Research on the Beauty-is-Good stereotype shows that unattractive people are perceived to have worse moral character than attractive individuals. Yet research has not explored what kinds of moral character judgments are particularly biased by attractiveness. In this work, we tested whether attractiveness particularly biases moral character judgments pertaining to the moral domain of purity, beyond a more general halo effect. Across four preregistered studies (N = 1,778), we found that unattractive (vs. attractive) individuals were judged to be more likely to engage in purity violations compared with harm violations and that this was not due to differences in perceived moral wrongness, weirdness, or sociality between purity and harm violations. The findings shed light on how physical attractiveness influences moral character attributions, suggesting that physical attractiveness particularly biases character judgments pertaining to the moral domain of purity.
AmbadyN.RosenthalR. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111(2), 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.111.2.256
2.
BascandzievI.HarrisP. L. (2014). In beauty we trust: Children prefer information from more attractive informants. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 32(1), 94–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12022
3.
BatesD.MächlerM.BolkerB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. http://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
4.
BrambillaM.SacchiS.RusconiP.CherubiniP.YzerbytV. Y. (2012). You want to give a good impression? Be honest! Moral traits dominate group impression formation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 149–166.
5.
BrambillaM.SacchiS.RusconiP.GoodwinG. (2021). The primacy of morality in impression development: Theory, research, and future directions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 187–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2021.03.001
6.
CarneyD. R.ColvinC. R.HallJ. A. (2007). A thin slice perspective on the accuracy of first impressions. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(5), 1054–1072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2007.01.004
7.
ChakroffA.DunganJ.YoungL. (2013). Harming ourselves and defiling others: What determines a moral domain?PLOS ONE, 8(9), Article e74434. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074434
ChapmanH. A. (2018). A component process model of disgust, anger, and moral judgment. In GrayK.GrahamJ. (Eds.), Atlas of moral psychology (pp. 70–80). Guilford Press.
10.
CliffordS.IyengarV.CabezaR.Sinnott-ArmstrongW. (2015). Moral foundations vignettes: A standardized stimulus database of scenarios based on moral foundations theory. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1178–1198. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0551-2
11.
DionK.BerscheidE.WalsterE. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(3), 285–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033731
12.
EaglyA. H.AshmoreR. D.MakhijaniM. G.LongoL. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . .: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109
13.
EverettJ. A.PizarroD. A.CrockettM. J. (2016). Inference of trustworthiness from intuitive moral judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 145(6), 772–787. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000165
14.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. J.GlickP.XuJ. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
17.
ForgasJ. P.LahamS. M. (2016). Halo effects. In PohlR. F. (Ed.), Cognitive illusions: Intriguing phenomena in judgement, thinking and memory (pp. 276–290). Psychology Press.
18.
GersonL. (Ed.). (2017). Plotinus: The Enneads (Boys-StonesG.DillonJ.KingR.SmithA.WilberdingJ., Trans.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511736490
19.
GoodwinG. P.PiazzaJ.RozinP. (2014). Moral character predominates in person perception and evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(1), 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034726
20.
GrahamJ.HaidtJ.NosekB. A. (2009). Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(5), 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015141
21.
GrayK.KeeneyJ. E. (2015). Impure or just weird? Scenario sampling bias raises questions about the foundation of morality. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(8), 859–868. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1948550615592241
GriffinA. M.LangloisJ. H. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty good or is ugly bad?Social Cognition, 24(2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2006.24.2.187
HeinzelmannN. C.WeberS. C.ToblerP. N. (2020). Aesthetics and morality judgments share cortical neuroarchitecture. Cortex, 129, 484–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.04.018
27.
HendersonG. E. (2015). Ugliness: A cultural history. Reaktion Books.
28.
HorbergE. J.OveisC.KeltnerD.CohenA. B. (2009). Disgust and the moralization of purity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), 963–976. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0017423
29.
HseeC. K.LoewensteinG. F.BlountS.BazermanM. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 576–590. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.576
30.
InbarY.PizarroD. A. (2014). Pollution and purity in moral and political judgment. In WrightJ.SarkissianH. (Eds.), Advances in experimental moral psychology (pp. 112–129). Bloomsbury Academic.
31.
JaegerB.WagemansF. M.EvansA. M.Van BeestI. (2018). Effects of facial skin smoothness and blemishes on trait impressions. Perception, 47(6), 608–625. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0301006618767258
32.
KantI. (2000). Critique of the power of judgment (GuyerP.MatthewsE., Eds.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published in 1790).
33.
KleblC.GreenawayK. H.RheeJ. J.BastianB. (2021). Ugliness judgments alert us to cues of pathogen presence. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(5), 617–628. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1948550620931655
34.
KleblC.LuoY.BastianB. (2021). Beyond aesthetic judgment: Beauty increases moral standing through perceptions of purity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F01461672211023648
35.
KleblC.RheeJ. J.GreenawayK.LuoY.BastianB. (2021). Beauty goes down to the core: Attractiveness biases moral character attributions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-021-00388-w
36.
KurzbanR.LearyM. R. (2001). Evolutionary origins of stigmatization: The functions of social exclusion. Psychological Bulletin, 127(2), 187–208. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.127.2.187
37.
MaD. S.CorrellJ.WittenbrinkB. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122–1135. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5
38.
MaF.XuF.LuoX. (2015). Children’s and adults’ judgments of facial trustworthiness: The relationship to facial attractiveness. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 121(1), 179–198. https://doi.org/10.2466%2F27.22.PMS.121c10x1
39.
NisbettR. E.WilsonT. D. (1977). The halo effect: Evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(4), 250–256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.4.250
40.
ParkJ. H.FaulknerJ.SchallerM. (2003). Evolved disease-avoidance processes and contemporary anti-social behavior: Prejudicial attitudes and avoidance of people with physical disabilities. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27(2), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430204046142
41.
ParkJ. H.Van LeeuwenF.ChochorelouY. (2013). Disease-avoidance processes and stigmatization: Cues of substandard health arouse heightened discomfort with physical contact. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(2), 212–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2012.721812
RyanS.OatenM.StevensonR. J.CaseT. I. (2012). Facial disfigurement is treated like an infectious disease. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(6), 639–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.04.00
45.
ScheinC.GrayK. (2018). The theory of dyadic morality: Reinventing moral judgment by redefining harm. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 32–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317698288
46.
TappC.OatenM.StevensonR. J.OcchipintiS.ThandiR. (2020). Is obesity treated like a contagious disease?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 50(4), 205–212. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12650
47.
ThorndikeE. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1), 25–29.
48.
TsukiuraT.CabezaR. (2010). Shared brain activity for aesthetic and moral judgments: Implications for the Beauty-is-Good stereotype. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6(1), 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq025
49.
TyburJ. M.LiebermanD.GriskeviciusV. (2009). Microbes, mating, and morality: Individual differences in three functional domains of disgust. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(1), 103–122. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0015474
50.
TyburJ. M.LiebermanD.KurzbanR.DeScioliP. (2013). Disgust: Evolved function and structure. Psychological Review, 120(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030778
51.
WagemansF.BrandtM. J.ZeelenbergM. (2018). Disgust sensitivity is primarily associated with purity-based moral judgments. Emotion, 18(2), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000359
52.
WheelerL.KimY. (1997). What is beautiful is culturally good: The physical attractiveness stereotype has different content in collectivistic cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(8), 795–800. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0146167297238001
53.
WilsonR. K.EckelC. C. (2006). Judging a book by its cover: Beauty and expectations in the trust game. Political Research Quarterly, 59(2), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F106591290605900202
54.
WolfeN. D.DunavanC. P.DiamondJ. (2007). Origins of major human infectious diseases. Nature, 447(7142), 279–283. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05775
55.
ZebrowitzL. A.FranklinR. G.Jr. (2014). The attractiveness halo effect and the babyface stereotype in older and younger adults: Similarities, own-age accentuation, and older adult positivity effects. Experimental Aging Research, 40(3), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2014.897151
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.
