Flawed methods and overstated conclusions regarding ‘Brain Sex’: a peer review of Kurth et al. (2022)

Abstract Kurth et al. (2022) concluded that the brain anatomy of transgender women is shifted away from their biological sex and toward their gender identity. We evaluate whether the study’s evidence supports this conclusion by focusing on its statistical methods and treatment of sexual orientation in its analyses. The principal finding relies on a very small sample, a weak justification for parametric analyses, one-tailed post hoc tests, no correction for multiple comparisons, and limited robustness testing. The study also did not properly account for sexual orientation as a potential neuroanatomical confound despite having the relevant participant data to do so. These methodological choices consistently bias the results toward smaller p-values and stronger apparent support for the authors’ stated hypothesis. The evidence presented therefore does not justify the study’s headline conclusion.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Theory and Society
Published
2026-09-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-026-09747-2
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Flawed methods and overstated conclusions regarding ‘Brain Sex’: a peer review of Kurth et al. (2022)

Adam M. Rochussen, Colin M. Wright, Samuel G. Stagg
Theory and Society
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Flawed methods and overstated conclusions regarding ‘Brain Sex’: a peer review of Kurth et al. (2022)

Adam M. Rochussen, Colin M. Wright, Samuel G. Stagg
article en

Abstract

Abstract Kurth et al. (2022) concluded that the brain anatomy of transgender women is shifted away from their biological sex and toward their gender identity. We evaluate whether the study’s evidence supports this conclusion by focusing on its statistical methods and treatment of sexual orientation in its analyses. The principal finding relies on a very small sample, a weak justification for parametric analyses, one-tailed post hoc tests, no correction for multiple comparisons, and limited robustness testing. The study also did not properly account for sexual orientation as a potential neuroanatomical confound despite having the relevant participant data to do so. These methodological choices consistently bias the results toward smaller p-values and stronger apparent support for the authors’ stated hypothesis. The evidence presented therefore does not justify the study’s headline conclusion.

Theory and SocietyVol. 55(5)
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (US), Salk Institute for Biological Studies (US)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Flawed methods and overstated conclusions regarding ‘Brain Sex’: a peer review of Kurth et al. (2022) — Adam M. Rochussen, Colin M. Wright, et al. · Theory and Society (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS