Human perception of fighting ability: Facial cues predict winners and losers in mixed martial arts fights

Behavioral Ecology

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1470-1475

  Little, Anthony C ^a   Třebický, Vít ^b   Havlíček, Jan ^c   Roberts, S Craig ^a   Kleisner, Karel ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

^b Department of Philosophy and History of Sciences ^*  (United Kingdom)

^c CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

competition; face appearance; fighting; intrasexual; violence

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; ANTAGONISM; DECISION MAKING; FIGHTING; INTRASEXUAL INTERACTION; PERCEPTION; VIOLENCE; VISUAL CUE;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84950977161     PISSN: 10452249     EISSN: 14657279     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/beheco/arv089     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Andersson M. 1994. Sexual selection. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
2. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. 2014. lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R Package Version 1.1-7. http://CRAN.Rproject. org/package=lme4.
3. Bergman TJ, Ho L, Beehner JC. 2009. Chest color and social status in male geladas (Theropithecus gelada). Int J Primatol. 30:791-806.
4. Carre JM, McCormick CM. 2008. In your face: facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players. Proc Biol Sci. 275:2651-2656.
5. Carre JM, McCormick CM, Mondloch CJ. 2009. Facial structure is a reliable cue of aggressive behavior. Psychol Sci. 20:1194-1198.
6. Chagnon N. 1983. Yanomamo: the fierce people. 3rd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
7. Doll LM, Hill AK, Rotella MA, Cardenas RA, Welling LLM, Wheatley JR, Puts DA. 2014. How well do mens faces and voices index mate quality and dominance? Hum Nat. 25:200-212.
8. Enquist M, Leimar O. 1983. Evolution of fighting behaviour: decision rules and assessment of relative strength. J Theor Biol. 102:387-410.
9. Fink B, Neave N, Seydel H. 2007. Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women. Am J Hum Biol. 19:82-87.
10. Gosling LM, Atkinson NW, Dunn S, Collins SA. 1996. The response of subordinate male mice to scent marks varies in relation to their own competitive ability. Anim Behav. 52:1185-1191.
11. Hazlett BA. 1996. Assessments during shell exchanges by the hermit crab Clibanarius vittatus: the complete negotiator. Anim Behav. 51:567-573.
12. Kokko H, Brooks R, Jennions MD, Morley J. 2003. The evolution of mate choice and mating biases. Proc Biol Sci. 270:653-664.
13. Krebs JR, Davies NB. 1998. Behavioural ecology: an evolutionary approach. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
14. Little AC, DeBruine LM, Jones BC. 2013. Environment contingent preferences: exposure to visual cues of direct male-male competition and wealth increase womens preferences for masculinity in male faces. Evo Hum Behav. 34:193-200.
15. Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. 2011. Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 366:1638-1659.
16. Parker GA. 1974. Assessment strategy and evolution of fighting behavior. J Theor Biol. 47:223-243.
17. Patton J. 2000. Reciprocal altruism and warfare: a case from the Ecuadorian Amazon. In: Cronk L, Chagnon N, Irons W, editors. Adaptation and human behavior: an anthropological perspective. Hawthorne (NY): Aldine de Gruyter. p. 417-436.
18. Perrett DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak IS, Rowland DR, Yoshikawa S, Burt DM, Henzi SP, Castles DL, Akamatsu S. 1998. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature. 394:884-887.
19. Plavcan M, Van Schaik C. 1997. Interpreting hominid behavior on the basis of sexual dimorphism. J Hum Evol. 32:345-374.
20. Pound N, Penton-Voak IS, Surridge AK. 2009. Testosterone responses to competition in men are related to facial masculinity. Proc Biol Sci. 276:153-159.
21. Puts DA. 2010. Beauty and the beast: mechanisms of sexual selection in humans. Evo Hum Behav. 31:157-175.
22. Puts DA, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. 2012. Sexual selection on human faces and voices. J Sex Res. 49:227-243.
23. von Rueden C, Gurven M, Kaplan H. 2008. The multiple dimensions of male social status in an Amazonian society. Evol Hum Behav. 29:402-415.
24. Sell A, Bryant GA, Cosmides L, Tooby J, Sznycer D, von Rueden C, Krauss A, Gurven M. 2010. Adaptations in humans for assessing physical strength from the voice. Proc Biol Sci. 277:3509-3518.
25. Sell A, Cosmides L, Tooby J, Sznycer D, von Rueden C, Gurven M. 2009. Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face. Proc Biol Sci. 276:575-584.
26. Sell A, Hone LSE, Pound N. 2012. The importance of physical strength to human males. Hum Nat. 23:30-44.
27. Stirrat M, Stulp G, Pollet TV. 2012. Male facial width is associated with death by contact violence: narrow-faced males are more likely to die from contact violence. Evo Hum Behav. 33:551-556.
28. R Core Team. 2013. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available from: http://www.R-project.org/.
29. Tibbetts EA, Dale J. 2004. A socially enforced signal of quality in a paper wasp. Nature. 432:218-222.
30. Trebicky V, Fialova J, Kleisner K, Roberts SC, Little AC, Havlicek J. 2015. Further evidence for links between facial width-to-height ratio and fighting success: commentary on Zilioli et al. Aggress Behav. 41:331-334.
31. Trebicky V, Havlicek J, Roberts SC, Little AC, Kleisner K. 2013. Perceived aggressiveness predicts fighting performance in mixed-martial-arts fighters. Psychol Sci. 24:1664-1672.
32. Zilioli S, Sell AN, Stirrat M, Jagor J, Vickerman W, Watson NV, Jagore J. 2015. Face of a fighter: bizygomatic width as a cue of formidability. Aggress Behav. 41:322-330.