factors affecting attraction: physical attractiveness Flashcards
physical attractiveness is related to
symmetry- an honest sign of genetic fitness
Who found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more physically attractive?
Shackelford and Laresen
why is symmetry thought to be an honest sign of genetic fitness?
- being symmetrical requires robust genes
- therefore a partner who selects a person with a symmetrical face is more likely to produce offspring with robust genes who survive to reproduce themselves
along with symmetry, what else is considered to be attractive?
neotenous features e.g. wide eyes and a small nose
why are neotenous features seen as physically attractive?
- they’re thought to trigger protective and caring instincts
- therefore explanations based on physical attractiveness are evolutionary ones- we have evolved a liking for physical attractiveness because it is a signal of high quality
who found that physical attractiveness is important beyond the formation stage?
McNulty et al (found that initial attractiveness continued to be an important feature of the relationship after marriage, for at least several years)
what is the Halo effect?
it is proposed that we hold preconceived ideas about other attributes of attractive people and those attributes are overwhelmingly positive because of the person’s physical attractiveness = halo effect
who found evidence supporting halo effect: physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people
Dion et al
what does the matching hypothesis state?
we choose partners that are of the same level of attractiveness to ourselves and to do this we need to assess our own value to a potential partner e.g. if we judge ourselves 6/10 then we are likely to seek a mate of a similar level of attarctiveness
explain how choosing a partner is essentially a compromise
whilst evolutionary theories suggest we should seek the most attractive mates, we also have to balance the potential for being rejected because the partner we aim for is ‘out of our league’ in terms of attractiveness
what are the evaluation points for physical attractiveness?
- research support for Halo effect (Palmer and Peterson)
- mixed support for matching hypothesis (Feingold)
- consistency of what is considered attractive across (Cunningham et al)
- online dating has not supported its assumptions (Taylor)
explain how there is research support for Halo effect (Palmer and Peterson)
- Palmer and Peterson found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people
- the halo effect persisted even when participants knew these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise
- this has obvious implications for the political process, suggesting that politicians might be elected merely because they are considered attractive by enough voters
- this suggests that the halo effect can be observed in real-life situations
explain how there is mixed support for matching hypothesis (Feingold)
- Walster’s matching hypothesis states that we choose partners that are of the same level of attractiveness to ourselves and to do this we need to assess our own value to a potential partner
- so if we judge ourselves as 6/10 then we are likely to seek a mate of similar attractiveness
- however a meta-analysis of 17 studies (Feingold) found a significant correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners
- Feingold’s participants were actual partners rather than those brought together for the purposes of a study as in the case of Walster’s original research, so it could be argued that the results are more valid
- these findings from more realistic studies support the hypothesis hypothesis even though the original studies did not
explain how there is consistency of what is considered attractive across (Cunningham et al)
- Cunningham et al found that female features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones and a small nose were rated as highly attractive by white, Hispanic and Asian males
- this consistency across cultures suggests that physical attractiveness is culturally independent unlike self-disclosure and may have evolutionary roots
explain how online dating has not supported its assumptions (Taylor)
- Taylor found that online dates sought dates with potential partners that were more attractive than themselves and did not seem to factor in their own level of attractiveness
- this research was done on actual dating choices as meeting someone online is becoming increasingly popular, yet it does not support the matching hypothesis
- and so it may be that the matching hypothesis no longer explains preferences regarding physical attractiveness in a useful way
