A considerable amount of social science research suggests an individual's initial perception of and reaction to another individual are affected by the physical attractiveness of the other person. The authors attempt to assess whether this general finding applies to people's perceptions of advertisements. Specifically, they assess the impact of attractiveness of male and female models on subjects’ evaluations of ads, and seek to determine whether the reactions depend on the sex of the ad reader or on the type of product being advertised.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllynJ. and FestingerL.. “The Effectiveness of Unanticipated Personal Communication,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62 (1961), 35–40.
2.
BerscheidE., DionK., WalsterE., and WalsterG. W.. “Physical Attractiveness and Dating Choice: A Test of the Matching Hypothesis,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1 (1971), 173–89.
3.
BerscheidE., and WalsterE.. “Equity Theory and Intimate Relations,” paper presented at American Sociological Association Meetings, 1973.
4.
BerscheidE., and WalsterE.. “Physical Attractiveness,” inBerkowitzL., ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.New York: Academic Press, 1974.
5.
BrislinR. W. and LewisS. A.. “Dating and Physical Attractiveness: Replication,” Psychological Reports, 22 (1968), 976.
6.
CliffordM. M. and WalsterE.. “The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on Teacher Expectation,” Sociology of Education, 46 (1973), 248–58.
7.
DionK. “Physical Attractiveness and Evaluations of Children's Transgressions,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24 (1972), 207–13.
8.
DionK. and BerscheidE.. “Physical Attractiveness and Social Perception of Peers in Preschool Children,” mimeographed research report available from the authors, 1972.
9.
DionK., BerscheidE.., and WalsterE.. “What is Beautiful is Good,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24 (1972), 285–90.
10.
EfranM. G. “The Effect of Physical Appearance on the Judgment of Guilt, Interpersonal Attraction and Severity of Recommended Punishment in a Simulated Jury Task,” Journal of Research in Personality, 8 (1974), 45–54.
11.
HansenR. A. and ScottC.. “Comments on ‘Attribution Theory and Advertiser Credibility,’ ” Journal of Marketing Research, 13 (May 1976), 193–7.
12.
HudsonJ. W. and HenzeL. S.. “Campus Values in Mate Selection: A Replication,” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 31 (1969), 772–5.
13.
IzzettR. and LeginskiW.. “Group Discussion and the Influence of Defendant Characteristics in a Simulated Jury Setting,” Journal of Social Psychology, 93 (1973), 271–9.
14.
JanisI. L., KayeD. and KirschnerP.. “Facilitating Effects of ‘Eating While Reading’ on Responsiveness to Persuasive Communications,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1 (1965), 181–6.
15.
JonesE. F. and DavisK. E.. “From Acts to Dispositions: The Attribution Process in Person Perception,” inBerkowitzL., ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.New York: Academic Press, 1965.
16.
KanungoR. N. and PangS.. “Effects of Human Models on Perceived Product Quality,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 57 (1973), 172–8.
17.
KelleyH. H. “The Processes of Causal Attribution,” American Psychologist, 28 (1973), 107–28.
18.
KieslerS. and BaralR.. “The Search for a Romantic Partner: The Effects of Self-Esteem and Physical Attractiveness on Romantic Behavior,” inGergenK. and MarloweE., eds., Personality and Social Behavior.Reading, Massachusetts: Addision-Wesley, 1970.
19.
KrugmanH. F. “The Impact of Television Advertising: Learning Without Involvement,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 29 (1965), 349–56.
20.
LandyD. and SigallH.. “Beauty is Talent: Task Evaluation as a Function of the Performer's Physical Attractiveness,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29 (1974), 299–304.
21.
MillerA. G. “Role of Physical Attractiveness in Impression Formation,” Psychometric Science, 19 (1970), 241–3.
22.
MillerA. G. “Social Perception of Internal-External Control,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 30 (1970), 103–9.
23.
MillerH. L. and RivenbarkW.. “Sexual Differences in Physical Attractiveness as a Determinant of Heterosexual Likings,” Psychological Reports, 27 (1970), 701–2.
24.
MillsJ. and AronsonE.. “Opinion Change as a Function of the Communicator's Attractiveness and Desire to Influence,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1 (1965), 173–7.
25.
MursteinB. I. “Physical Attractiveness and Marital Choice,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 22 (1972), 8–12.
26.
RayM. L., alet. “Marketing Communication and the Hierarchy of Effects,” in ClarkeP., ed., New Models for Mass Communication Research.Beverly Hills, California: Sage Publications, 1973, 147–76.
27.
SettleR. B. and GoldenL.. “Attribution Theory and Advertiser Credibility,” Journal of Marketing Research, 11 (May 1974), 181–5.
28.
SigallH. and LandyD.. “Radiating Beauty: The Effects of Having a Physically Attractive Partner on Person Perception,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28 (November 1973), 218–24.
29.
SigallH. and OstroveN.. “Effects of the Physical Attractiveness of the Defendant and Nature of the Crime on Juridic Judgement,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31 (1975), 410–4.
30.
SmithG. and EngelR.. “Influence of a Female Model on Perceived Characteristics of an Automobile,” Proceedings of the 76th Annual Convention of the AmericanPsychological Association, 1968, 681–2.
TesserA. and BrodieM.. “A Note on the Evaluation of a ‘Computer Date,’” Psychonomic Science, 23 (1971), 300.
33.
WackmanDaniel B. “Theories in Interpersonal Perception,” inWardS. and RobertsonT., eds., Consumer Behavior: Theoretical Sources.Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1973, 200–29.
34.
WalsterE., AronsonV., AbrahamsD., and RottmanL.. “The Importance of Physical Attractiveness in Dating Behavior,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4 (1966), 508–16.
35.
WalsterE., BerscheidE., and WalsterG. W.. “New Directions in Equity Research,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25 (1973), 151–76.
36.
WalsterE. and FestingerL.. “The Effectiveness of ‘Overheard’ Persuasive Communications,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65 (1962), 395–402.
37.
; WolfeJ., BrownF., GreenbergS., and ThompsonG.. Pretesting Advertising, Business Policy Study No. 109. New York: National Industrial Conference Board, 1963.
