Like father, like self: Emotional closeness to father predicts women's preferences for self-resemblance in opposite-sex faces

Evolution and Human Behavior

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 70-75

  Watkins, Christopher D ^a   DeBruine, Lisa M ^a   Smith, Finlay G ^a   Jones, Benedict C ^a   Vukovic, Jovana ^a   Fraccaro, Paul ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Faces; Familial imprinting; Inclusive fitness; Kin recognition; Optimal outbreeding; Phenotype matching; Self resemblance; Sex contingent face processing

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649947960     PISSN: 10905138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Arrindell W.A., Sanavio E., Aguilar G., Sica C., Hatzichristou C., Eisemann M., Recinos L.A., Gaszner P., Peter M., Battagliese G., Kallai J., van der Ende J. The development of a short form of the EMBU: Its appraisal with students in Greece, Guatemala, Hungary and Italy. Personality and Individual Differences 1999, 27:613-628.
2. Bateson P. Preferences for cousins in Japanese quail. Nature 1982, 295:236-237.
3. Bereczkei T., Gyuris P., Koves P., Bernáth L. Homogamy, genetic similarity, and imprinting; parental influence on mate choice preferences. Personality and Individual Differences 2002, 33:677-690.
4. Bereczkei T., Gyuris P., Weisfeld G.E. Sexual imprinting in human mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2004, 271:1129-1134.
5. Bereczkei T., Hegedus G., Hajnal G. Facialmetric similarities mediate mate choice: Sexual imprinting on opposite-sex parents. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological sciences 2009, 276:91-98.
6. Bestelmeyer P.E., Jones B.C., DeBruine L.M., Little A.C., Perrett D.I., Schneider A., et al. Sex-contingent face aftereffects depend on perceptual category rather than structural encoding. Cognition 2008, 107:353-365.
7. Bestelmeyer P.E., Jones B.C., DeBruine L.M., Little A.C., Welling L.L.M. Face aftereffects demonstrate interdependent processing of expressions and the invariant characteristics of sex and race. Visual Cognition 2010, 18:255-274.
8. Brédart S., French R.M. Do Babies Resemble Their Fathers More Than Their Mothers? A Failure to Replicate Christenfeld and Hill (1995). Evolution and Human Behavior 1999, 20:129-135.
9. Bressan P., Dal Martello M.F. Talis pater, talis filius: Perceived resemblance and the belief in genetic relatedness. Psychological Science 2002, 13:213-218.
10. Bressan P., Grassi M. Parental resemblance in one-year-olds and the Gaussian curve. Evolution and Human Behavior 2004, 25:133-141.
11. Bressan P., Zucchi G. Human kin recognition is self rather than family-referential. Biology Letters 2009, 5:336-338.
12. DeBruine L.M. Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2002, 269:1307-1312.
13. DeBruine L.M. Facial resemblance increases the attractiveness of same sex more than other sex faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2004, 271:2085-2090.
14. DeBruine L.M. Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2005, 272:919-922.
15. DeBruine L.M., Jones B.C., Little A.C., Perrett D.I. Social Perception of Facial Resemblance in Humans. Archives of Sexual Behavior 2008, 37:64-77.
16. Hall S.S. Paternal influences on daughters' heterosexual relationship socialization: Attachment styles and dispositions toward marriage. Family Science Review 2009, 14:1-17.
17. Hamilton W.D. The genetical evolution of social behaviour. International Journal of Theoretical Biology 1964, 7:1-16.
18. Hauber M.E., Sherman P.W. Self-referent phenotype matching: Theoretical considerations and empirical evidence. Trends in Neurosciences 2001, 24:609-616.
19. Irwin D.E., Price T. Sexual imprinting, learning and speciation. Heredity 1999, 82:347-354.
20. Jaquet E., Rhodes G. Face aftereffects indicate dissociable, but not distinct, coding of male and female faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 2008, 34:101-112.
21. Jedlicka D. A test of the psychoanalytic theory of mate selection. Journal of Social Psychology 1980, 112:295-299.
22. Jones B.C., DeBruine L.M., Little A.C., Feinberg D.R. The valence of experience with faces influences generalized preferences. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 2007, 5:119-129.
23. Kendrick K.M., Hinton M.R., Atkins K. Mothers determine male sexual preferences. Nature 1998, 395:229-230.
24. Krupp D.B., DeBruine L.M., Barclay P. A cue of kinship promotes cooperation for the public good. Evolution and Human Behavior 2008, 29:49-55.
25. Little A.C., DeBruine L.M., Jones B.C. Sex-contingent face after-effects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2005, 272:2283-2287.
26. Little A.C., Penton-Voak I.S., Burt D.M., Perrett D.I. Investigating an imprinting-like phenomenon in humans: Partners and opposite-sex parents have similar hair and eye colour. Evolution and Human Behavior 2003, 24:43-51.
27. Mateo J.M. Recognition systems and biological organization: The perception component of social recognition. Annals Zoologica Fennici 2004, 41:729-745.
28. Mateo J.M., Johnston R.E. Kin recognition by self-referent phenotype matching: Weighing the evidence. Animal Cognition 2003, 6:73-76.
29. Nesse R.M., Silverman A., Bortz A. Sex differences in ability to recognize family resemblance. Ethology and Sociobiology 1990, 11:11-21.
30. Oda R., Matsumoto-Oda A., Kurashima O. Facial resemblance of Japanese children to their parents. Journal of Ethology 2002, 20:81-85.
31. Parker G., Tupling H., Brown L.B. A Parental Bonding Instrument. British Journal of Medical Psychology 1979, 52:1-10.
32. Penton-Voak I.S., Perrett D.I., Peirce J.W. Computer graphic studies of the role of facial similarity in judgments of attractiveness. Current Psychology 1999, 18:104-117.
33. Perrett D.I., Penton-Voak I.S., Little A.C., Tiddeman B.P., Burt D.M., Schmidt N., et al. Facial attractiveness judgments reflect learning of parental age characteristics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 2002, 269:873-880.
34. Platek S.M., Kemp S.M. Is family special to the brain? An event-related fMRI study of familiar, familial, and self-face recognition. Neuropsychologia 2009, 47:849-858.
35. Saxton T.K., Little A.C., Rowland H.M., Gao T., Roberts S.C. Trade-offs between markers of absolute and relative quality in human facial preferences. Behavioral Ecology 2009, 20:1133-1137.
36. Wiszewska A., Pawlowski B., Boothroyd L.G. Father-daughter relationship as a moderator of sexual imprinting: A facialmetric study. Evolution and Human Behavior 2007, 28:248-252.