Previous research has identified facial averageness and sexual dimorphism as important factors in facial attractiveness. The averageness and sexual dimorphism accounts provide important first steps in understanding what makes faces attractive, and should be valued for their parsimony. However, we show that they explain relatively little of the variance in facial attractiveness, particularly for male faces. As an alternative to these accounts, we built a regression model that defines attractiveness as a function of a face’s position in a multidimensional face space. The model provides much more predictive power than the averageness and sexual dimorphism accounts and reveals previously unreported components of attractiveness. The model shows that averageness is attractive in some dimensions but not in others and resolves previous contradictory reports about the effects of sexual dimorphism on the attractiveness of male faces.
BishopC. M. (2006). Pattern recognition and machine learning. New York, NY: Springer.
2.
BlanzV.VetterT. (2003). Face recognition based on fitting a 3D morphable model. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 25, 1063–1074.
BussD. M. (1989). Sex-differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypothesis tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 12, 1–14.
5.
ChenF. M.ZhangD. A. (2010). Benchmark for geometric facial beauty study. In ZhangD. A.SonkaM. (Eds.), Medical Biometrics: Vol. 6165. Second International Conference, ICMB 2010, Hong Kong, China, June 2010. Proceedings (pp. 21–32). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
6.
CunninghamM. 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.
7.
CunninghamM. R.BarbeeA. P.PikeC. 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, 59, 61–72.
8.
DeBruineL. M.JonesB. C.LittleA. C.BoothroydL. G.PerrettD. I.Penton-VoakI. S.TiddemanB. P. (2006). Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner’s masculinity. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 1355–1360.
9.
DeBruineL. M.JonesB. C.SmithF. G.LittleA. C. (2010). Are attractive men’s faces masculine or feminine? The importance of controlling confounds in face stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 751–758.
10.
EaglyA. H.MakhijaniM. G.AshmoreR. D.LongoL. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . . : A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109–128.
11.
FriezeI. H.OlsonJ. E.RussellJ. (1991). Attractiveness and income for men and women in management. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1039–1057.
12.
GaltonF. (1878). Composite portraits. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 8, 132–142.
13.
HillH.BruceV.AkamatsuS. (1995). Perceiving the sex and race of faces: The role of shape and colour. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 261, 367–373.
14.
JohnstonV. S.HagelR.FranklinM.FinkB.GrammerK. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 251–267.
15.
KoehlerN.SimmonsL. W.RhodesG.PetersM. (2004). The relationship between sexual dimorphism in human faces and fluctuating asymmetry. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 271, S233−S236.
16.
KomoriM.KawamuraS.IshiharaS. (2009). Averageness or symmetry: Which is more important for facial attractiveness?Acta Psychologica, 131, 136–142.
17.
LangloisJ. H.RoggmanL. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115–121.
18.
LangloisJ. H.RoggmanL. A.MusselmanL. (1994). What is average and what is not average about attractive faces. Psychological Science, 5, 214–220.
19.
LittleA. C.BurtD. M.Penton-VoakI. S.PerrettD. I. (2001). Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 268, 39–44.
20.
OosterhofN. N.TodorovA. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 105, 11087–11092.
21.
O’TooleA. J.PriceT.VetterT.BartlettJ. C.BlanzV. (1999). 3D shape and 2D surface textures of human faces: The role of “averages” in attractiveness and age. Image and Vision Computing, 18, 9–19.
22.
Penton-VoakI. S.JacobsonA.TriversR. (2004). Populational differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: Comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 355–370.
PerrettD. I.LeeK. J.Penton-VoakI.RowlandD.YoshikawaS.BurtD. M.AkamatsuS. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884–887.
25.
PerrettD. I.MayK. A.YoshikawaS. (1994). Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature, 368, 239–242.
26.
PerrettD. I.Penton-VoakI. S.LittleA. C.TiddemanB. P.BurtD. M.SchmidtN.BarrettL. (2002). Facial attractiveness judgements reflect learning of parental age characteristics. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 269, 873–880.
27.
RennelsJ. L.BronstadP. M.LangloisJ. H. (2008). Are attractive men’s faces masculine or feminine? The importance of type of facial stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 884–893.
28.
RhodesG. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226.
29.
RhodesG.ChanJ.ZebrowitzL. A.SimmonsL. W. (2003). Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health?Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 270, S93−S95.
30.
RhodesG.HickfordC.JefferyL. (2000). Sex-typicality and attractiveness: Are supermale and superfemale faces super- attractive?British Journal of Psychology, 91, 125–140.
31.
RussellR. (2003). Sex, beauty, and the relative luminance of facial features. Perception, 32, 1093–1107.
32.
RussellR. (2009). A sex difference in facial contrast and its exaggeration by cosmetics. Perception, 38, 1211–1219.
SwaddleJ. P.ReiersonG. W. (2002). Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 269, 2285–2289.
35.
SymonsD. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36.
ThornhillR.GangestadS. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452–460.
37.
ValentineT. (1991). A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 43, 161–204.
38.
WalkerM.VetterT. (2009). Portraits made to measure: Manipulating social judgments about individuals with a statistical face model. Journal of Vision, 9(11), Article 12. Retrieved from http://www.journalofvision.org/content/9/11/12
39.
WellingL. L.JonesB. C.DeBruineL. M.ConwayC. A.Law SmithM. J.LittleA. C.Al-DujailiE. A. (2007). Raised salivary testosterone in women is associated with increased attraction to masculine faces. Hormones and Behavior, 52, 156–161.
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.
