Past research has investigated ideals of beauty and how these ideals have changed across time. In the current study, facial and body characteristics of Playboy Playmates of the Year from 1960-2000 were identified and investigated to explore their relationships with U.S. social and economic factors. Playmate of the Year age, body feature measures, and facial feature measurements were correlated with a general measure of social and economic hard times. Consistent with Environmental Security Hypothesis predictions, when social and economic conditions were difficult, older, heavier, taller Playboy Playmates of the Year with larger waists, smaller eyes, larger waist-to-hip ratios, smaller bust-to-waist ratios, and smaller body mass index values were selected. These results suggest that environmental security may influence perceptions and preferences for women with certain body and facial features.
Adams, G. R. (1980). Social psychology of beauty: Effects of age, height, and weight on self-reported personality traits and social behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 112, 287-293.
2.
Anderson, J. L., Crawford, C. B., Nadeau, J., & Lindberg, T. (1992). Was the Duchess of Windsor right? A cross-cultural review of the socioecology of ideals of female body shape. Ethology & Sociobiology, 13, 197-227.
3.
Barber, N. (1998a). Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: Different masculine and feminine ideals. Journal of Psychology, 132, 87-94.
4.
Barber, N. (1998b). The slender ideal and eating disorders: An inter-disciplinary “telescope” model. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 23, 294-307.
5.
Barber, N. (1999). Women’s dress fashions as a function of reproductive strategy. Sex Roles, 40, 459-471.
6.
Berry, D. S., & McArthur, L. Z. (1985). Some components and consequences of a babyface. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 312-323.
7.
Boynton, P. M. (2003). “Shapely centerfolds? Temporal change in body measures: Trend analysis”: Comment. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 326, 823.
8.
Boyson, A. R., Pryor, B., & Butler, J. (1999). Height as power in women. North American Journal of Psychology, 1, 109-114.
9.
Broadstock, M., Borland, R., & Gason, R. (1992). Effects of suntan on judgements of healthiness and attractiveness by adolescents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22, 157-172.
10.
Brownlow, S. (1992). Seeing is believing: Facial appearance, credibility, and attitude change. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 16, 101-115.
11.
Brownlow, S., & Zebrowitz, L. A. (1990). Facial appearance, gender, and credibility in television commercials. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 51-60.
12.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
13.
Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.
14.
Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. L. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559-570.
15.
Cherulnik, P. D., Turns, L. C., & Wilderman, S. K. (1990). Physical appearance and leadership: Exploring the role of appearance-based attribution in leader emergence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 1530-1539.
16.
Cunningham, M. R. (1986). Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 925-935.
17.
Cunningham, M. R., Barbee, A. P., & Pike, C. L. (1990). What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 61-72.
18.
Cunningham, M.R., Roberts, A.R., Barbee, A.P., Druen, P.B., & Wu, C. (1995). “Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours”: Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 261-279.
19.
Doty, R. M., Peterson, B. E., & Winter, D. G. (1991). Threat and authoritarianism in the United States, 1978-1987. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 629-640.
20.
Enquist, M., & Ghirlanda, S. (1998). The secrets of faces. Nature, 394, 826-827.
21.
Fink, B., & Penton-Voak, I. (2002). Evolutionary psychology of facial attractiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 154-158.
22.
Furnham, A., Hester, C., & Weir, C. (1990). Sex differences in the preferences for specific female body shapes. Sex Roles, 22, 743-754.
23.
Garner, D. M., Garfinkel, P. E., Schwartz, D., & Thompson, M. (1980). Cultural expectations of thinness in women. Psychological Reports, 47, 483-491.
24.
Henss, R. (1991). Perceiving age and attractiveness in facial photographs. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 933-946.
25.
Information Please Almanac. (1993-1996). New York: Doubleday.
26.
Jackson, L. A., & McGill, O. D. (1996). Body type and body characteristics associated with attractive and unattractive bodies by African Americans and Anglo Americans. Sex Roles, 35, 295-307.
27.
Jones, D. (1995). Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny: Cross-cultural evidence and implications. Current Anthropology, 36, 723-748.
28.
Keating, C. F. (1985). Gender and the physiognomy of dominance and attractiveness. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 61-70.
29.
Keating, C. F., & Doyle, J. (2002). The faces of desirable mates and dates contain mixed social status cues. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 414-424.
30.
Keating, C. F., Mazur, A., & Segall, M. H. (1981). A cross-cultural exploration of physiognomic traits of dominance and happiness. Ethology and Sociobiology, 2, 41-48.
31.
Mabry, M. A. (1971). The relationship between fluctuations in hemlines and stock market average from 1921-1971. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
32.
Mazur, A. (1986). U.S. trends in feminine beauty and overadaptation. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 281-303.
33.
McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215-238.
34.
McCann, S. J. (1991). Threat, authoritarianism, and the power of U.S.: New threat and power measures. Journal of Psychology, 125, 237-240.
35.
McCann, S. J. (1997). Threatening times and the election of charismatic U.S. Presidents: With and without FDR. Journal of Psychology, 131, 393-400.
36.
McCann, S. J., & Stewin, L. L. (1987). Threat, authoritarianism, and the power of U.S. presidents. Journal of Psychology, 121, 149-157.
37.
McIntosh, W. D., Schwegler, A. F., & Terry-Murray, R. M. (2000). Threat and television viewing in the United States, 1960-1990. Media Psychology, 2, 35-46.
38.
McQueen, D. (2003). “Shapely centerfolds? Temporal change in body measures: Trend analysis”: Comment. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 326, 823.
39.
Melamed, T. (1992). Personality correlated of physical height. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 1349-1350.
40.
Mitchell, B. R. (1993). International historical statistics: The Americas 1750-1988. New York: Stockton Press.
41.
Owen, P. R., & Laurel-Seller, E. (2000). Weight and shape ideals: Thin is dangerously in. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 979-990.
42.
Pettijohn II, T. F., & Tesser, A. (1999). Popularity in environmental context: Facial feature assessment of American movie actresses. Media Psychology, 1, 229-247.
43.
Pettijohn II, T. F., & Tesser, A. (2003). History and facial features: The eyes have it for actresses but not for actors. North American Journal of Psychology, 5(3), 335-344.
44.
Pettijohn II, T. F., & Tesser, A. (2004). Threat and social choice: When eye size matters. Manuscript submitted for publication.
45.
PhotoMagic 1.0. (1993). Richardson, TX: Micrografx, Inc.
46.
The Playboy book: The complete pictorial history. (1994). Santa Monica, CA: General Publishing Group, Inc.
47.
The Playmate book: Five decades of centerfolds. (1996). Santa Monica, CA: General Publishing Group, Inc.
48.
Puhl, R. M., & Boland, F. J. (2001). Predicting female attractiveness: Waist-to-hip ratio versus thinness. Psychology, Evolution & Gender, 3, 27-46.
49.
Rosenfeld, L. B., Stewart, S. C., Stinnett, H. J., & Jackson, L. A. (1999). Preferences for body type and body characteristics associated with attractive and unattractive bodies: Jackson and McGill revisited. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 89, 459-470.
50.
Sales, S. M. (1972). Economic threat as a determinate of conversion rates in authoritarian and nonauthoritarian churches. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 23, 420-428.
51.
Sales, S. M. (1973). Threat as a factor in authoritarianism: An analysis of archival data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 44-57.
52.
Silverstein, B., Peterson, B., & Perdue, L. (1986). Some correlates of the thin standard of bodily attractiveness for women. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 5, 895-905.
53.
Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293-307.
54.
Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breasts, and hips: Roles in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology & Sociobiology, 16, 483-507.
55.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
56.
Tassinary, L. G., & Hansen, K. A. (1998). A critical test of the waist-to-hip ratio hypothesis of female physical attractiveness. Psychological Science, 9, 150-155.
57.
Thornhill, R., & Grammer, K. (1999). The body and face of woman: One ornament that signals quality?Evolution & Human Behavior, 20, 105-120.
58.
U.S. Bureau of Census. (1975). Historical statistics of the United States: Colonial times to 1970. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
59.
U.S. Bureau of Census. (1977-2001). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
60.
Voracek, M., & Fisher, M. L. (2002). Shapely centerfolds? Temporal change in body measures: Trend analysis. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 325, 1447-1448.
61.
Wiseman, C. V., Gray, J. J., Mosimann, J. E., & Ahrens, A. H. (1992). Cultural expectations of thinness in women: An update. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 11, 85-89.
62.
World almanac and book of facts. (1993-1996). New York: Newspaper Enterprise Associates.
63.
Young, T. J., & French, L. A. (1998). Heights of U.S. presidents: A trend analysis for 1948-1996. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 87, 321-322.
64.
Zebrowitz, L. A. (1997). Reading faces: A window to the soul?Boulder, CO: Westview.
65.
Zebrowitz, L. A., Fellous, J., Mignault, A., & Andreoletti, C. (2003). Trait impressions as overgeneralized responses to adaptively significant facial qualities: Evidence from connectionist modeling. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 194-215.
66.
Zebrowitz, L. A., & McDonald, S. M. (1991). The impact of litigants’ babyfacedness and attractiveness on adjudications in small claims courts. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 603-623.
67.
Zebrowtitz, L. A., Tenenbaum, D. R., & Goldstein, L. H. (1991). The impact of job applicants’ facial maturity, sex, and academic achievement on hiring recommendations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 525-548.
