Social perception of facial resemblance in humans

Archives of Sexual Behavior

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 64-77

  DeBruine, Lisa M ^a   Jones, Benedict C ^a   Little, Anthony C ^b   Perrett, David I ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assortative mating; Faces; Kin recognition; Resemblance; Social perception

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; COST; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; FACE; HUMAN; INBREEDING; NONHUMAN; PERCEPTION; SELF CONCEPT; SEX; SEXUALITY; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; THEORY;

ALTRUISM; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CUES; FACE; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INBREEDING; MALE; MARRIAGE; MENTAL RECALL; PHYSICAL FITNESS; SEX CHARACTERISTICS; SOCIAL PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 38349130220     PISSN: 00040002     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10508-007-9266-0     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (97)

1. Alberts, S. C. (1999). Paternal kin discrimination in wild baboons. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266, 1501-1506.
2. Austin, W., & McGinn, N. C. (1977). Sex differences in choice of distribution rules. Journal of Personality, 45, 379-394.
3. Bailenson, J. N., Garland, P., Iyengar, S., & Yee, N. (2006). Transformed facial similarity as a political cue: A preliminary investigation. Political Psychology, 27, 373-385.
4. Bateson, P. (1980). Optimal outbreeding and the development of sexual preferences in Japanese quail. Zietschrift fur Tierpsychologie, 53, 231-244.
5. Bateson, P. (1983). Optimal outbreeding. In P. Bateson (Ed.), Mate choice (pp. 257-278). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
6. Bereczkei, T., Gyuris, P., Koves, P., & Bernath, L. (2002). Homogamy, genetic similarity, and imprinting; parental influence on mate choice preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 677-690.
7. Berg, S. J., & Wynne-Edwards, K. (2001). Changes in testosterone, cortisol, and estradiol levels in men becoming fathers. Mayo Clinical Proceedings, 76, 582-592.
8. Bittles, A. H. (2001). Consanguinity and its relevance to clinical genetics. Clinical Genetics, 60, 89-98.
9. Bittles, A. H., Grant, J. C., Sullivan, S. G., & Hussain, R. (2002). Does inbreeding lead to decreased human fertility? Annals of Human Biology, 29, 111-130.
10. Blomqvist, D., Andersson, M., Küpper, C., Cuthill, I. C., Kis, J., Lanctotk, R. B., et al. (2002). Genetic similarity between mates and extra-pair parentage in three species of shorebirds. Nature, 419, 613-615.
11. Brédart, S., & French, R. M. (1999). Do babies resemble their fathers more than their mothers? A failure to replicate Christenfeld and Hill (1995). Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 129-135.
12. Bressan, P. (2002). Why babies look like their daddies: Paternity uncertainty and the evolution of self-deception in evaluating family resemblance. Acta Ethologica, 4, 113-118.
13. Bressan, P., & Grassi, M. (2004). Parental resemblance in one-year-olds and the Gaussian curve. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 133-141.
14. Bressan, P., & Martello, M. F. D. (2002). Talis pater, talis filius: Perceived resemblance and the belief in genetic relatedness. Psychological Science, 13, 213-218.
15. Bressan, P., Bertamini, M., Nalli, A., & Zanutto, A. (submitted). Effect of self-resemblance in child faces on hypothetical parental investment choices in men and women. Archives of Sexual Behavior.
16. Buckingham, G., DeBruine, L. M., Little, A. C., Welling, L. L. M., Conway, C. A., Tiddeman, B. P., et al. (2006). Visual adaptation to masculine and feminine faces influences generalized preferences and perceptions of trustworthiness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 381-389.
17. Bukacinski, D., Bukacinski, M., & Lubjuhn, T. (2000). Adoption of chicks and the level of relatedness in common gull, Larus canus, colonies. Animal Behaviour, 59, 289-299.
18. Burley, N. (1983). The meaning of assortative mating. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4, 191-203.
19. Burnstein, E., Crandall, C., & Kitayama, S. (1994). Some neo-Darwinian decision rules for altruism: Weighing cues for inclusive fitness as a function of the biological importance of the decision. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 773-789.
20. Byard, P. J., Poosha, D. V., Satyanarayana, M., & Rao, D. C. (1985a). Family resemblance for components of craniofacial size and shape. Journal of Craniofacial Genetic Developmental Biology, 5, 229-238.
21. Byard, P. J., Poosha, D. V., Satyanarayana, M., Rao, D. C., & Russell, J. M. (1985b). Path analysis of family resemblance for cranio-facial traits in Andhra Pradesh nuclear families and twins. Annals of Human Biology, 12, 305-314.
22. Christenfeld, N. J. S., & Hill, E. A. (1995). Whose baby are you? Nature, 378, 669.
23. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1982). Whom are newborn babies said to resemble? Ethology and Sociobiology, 3, 69-78.
24. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1984). A sociobiological analysis of human infanticide. In G. Hausfater & S. Hrdy (Eds.), Infanticide: Comparative and evolutionary perspectives (pp. 487-502). New York: Aldine Press.
25. DeBruine, L. M. (2002). Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 1307-1312.
26. DeBruine, L. M. (2004a). Facial resemblance increases the attractiveness of same-sex faces more than other-sex faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 271, 2085-2090.
27. DeBruine, L. M. (2004b). Resemblance to self increases the appeal of child faces to both men and women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 142-154.
28. DeBruine, L. M. (2005). Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, 919-922.
29. DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., & Perrett, D. I. (2005). Women's attractiveness judgments of self-resembling faces change across the menstrual cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 47, 379-383.
30. Epstein, E., & Guttman, R. (1982). Mate selection in man: Evidence, theory, and outcome. Social Biology, 31, 243-276.
31. Euler, H. A., & Weitzel, B. (1999). Grandparental caregiving and intergenerational relations reflect reproductive strategies. In J. M. van der Dennen, D. Smillie, & D. R. Wilson (Eds.), The Darwinian heritage and sociobiology: Human evolution, behavior, and intelligence (pp. 243-252). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
32. Fujita, K. (1993). Development of visual preference for closely related species by infant and juvenile macaques with restricted social experience. Primates, 34, 141-150.
33. Gaulin, S. J., & Schlegel, A. (1980). Paternal confidence and paternal investment: A cross cultural test of a sociobiological hypothesis. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1, 301-309.
34. Gaulin, S. J. C., McBurney, D. H., & Wartell, S. L. B. (1997). Matrilateral biases in the investment of aunts and uncles: A consequence and measure of paternity uncertainty. Human Nature, 8, 139-151.
35. Greenberg, L. (1979). Genetic component of bee odor in kin recognition. Science, 206, 1095-1097.
36. Griffin, A. S., & West, S. A. (2003). Kin discrimination and the benefit of helping in cooperatively breeding vertebrates. Science, 302, 634-636.
37. Griffiths, R., & Kunz, P. (1973). Assortative mating: A study of physiognomic homogamy. Social Biology, 20, 448-453.
38. Hames, R. (1987). Relatedness and garden labor exchange among the Ye'kwana. Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 259-284.
39. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour, I. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1-16.
40. Harris, R. N., Vess, T. J., Hammond, J. I., & Lindermuth, C. J. (2003). Context-dependent kin discrimination in larval four-toed salamanders Hemidactylium scutatum (Caudata Plethodontidae). Herpetologica, 59, 164-177.
41. Hauber, M. E., & Sherman, P. W. (1998). Nepotism and marmot alarm calling. Animal Behaviour, 53, 1049-1052.
42. Heth, G., Todrank, J., Busquet, N., & Baudoin, C. (2003). Genetic relatedness assessment through individual odour similarities in mice. Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 78, 595-603.
43. Hill, C. T., Rubin, Z., & Peplau, L. A. (1976). Breakups before marriage: The end of 103 affairs. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 147-168.
44. Hinsz, V. B. (1989). Facial resemblance in engaged and married couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6, 223-229.
45. Holmes, W. G., & Sherman, P. W. (1982). The ontogeny of kin recognition in two species of ground squirrels. American Zoologist, 22, 491-517.
46. Irons, W. (1986). Incest: Why all the fuss? Paper presented at the Evolution and Human Behavior meeting, University of Michigan.
47. Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., Perrett, D. I., Little, A. C., Feinberg, D. R., & Law Smith, M. J. (2008). Effects of menstrual cycle phase on face preferences. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9268y.
48. Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L., DeBruine, L. M., Feinberg, D. R., Law Smith, M. J., et al. (2005a). Commitment to relationships and preferences for femininity and apparent health in faces are strongest on days of the menstrual cycle when progesterone level is high. Hormones and Behavior, 48, 283-290.
49. Jones, B. C., Perrett, D. I., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L., Cornwell, R. E., Feinberg, D. R., et al. (2005b). Menstrual cycle, pregnancy and oral contraceptive use alter attraction to apparent health in faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 272, 347-354.
50. Kahn, A., O'Leary, V. E., Krulewitz, J. E., & Lamm, H. (1980). Equity and equality: Male and female means to a just end. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1, 173-197.
51. Kendrick, K. M. (2000). Oxytocin, motherhood and bonding. Experimental Physiology, 85, 111S-124S.
52. Kendrick, K. M., Hinton, M. R., & Atkins, K. (1998). Mothers determine sexual preferences. Nature, 395, 229-230.
53. Krupp, D. B., DeBruine, L. M., & Barclay, P. (in press). A cue of kinship promotes cooperation for the public good. Evolution and Human Behavior. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.08.002.
54. Langlois, J., & Roggman, L. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science, 1, 115-121.
55. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2003). Does morality have a biological basis? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 819-826.
56. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2007). The architecture of human kin detection. Nature, 225, 727-731.
57. Little, A. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Jones, B. C. (2005). Sex-contingent face aftereffects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, 2283-2287.
58. Little, A. C., Penton-Voak, I. S., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2003). Investigating an imprinting-like phenomenon in humans: Partners and opposite-sex parents have similar hair and eye colour. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 43-51.
59. Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2006). Assortative mating for perceived facial personality traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 973-984.
60. Maloney, L. T., & Dal Martello, M. F. (2006). Kin recognition and the perceived facial similarity of children. Journal of Vision, 6, 1047-1056.
61. McLain, D. K., Setters, D., Moulton, M. P., & Pratt, A. E. (2000). Ascription of resemblance of newborns by parents and nonrelatives. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 11-23.
62. Nesse, R. M., Silverman, A., & Bortz, A. (1990). Sex differences in ability to recognize family resemblance. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 11-21.
63. Oda, R., Matsumoto-Oda, A., & Kurashima, O. (2002). Facial resemblance of Japanese children to their parents. Journal of Ethology, 20, 81-85.
64. Olsén, H. (1999). Present knowledge of kin discrimination in salmonids. Genetica, 104, 295-299.
65. Pagel, M. (1997). Desperately concealing father: A theory of parent-infant resemblance. Animal Behaviour, 53, 973-981.
66. Penn, D., & Potts, W. (1998). MHC-disassortative mating preferences reversed by cross-fostering. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 1299-1306.
67. Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., & Peirce, J. W. (1999). Computer graphic studies of the role of facial similarity in judgments of attractiveness. Current Psychology, 18, 104-117.
68. Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., & Minamisawa, R. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399, 741-742.
69. Perrett, D. I., Penton-Voak, I. S., Little, A. C., Tiddeman, B. P., Burt, D. M., Schmidt, N., et al. (2002). Facial attractiveness judgments reflect learning of parental age characteristics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 873-880.
70. Pfennig, D. W., Sherman, P. W., & Collins, J. P. (1994). Kin recognition and cannibalism in polyphenic salamanders. Behavioral Ecology, 5, 225-232.
71. Platek, S. M. (2002). Unconscious reactions to children's faces: The effect of resemblance. Evolution and Cognition, 8, 207-214.
72. Platek, S. M., Burch, R. L., Panyavin, I. S., Wasserman, B. H., & Gallup, G. G. (2002). Reactions to children's faces: Resemblance affects males more than females. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 159-166.
73. Platek, S. M., Critton, S. R., Burch, R. L., Frederick, D. A., Meyers, T. E., & Gallup, G. G. (2003). How much paternal resemblance is enough? Sex differences in hypothetical investment decisions but not in the detection of resemblance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 81-87.
74. Platek, S. M., Raines, D. M., Gallup, G. G. Jr., Mohamed, F. B., Thomson, J. W., Myers, T. E., et al. (2004). Reactions to children's faces: Males are more affected by resemblance than females are, and so are their brains. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 394-405.
75. Poosha, D. V., Byard, P. J., Satyanarayana, M., Rice, J. P., & Rao, D. C. (1984). Family resemblance for cranio-facial measurements in Velanti Brahmins from Andhra Pradesh, India. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 65, 15-22.
76. Porter, R. H., Cernoch, J. M., & Balogh, R. D. (1984). Recognition of neonates by facial-visual characteristics. Pediatrics, 74, 501-504.
77. Regalski, J. M., & Gaulin, S. J. (1993). Whom are Mexican infants said to resemble? Monitoring and fostering paternal confidence in the Yucatan. Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 97-113.
78. Rowland, D., & Perrett, D. I. (1995). Manipulating facial appearance through shape and color. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 15, 70-76.
79. Rushton, J. P. (1988). Genetic similarity, mate choice, and fecundity in humans. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 329-333.
80. Rushton, J. P., & Nicholson, I. R. (1988). Genetic similarity theory, intelligence, and human mate choice. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 45-57.
81. Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second generation Kibbutz adolescents and adults: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1, 293-307.
82. Sherman, P. (1977). Nepotism and the evolution of alarm calls. Science, 197, 1246-1253.
83. Silk, J. B. (2002). Kin selection in primate groups. International Journal of Primatology, 23, 849-875.
84. Spoon, T. R., Millam, J. R., & Owings, D. H. (2006). The importance of mate behavioural compatabilty in parenting and reproductive success by cockatiels, Nymphicus hollandicus. Animal Behaviour, 71, 315-326.
85. Storey, A. E., Walsh, C., Quinton, R., & Wynne-Edwards, K. (2000). Hormonal correlates of paternal responsiveness in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 79-95.
86. Thiessen, D., & Gregg, B. (1980). Human assortative mating and genetic equilibrium: An evolutionary perspective. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1, 111-140.
87. Tiddeman, B. P., Perrett, D. I., & Burt, D. M. (2001). Prototyping and transforming facial textures for perception research. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, Research, 21, 42-50.
88. Todrank, J., & Heth, G. (2001). Rethinking cross-fostering designs for studying kin recognition mechanisms. Animal Behaviour, 61, 503-505.
89. van der Jeugd, H., van der Veen, I. T., & Larsson, K. (2002). Kin clustering in barnacle geese: Familiarity or phenotype matching? Behavioral Ecology, 13, 786-790.
90. Volk, A., & Quinsey, V. L. (2002). The influence of infant facial cues on adoption preferences. Human Nature, 13, 437-455.
91. Vos, D. R. (1995). Sexual imprinting in zebra-finch females: Do females develop a preference for males that look like their father? Ethology, 99, 252-262.
92. Westermarck, E. A. (1921). The history of human marriage (5th ed.). London: Macmillan.
93. Wilson, G. D., & Barrett, P. T. (1987). Parental characteristics and partner choice: Some evidence for Oedipal imprinting. Journal of Biosocial Science, 19, 157-161.
94. Wolf, A. P. (1993). Westermarck redivivus. Annual Review of Anthropology, 22, 157-175.
95. Wolf, A. P. (1995). Sexual attraction and childhood association: A Chinese brief for Edward Westermarck. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
96. Zajonc, R. B., Adelmann, P. K., Murphy, S. T., & Niendenthal, P. M. (1987). Convergence in the physical appearance of spouses. Motivation and Emotion, 11, 335-346.
97. Zei, G., Astolfi, P., & Jayakar, S. D. (1983). Correlation between father's age and husband's age: A case of imprinting. Journal of Biosocial Science, 15, 116-117.