The role of symmetry in attraction to average faces

Perception and Psychophysics

Volumn 69, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1273-1277

  Jones, Benedict C ^a   DeBruine, Lisa M ^a   Little, Anthony C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 36748999298     PISSN: 00315117     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03192944     Document Type: Article

References (34)

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. BENSON, P. J., & PERRETT, D. I. (1991). Synthesizing continuous-tone caricatures. Image & Vision Computing, 9, 123-129.
3. CÁRDENAS, R. A., & HARRIS, L. J. (2006). Symmetrical decorations enhance the attractiveness of faces and abstract designs. Evolution & Human Behavior, 27, 1-18.
4. DEBRUINE, L. M. (2005). Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 272, 919-922.
5. DEBRUINE, L. M., JONES, B. C., UNGER, L., LITTLE, A. C., & FEINBERG, D. R. (in press). Dissociating averageness and attractiveness: Attractive faces are not always average. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
6. ENQUIST, M., GHIRLANDA, S., LUNDQVIST, D., & WACHTMEISTER, C. A. (2002). An ethological theory of attractiveness. In G. Rhodes & L. A. Zebrowitz (Eds.), Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary, cognitive and social perspectives (pp. 27-153). Westport, CT: Ablex.
7. GOMBRICH, E. H. (1984). The sense of order: A study in the psychology of decorative art. London: Phaidon.
8. 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.
9. JONES, B. C., DEBRUINE, L. M., LITTLE, A. C., CONWAY, C. A., & FEINBERG, D. R. (2006). Integrating gaze direction and expression in preferences for attractive faces. Psychological Science, 17, 588-591.
10. JONES, B. C., LITTLE, A. C., FEINBERG, D. R., TIDDEMAN, B. P., PENTONVOAK, I. S., & PERRETT, D. I. (2004). The relationship between shape, symmetry, and visible skin condition in male facial attractiveness. Evolution & Human Behavior, 25, 24-30.
11. KAMPE, K. K., FRITH, C. D., DOLAN, R. J., & FRITH, U. (2001). Reward value of attractiveness and gaze. Nature, 413, 589.
12. LANGLOIS, J. H., & ROGGMAN, L. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.
13. LITTLE, A. C., & HANCOCK, P. J. B. (2002). The role of masculinity and distinctiveness in judgements of human male facial attractiveness. British Journal of Psychology, 93, 451-464.
14. LITTLE, A. C., & JONES, B. C. (2003). Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 270, 1759-1763.
15. MALONEY, L. T., & DAL MARTELLO, M. F. (2006). Kin recognition and the perceived facial similarity of children. Journal of Vision, 6, 1047-1056.
16. O'DOHERTY, J., WINSTON, J., CRITCHLEY, H., PERRETT, D. [I.], BURT, D. M., & DOLAN, R. J. (2003). Beauty in a smile: The role of medial orbitofrontal cortex in facial attractiveness. Neuropsychologia, 41, 147-155.
17. O'TOOLE, A. J., PRICE, T., VETTER, T., BARTLETT, J. C., & BLANZ, V. (1999). 3D shape and 2D surface textures of human faces: The role of "averages" in attractiveness and age. Image & Vision Computing, 18, 9-19.
18. PENTON-VOAK, I. S., & PERRETT, D. I. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Perceived personality and shining female preferences for male traits across the menstrual cycle. Advances in Animal Behaviour, 30, 219-259
19. PERRETT, D. I., BURT, D. M., PENTON-VOAK, I. S., LEE, K. J., ROWLAND, D. A., & EDWARDS, R. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution & Human Behavior, 20, 295-307.
20. PERRETT, D. I., LEE, K. J., PENTON-V OAK, I. S., ROWLAND, D. R., YOSHIKAWA, S., BURT, D. M., ET AL. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884-887.
21. PERRETT, D. I., MAY, K. A., & YOSHIKAWA, S. (1994). Facial shape and judgments of female attractiveness. Nature, 368, 239-242.
22. PERRETT, D. I., PENTON-VOAK, I. S., LITTLE, A. C., TIDDEMAN, B. P., BURT, D. M., SCHMIDT, N., ET AL. (2002). Facial attractiveness judgements reflect learning of parental age characteristics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 269, 873-880.
23. RHODES, G. (2006). The evolution of facial attractiveness. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199-226.
24. RHODES, G., PROFFITT, F., GRADY, J. M., & SUMICH, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 659-669.
25. RHODES, G., SUMICH, A., & BYATT, G. (1999). Are average facial configurations attractive only because of their symmetry? Psychological Science, 10, 52-58.
26. RHODES, G., & TREMEWAN, T. (1996). Averageness, exaggeration and facial attractiveness. Psychological Science, 7, 105-110.
27. RHODES, G., YOSHIKAWA, S., CLARK, A., LEE, K., MCKAY, R., & AKAMATSU, S. (2001). Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in nonwestern cultures: In search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception, 30, 611-625.
28. RHODES, G., ZEBROWITZ, L., CLARK, A., KALICK, S. M., HIGHTOWER, A., & MCKAY, R. (2001). Do facial averageness and symmetry signal health? Evolution & Human Behavior, 22, 31-46.
29. ROWLAND, D. A., & PERRETT, D. I. (1995). Manipulating facial appearance through shape and colour. IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 15, 70-76.
30. SWADDLE, J. P., & CUTHILL, I. C. (1995). Asymmetry and human facial attractiveness: Symmetry may not always be beautiful. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 261, 111-116.
31. THORNHILL, R., & GANGESTAD, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance. Human Nature, 4, 237-269.
32. TIDDEMAN, B. P., BURT, D. M., & PERRETT, D. I. (2001). Prototyping and transforming facial textures for perception research. IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 21, 42-50.
33. VALENTINE, T., DARLING, S., & DONNELLY, M. (2004). Why are average faces attractive? The effect of view and averageness on the attractiveness of female faces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 482-487.
34. WINKIELMAN, P., HALBERSTADT, J., FAZENDEIRO, T., & CATTY, S. (2006). Prototypes are attractive because they are easy on the mind. Psychological Science, 17, 799-807.