Putting beauty back in the eye of the beholder

Psychologist

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 28-32

  Little, Anthony ^a   Perrett, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038307045     PISSN: 09528229     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Bakker, T.C., Kunzler, R. & Mazzi, K. (1999). Condition-related mate choice in sticklebacks. Nature, 401, 234.
2. Bateson, P. (1982). Preferences for cousins in Japanese quail. Nature, 295, 236-237.
3. Botwin, M.D., Buss, D.M. & Shackelford, T.K. (1997). Personality and mate preference: Five factors in mate selection and marital satisfaction. Journal of Personalty, 65, 107-136.
4. Burley, N. (1983). The meaning of assortative mating. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4, 191-203.
5. Burley N. (1986). Sexual selection for aesthetic traits in species with biparental care. American Naturalist, 127, 415-445.
6. Buss, D.M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 12, 1-49.
7. Freud, S. (1927). Some psychological consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 8, 133-142.
8. Grammer, K. & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233-242.
9. Hinsz, V.B. (1989). Facial resemblance in engaged and married couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 223-229.
10. Hill, C.T., Rubzin, Z. & Peplau, L.A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: the end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 147-168.
11. Hume, D. (1757). Four dissertations. IV: Of the standard of taste. London: Millar.
12. Jedlicka, D. (1980). A test of the psychoanalytic theory, of mate selection. Journal of Social Psychology, 112, 295-299.
13. Kendrick, K.M., Hinton, M.R. & Atkins, K. (1998). Mothers determine male sexual preferences. Nature, 395, 229-230.
14. Langlois, J.H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A.J., Larson, A., Hallamm, M. & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423.
15. Little, A.C., Burt, D.M., Penton-Voak, I. & Perrett, D.I. (2001). Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B268, 39-44.
16. Lorenz, K. (1943). The innate forms of potential experience. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie, 5, 234-409.
17. Mazur, A. & Booth, A. (1998). Testosterone and dominance in men. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 353-371
18. Mealy, L., Bridgestock, R. & Townsend, G. (1999). Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 151-158.
19. Møller, A.P. & Thornhill, R. (1998). Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: A meta-analysis. American Naturalist, 151, 174-192.
20. Penton-Voak, I.S., Jones, B.C., Little, A.C. Baker, S., Tiddeman, B., Burt, D.M. et al. (2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions, and male facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B268, 1617-1623.
21. Penton-Voak, I.S., Perrett, D., Castles, D., Burt, D.M., Koyabashi, T., Murray, L.K. et al. (1999). Female preferences for male faces change cyclically. Nature, 399, 741-742.
22. Penton-Voak, I.S. & Perrett, D.I. (2000). Female preference for male faces changes cyclically - Further evidence. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 27, 39-48.
23. Perrett, D.I., Burt, D.M., Penton-Voak, I.S., Lee, K.J., Rowland, D.R. & Edwards, R. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 20, 295-307.
24. Perrett, D.I., Lee, K.J., Penton-Voak, I.S., Rowland, D.R., Yokishikawa, S., Burt, D.M. et al. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884-887.
25. Petrie, M., Krupa, A. & Burke T. (1999). Peacocks lek with relatives even in the absence of social and environmental cues. Nature, 401, 155-157.
26. Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 659-669.
27. Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second generation kibbutz adolescents and adults: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1, 293-307.
28. Spuhler, J.N. (1968). Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Eugenics Quarterly, 15, 128-140.
29. ten Cate C. & Vos D.R. (1999). Sexual imprinting and evolutionary processes in birds: a reassessment. Advances in the Study of Behaviour, 28, 1-31.
30. Thiessen, D. & Gregg B. (1980). Human associative mating and genetic equilibrium: An evolutionary perspective. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1, 111-140.
31. Thornhill, R. & Gangestad, S.W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452-460.
32. Westermarck, E. (1894). The history of human marriage. London, Macmillan.
33. Wilson, G.D. & Barrett, P.T. (1987). Parental characteristics and partner choice: Some evidence for Oedipal imprinting. Journal of Biosocial Science, 19, 157-161.
34. Zei, G.P., Astolifi, P. & Jayakar, S.D. (1981). Correlation between father's age and husband's age: A case of imprinting. Journal of Biosociol Science, 13, 409-418.