No interviewed man/men wanted to

• No interviewed man wanted to put the system in his trouser pocket, as opposed to two of four females.

or

• No interviewed men wanted to put the system in their trouser pockets, as opposed to two of four females.

In this sentence, should it be manor men? I would say man but Word Grammar Check is happy with both. Would this make a difference in the meaning of the sentence?

The Cambridge Grammar Of The English Language deals with this issue in its section 'The negative determinatives no and none' (p388).

The CGEL compares the statements:

• No juvenile was admitted.
• No juveniles were admitted.

It says that these 'are semantically equivalent: the distinction between singular and plural is here neutralised'.

The CGEL goes on to list cases where the singular or the plural is 'required' or 'more natural'. So, the singular is required in 'He has no father', since you can only have one (biological) father. The singular is more natural in 'He has no job', since you usually have only one job. Conversely, the plural is more natural in She has no children, since according to the CGEL 'it is more usual to have two or more children than just one'.

In the present case there is no semantic difference and no 'requirement' for either the singular or the plural. For me the plural, No interviewed men wanted... sounds a little more natural since it is followed by the plural in their trouser pockets.