please choose the description
that best fits how you think about yourself: 100%
heterosexual (straight), mostly heterosexual (straight),
but somewhat attracted to people of your own sex,
bisexualthat is, attracted to men and women equally,
281
mostly homosexual (gay), but somewhat attracted to
people of the opposite sex, 100% homosexual (gay),
and not sexually attracted to either males or females.
In order to create a classification scheme that both
followed logically from previous research and maximized
statistical power, these categories were collapsed to create
a dichotomy between exclusive heterosexuality (the first
rating) and bisexuality/homosexuality (the third through
fifth ratings). Individuals missing data or reporting mostly
heterosexual or no sexual attraction were excluded.
Significance of results was not affected when other
recoding schemes were tried: using all five categories
of attraction, collapsing the five into three categories,
and dichotomizing the first versus the fourth and fifth
(excluding the second and third).
Pubertal Development
The Add Health data set asked about various markers
of pubertal development during Waves 1 and 2 that
reflected relative age of pubertal onset. For purposes
of this investigation, they were considered individually
rather than as a composite measure to assess whether some
indicators were more useful in this context than others.
Developed for Age
Participants were asked, How advanced is your
physical development compared to other boys/girls of
your age? Response options were I look younger
than most, I look younger than some, I look about
average, I look older than some, and I look older
than most. Despite its subjective, self-report nature, this
assessment has proven to be a modestly reliable measure
of maturation level relative to peers (Schlossberger,
Turner, & Irwin, 1992).
Axillary Hair
Males were asked, How much hair is under your
arms now? Which sentence best describes you? A 5-
point response scale followed: I have no hair, I have a
little hair, I have some hair, but not a lot; it has spread
out since it first started growing and is thicker, I have a
lot of hair that is thick, and I have a whole lot of hair
that is very thick, as much hair as a grown man.
Facial Hair
Males were asked, How thick is the hair on your
face? Which sentence best describes you? Response
282
options included, I have a few scattered hairs, but the
growth is not thick, The hair is somewhat thick, but you
can still see a lot of skin under it, The hair is thick; you
cant see much skin under it, and The hair is very thick,
like a grown mans facial hair.
Voice Change
Males were asked, Is your voice lower now than it
was when you were in grade school? The five possible
responses were, No, it is about the same as when I was
in grade school, Yes, it is a little lower than when I was
in grade school, Yes, it is somewhat lower than when
I was in grade school, Yes, it is a whole lot lower than
when I was in grade school, and Yes, it is a whole lot
lower than when I was in grade school; it is as low as an
adult mans voice.
Breast Development
Females were asked, As a girl grows up, her breasts
develop and get bigger. Which sentence best describes
you? The five possible responses were, My breasts are
about the same size as when I was in grade school, My
breasts are a little bigger than when I was in grade school,
My breasts are somewhat bigger than when I was in grade
school, My breasts are a lot bigger than when I was in
grade school, and My breasts are a whole lot bigger
than when I was in grade school, they are as developed as
a grown womans breasts.
Body Curvature
Females were asked, As a girl grows up, her body
becomes more curved. Which sentence best describes
you? Response options included, My body is about as
curvy as when I was in grade school, My body is a
little more curvy than when I was in grade school, My
body is somewhat more curvy than when I was in grade
school, My body is a lot more curvy than when I was in
grade school, and My body is a whole lot more curvy
than when I was in grade school.
Menses
Females were asked to report their age in response to
the question, How old were you when you had your very
first menstrual period? Valid cases included only those
who had reported an age of first menses.
Savin-Williams and Ream
Analytic Strategy
The first set of analyses examined the relationship
between sexual orientation and indicators of the timing of
pubertal maturation onset. Participants were selected for
specific analyses based on whether they had valid data for
measures of pubertal maturation. Although females who
had experienced menses could enter a valid age at first
menstrual period, the questionnaire did not ask for specific
ages for other pubertal onset milestones. For males
arm/body hair and voice and females body curvature
and breast development, the questionnaire asked for the
current level at both Wave 1 and Wave 2. Participants who
reported completely childlike appearance at Wave 1 and
something other than a completely childlike appearance
at Wave 2 were considered to have undergone pubertal
maturation onset between the two waves. Their age at
Wave 1 was entered as a predictor of sexual orientation for
analyses of pubertal maturation timing. Analyses of each
indicator necessarily involved only the subset of cases that
experienced pubertal onset according to those indicators.
The disadvantage to this was that the valid number of
cases available was severely reduced from the thousands
to the hundreds, leaving a sample size comparable to
that used in other studies. The explicit advantage for this
approach, however, was that these questions asked only
for observations of present levels of physical indicators
and were perhaps less prone to social desirability and
retrospective bias effects that affect responses to questions
about development relative to peers.
The second set of analyses examined relative pu-
bertal developmental progress, or how developed par-
ticipants were for their age. Though not longitudinal
in nature, these analyses consider romantic attraction
at all three waves and sexual identity at Wave 3 as
four different indicators of sexual orientation; the seven
indicators of pubertal maturation timing measured at
two waves constituted 14 distinct operationalizations of
pubertal maturation status during adolescence. In survey-
adjusted analyses, pubertal maturation indicatorsthat
were roughly normally distributedwere regressed over
sexual orientation with age as a control. Survey-adjusted
analyses accounted for the stratified random nature of the
sample, weighted the data so that sample statistics were
as close as possible to population parameters, and made
tests of statistical significance more realistically strict.
Although this approach may draw statistical power to
some degree, valid N for all analyses was in the thousands;
they would have been unrealistically overpowered unless
some adjustments were made. Individuals who indicated
a lower degree of maturation at Wave 2 than at Wave 1
were excluded from analyses.
Puberty and Sexual Orientation 283

Table I. Proportions and Means of Youth Reporting Indicators of Pubertal Maturation

11 12 13 14 15 16

Male
Axillary hair (%) 0.0 13.3 40.5 26.3 12.1 7.8
Facial hair (%) 0.0 3.4 23.9 26.8 26.5 19.4
Voice change (%) 0.0 7.2 27.1 32.8 17.7 15.1
Adv. age (Wave 1)a 3.30 2.72 3.04 3.13 3.25 3.27
Adv. age (Wave 2)a 3.23 2.90 3.17 3.19 3.23 3.23
Female
Breast development (%) 0.7 7.6 24.6 26.1 20.3 20.8
Body curvature (%) 0.4 14.1 26.3 25.5 20.7 13.0
Menses (Wave 1) (%) 28.9 33.9 25.2 9.0 2.5 0.6
Menses (Wave 2) (%) 27.9 32.3 26.7 9.8 2.7 0.6
Adv. age (Wave 1)a 3.17 3.08 3.30 3.42 3.38 3.31
Adv. age (Wave 2)a 3.48 3.33 3.37 3.44 3.30 3.15

a Scaled from 1 = I look younger than most to 5 = I look older than most.

RESULTS later onset of puberty than will heterosexual members

Descriptive Statistics
Table I summarizes the onset of puberty as derived
from Waves 1 and 2, separate by age grouping and pubertal
indicator. Except for 12-year-old boys, the average youth
(sexuality unspecified) reported being slightly ahead of
peers in pubertal development. The youths self-reported
pubertal indicator medians were consistent with national
norms (Archibald et al., 2003; Coleman & Coleman,
2002).
Tests of Hypotheses
To test the two hypotheses with respect to pubertal
maturation timing, that same-sex attracted males will have
an earlier and same-sex attracted females will have a
of their sex, logistic regression models were run in which
each indicator of pubertal maturation was entered, in its
own model, as an independent variable predicting each
indicator of same-sex sexuality, each in its own model.
In interpreting the results presented in Table II, it is
important to take into account that each coefficient reports
the meaningful result from a separate logistic regression
model. In all but the menses analyses, only participants
in the 1116 age range were included in order to restrain
the scope of analyses to ages in which puberty normally
occurs. All models except those with the advanced-
for-age reports contained only the single independent
variable of the pubertal maturation indicator and the single
dependent variable of the same-sex affiliation indicator.
In models with the advanced-for-age reports, age was
entered as a control because of a relationship between
perceived pubertal status and age that previous research
has established (Schlossberger et al., 1992).

Table II. Logistic Regression Analyses Predicting Sexual Orientation from Pubertal Maturation Timing Indicators

W1 attraction W2 attraction W3 attraction W3 identity

B SM N B SM N B SM N B SM N

Male
Axillary hair 0.125 15 164 0.116 13 164 0.240 8 169 0.117 9 173
Facial hair 0.197 46 750 0.056 29 691 0.111 38 656 0.171 40 674
Voice change 0.166 19 293 0.181 26 280 0.065 18 312 0.255 16 327
Female
Breast development 1.391 10 147 0.287 8 152 0.536 15 167 0.389 14 172
Body curvature 0.154 10 181 0.010 10 187 0.074 22 202 0.079 21 209
W1 Menses 0.031 456 7393 0.002 297 5177 0.027 881 6560 0.026 951 6675
W2 Menses 0.023 318 5698 0.181 299 5361 0.013 663 5118 0.047 715 5205

Note. SM, sexual minorities in analysis; N, total cases in analysis.

p < .01.
284 Savin-Williams and Ream

Entering all indicators at once was neither possible Table III. Linear Regressions Predicting Pubertal Maturation Indi-
nor desirable for several reasons. Hypotheses did not spec- cators from Sexual Orientation Indicators, Controlling for Age
ify on which pubertal maturation indicator differences Attraction Identity
would be manifested and this study was not concerned
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 3
with whether any indicators were better than others, which
is the research question that a model with all indicators Male
entered simultaneously would evaluate. Further, in order Axillary hair
to be included in an analysis with all indicators simultane- W1 0.007 0.089 0.173 0.147
ously, a participant would have to experience all indicators W2 0.054 0.016 0.190 0.023
Facial hair
in the same year-long time frame of the first two waves of
W1 0.072 0.003 0.026 0.013
the study. Given that these indicators do not normatively W2 0.021 0.014 0.080 0.034
occur at the same time, this would leave a subject pool Voice change
that would be neither sufficiently large nor representative W1 0.159 0.407 0.025 0.004
for meaningful analyses. W2 0.223 0.134 0.021 0.106
Comparison with peers
Even with one indicator at a time in the analyses,
W1 0.003 0.359 0.121 0.087
there remained justifiable concern about sample size. W2 0.091 0.132 0.053 0.261
Because some physical manifestations of puberty were Female
only experienced by a few participants, analyses involv- Breast development
ing those manifestations have a small total number of W1 0.115 0.085 0.175 0.206
W2 0.017 0.138 0.161 0.229
individuals with a same-sex orientation. These analyses
Body curvature
have low statistical power and a significant possibility W1 0.053 0.149 0.188 0.105
of Type II error. They should, therefore, be interpreted W2 0.066 0.093 0.135 0.062
with caution. They were left in to treat the broadest Comparison with peers
range of indicators possible and to address the concern W1 0.191 0.197 0.084 0.184
W2 0.093 0.014 0.161 0.292
that significant findings may be based only on having
a large sample. So that the reader can evaluate the Note. Maturation was the dependent variable and age (coefficients not
potential for nonsignificant findings due to lack of power shown) and sexual orientation were the independent variables.
p < .05, p < .01.
or statistically significant but meaningless findings due
to overwhelming statistical power, the sample number is
provided in Table II. and females were expected to report less developed
Results for males did not confirm the hypothesis. for their agereflecting later, male-typical maturation
A finding that confirmed hypotheses would have a timing. Few analyses were statistically significant and all
significant positive coefficient, indicating that those who that were significant were in the opposite direction of
were more mature for their age were more likely to have hypotheses.
same-sex attraction. The only significant finding for males
suggested that those who reported being less developed
for their age (Wave 2 attraction) were more likely to report DISCUSSION
same-sex attraction.
Findings for females were mixed. A coefficient for The study hypotheses were not confirmed for either
one of the objective physical indicators (breast develop- males or females: on most pubertal measures, same-
ment for Wave 1 attraction) was significant in the direction sex oriented groupings did not differ significantly from
of confirming the hypothesis, indicating that females heterosexuals. The first set of analyses that prospectively
who developed later were more likely to report same- captured pubertal maturation as it happened mostly failed
sex attraction. Not supporting the female hypothesis were to predict sexual orientation from pubertal maturation.
findings that same-sex attracted females had an earlier and The only significant results were in the opposite direction
not later menstrual onset (Wave 2 attraction) and were of hypotheses. The overpowered second set of analyses
more, not less, developed for their age (Wave 3 attraction found several statistically significant instances of sexual
and identity). orientation emerging as a predictor of maturation over
Table III describes results of testing hypotheses and above age; yet, all were in the opposite direction
with respect to relative pubertal maturation. Males were of hypotheses. Same-sex attracted males tended to report
expected to report being more developed for their age delayed, not accelerated, pubertal development, and same-
reflecting earlier, female-typical, maturation timing sex attracted females reported being farther along, not
Puberty and Sexual Orientation
less far along, for their age than opposite-sex attracted
females.
These nonfindings were unlikely to have emerged
from a problem with the data; the ages at which study
participants reported pubertal onset were consistent with
national norms. Neither was it likely that findings arose
from lack of power, as even pubertal indicators with
several thousand valid cases, including several hundred
sexual minorities, did not significantly distinguish sexual
orientations. Thus, results raised doubts about pubertal
maturation as a correlate of sexual orientation. Given that
previous studies on females have rarely found significant
sexual orientation differences in age of pubertal onset,
the present findings were consistent with the empirical
literature. Although results have been inconsistent when
the sample was composed of adolescent males, our
findings were in contrast to previous research with adult
samples (Bogaert et al., 2002) and with a recent review of
the literature (Mustanski et al., 2002).
This review also offered the most parsimonious
explanation of our findingsmethodological. Mustanski
et al. (2002) pointed out that pubertal timing results were
suspect because past findings have been retrospective and
based on a singular event. When research relies on subjects
recalling their age of pubescence considerably beyond its
occurrence (retrospective bias) and on singular measures
of puberty, findings may be compromised. In addition,
previous research has tended to assess highly eroticized
aspects of male pubertal development (penile and testic-
ular development, pubic hair onset, first ejaculation, first
sexual arousal, onset of sexual behavior); gay males in
those studies might have been more sensitive to these
sexualized aspects of male development and thus more
likely to remember or report an early first development.
The present studys greater reliance on secondary rather
than primary pubertal development might have blunted
this sexual orientation difference in recall.
Although a studys nonfindings would normally
not be a compelling contribution to the scientific lit-
erature, what may prove most valuable are not the
findings themselves, but the methods used to obtain them.
The present study used a nationally representative sample
and employed both cross-sectional and prospective time
frames. The only youth included in our analyses were
those who observed themselves to have gone through
puberty between the first and second data collections;
their data were arguably more convincing because they
represented the pubertal experience as it was happening
rather than its recall years later. Prospective longitudinal
design with heterosexual control groups built into the
sampling frame will help resolve the extent to which
285
between-group mean differences based on sexual orienta-
tion exists.
Several study limitations caution against any attempt
to represent these findings as the final word. First, due to
the relatively small number of same-sex attracted youth,
statistical power was reduced. Second, pubertal measures
were self-reports rather than actual assessments and thus
could be subject to systematic bias by sexual orientation.
Third, it was unfortunate that the Add Health data set
did not include the typical measure of pubertal onset
(pubic hair) or a sexualized measure (e.g., first orgasm) to
test the significance of primary versus secondary pubertal
indicators.
Our failure to find sexual orientation differences in
pubertal onset age was indicative that at least in this one
regard, a biological variable might not be a primary agent
separating sexual orientation groups. Thus, if homosexual
individuals are cross-sexed as indicated by recent reviews
(Mustanski et al., 2002; Rahman & Wilson, 2003), then it
is not true for all biologic indicators.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research used data from Add Health, a pro-
gram project designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S.
Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris, and funded by
a grant P01-HD31921 from the National Institute of
Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative
funding from 17 other agencies. Special acknowledgment
is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for
assistance in the original design. Persons interested
in obtaining data files from Add Health should con-
tact Add Health, Carolina Population Center, 123 W.
Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516-2524
(www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth/contract.html)
REFERENCES
Archibald, A. B., Graber, J. A., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Pubertal
process and physiological growth in adolescence. In G. R. Adams
& M. D. Berzonsky (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of adolescence
(pp. 2447). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Bell, A. P., Weinberg, M. S., & Hammersmith, S. K. (1981). Sexual
preference: Its development in men and women. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press.
Bogaert, A. F., Friesen, C., & Klentrou, P. (2002). Age of puberty and
sexual orientation in a national probability sample. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 31, 7381.
Cohen, K. M. (1999). The biology of male sexual orientation: Rela-
tionship among homoeroticism, childhood sex-atypical behavior,
spatial ability, handedness, and pubertal timing. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Detroit Mercy, Detroit, MI.
286
Coleman, L., & Coleman, J. (2002). The measurement of puberty: A
review. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 535550.
Eveleth, P., & Tanner, J. M. (1990). Worldwide variation in human
growth (2ne ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gilger, J. W., Geary, D. C., & Eisele, L. M. (1991). Reliability and
validity of retrospective self-reports of the age of pubertal onset
using twin, sibling, and college student data. Adolescence, 26,
4153.
Katchadourian, H. (1977). The biology of adolescence. San Francisco,
CA: Freeman.
Katchadourian, H. (1990). Sexuality. In S. S. Feldman & G. R. Elliott
(Eds.), At the threshold: The developing adolescent (pp. 330351).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mustanski, B. S., Chivers, M. L., & Bailey, J. M. (2002). A critical
review of recent biological research on human sexual orientation.
Annual Review of Sex Research, 13, 89140.
Pattatucci, A. M. L., & Hamer, D. H. (1995). Development and
familiality of sexual orientation in females. Behavior Genetics,
25, 407420.
Rahman, Q., & Wilson, G. D. (2003). Born gay? The psychobiology of
human sexual orientation. Personality and Individual Differences,
34, 13371382.
Savin-Williams and Ream
Savin-Williams, R. C. (1995). An exploratory study of pu-
bertal maturation timing and self-esteem among gay and
bisexual male youths. Developmental Psychology, 31, 56
64.
Savin-Williams, R. C., & Ream, G. L. (2006). Prevalence and stability
of sexual orientation during adolescence and young adulthood.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
Schlossberger, N. M., Turner, R. A., & Irwin, C. E. (1992). Validity of
self-report of pubertal maturation in early adolescents. Journal of
Adolescent Health, 13, 109113.
Schmidt, G. (1997, December 21). Hamburg student study 19661981
1996. Retrieved from sexnet@listserve.acns.nwu.edu.
Tenhula, W. N., & Bailey, J. M. (1998). Female sexual orientation
and pubertal onset. Developmental Neuropsychology, 14, 369
383.
Udry, J. R., & Bearman, P. S. (1998a). The national longitudinal
study of adolescent health. Retrieved April 30, 2003, from
http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth.
Udry, J. R., & Bearman, P. S. (1998b). New methods for new research on
adolescent sexual behavior. In R. Jessor (Ed.), New perspectives
on adolescent risk behavior (pp. 241269). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.