Given the positive bias toward attractive people in society, online sellers are justifiably apprehensive about perceptions of their profile pictures. Although the existing literature emphasizes the “beauty premium” and the “ugliness penalty,” the current studies of seller profile pictures on customer-to-customer e-commerce platforms find a U-shaped relationship between facial attractiveness and product sales (i.e., both beauty and ugliness premiums and, thus, a “plainness penalty”). By analyzing two large data sets, the authors find that both attractive and unattractive people sell significantly more than plain-looking people. Two online experiments reveal that attractive sellers enjoy greater source credibility due to perceived sociability and competence, whereas unattractive sellers are considered more believable on the basis of their perceived competence. While a beauty premium is apparent for appearance-relevant products, an ugliness premium is more pronounced for expertise-relevant products and for female consumers evaluating male sellers. These findings highlight the influence of facial appearance as a key vehicle for impression formation in online platforms and its complex effects in e-commerce and marketing.
AgtheMariaSpörrleMatthiasManerJon K. (2011), “Does Being Attractive Always Help? Positive and Negative Effects of Attractiveness on Social Decision Making,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37 (8), 1042–54.
2.
AhearneMichaelGruenThomas W.JarvisCheryl Burke (1999), “If Looks Could Sell: Moderation and Mediation of the Attractiveness Effect on Salesperson Performance,” International Journal of Research in Marketing, 16 (1), 269–84.
3.
ArgoJennifer J.DahlDarren W.MoralesAndrea C. (2008), “Positive Consumer Contagion: Responses to Attractive Others in a Retail Context,” Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (6), 690–701.
4.
BiddleJeffHamermeshDaniel (1994), “Beauty and the Labor Market,” American Economic Review, 84 (5), 1174–94.
5.
BowerAmanda B.LandrethStacy (2001), “Is Beauty Best? Highly Versus Normally Attractive Models in Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 30 (1), 1–12.
6.
CarusiAnnamaria (2008), “Scientific Visualisations and Aesthetic Grounds for Trust,” Ethics and Information Technology, 10 (4), 243–54.
7.
ChaikenShellyMaheswaranDurairaj (1994), “Heuristic Processing Can Bias Systematic Processing: Effects of Source Credibility, Argument Ambiguity, and Task Importance on Attitude Judgment,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (3), 460–73.
8.
CraneTimPattersonSarah (2012), History of the Mind-Body Problem. New York: Routledge.
9.
DebevecKathleenMaddenThomas J.KernanJerome B. (1986), “Physical Attractiveness, Message Evaluation, and Compliance: A Structural Examination,” Psychological Reports, 58 (2), 503–08.
10.
EaglyAlice H.AshmoreRichard D.MakhijaniMona G.LongoLaura C. (1991), “What Is Beautiful Is Good, But…: A Meta-Analytic Review of Research on the Physical Attractiveness Stereotype,” Psychological Bulletin, 110 (1), 109–28.
11.
EngellAndrew D.HaxbyJames V.TodorovAlexander (2007), “Implicit Trustworthiness Decisions: Automatic Coding of Face Properties in Human Amygdala,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19 (9), 1508–19.
12.
ErtEyalFleischerAlizaMagenNathan (2016), “Trust and Reputation in the Sharing Economy: The Role of Personal Photos in Airbnb”, Tourism Management, 55, 62–73.
13.
FidrmucJanPaphawasitBoontarikaTunalıÇiğdem Börke (2017), “Nobel Beauty,” Working Paper, Rimini Center for Economic Analysis.
14.
FisherRobert J.MaYu (2014), “The Price of Being Beautiful: Negative Effects of Attractiveness on Empathy for Children in Need,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (2), 436–50.
15.
FiskeSusan T.CuddyAmy J.C.GlickPeter (2007), “Universal Dimensions of Social Cognition: Warmth and Competence,” Trends in Cognitive Science, 11 (2), 77–83.
16.
FormanChrisGhoseAnindyaWiesenfeldBatia (2008), “Examining the Relationship Between Reviews and Sales: The Role of Reviewer Identity Disclosure in Electronic Markets,” Information Systems Research, 19 (3), 291–313.
17.
GheorghiuAna I.CallanMitchell J.SkylarkWilliam (2017), “Facial Appearance Affects Science Communication,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 114 (23), 5970–75.
18.
GoldsmithRonald E.LaffertyBarbara A.NewellStephen J. (2000), “The Impact of Corporate Credibility and Celebrity Credibility on Consumer Reaction to Advertisements and Brands,” Journal of Advertising, 29 (3), 43–54.
19.
GrabeShellyWardMonique L.HydeJanel S. (2008), “The Role of the Media in Body Image Concerns Among Women: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental and Correlational Studies,” Psychological Bulletin, 134 (3), 460–76.
20.
GuanShu-Sha A.SubrahmanyamKaveriLinaresKevinChengRoy (2015), “Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder? Attractiveness in a Virtual World,” Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 9 (2), 1–19.
GunesHaticePiccardiMassimo (2006), “Assessing Facial Beauty Through Proportion Analysis by Image Processing and Supervised Learning,” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64 (12), 1184–99.
23.
HamermeshDaniel S. (2011), Beauty Pays: Why Attractive People Are More Successful. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
24.
HeilmanMadeline E.WallenAaron S.FuchsDaniellaTamkinsMelinda M. (2004), “Penalties for Success: Reactions to Women Who Succeed at Male Gender-Typed Tasks,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (3), 416–27.
25.
KaminsMichael A. (1990), “An Investigation into the ‘Match-Up’ Hypothesis in Celebrity Advertising: When Beauty May Be Only Skin Deep,” Journal of Advertising, 19 (1), 4–13.
26.
KanazawaSatoshiStillMary C. (2018), “Is There Really a Beauty Premium or an Ugliness Penalty on Earnings?” Journal of Business and Psychology, 33 (2), 249–62.
27.
KangYong-SoonHerrPaul M. (2006), “Beauty and the Beholder: Toward an Integrative Model of Communication Source Effects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 33 (6), 123–30.
28.
KaplanRobert M. (1978), “Is Beauty Talent? Sex Interaction in the Attractiveness Halo Effect,” Sex Roles, 4 (2), 195–204.
29.
KehHean TatRenRunHillSally RaoLiXuan (2013), “The Beautiful, the Cheerful, and the Helpful: The Effects of Service Employee Attributes on Customer Satisfaction,” Psychology and Marketing, 30 (3), 211–26.
30.
KockNed (2003), Compensatory Adaptation: Understanding How Obstacles Can Lead to Success. Conshohocken, PA: Infinity Publishing.
31.
LangloisJudith H.KalakanisLisaRubensteinAdam J.LarsonAndreaHallamMonicaSmootMonica (2000), “Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review,” Psychological Bulletin, 126 (3), 390–423.
32.
LeeMargaretPitesaMarkoPillutlaMadan M.ThauStefan (2018), “Perceived Entitlement Causes Discrimination Against Attractive Job Candidates in the Domain of Relatively Less Desirable Jobs,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114 (3), 422–42.
33.
LiNorman P.KenrickDouglas T. (2006), “Sex Similarities and Differences in Preferences for Short-Term Mates: What, Whether, and Why,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90 (3), 468–89.
34.
LindJo T.MehlumHalvor (2010), “With or Without U? The Appropriate Test for a U-Shaped Relationship,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 72 (1), 109–18.
35.
LoShao-KangHsiehAi-YunChiuYu-Ping (2013), “Contradictory Deceptive Behavior in Online Dating,” Computers in Human Behavior, 29 (4), 1755–62.
36.
LucaMichael (2017), “Designing Online Marketplaces: Trust and Reputation Mechanisms,” Innovation Policy and the Economy, 17, 77–93.
37.
MacInnisDeborah J.Whan ParkC. (1991), “The Differential Role of Characteristics of Music on High- and Low- Involvement Consumers’ Processing of Ads,” Journal of Consumer Research, 18 (2), 161–73.
38.
MagroAlbert M. (1999), “Evolutionary-Derived Anatomical Characteristics and Universal Attractiveness,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 88 (1), 147–66.
39.
ManerJon K.MillerSaul L.RoubyD. AaronGailliotMatthew T. (2009), “Intrasexual Vigilance: The Implicit Cognition of Romantic Rivalry,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97 (1), 74–87.
40.
Martín-LoechesManuelHernández-TamamesJuan AntonioMartínAdrianUrrutiaMabel (2014), “Beauty and Ugliness in the Bodies and Faces of Others: An fMRI Study of Person Esthetic Judgement,” Neuroscience, 277, 486–97.
41.
MattesKyleSpezioMichaelKimHackjinTodorovAlexanderAdolphsRalphAlvarezR. Michael (2010), “Predicting Election Outcomes from Positive and Negative Trait Assessments of Candidate Images,” Political Psychology, 31 (1), 41–58.
42.
McCollRodTruongYann (2013), “The Effects of Facial Attractiveness and Gender on Customer Evaluations During a Web-Video Sales Encounter,” Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 33 (1), 117–28.
43.
OhanianRoobina (1990), “Construction and Validation of a Scale to Measure Celebrity Endorsers’ Perceived Expertise, Trustworthiness, and Attractiveness,” Journal of Advertising, 19 (3), 39–52.
44.
ReingenPeter H.KernanJerome B. (1993), “Social Perception and Interpersonal Influence: Some Consequences of the Physical Attractiveness Stereotype in a Personal Selling Setting,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2 (1), 25–38.
45.
RuffleBradley J.ShtudinerZe’ev (2015), “Are Good-Looking People More Employable?” Management Science, 61 (8), 1760–76.
46.
SaidChristopher P.BaronSean G.TodorovAlexander (2008), “Nonlinear Amygdala Response to Face Trustworthiness: Contributions of High and Low Spatial Frequency Information,” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21 (3), 519–28.
47.
SamperAdrianaYangLinyun W.DanielsMichelle E. (2018), “Beauty, Effort, and Misrepresentation: How Beauty Work Affects Judgments of Moral Character and Consumer Preference,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (1), 126–47.
48.
ScharlemannJörn P.W.EckelCatherine C.KacelnikAlexWilsonRick K. (2001), “The Value of a Smile: Game Theory with a Human Face,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 22 (5), 617–40.
49.
SirdeshmukhDeepakSinghJagdipSabolBarry (2002), “Consumer Trust, Value, and Loyalty in Relational Exchanges,” Journal of Marketing, 66 (1), 15–37.
50.
SprecherSusanSullivanQuintinHatfieldElaine (1994), “Mate Selection Preferences: Gender Differences Examined in a Natural Sample,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66 (6), 1074–80.
51.
TillBrian D.BuslerMichael (2000), “The Match-Up Hypothesis: Physical Attractiveness, Expertise, and the Role of Fit on Brand Attitude, Purchase Intent and Brand Beliefs,” Journal of Advertising, 29 (3), 1–13.
52.
TodorovAlexanderMandisodzaAnesu N.GorenAmirHallCrystal C. (2005), “Inferences of Competence from Faces Predict Election Outcomes,” Science, 308 (5728), 1623–26.
53.
TrampeDebraStapleDiederik A.SieroFrans W.MulderHenriëtte (2010), “Beauty as a Tool: The Effect of Model Attractiveness, Product Relevance, and Elaboration Likelihood on Advertising Effectiveness,” Psychology & Marketing, 27 (2), 1101–21.
54.
VuilleumierPatrik (2000), “Faces Call for Attention: Evidence from Patients with Visual Extinction,” Neuropsychologia, 38 (5), 693–700.
55.
WanLisa C.WyerRobert S. (2015), “Consumer Reactions to Attractive Service Providers: Approach or Avoid?” Journal of Consumer Research, 42 (4), 578–95.
56.
WangZeMaoHuifangLiYexin JessicaLiuFan (2017), “Smile Big or Not? Effects of Smile Intensity on Perceptions of Warmth and Competence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (5), 787–805.
57.
WheelerS. ChristianPettyRichard E. (2001), “The Effects of Stereotype Activation on Behavior: A Review of Possible Mechanisms,” Psychological Bulletin, 127 (6), 797–826.
58.
WillisJanineTodorovAlexander (2006), “First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind After a 100-Ms Exposure to a Face,” Psychological Science, 17 (7), 592–98.
59.
WinstonJoel S.O’DohertyJohnKilnerJames M.PerrettDavid I.DolanRaymond J. (2007), “Brain Systems for Assessing Facial Attractiveness,” Neuropsychologia, 45 (1), 195–206.
60.
YangMochenAdomaviciusGediminasBurtchGordonRenYuqing (2018), “Mind the Gap: Accounting for Measurement Error and Misclassification in Variables Generated Via Data Mining,” Information Systems Research, 29 (1), 4–24.
61.
ZhaoXinshuLynchJohn G.JrChenQimei (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths About Mediation Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2), 197–206.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
