Are sociable people more beautiful? A zero-acquaintance analysis of agreeableness, extraversion, and attractiveness

Journal of Research in Personality

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 293-296

  Meier, Brian P ^a   Robinson, Michael D ^b   Carter, Margaret S ^a   Hinsz, Verlin B ^b  

^a GETTYSBURG COLLEGE   (United States)

^b NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Agreeableness; Attractiveness; Extraversion; Personality; Social perception; Zero acquaintance

Indexed keywords

EID: 77950024417     PISSN: 00926566     EISSN: 10957251     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2010.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Anderoni J., Petrie R. Beauty, gender, and stereotypes: Evidence from laboratory experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology 2008, 29:73-93.
2. Baron R.M., Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 51:1173-1182.
3. Beer A., Watson D. Personality judgment at zero acquaintance: Agreement, assumed similarity, and implicit simplicity. Journal of Personality Assessment 2008, 90:250-260.
4. Boor M., Wartman S.A., Reuben D.B. Relationship of physical appearance and professional demeanor to interview evaluation and rankings of medical residency applications. The Journal of Psychology 1983, 113:61-65.
5. Borkenau P., Liebler A. Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 62:645-657.
6. Brown T.A., Cash T.F., Noles S.W. Perceptions of physical attractiveness among college students: Selected determinants and methodological matters. The Journal of Social Psychology 1986, 126:305-316.
7. Callan M.J., Powell N.G., Ellard J.H. The consequences of victim physical attractiveness on reactions to injustice: The role of observers' belief in a just world. Social Justice Research 2007, 20:433-456.
8. Dion K.K., Berscheid E. Physical attractiveness and peer perception among children. Sociometry 1974, 37:1-12.
9. Dion K.K., Berscheid E., Walster E. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1972, 24:285-290.
10. Eagly A.H., Ashmore R.D., Makhijani M.G., Longo L.C. What is beautiful is good...but: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin 1991, 110:109-128.
11. Fink B., Penton-Voak I. Evolutionary psychology of facial attractiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2002, 11:154-158.
12. Funder D.C. On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review 1995, 102:652-670.
13. Goldberg L.R. A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality psychology in Europe 1999, Vol. 7:7-28. Tilburg University Press, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
14. Goldman W., Lewis P. Beautiful is good: Evidence that the physically attractive are more socially skilled. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 1977, 13:125-130.
15. Graziano W.G., Jensen-Campbell L.A., Hair E.C. Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1996, 70:820-835.
16. Greitemeyer T. What do men and women want in a partner? Are educated partners always more desirable?. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2007, 43:180-194.
17. John O.P., Srivastava S. The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and research 1999, 102-138. Guilford, New York. 2nd ed. L.A. Pervin, O.P. John (Eds.).
18. Kenrick D.T., Funder D.C. Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate. American Psychologist 1988, 43:23-34.
19. Langlois J.H., Kalakanis L., Rubenstein A.J., Larson A., Hallam M., Smoot M. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin 2000, 126:390-423.
20. McCrae R.R., John O.P. An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality 1992, 60:175-215.
21. Mehu M., Little A.C., Dunbar R.I.M. Sex differences in the effect of smiling on social judgments: An evolutionary approach. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology 2008, 2:103-121.
22. Naumann L.P., Vazire S., Rentfrow P.J., Gosling S.D. Personality judgments based on physical appearance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2009, 35:1661-1671.
23. Rand C.S., Hall J.A. Sex differences in the accuracy of self-perceived attractiveness. Social Psychology Quarterly 1983, 46:359-363.
24. Reis H.T., Wilson I.M., Monestere C., Bernstein S., Clark K., Seidl E., et al. What is smiling is beautiful and good. European Journal of Social Psychology 1990, 20:259-267.
25. Smith S.M., McIntosh W.D., Bazzini D.G. Are the beautiful good in Hollywood? An investigation of the beauty-and-goodness stereotype on film. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 1999, 27:69-80.
26. Snyder M., Decker Tanke E., Berscheid E. Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1977, 35:656-666.
27. Townsend J.M., Levy G.D. Effects of potential partners costume and physical attractiveness on sexuality and partner selection. Journal of Psychology 1990, 124:371-389.
28. Wiggins J.S., Trobst K.K. When is a circumplex an " interpersonal circumplex" ? The case of supportive actions. Circumplex models of personality and emotions 1997, 57-80. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. R. Plutchik, H.R. Conte (Eds.).
29. Zebrowitz L.A., Collins M.A. Accurate social perceptions at zero acquaintance: The affordances of a Gibsonian approach. Personality and Social Psychology Review 1997, 3:204-223.
30. Zebrowitz L.A., Collins M.A., Dutta R. The relationship between appearance and personality across the life span. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 1998, 24:736-749.