L3 - Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical Attraction Flashcards
Physical attractiveness & why it’s considered important?
- applies specifically to how appealing we find a person’s face
- general agreement within & across cultures about what is considered physically attractive
- one explanation draws upon the evolutionary theory related to sexual selection - Shackelford & Larson (1997) found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive as it is an honest sign of genetic fitness (can’t fake facial symmetry)
The halo effect
- It’s how 1 distinguishing feature - physical attractiveness - tends to have a disproportionate influence on our judgements of someone’s personality
- we have preconceived ideas about personality traits that attractive people must have and they are almost universally positive
- Dion et al. (1972) - summed it up in phrase ‘what is beautiful is good’ e.g. found that physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind,strong, sociable & successful compared to unattractive people
- belief that physically attractive people have ‘nice’ characteristics makes them even more attractive, so we behave positively to them - an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy
Evaluation of halo effect
- research evidence
- research support
- contradicting research evidence
Research evidence(halo effect)
One strength of the halo effect is the research evidence to suggest that physical attractiveness is associated with the halo effect. For example, Palmer and Peterson (2012) found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people. In fact the halo effect was so powerful that it persisted even when participants knew that these ‘knowledgeable’ people had no particular expertise. This finding has implications in the real world since politicians seen as physically attractive garnering more votes could have an impact on democracy - people are voting not for capability but for physical attractiveness - the halo effect!!
Research support(halo effect)
Another piece of research to support the halo effect was found by Cunningham et al. (1995) and might be consistent across a range of cultures. Cunningham found that female features of arge eyes, small nose and prominent cheek bones were rated as physically attractive by white, Asian and Hispanic males. Furthemore Kim (1997) found that USA and Korean students judged physically attractive people to be trustworthy, mature and friendly, but this was less evident for unattractive people. It seems that stereotypes of physically attractive people is strong in both collectivist and individualist cultures and supports the halo effect.
Contradicting research evidence (halo effect)
One weakness of the halo effect is that there is research evidence that contradicts the halo effect, as some people do not attach great importance to physical attractiveness. Towhey asked male and female participants to rate how much they liked an individual based on a photograph and some biological information. Participants also completed a MACHO scale which measured sexist attitudes and behaviour. It was found that participants who scored highly on the MACHO scale were more influenced by physical attractiveness when judging the photograph. Those who scored low on the questionnaire did not value physical attractiveness very much. Therefore the influence of physical attractiveness can be moderated by other factors such as personality and attitudes that the judging person holds.
Matching hypothesis
This is the belief that we do not select the most attractive person as a prospective partner but, instead, are attracted to a person who approximately ‘matches’ us in physical (facial) attractiveness. This implies that we take into account our own attractiveness value’ to others when seeking a romantic partner.
Walster and Walster (1969) suggests that we look for partners who are similar to ourselves not only in terms of physical attractiveness but also similar in terms of personality and intelligence etc. This means our partners may not always look appealing but they match us.
Walster et al designed a study to test this called ‘the computer dance’
Computer dance procedure
- used 177 male and 170 female students from the University of Minnesota in the USA.
- had to fill in a questionnaire about IQ and personality & told that based on their answers they would be allocated an ideal partner for an evening dance
- while filling in questionnaire they were judged on physical attractiveness by 4 independent judges
- pairings were actually done randomly by computers
- after the dance all were asked how much they liked their date & if they wished to see them again
- was also followed up 6 months using questionnaires
Computer dance findings
- hypothesis wasn’t supported, most liked partners were also most physically attractive rather then taking into account their own level of attractiveness
- also found that personality & intelligence didn’t affect liking the dates
- but Berscheid et al (1971) replicated the study but this time each participant was able to select their partner from people of varying degrees of attractiveness, this time participants tended to choose partners who matched them in physical attractiveness
Computer dance conclusions
- we tend to seek and choose partners whose attractiveness matches our own
E.g. if we judge ourselves on a rating of 6/10 then we are likely to choose a partner of similar attractiveness so choice of partner is a compromise as we do not want to get rejected by someone who has a rating of 10/10 on their beauty
Evaluation of matching hypothesis
- research support
- not supported by real-world research
- meta-analysis
Research support (matching hypothesis)
- a strength of the matching hypothesis is the research support for it for example Walster’s study, the study used a large sample of around 350 participants both male and female.
- This means that conclusions drawn from this study about the matching hypothesis are valid in that we can say that when choosing partners on attractiveness, we tend to choose partners who are similar to us in attractiveness - this finding is useful for marriage websites in helping people to find their partners.
Not supported by real-world research
- a limitation of the matching hypothesis is that it is not supported by real-world research on dating.
- Taylor et al (2011) studied the activity logs of a popular online dating site, it was a real world test of the matching hypothesis.
- It was found that online daters wanted to date and meet potential partners who were more physically attractive than them - this study undermines the validity of the matching hypothesis as people who are not attractive will still seek an attractive partner
Meta-analysis
Although dating is different to selecting a partner for a long term romantic relationship since Feingold (1988) carried out a meta-analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation in ratings of physical attractiveness between romantic partners meaning that in the real world people tend to have partners that are similar to them in attractiveness - supporting the matching hypothesis
