Face preferences affect a diverse range of critical social outcomes, from mate choices and decisions about platonic relationships to hiring decisions and decisions about social exchange. Firstly, we review the facial characteristics that influence attractiveness judgements of faces (e.g. symmetry, sexually dimorphic shape cues, averageness, skin colour/texture and cues to personality) and then review several important sources of individual differences in face preferences (e.g. hormone levels and fertility, own attractiveness and personality, visual experience, familiarity and imprinting, social learning). The research relating to these issues highlights flexible, sophisticated systems that support and promote adaptive responses to faces that appear to function to maximize the benefits of both our mate choices and more general decisions about other types of social partners.
Organisms are expected to be sensitive to cues of genetic relatedness when making decisions about social behaviour. Relatedness can be assessed in several ways, one of which is phenotype matching: the assessment of similarity between others' traits and either one's own traits or those of known relatives. One candidate cue of relatedness in humans is facial resemblance. Here, I report the effects of an experimental manipulation of facial resemblance in a two-person sequential trust game. Subjects were shown faces of ostensible playing partners manipulated to resemble either themselves or an unknown person. Resemblance to the subject's own face raised the incidence of trusting a partner, but had no effect on the incidence of self ish betrayals of the partner's trust. Control subjects playing with identical pictures failed to show such an effect. In a second experiment, resemblance of the playing partner to a familiar (famous) person had no effect on either trusting or betrayals of trust.
Recent formulations of sexual selection theory emphasize how mate choice can be affected by environmental factors, such as predation risk and resource quality. Women vary greatly in the extent to which they prefer male masculinity and this variation is hypothesized to reflect differences in how women resolve the trade-off between the costs (e.g. low investment) and benefits (e.g. healthy offspring) associated with choosing a masculine partner. A strong prediction of this trade-off theory is that women's masculinity preferences will be stronger in cultures where poor health is particularly harmful to survival. We investigated the relationship between women's preferences for male facial masculinity and a health index derived from World Health Organization statistics for mortality rates, life expectancies and the impact of communicable disease. Across 30 countries, masculinity preference increased as health decreased. This relationship was independent of cross-cultural differences in wealth or women's mating strategies. These findings show non-arbitrary cross-cultural differences in facial attractiveness judgements and demonstrate the use of trade-off theory for investigating cross-cultural variation in women's mate preferences.
Studies of women's preferences for male faces have variously reported preferences for masculine faces, preferences for feminine faces and no effect of masculinity-femininity on male facial attractiveness. It has been suggested that these apparently inconsistent findings are, at least partly, due to differences in the methods used to manipulate the masculinity of face images or individual differences in attraction to facial cues associated with youth. Here, however, we show that women's preferences for masculinity manipulated in male faces using techniques similar to the three most widely used methods are positively inter-related. We also show that women's preferences for masculine male faces are positively related to ratings of the masculinity of their actual partner and their ideal partner. Correlations with partner masculinity were independent of real and ideal partner age, which were not associated with facial masculinity preference. Collectively, these findings suggest that variability among studies in their findings for women's masculinity preferences reflects individual differences in attraction to masculinity rather than differences in the methods used to manufacture stimuli, and are important for the interpretation of previous and future studies of facial masculinity.
If humans are sensitive to the costs and benefits of favouring kin in different circumstances, a strong prediction is that cues of relatedness will have a positive effect on prosocial feelings, but a negative effect on sexual attraction. Indeed, positive effects of facial resemblance (a potential cue of kinship) have been demonstrated in prosocial contexts. Alternatively, such effects may be owing to a general preference for familiar stimuli. Here, I show that subtly manipulated images of other-sex faces were judged as more trustworthy by the participants they were made to resemble than by control participants. In contrast, the effects of resemblance on attractiveness were significantly lower. In the context of a long-term relationship, where both prosocial regard and sexual appeal are important criteria, facial resemblance had no effect. In the context of a short-term relationship, where sexual appeal is the dominant criterion, facial resemblance decreased attractiveness. The results provide evidence against explanations implicating a general preference for familiar-looking stimuli and suggest instead that facial resemblance is a kinship cue to which humans modulate responses in a context-sensitive manner.
Responding appropriately to gaze cues is essential for fluent social interaction, playing a crucial role in social learning, collaboration, threat assessment and understanding others’ intentions. Previous research has shown that responses to gaze cues can be studied by investigating the gaze-cuing effect (i.e. the tendency for observers to respond more quickly to targets in locations that were cued by others’ gaze than to uncued targets). A recent study demonstrating that macaques demonstrate larger gaze-cuing effects when viewing dominant conspecifics than when viewing subordinate conspecifics suggests that cues of dominance modulate the gaze-cuing effect in at least one primate species. Here, we show a similar effect of facial cues associated with dominance on gaze cuing in human observers: at short viewing times, observers demonstrated a greater cuing effect for gaze cues from masculinized (i.e. dominant) faces than from feminized (i.e. subordinate) faces. Moreover, this effect of facial masculinity on gaze cuing decreased as viewing time was increased, suggesting that the effect is driven by involuntary responses. Our findings suggest that the mechanisms that underpin reflexive gaze cuing evolved to be sensitive to facial cues of others’ dominance, potentially because such differential gaze cuing promoted desirable outcomes from encounters with dominant individuals.
Exposure to faces biases perceptions of subsequently viewed faces. Faces similar to those seen previously are judged more normal and attractive than they were prior to exposure. Here we show sex-contingent after-effects following adaptation to eye-spacing (experiment 1), facial identity (experiment 2) and masculinity (experiment 3). Viewing faces of one sex with increased eye-spacing and faces of the other sex with decreased eye-spacing simultaneously induced opposite after-effects for male and female faces (assessed by normality judgments). Viewing faces transformed in identity or masculinity increased preferences for novel faces with characteristics similar to those viewed only when the sex of the faces presented in the adaptation phase and in post-adaptation preference tests were congruent. Because aftereffects reflect changes in responses of neural populations that code faces, our findings indicate that distinct neural populations code male and female faces.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.