Similarities in Human Visual and Declared Measures of Preference for Opposite-Sex Faces
Abstract
Facial appearance in humans is associated with attraction and mate choice. Numerous studies have identified that adults display directional preferences for certain facial traits including symmetry, averageness, and sexually dimorphic traits. Typically, studies measuring human preference for these traits examine declared (e.g., choice or ratings of attractiveness) or visual preferences (e.g., looking time) of participants. However, the extent to which visual and declared preferences correspond remains relatively untested. In order to evaluate the relationship between these measures we examined visual and declared preferences displayed by men and women for opposite-sex faces manipulated across three dimensions (symmetry, averageness, and masculinity) and compared preferences from each method. Results indicated that participants displayed significant visual and declared preferences for symmetrical, average, and appropriately sexually dimorphic faces. We also found that declared and visual preferences correlated weakly but significantly. These data indicate that visual and declared preferences for manipulated facial stimuli produce similar directional preferences across participants and are also correlated with one another within participants. Both methods therefore may be considered appropriate to measure human preferences. However, while both methods appear likely to generate similar patterns of preference at the sample level, the weak nature of the correlation between visual and declared preferences in our data suggests some caution in assuming visual preferences are the same as declared preferences at the individual level. Because there are positive and negative factors in both methods for measuring preference, we suggest that a combined approach is most useful in outlining population level preferences for traits.
References
(2009). A pox on the mind: Disjunction of attention and memory in the processing of physical disfigurement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 478–485. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.008
(2007). Facial averageness and attractiveness in an isolated population of hunter-gatherers. Perception, 36, 1813–1820.
(1991). Synthesizing continuous-tone caricatures. Image and Vision Computing, 9, 123–129.
(1993). Extracting prototypical facial images from exemplars. Perception, 22, 257–262. doi: 10.1068/p220257
(1986). Understanding face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 307–327.
(1995). Perception of age in adult Caucasian male faces: Computer graphic manipulation of shape and colour information. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 259, 137–143.
(2003). Sexual dichromatism and female preference in Eulemur fulvus subspecies. International Journal of Primatology, 24, 1177–1188.
(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.
(1977). Incentive value of physical attractiveness for young-children. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 67–70.
(1976). Pictures of facial affect. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychological Press.
(1995). Visual preference for closely related species by Sulawesi macaques. American Journal of Primatology, 37, 253–261.
(1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233–242. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.108.3.233
(1995). Sex-differences in intra-sex variations in human mating tactics – An evolutionary approach. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 3–23. doi: 10.1016/0162-3095(94)00012-v
(2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390–423.
(1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115–121.
(1987). Infant preferences for attractive faces: Rudiments of a stereotype? Developmental Psychology, 23, 363–369.
(2010). Presentation and validation of the Radboud Faces Database. Cognition & Emotion, 24, 1377–1388.
(2007). Preferences for symmetry in human faces in two cultures: Data from the UK and the Hadza, an isolated group of hunter-gatherers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences, 274, 3113–3117.
(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. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2000.1327
(2002). The role of masculinity and distinctiveness in judgments of human male facial attractiveness. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 451–464.
(2011a). Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences, 366, 1638–1659.
(2011b). The many faces of research on face perception Introduction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B – Biological Sciences, 366, 1634–1637.
(2008). Symmetry and sexual dimorphism in human faces: Interrelated preferences suggest both signal quality. Behavioral Ecology, 19, 902–908.
(1998). Face recognition in primates: A cross-species study. Behavioural Processes, 43, 87–96.
(1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 295–307.
(1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884–887. doi: 10.1038/29772
(1996). Viewing time as a measure of sexual interest. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 341–354. doi: 10.1016/s0162-3095(96)00060-x
(2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226.
(2013). Participant sexual orientation matters. Experimental Psychology, 60, 362–367. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000209
(1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452–460.
(2001). Prototyping and transforming facial texture for perception research. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 21, 42–50. doi: 10.1109/38.946630
(2005). Three-month-olds’ visual preference for faces and its underlying visual processing mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 90, 255–273. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2004.11.001
(2006). Preferences for symmetry in conspecific facial shape among Macaca mulatta. International Journal of Primatology, 27, 133–145.
(2007). Visual attention to plain and ornamented human bodies: An eye-tracking study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 104, 1337–1349.
