The connection of brain size, neuroanatomy, and physiology to personal style, intellect, behavior, and complex features of sexuality has been popularly viewed as a well-established fact. In this section we challenge the process by which some findings are given superordinate attention beyond scientific basis, and by which these are indirectly supported by virtue of frequent repetition. We have taken research reported by Simon LeVay (1991) as a case in point. In addition to noting a number of serious flaws in the study itself, we examine the context provided for the article both prior to its publication and within the issue of Science in which it appeared.
Notably it was the subsequent replay and repetition of the study that accorded the study significance beyond its technical merit. The mechanisms of social construction are revealed by the way in which the article was paired with other animal studies designed within a biological framework. The process of social construction is also revealed by later hype associated with the study. We suggest that the excessive attention accorded a limited study of questionable merit was due to the fact that it allowed writers to publish their own cherished beliefs as if these beliefs were scientifically based.