Physical attractiveness

Physical attractiveness

An important factor in the formation of romantic relationships.

Applies specifically to how appealing we find a person’s face.

General agreement within and across cultures about what is considered physically attractive and an assumption that we seek to form relationships with the most attractive people available.

Matching hypothesis

The belief that we do not select the most attractive person as a prospective partner but instead are attracted to a person who matches us in physical attractiveness.

Implies that we take into account our own attractiveness value to others when seeking a romantic partner.

Evolutionary explanations

Shackelford and Larsen

Found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive. This is a sign of genetic health as it requires robust genes and is difficult to fake.

People who mate with a genetically healthy partner are then more likely to have offspring who survive, perpetuating the person’s genes.

People are attracted to faces with neotenous features like large eyes, delicate chin and a small nose as they elicit a protective instinct. It is likely that the preference for baby face features evolved as babies who are ‘attractive’ get better care.

The halo effect

Physical attractiveness matters because we have preconceived ideas about personality traits that attractive people have. These are mostly positive - Physical attractiveness stereotype.

Dion found that physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong and soiable compared to unattractive people.

The belief that good-looking people have these characteristics makes them more attractive to us so we behave positively towards them.

1 distinguishing feature tends to have a disproportionate influence on our judgement on someone’s other attributes.

Walster + Walster study

PROCEDURE

Students were invited to a dance.

They were rated for physical attractiveness at the start by objective observers.

Also completed a questionnaire which asked about self esteem and personality.

They were told that the answers would be used by a computer to decide their partner.

Walster + Walster study

FINDINGS

Matching hypothesis was not supported.

Physically attractive partners were the ones who were liked more and were more likely to be asked on another date.

Berscheid replicated the study but each participant could choose their partners from people of varying degrees of attractiveness. They chose partners who matched them in physical attractiveness.

Walster + Walster study

CONCLUSIONS

We seek partners whose attractiveness matches our own.

If we judge ourselves a 6/10 then we seek a mate of a similar level of attractiveness.

Choice of partner is a compromise as we risk rejection in selecting the most attractive people so we settle on those who are physically in our league.

S Cunningham

Research support for evolutionary process

Found that women with large eyes, prominent cheekbones, a small nose and high eyebrows were rated as highly attractive by white, hispanic and asian men.

Concluded that what is considered physically attractive is consistent across different cultures.

Suggests that symmetrical attractive features are a sign of genetic fitness/evolutionary process.

S Batres + Shiramizu

Cross-cultural support for the halo effect

Asked participants from 45 countries to rate 120 faces on 13 personality traits, some desirable and some not.

Attractiveness positively correlated with most of the socially desirable traits.

The face of men and women who were rated as more attractive were rated as more intelligent, confident, trustworthy, emotionally stable, responsible and sociable.

Suggests that the halo effet is evident across the world and that it may influence our judgement of multiple other traits in potential partners.

W Taylor

Matching hypothesis is not supported by real-world research into dating.

Studied the activity logs of an online dating site. Real-world test of the matching hypothesis as it measured actual date choices rather than preferences.

Found that online daters sought meetings with partners who were more physically attractive than them.

Undermines the validity of the matching hypothesis as it contradicts the central prediction about matching attractiveness.

W Touhey

Physical attractiveness not that important for everyone.

Participants were given a questionnaire (MACHO scale)

Those who scored lower on the scale were not affected by physical attractiveness when judging potential partners