Hot or not: Do professors perceived as physically attractive receive higher student evaluations?

Journal of General Psychology

Volumn 133, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 19-35

  Riniolo, Todd C ^a   Johnson, Katherine C ^a   Sherman, Tracy R ^a   Misso, Julie A ^a  

^a MEDAILLE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Naturalistic research; Physical attractiveness; Student evaluations; Teacher characteristics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ESTHETICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNET; MALE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; STANDARD; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

BEAUTY; FACULTY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNET; JUDGMENT; MALE; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; SOCIAL DESIRABILITY; STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 32944469206     PISSN: 00221309     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/GENP.133.1.19-35     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abbey, A., Cozzarelli, C., McLaughlin, K., & Harnish, R. J. (1987). The effects of clothing and dyad sex composition on perceptions of sexual intent: Do women and men evaluate these cues differently? Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 108-126.
2. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431-441.
3. Basow, S. A. (2000). Best and worst professors: Gender patterns in students' choices. Sex Roles, 43, 407-417.
4. Benson, P. L., Karabenick, S. A., & Lerner, R. M. (1976). Pretty pleases: The effects of physical attractiveness, race, and sex on receiving help. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 409-415.
5. Bloch, P. H., & Richins, M. L. (1992). You look "mahvelous" : The pursuit of beauty and the marketing concept. Psychology & Marketing, 9, 3-15.
6. Buck, S., & Tiene, D. (1989). The impact of physical attractiveness, gender and teaching philosophy on teacher evaluations. Journal of Educational Research, 82, 172-177.
7. Buckley, H. M. (1983). Perception of physical attractiveness as manipulated by dress: Subject versus independent judges. The Journal of Psychology, 114, 243-248.
8. Budesheim, T. L., & DePaola, S. J. (1994). Beauty or the beast? The effects of appearance, personality, and issue information on evaluations of political candidates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 339-348.
9. Cashin, W. E., & Downey, R. G. (1992). Using global student rating items for summative evaluation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 563-572.
10. Cassidy, L., & Hurrell, R. M. (1995). The influence of victim's attire on adolescents' judgments of date rape. Adolescence, 30, 319-323.
11. Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1387-1397.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but . . .: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109-128.
14. Freeman, H. R. (1994). Student evaluations of college instructors: Effects of type of course taught, instructor gender and gender role, and student gender. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 627-630.
15. Frieze, I. H., Olson, J. E., & Russell, J. (1991). Attractiveness and income for men and women in management. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1039-1057.
16. Goebel, B., & Cashen, V. (1979). Age, sex and attractiveness as factors in student ratings of teachers: A developmental study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 646-653.
17. Greenwald, A. G., & Gillmore, G. M. (1997). Grading leniency is a removable contaminant of student ratings. American Psychologist, 52, 1209-1217.
18. Gross, A. E., & Crofton, C. (1977). What is good is beautiful. Sociometry, 40, 85-90.
19. Hamermesh, D. S., & Biddle, J. E. (1994). Beauty and the labor market. American Economic Review, 84, 1174-1194.
20. Hamermesh, D. S., & Parker, A. M. (in press). Beauty in the classroom: Instructors' pulchritude and putative pedagogical productivity. Economics of Education Review.
21. Horton, R. S. (2003). Similarity and attractiveness in social perception: Differentiating between biases for the self and the beautiful. Self & Identity, 2, 137-152.
22. Hosoda, M., Stone-Romero, E. F., & Coats, G. (2003). The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology, 56, 431-462.
23. Johnson, D. J., & Rusbult, C. E. (1989). Resisting temptation: Devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 967-980.
24. Johnson, K. P., & Workman, J. E. (1992). Clothing and attributions concerning sexual harassment. Home Economics Research Journal, 21, 160-172.
25. Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (2001). What have psychologists (and others) discovered about the process of scientific discovery? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 75-79.
26. Klentz, B., Beaman, A. L., Mapelli, S. D., & Ullrich, J. R. (1987). Perceived physical attractiveness of supporters and nonsupporters of the women's movement: An attitude-similarity-mediated error (AS-ME). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 13, 513-523.
27. Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A. Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390-423.
28. Mack, D., & Rainey, D. (1990). Female applicants' grooming and personnel selection. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 399-407.
29. Marsh, H. W., & Roche, L. A. (1997). Making students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness effective: The critical issues of validity, bias, and utility. American Psychologist, 52, 1187-1197.
30. Marsh, H. W., & Roche, L. A. (2000). Effects of grading leniency and low workload on students' evaluations of teaching: Popular myth, bias, validity, or innocent bystanders? Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 202-228.
31. Mazzella, R., & Feingold, A. (1994). The effects of physical attractiveness, race, socio-economic status and gender of defendants and victims on judgments of mock jurors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1315-1344.
32. McKeachie, W. J. (1997). Student ratings: The validity of use. American Psychologist, 52, 1218-1225.
33. Millea, M., & Grimes, P. W. (2002). Grade expectations and student evaluation of teaching. College Student Journal, 36, 582-590.
34. Monin, B. (2003). The warm glow heuristic: When liking leads to familiarity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1035-1048.
35. Myers, D. G. (2005). Social psychology (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
36. Naftulin, D., Ware, J., & Donnelly, F. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635.
37. Peterson's. (2004). Four-year colleges (35th ed.). Princeton, NJ: Author.
38. Radmacher, S. A., & Martin, D. J. (2001). Identifying significant predictors of student evaluations of faculty through hierarchical regression analysis. The Journal of Psychology, 135, 259-268.
39. Riniolo, T. C., & Schmidt, L. A. (2000). Searching for reliable relationships with statistics packages: An empirical example of the potential problems. The Journal of Psychology, 134, 143-151.
40. Ritts, V., Patterson, M. L., & Tubbs, M. E. (1992). Expectations, impressions, and judgments of physically attractive students: A review. Review of Educational Research, 62, 413-426.
41. Sigelman, C. K., Thomas, D. B., Sigelman, L., & Ribich, F. D. (1986). Gender, physical attractiveness, and electability: An experimental investigation of voter biases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16, 229-248.
42. Simpson, J. A., Gangestad, S. W., & Lerma, M. (1990). Perception of physical attractiveness: Mechanisms involved in the maintenance of romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1192-1201.
43. Stewart, J. E. (1980). Defendant's attractiveness as a factor in the outcome of criminal trials: An observational study. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 10, 348-361.
44. Ware, J., & Williams, R. (1975). The Dr. Fox effect: A study of lecturer effectiveness and ratings of instruction. Journal of Medical Education, 40, 149-156.
45. Waters, M., Kemp, E., & Pucci, A. (1988). High and low faculty evaluations: Descriptions by students. Teaching of Psychology, 15, 203-204.
46. Williams, W. M., & Ceci, S. J. (1997). "How'm I doing?" Change, 29, 13-24.
47. Williamson, S., & Hewitt, J. (1986). Attire, sexual allure, and attractiveness. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 63, 981-982.
48. Workman, J. E., & Freeburg, E. W. (1999). An examination of date rape, victim dress, and perceiver variables within the context of attribution theory. Sex Roles, 41, 261-277.
49. Workman, J. E., & Orr, R. L. (1996). Clothing, sex of subject, and rape myth acceptance as factors affecting attributions about an incident of acquaintance rape. Clothing & Textiles Research Journal, 14, 276-284.