Is Beauty in the Face of the Beholder?

PLoS ONE

Volumn 8, Issue 7, 2013, Pages

  Laeng, Bruno ^a   Vermeer, Oddrun ^b   Sulutvedt, Unni ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TROMSØ   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; ETHNIC GROUP; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; NORWEGIAN; PERCEPTION; PHENOTYPE; PHYSICAL ATTRACTIVENESS; SIGNAL DETECTION; VISUAL MEMORY;

ADULT; BEAUTY; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FACE; FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; PHENOTYPE; SELF CONCEPT; SEXUAL PARTNERS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84880032293     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0068395     Document Type: Article

References (112)

1. Rhodes G, (2006) The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology 57: 199-226.
2. Sugyama L (2005) Physical attractiveness in adaptationist perspective. In Buss, D.M. (editor), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
3. Cunningham MR, Roberts AR, Barbee AP, Druen PB, Wu CH, (1995) "Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours": consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68: 261-279.
4. Frost P, (2008) Sexual selection and human geographic variation, Special Issue: Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Meeting of the NorthEastern Evolutionary Psychology Society. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology 2: 169-191.
5. Bateson P (1983) Optimal outbreeding. In P. Bateson (ed.), Mate choice. Cambridge University Press. 257-277.
6. Zhu QY, Song S, Hu X, Li M, Tian Z, et al. (2009) Heritability of the specific cognitive ability of face perception, Current Biology. 20: 137-142.
7. Leopold DA, O'Toole AJ, Vetter T, Blanz V, (2001) Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects. Nature Neuroscience 4: 89-94.
8. Morton J, Johnson MH, (1991) CONSPEC and CONLERN: A Two-Process Theory of Infant Face Recognition. Psychological Review 98: 164-181.
9. Currie TE, Little AC, (2009) The relative importance of the face and body in judgments of human physical attractiveness. Evolution and human behavior 30: 409-416.
10. Peters M, Rhodes G, Simmons L W, (2007) Contributions of the face and body to overall attractiveness. Animal Behavior 73: 937-942.
11. Alvarez L, Jaffe K, (2004) Narcissism guides mate selection: Humans mate assortatively, as revealed by facial resemblance, following an algorithm of "self seeking like". Evolutionary Psychology 2: 177-194.
12. Bovet J, Barthes J, Durand V, Raymond M, Alvergne A, (2012) Men's preference for women's facial features: testing homogamy and the paternity uncertainty hypothesis. PloSOne 7: e49791.
13. Nojo S, Tamura S, Ihara Y, (2012) Human homogamy in facial characteristics. Does a sexual-imprinting-like mechanism play a role? Human Nature 23: 323-340.
14. Mateo JM, Johnston RE, (2003) Kin recognition by self-referent phenotype matching: Weighing the evidence. Animal Cognition 6: 73-76.
15. 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.
16. Bereczkei T, Gyuris P, Weisfeld GE, (2004) Sexual imprinting in human mate choice. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 271: 1129-1134.
17. Bereczkei T (2007) Parental impacts on development: How proximate factors mediate adaptive plans. In R.I.M. Dunbar and L. Barrett (editors), Oxford Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18. Hinsz VB, (1989) Facial resemblance in engaged and married couples. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 6: 223-229.
19. Jedlicka D, (1980) A test of the psychoanalytic theory of mate selection. Journal of Social Psychology 112: 295-299.
20. Jedlicka D (1984) Indirect parental influence on mate choice: A test of the Psychoanalytic Theory. Journal of Marriage and the Family 46 65-70.
21. Moreland RL, Zajonc RB, (1982) Exposure effects in person perception: Familiarity, similarity, and attraction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 18: 395-415.
22. Price RA, Vanderberg SG, (1980) Spouse similarity in American and Swedish couples. Behavior Genetics 10: 59-71.
23. Spuhler JN, (1968) Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Eugenics Quarterly 2: 128-140.
24. Zajonc R, Adelmann P, Murphy S, Niedenthal P, (1987) Convergence in the physical appearance of spouses. Motivation and emotion 11: 335-346.
25. Platek SM, Thomson JW, (2007) Facial resemblance exaggerates sex-specific jealousy-based decisions. Evolutionary Psychology 5: 223-231.
26. Fisher RA, (1918) The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance. Transaction of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 52: 399-433.
27. Thiessen D, Gregg B, (1980) Human assortative mating and genetic equilibrium: An evolutionary perspective. Ethology and Sociobiology 1: 111-140.
28. Bovet J, Barthes J, Durand V, Raymond M, Alvergne A, (2012) Men's Preference for Women's Facial Features: Testing Homogamy and the Paternity Uncertainty Hypothesis. PLoS ONE 7: e49791.
29. Laeng B, Mathisen R, Johnsen JA, (2007) Why do blue-eyed men prefer women with the same eye color? Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61: 371-382.
30. Helgason A, Pálsson S, Gu{eth}bjartsson DF, Kristjánsson {Thorn}, Stefánsson K, (2008) An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples. Science 319: 813-816.
31. Tregenza T, Wedell N, (2000) Genetic compatibility, mate choice and patterns of parentage: invited review. Molecular Ecology 9: 1013-27.
32. van den Berghe P, (1983) Human inbreeding avoidance: Culture in nature. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6: 91-123.
33. Rantala MJ, Marcinkowska UM, (2011) The role of sexual imprinting and the Westermark effect in mate choice in humans. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 65: 859-873.
34. Lie HC, Simmons LW, Rhodes G, (2010) Genetic dissimilarity, genetic diversity, and mate preferences in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior 31: 48-58.
35. Fraley RC, Marks MJ, (2010) Westermarck, Freud, and the Incest Taboo: Does Familial Resemblance Activate Sexual Attraction? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 36: 1202-1212.
36. Miller GF, Todd PM, (1998) Mate choice turns cognitive. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2: 190-198.
37. Bandura A, (1982) The psychology of chance encounters and life paths. American Psychologist 37: 747-755.
38. Verosky SC, Todorov A, (2010) Generalization of affective learning about faces to perceptually similar faces. Psychological Science 21: 779-785.
39. Li NP, Bailey JM, Kenrick DT, Linsenmeier JAW, (2002) The necessities and luxuries of mate preferences: Testing the tradeoffs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82: 947-955.
40. Schyns PG, Bonnar L, Gosselin F, (2002) Show me the features! Understanding recognition from the use of visual information. Psychological Science 13: 402-409.
41. Tyler CW, Chen CC, (2006) Spatial summation of face information. Journal of Vision 6: 1117-1125.
42. Murstein BI, (1972) Physical attractiveness and marital choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 22: 8-12.
43. McKillip J, Riedel SL, (1983) External validity of matching on physical attractiveness for same and opposite sex couples. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 13: 328-337.
44. Feingold A, (1988) Matching for attractiveness in romantic partners and same-sex friends: A meta-analysis and theoretical critique. Psychological Bulletin 104: 226-235.
45. Buston PM, Emlen ST, (2003) Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: The relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society. PNAS 100: 8805-8810.
46. Huston TL, (1973) Ambiguity of acceptance, social desirability, and dating choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9: 32-42.
47. Todd PM, Penke L, Fasolo B, Lenton AP, (2007) Different cognitive processes underlie human mate choices and mate preferences. PNAS 104: 15011-15016.
48. Turk DJ, Heatherton TF, Kelley WM, Funnell MG, Gazzaniga MS, et al. (2002) Mike or me? Self-recognition in a split-brain patient. Nature Neuroscience 5: 841-842.
49. Watkins CD, DeBruine LM, Smith FG, Jones BC, Vukovic J, et al. (2012) Like father, like self: Emotional closeness to father predicts women's preferences for self-resemblance in opposite-sex faces. Evolution and Human Behavior 32: 70-75.
50. Alexander RD, (1990) Epigenetic rules and Darwinian Algorithms. Ethology and Sociobiology 11: 241-303.
51. Cosmides L, Tooby P, (1994) Beyond intuition and instinct blindness: Toward an evolutionary rigorous cognitive science. Cognition 50: 41-77.
52. Hassin RR, (2013) Yes it can: On the functional abilities of the human unconscious. Perspectives on Psychological Science 8: 195-207.
53. Dimberg U, Thunberg M, Elmehed K, (2000) Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science 11: 86-89.
54. Berridge K C, Winkielman P, (2003) What is an unconscious emotion? (The case for unconscious "liking"). Cognition & Emotion 17: 181-211.
55. Laeng B, (2010) Profeti I, Saether L, Adolfsdottir S, Lundervold AJ, et al. (2010) Invisible expressions evoke core impressions. Emotion 10: 573-586.
56. McDonald PR, Slater AM, Longmore CA, (2008) Covert detection of attractiveness among the neurologically intact: Evidence from skin-conductance responses. Perception 37: 1054-1060.
57. Ferguson MJ, Zayas V, (2009) Automatic evaluation. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18: 362-366.
58. Monahan JL, Murphy ST, Zajonc RB, (2000) Subliminal mere exposure: Specific, General, and Diffuse Effects. Psychological Science 11: 462-466.
59. Jiang Y, Costello P, Fang F, Huang M, He S, (2006) A gender- and sexual orientation-dependent spatial attentional effect of invisible images. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103: 17048-17052.
60. Shimojo S, Simion C, Shimojo, Scheier C, (2003) Gaze bias both reflects and influences preferences. Nature Neuroscience 6: 1317-1322.
61. Platek SM, (2002) Unconscious reactions to children's faces: The effect of resemblance. Evolution and Cognition 8: 207-214.
62. Platek SM, Critton SR, Burch RL, Frederick DA, Myers TE, et al. (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.
63. Ortigue S, Bianchi-Demicheli F, Hamilton AF, de C, Grafton SC, (2007) The neural basis of love as a subliminal prime: An event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19: 1218-1230.
64. Platek SM, Kemp SM, (2009) Is family special to the brain? An event-related fMRI study of familiar, familial, and self-face recognition. Neuropsychologia 47: 849-858.
65. Seth AK, Dienes Z, Cleeremans A, Overgaard M, Pessoa L, (2008) Measuring consciousness: Relating behavioural and neurophysiological approaches. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12: 314-321.
66. Mangan B, (1993) Taking phenomenology seriously: The "fringe" and its implications for cognitive research. Consciousness and Cognition 2: 89-108.
67. Cheesman J, Merikle PM, (1984) Priming with and without awareness. Perception & Psychophysics 36: 387-395.
68. Merikle PM, Smilek D, Eastwood JD, (2001) Perception without awareness: Perspectives from cognitive psychology. Cognition 79: 115-134.
69. Macmillan NA, Creelman CD (2004) Detection theory: A user's guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.
70. Penton-Voak I S, Perrett D I, Peirce JW, (1999) Computer graphic studies of the role of facial similarity in judgments of attractiveness. Current Psychology 18: 104-117.
71. Berscheid E, Dion K, Walster E, Walster GW, (1971) Physical attractiveness and dating choice: A test of the matching hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 7: 173-189.
72. Folkes VS, (1982) Forming relationships and the matching hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 8: 631-636.
73. Kalick SM, Hamilton III TE, (1986) The matching hypothesis reexamined. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51: 673-682.
74. Burley N, (1982) The meaning of assortative mating. Ethology and Sociobiology 4: 191-203.
75. Noë R, Hammerstein P, (1995) Biological markets. TREE Perspectives 10: 338-339.
76. Platek SM, Raines DM, Gallup GG Jr, Mohamed FB, Thomson JW, 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.
77. Kaminski G, Dridi S, Graff C, Gentaz E, (2009) Human ability to detect kinship in strangers' faces: Effects of degree of relatedeness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London - B 276: 3193-3200.
78. Parr LA, de Waal FBM, (1999) Visual kin recognition in chimpanzees. Nature 399: 647-648.
79. Pascalis O, de Haan M, Nelson CA, (2002) Is face processing species-specific during the first year of life. Science 296: 1321-1323.
80. Scott LS, Monesson A, (2009) The origin of biases in face perception. Psychological Science 20: 676-680.
81. Mita TH, Dermer M, Knight J, (1977) Reversed facial images and the mere-exposure hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35: 597-601.
82. Lieberman D, Tooby J, Cosmides L, (2007) The architecture of human kin detection. Nature 445: 727-731.
83. Tramm N, Servedio M, (2008) Evolution of mate-choice imprinting: competing strategies. Evolution 62: 1991-2003.
84. Amsterdam B, (1972) Mirror self-image reactions before age two. Developmental Psychobiology 5: 297-305.
85. Gallup GG Jr, (1970) Chimpanzees: Self Recognition. Science 167: 86-87.
86. Plotnik JM, de Waal FBM, Reiss D, (2006) Self-recognition in an Asian elephant. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences USA 103: 17053-17057.
87. Reiss D, Marino L, (2001) Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 98: 5937-5942.
88. Keenan JP, Gallup GG Jr, Falk D (2003) The face in the mirror: The search for the origins of consciousness. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
89. Buss DM, (1985) Human mate selection. American Scientist 73: 47-51.
90. Hamilton WD, (1964) The genetical evolution of social behaviour I, II. Journal of Theoretical Biology 7: 1-52.
91. Jones D, Hill K, (1996) Criteria of physical attractiveness in five populations. Human Nature 4: 271-296.
92. Kleven O, Jacobsen F, Robertson RJ, Lifield JT, (2005) Extrapair mating between relatives in the barn swallow: a role for kin selection? Biology Letters 1: 389-392.
93. McGraw KJ (2002) Environmental predictors of human variation in human mating preferences. Ethology, 108, 303-317.
94. Alexander RD (1979) Darwinism and human affairs. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.
95. Epstein E, Guttman R, (1984) Mate selection in man: evidence, theory, and outcome. Social Biology 31: 243-78.
96. Blomqvist D, Andersson M, Küpper C, Cuthill IC, Kis J, et al. (2002) Genetic similarity between mates and extra-pair parentage in three species of songbirds. Nature 419: 613-615.
97. Lihoreau M, Zimmer C, Rivault C, (2008) Mutual mate choice: When it pays both sexes to avoid inbreeding. PloS One 3: e3365.
98. Penn D, Potts W, (1999) The evolution of mating preferences and major histocompatibility complex genes. American Naturalist 153: 145-164.
99. Cohen LB, Dearborn DC, (2004) Great frigatebirds, Fregata minor, choose mates that are genetically similar. Animal Behavior 68: 1229-1236.
100. Edmands S, (2007) Between a rock and a hard place: evaluating the relative risks of inbreeding and outbreeding for conservation and management. Molecular Ecology 16: 463-475.
101. Liljedah S, Rudolfsen G, Folstad I, (2008) Factors predicting male fertilization success in an external fertilizer. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 62: 1805-1811.
102. Ratti O, Hovi M, Lundberg A, Tegelstrom H, Alatalo RV, (1995) Extra-pair paternity and male characteristics in the Pied Flycatcher. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 37: 419-425.
103. Bentler PM, Newcomb MD, (1978) Longitudinal study of marital success and failure. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 40: 1053-1070.
104. Garcia LT, Markey C, (2007) Matching in sexual experience for married, cohabiting, and dating couples. Journal of Sex Research 44: 250-255.
105. Becker GS (1991) A treatise on the family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
106. Godoy R, Eisenberg DTA, Reyes-García V, Huancad T, Leonard WR, et al. (2008) Assortative mating and offspring well-being: theory and empirical findings from a native Amazonian society in Bolivia. Evolution and Human Behavior 29: 201-210.
107. Savoye I, Loos R, Carels C, Derom C, Vlietinck R, (1998) A genetic study of anteroposterior and vertical facial proportions using model-fitting. The Angle Orthodontist 68: 467-470.
108. Apicella CL, Marlowe FW, (2004) Perceived mate fidelity and paternal resemblance predict men's investment in children. Evolution and Human Behavior 25: 371-378.
109. Salter F, (1996) Carrier females and sender males: An evolutionary hypothesis linking female attractiveness, family resemblance, and paternity confidence. Ethology and Sociobiology 17: 211-220.
110. Saxton TK, Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Roberts SC, (2009) Adolescents' preference for sexual dimorphism are influenced by relative exposure to male and female faces. Personality and Individual Differences 47: 864-868.
111. Freyre G. (1986). The Masters and the Slaves. A study in the development of Brazilian civilization, Translated by S. Putnam, Berkeley: University of California Press.
112. Rhodes G, Zebrowitz LA (2002) Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary, cognitive and social perspectives. Westport, CT: Ablex.