It's not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makes birds, fish, and automobiles attractive

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 149-156

  Halberstadt, Jamin ^a   Rhodes, Gillian ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AFFECT; ANIMAL; ART; ARTICLE; BIRD; CAR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; ESTHETICS; FACE; FEMALE; FISH; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MARRIAGE; PATTERN RECOGNITION;

ADULT; AFFECT; ANIMALS; AUTOMOBILES; BEAUTY; BIRDS; CARICATURES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FACE; FEMALE; FISHES; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MARRIAGE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL;

EID: 0042779672     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03196479     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. ALLEY, T. R., & CUNNINGHAM, M. R. (1991). Averaged faces are attractive, but very attractive faces are not average. Psychological Science, 2, 123-125.
2. BORNSTEIN, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289.
3. CUNNINGHAM, M. R., BARBEE, A. P., & PIKE, C. L. (1990). What do women want? Facial metric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 59, 61-72.
4. FRANKS, J. J., & BRANSFORD, S. D. (1971). Abstraction of visual patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 65-74.
5. 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.
6. HALBERSTADT, J., & RHODES, G. (2000). The attractiveness of non-face averages: Implications for an evolutionary explanation of the attractiveness of average faces. Psychological Science, 11, 285-289.
7. JOHNSTON, V. S., HAGEL, R., FRANKLIN, M., FINK, B., & GRAMMER, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution & Human Behavior, 22, 251-267.
8. JONES, D., & HILL, K. (1993). Criteria of facial attractiveness in five populations. Human Nature, 4, 271-296.
9. LANGLOIS, J. H., & ROGGMAN, L. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.
10. LANGLOIS, J. H., ROGGMAN, L. A., & MUSSELMAN, L. (1994). What is average and what is not average about attractive faces? Psychological Science, 5, 214-220.
11. LAST, P. R., SCOTT, E. O. G., & TALBOT, F. H. (1983). Fishes of Tasmania. Hobart, Tasmania: Tasmanian Fisheries Development Authority.
12. LIGHT, L. L., HOLLANDER, S., & KAYRA-STUART, F. (1981). Why attractive people are harder to remember. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 269-276.
13. MØLLER, A. P., & SWADDLE, J. P. (1997). Asymmetry, developmental stability and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
14. MORPH (Version 2.5) [Computer software] (1994). San Diego: Gryphon Software.
15. NELSON, J. S. (1994). Fishes of the world (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
16. PENTON-VOAK, I. S., PERRETT, D. I., CASTLES, D. L., KOBAYASHI, T., BURT, D. M., MURRAY, L. K., & RINAMISAWA, R. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399, 741-742.
17. PERRETT, D. I., LEE, K. J., PENTON-VOAK, I., ROWLAND, D., YOSHIKAWA, S., BURT, D. M., HENZI, S. P., CASTLES, D., & AKAMATSU, S. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884-887.
18. PERRETT, D. I., MAY, K. A., & YOSHIKAWA, S. (1994). Facial shape and judgments of female attractiveness. Nature, 368, 239-242.
19. RHODES, G., BRENNAN, S., & CAREY, S. (1987). Identification and ratings of caricatures: Implications for mental representations of faces. Cognitive Psychology, 19, 473-497.
20. RHODES, G., HALBERSTADT, J., & BRAJKOVICH, G. (2001). Generalization of mere exposure effects in social stimuli. Social Cognition, 19, 57-70.
21. RHODES, G., HARWOOD, K., YOSHIKAWA, S., NISHITANI, M., & McLEAN, I. G. (2002). The attractiveness of average facial configurations: Cross-cultural evidence and the biology of beauty. In G. Rhodes & L. A. Zebrowitz (Eds.), Advances in visual cognition: Vol. 1. Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary, cognitive, and social perspectives (pp. 35-58). Westport, CT: Ablex.
22. RHODES, G., HICKFORD, C., & JEFFERY, L. (2000). Sex-typicality and attractiveness: Are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive? British Journal of Psychology, 91, 125-140.
23. RHODES, G., & McLEAN, I. G. (1990). Distinctiveness and expertise effects with homogeneous stimuli: Towards a model of configural coding. Perception, 19, 773-794.
24. RHODES, G., SUMICH, A., & BYATT, G. (1999). Are average facial configurations only attractive because of their symmetry? Psychological Science, 10, 52-58.
25. RHODES, G., & TREMEWAN, T. (1996). Averageness, exaggeration, and facial attractiveness. Psychological Science, 7, 105-110.
26. RHODES, G., YOSHIKAWA, S., CLARK, A., LEE, K., McKAY, R., & AKAMATSU, S. (2001). Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-Western populations: In search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception, 30, 611-625.
27. RHODES, G., ZEBROWITZ, L. A., CLARK, A., KALICK, S. M., HIGH-TOWER, A., & McKAY, R. (2000). Do facial averageness and symmetry signal health? Evolution & Human Behavior, 21, 1-16.
28. ZAJONC, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 9, 1-27.