Taking a shine to it: How the preference for glossy stems from an innate need for water

Human beings are attracted to glossy objects. However, the investigation of whether this preference for glossy is a systematic bias, and the rationale for why, has received little or no attention. Drawing on an evolutionary psychology framework, we propose and test the hypothesis that the preference for glossy stems from an innate preference for fresh water as a valuable resource. In a set of six studies we demonstrate the preference for glossy among both adults and young children (studies 1A, 1B and 2) ruling out a socialization explanation, investigate the hypothesis that the preference for glossy stems from an innate need for water as a resource (studies 3 and 5) and, in addition, rule out the more superficial account of glossy = pretty (study 4). The interplay between the different perspectives, implications of the findings and future research directions are discussed.

[1]  D. Hope,et al.  Global social skill ratings: measures of social behavior or physical attractiveness? , 1994, Behaviour research and therapy.

[2]  G. L. Lorenzo,et al.  What Is Beautiful Is Good and More Accurately Understood , 2010, Psychological science.

[3]  D. Hantula Guest editorial: Evolutionary psychology and consumption , 2003 .

[4]  S. Kaplan Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition , 1987 .

[5]  A survey of prescription label preferences among community pharmacy patrons , 1992, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[6]  I. Frieze,et al.  Attractiveness and Income for Men and Women in Management1 , 1991 .

[7]  I. Altman,et al.  Behavior and the natural environment , 1983 .

[8]  Lori A. Roggman,et al.  Facial Diversity and InfantPreferences for Attractive Faces , 1991 .

[9]  D. Buss,et al.  Evolutionary psychology. Controversies, questions, prospects, and limitations. , 2010, The American psychologist.

[10]  M. Lynn,et al.  Evolutionary Perspectives on Consumer Behavior: an Introduction , 1999 .

[11]  M. Hassenzahl,et al.  AESTHETICS IN INTERACTIVE PRODUCTS: CORRELATES AND CONSEQUENCES OF BEAUTY , 2008 .

[12]  John A. Quelch,et al.  The mass marketing of luxury , 1998 .

[13]  Katherina Danko-McGhee Favourite artworks chosen by young children in a museum setting , 2006 .

[14]  R. L. Dipboye,et al.  Sex and physical attractiveness of raters and applicants as determinants of resumé evaluations. , 1977 .

[15]  R. Ulrich View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. , 1984, Science.

[16]  S. Pinker The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature , 2002 .

[17]  E. Zube,et al.  A lifespan developmental study of landscape assessment , 1983 .

[18]  T. Purcell,et al.  Why do Preferences Differ between Scene Types? , 2001 .

[19]  M. Depledge,et al.  Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes , 2010 .

[20]  J. Bettman,et al.  Multiattribute Measurement Models and Multiattribute Attitude Theory: A Test of Construct Validity , 1975 .

[21]  Elizabeth R Schotter,et al.  Gaze bias: Selective encoding and liking effects , 2010 .

[22]  G. Butterworth,et al.  Newborn infants prefer attractive faces , 1998 .

[23]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Emotion & design: attractive things work better , 2002, INTR.

[24]  J. Luttik The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands , 2000 .

[25]  Michael Pointer,et al.  Measurement of appearance , 2002, Other Conferences.

[26]  Gad Saad,et al.  Applications of evolutionary psychology in marketing , 2000 .

[27]  Vladas Griskevicius,et al.  Fundamental motives: How evolutionary needs influence consumer behavior , 2013 .

[28]  Merle Crawford,et al.  Design that sells and sells and , 1992 .

[29]  Jonah Berger,et al.  Subtle Signals of Inconspicuous Consumption , 2008 .

[30]  R. Millward,et al.  The Experience of Landscape , 1988 .

[31]  R. Ulrich Natural Versus Urban Scenes , 1981 .

[32]  Chad Ebesutani,et al.  Phasic alerting and spatial orienting interact under peripheral but not central cuing conditions: Evidence for a selective enhancement of sensory processing , 2004 .

[33]  S. Shimojo,et al.  Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference , 2003, Nature Neuroscience.

[34]  A. Feingold Good-looking people are not what we think. , 1992 .

[35]  Ke-Tsung Han Responses to Six Major Terrestrial Biomes in Terms of Scenic Beauty, Preference, and Restorativeness , 2007 .

[36]  Keith Roe,et al.  Can buy me love: Mate attraction goals lead to perceptual readiness for status products , 2011 .

[37]  L. Cosmides,et al.  The Adapted mind : evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture , 1992 .

[38]  J. Lang Infants ' Differential Social Responses to Attractive and Unattractive Faces , 1990 .

[39]  Xiaoping Hu,et al.  Art for reward's sake: Visual art recruits the ventral striatum , 2011, NeuroImage.

[40]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Part-Whole Question Sequences: A Conversational Logic Analysis , 1991 .

[41]  T. Love,et al.  Path-dependent Foundation of Global Design-driven Outdoor Trade in the Northwest of England , 2007 .

[42]  Vladas Griskevicius,et al.  The Many Shades of Rose-Colored Glasses: An Evolutionary Approach to the Influence of Different Positive Emotions , 2010 .

[43]  Joan Meyers-Levy,et al.  The Influence of Self-View on Context Effects: How Display Fixtures Can Affect Product Evaluations , 2009 .

[44]  D. Buss The handbook of evolutionary psychology. , 2015 .

[45]  R. Hickman The Art Instinct: Beauty, Pleasure, and Human Evolution , 2010 .

[46]  Ian Yeoman,et al.  Trading Up: The New American Luxury , 2004 .

[47]  F. Bernáldez,et al.  Children's landscape preferences: From rejection to attraction , 1987 .

[48]  John Tooby,et al.  Better than rational: Evolutionary psychology and the invisible hand , 1994 .

[49]  R W Newman,et al.  Why man is such a sweaty and thirsty naked animal: a speculative review. , 1970, Human biology.

[50]  J. Fagan,et al.  Chapter 4 – Early Visual Selectivity: As a Function of Pattern Variables, Previous Exposure, Age from Birth and Conception, and Expected Cognitive Deficit , 1975 .

[51]  V. Baladandayuthapani,et al.  Undertaking an Art Survey to Compare Patient Versus Student Art Preferences , 2008 .

[52]  G. Saad,et al.  Applying evolutionary psychology in understanding the representation of women in advertisements , 2004 .

[53]  Eckart Lange,et al.  A comment on the market value of a room with a view , 2001 .

[54]  Patricia Tarr Aesthetic Codes in Early Childhood Classrooms: What Art Educators Can Learn from Reggio Emilia , 2001 .

[55]  Patrick Hartmann,et al.  Beyond savanna: An evolutionary and environmental psychology approach to behavioral effects of nature scenery in green advertising , 2010 .

[56]  R. Mccall,et al.  Complexity, Contour, and Area as Determinants of Attention in Infants. , 1970 .

[57]  Henrik Walter,et al.  Cultural objects modulate reward circuitry , 2002, Neuroreport.

[58]  E. Berscheid,et al.  What is beautiful is good. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[59]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective , 1989 .

[60]  E. Berscheid,et al.  Physical Attractiveness and Peer Perception Among Children , 1974 .

[61]  J. Zaichkowsky,et al.  Aesthetic package design: A behavioral, neural, and psychological investigation , 2010 .

[62]  A. Eagly,et al.  What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. , 1991 .

[63]  C. Townsend,et al.  Self-Affirmation through the Choice of Highly Aesthetic Products , 2012 .

[64]  Tanya Rosenblat,et al.  Why Beauty Matters ∗ , 2005 .

[65]  E. Lyons Demographic Correlates of Landscape Preference , 1983 .

[66]  K. H. Stauder,et al.  Psychology of the Child , 1959 .

[67]  Karen B. Schloss,et al.  Visual aesthetics and human preference. , 2013, Annual review of psychology.

[68]  G. Orians,et al.  Evolved responses to landscapes. , 1992 .

[69]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience? , 2004, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[70]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Priming and communication: Social determinants of information use in judgments of life satisfaction , 1988 .

[71]  F. d’Errico,et al.  An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language. , 2001, Journal of human evolution.

[72]  Mark Cypher,et al.  Biophilia , 1984 .

[73]  Todd J. Arnold,et al.  Individual Differences in the Centrality of Visual Product Aesthetics: Concept and Measurement , 2003 .

[74]  Gad Saad,et al.  Research DialogueEvolutionary consumption , 2013 .

[75]  Kenneth D. Bahn,et al.  Developmental Recognition of Consumption Symbolism , 1982 .

[76]  R. Coss,et al.  All That Glistens: II. The Effects of Reflective Surface Finishes on the Mouthing Activity of Infants and Toddlers , 2003 .

[77]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  The science of art: A neurological theory of aesthetic experience , 1999 .

[78]  Elaine P. Gelineau A Psychometric Approach to the Measurement of Color Preference , 1981, Perceptual and motor skills.

[79]  Clive Nancarrow,et al.  Impulse purchasing: a qualitative exploration of the phenomenon , 1998 .

[80]  Spent: Sex, evolution, and consumer behavior , 2009, Politics and the Life Sciences.

[81]  Stephen M. Colarelli,et al.  Intuitive evolutionary perspectives in marketing practices1 , 2003 .

[82]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. , 2014, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[83]  T. R. Herzog,et al.  A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes , 1985 .

[84]  L. Tyrväinen,et al.  Favorite green, waterside and urban environments, restorative experiences and perceived health in Finland. , 2010, Health promotion international.

[85]  G. Obein,et al.  Difference scaling of gloss: nonlinearity, binocularity, and constancy. , 2004, Journal of vision.

[86]  P. Desmet,et al.  Framework of product experience , 2007 .

[87]  Gad Saad,et al.  The evolutionary bases of consumption , 2007 .

[88]  Richard G. Coss,et al.  All that Glistens: Water Connotations in Surface Finishes , 1990 .

[89]  L. Tassinary,et al.  Anger and Stress , 2008 .

[90]  J. Falk,et al.  Development of Visual Preference for Natural Environments , 1982 .

[91]  Deborah Roedder John Consumer Socialization of Children: A Retrospective Look at Twenty-Five Years of Research , 1999 .

[92]  G. Felsten Where to take a study break on the college campus: An attention restoration theory perspective , 2009 .

[93]  V. Smith,et al.  Preferences, Property Rights, and Anonymity in Bargaining Games , 1994 .

[94]  S. Schneider,et al.  Gender and Attractiveness Biases in Hiring Decisions: Are More Experienced Managers Less Biased? , 1996 .

[95]  Sue J. Waite,et al.  ‘Memories are made of this’: some reflections on outdoor learning and recall , 2007 .

[96]  Steven Solomon,et al.  Steven Solomon, Water: The Epic Struggle for Wealth, Power, and Civilization , 2011 .

[97]  L. Cosmides,et al.  THE EMERGENCE OF EVOLUTIONARY PSYCHOLOGY: WHAT IS AT STAKE? , 2022 .

[98]  J. Langlois,et al.  Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. , 2000, Psychological bulletin.