60 male and 60 female college students evaluated one picture of an attractive or unattractive male or female who was presented as an assistant professor of psychology. The attractive instructor, regardless of sex, received significantly higher ratings on warmth, sensitivity, ability to communicate, knowledge of subject matter, and superiority. Ratings on certain instructors' characteristics were independent of the attractiveness of the instructor and dependent upon the instructor's sex, with males receiving the higher ratings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DeauxK.EmswillerT.Explanations of successful performance on sex-linked tasks: What's skill for the male is luck for the female. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 80–85.
2.
DionK. K.BerscheidE.WalsterE.What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1972, 24, 285–290.
3.
GrahamP. A.Women in academics. Science, 1970, 169, 1284–1290.
4.
KaplanR. M.Is beauty talent? Sex interaction in the attractiveness halo effect. Sex Roles, 1978, 4, 195–204.
5.
LandyD.SigallH.Beauty is talent: Task evaluation as a function of the performer's physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1974, 29, 299–304.
6.
PhetersonG. I.KieslerS. B.GoldbergP. A.Evaluation of the performance of women as a function of their sex, achievement, and personal history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, 19, 114–118.
