Attractiveness

Attractiveness

1. Intro

   • Evolution selects for behaviours which are ultimately going to benefit reproduction.
     • Choosing "good traits" may benefit reproductive success for themselves directly or it may affect their offspring
     • Unequal parental investment results in males and females having different priorities in a relationship = different things are attractive

2. Youth

   • More likely to be socially and economically stable with age
   • Buss (1989): there is a female preference for men on average 4 years older across cultures
   • Kenrick & Keefe (1992): on average females marry men 5 years older whilst men preferred an increasing age gap as they age
   • Jaeger (2011): men and women with more attractive faces are more likely to get married younger

3. Height

   • Pawlowski et al (2000): height is significantly associated with the likelihood of marriage and kids in 4000 polish men

4. Body Shape

   • Horvarth (1979): shoulder width has been associated with attractiveness
   • Maisey et al (1999): waist-chest ratio; narrow waist and broad shoulders is most attractive
   • Faurie et al (2004): the more athletic/sporty the males were, the more sexual partners they had had
   • Shoup et al (2008): attractive faced males = more masculine SHR, increased grip strength and more sexual partners
   • Singh et al (2010): across cultures, participants selected women with low WHR
   • Koscinski et al (2010): 0.7 WHR was preferred by both males and females but BMI was found to be twice as important as WHR
   • Dixon et al (2011): men looked first at breasts or waist. Females with a WHR of 0.7 were rated most attractive regardless of breast size

5. Facial Attractiveness

   • Saxon et al (2011): adolescents judged faces high in averageness, symmetry and femininity to be the most attractive
   • Halsey et al (2012): alcohol dosed participants are less able to judge asymmetry cues
   • Goelle et al (2014): happier faces compensate for relative unattractiveness (attractiveness also influences happiness evaluations)
   • Pham et al (2014): males who perceive their partner as particularly attractive have sex more often if their partner has more male friends or coworkers (higher number of potential threats)

6. Money

   • Buss (1999): women valued financial prospects twice as highly as men
   • Kenrick (1990): acceptable income from dating through to marriage increases for both males and females; BUT females consistently higher
   • Betzig (1989): women significantly more likely to end relationships with males who become unemployed, lack career motivation or show laziness
   • Townsend & Levy (1990a): socioeconomic status was more influential than physical attractiveness in females
     • 1987: high status females still want a male of equal, if not higher, status

7. Short vs Long Term

   • Little & Jones (2012): for short term relationships, women prefer masculinity when fertility is high
   • Quist et al (2012): women reporting short term interest had a stronger attraction to symmetry
   • Conway et al (2010): women prefer more feminine men for long term relationships and more masculine for short term
     • Gildersleeve, Haselton & Fales (2014): meta-analysis revealed ovulatory cyclic shifts in masculinity preferences for short term versus long term partners
       • Woods & Carden (2014): released their own meta-analysis showing null results. Very critical of Gildersleeve, Haselton & Flales' study
   • Note: women prefer femininity for long term relationships but when they are most fertile they prefer masculinity; if they are in a LT relationship this doesn't matter much but for a one night stand it increases the likelihood of healthy offspring (masculinity = health)

8. Other Social Cues

   • Little (2014): general agreement on what is "attractive" (e.g. symmetry, body shape, sexual dimorphism) but if a specific trait could be beneficial to the receiver then ultimately it will be attractive to them
   • Swami (2010): participants who were provided with positive personality attributes perceived a wider range of body sizes as physically attractive. Negative information; a narrower range was perceived as attractive
   • Quist et al (2012) females rate masculine men as more attractive when they are labelled "faithful" versus "unfaithful
   • Dunn & Doria (2010): participants rated models more attractive when given positive information about them (e.g. they are made socially desirable)
   • NOTE: it was initially assumed that women dont signal ovulation or fertility (compared to other animals!); this could be due to the benefits of increased bonding from mating throughout the month
     • Miller, Tybur & Jordan (2005): lap dancers tips increased during fertility versus those who were on the pill throughout the month (e.g. those who didn't ovulate); possible evidence that women do display subtle fertility cues

9. Why?

   • Pfluger et al (2012): investigated women who never used hormonal contraceptives; those who were rated as "more attractive" went on to have more children (reproductive fitness is reflected in faces?)
   • Koziel et al (2010): men with tattoos and piercings were rated as more physically symmetrical (possible exposure to disease illustrates health)
   • Pawlowski & Dunbar (2005): WHR correlates with first child birth weight (predictor of survival)
   • Honekopp et al (2004): physical facial attractiveness (measured by symmetry) correlated with physical fitness)
     • Shackelford & Larsen (1999): facial asymmetry related to self-report mental and physical health problems
   • Tybur & Gangestad (2011): review concludes that health is valuable in mates and attractive features indicate health