Facial attractiveness, social status, and face recognition

ABSTRACT Research on facial attractiveness and face recognition has produced contradictory results that we believe are rooted in methodological limitations. Three experiments evaluated the hypothesis that facial attractiveness and face recognition are positively and linearly related. We also expected that social status would moderate the attractiveness effect. Attractive faces were recognized with very high accuracy compared to less attractive faces. We specified two estimates of facial distinctiveness (generalized and idiosyncratic) and demonstrated that the attractiveness effect on face recognition was not due to distinctiveness. This solves the long-standing problem that because facial attractiveness and distinctiveness are naturally confounded, construct validity is compromised. There was no support for the prediction, based on meta-analysis, that females would outperform males in face recognition. The attractiveness effect was so strong that gender effects were precluded. Methodological prescriptions to enhance internal, construct, and statistical conclusion validity in face recognition paradigms are presented.

[1]  Mohammad Madallh Alhabahba,et al.  Sex Differences in Mate Preferences Across 45 Countries: A Large-Scale Replication , 2020, Psychological science.

[2]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The unappreciated heterogeneity of effect sizes: Implications for power, precision, planning of research, and replication. , 2019, Psychological methods.

[3]  T. Malloy,et al.  Implications for the self determine benevolence and self-protection in intergroup relations , 2017, Self and identity : the journal of the International Society for Self and Identity.

[4]  Pedro B. Albuquerque,et al.  Always on My Mind? Recognition of Attractive Faces May Not Depend on Attention , 2016, Front. Psychol..

[5]  William G. Hayward,et al.  How Well Do Computer-Generated Faces Tap Face Expertise? , 2015, PloS one.

[6]  A. Little,et al.  Facial attractiveness. , 2014, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[7]  S. Schweinberger,et al.  Effects of attractiveness on face memory separated from distinctiveness: Evidence from event-related brain potentials , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  Holger Wiese,et al.  Ageing faces in ageing minds: A review on the own-age bias in face recognition , 2013 .

[9]  J. Tanaka,et al.  Perceptual expertise and the plasticity of other-race face recognition , 2013 .

[10]  Jean-Christophe Rohner,et al.  Recognition bias and the physical attractiveness stereotype. , 2012, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[11]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Treating stimuli as a random factor in social psychology: a new and comprehensive solution to a pervasive but largely ignored problem. , 2012, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  Yan Zhang,et al.  Identifying cognitive preferences for attractive female faces: An event‐related potential experiment using a study‐test paradigm , 2011, Journal of neuroscience research.

[13]  Alexander Todorov,et al.  A Statistical Model of Facial Attractiveness , 2011, Psychological science.

[14]  Jean-Christophe Rohner,et al.  Physical attractiveness stereotype and memory. , 2011, Scandinavian journal of psychology.

[15]  M. Viggiano,et al.  Deep and shallow encoding effects on face recognition: an ERP study. , 2010, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[16]  Kurt Hugenberg,et al.  The categorization-individuation model: an integrative account of the other-race recognition deficit. , 2010, Psychological review.

[17]  S. Fiske.  Interpersonal Stratification: Status, Power, and Subordination , 2010 .

[18]  Yi Zhang,et al.  Neural activation in the “reward circuit” shows a nonlinear response to facial attractiveness , 2010, Social neuroscience.

[19]  J. Sui,et al.  Can beauty be ignored? Effects of facial attractiveness on covert attention , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[20]  O. Corneille,et al.  Locating attractiveness in the face space: Faces are more attractive when closer to their group prototype , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[21]  Paul J. Whalen,et al.  Are Attractive People Rewarding? Sex Differences in the Neural Substrates of Facial Attractiveness , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Are you always on my mind? A review of how face perception and attention interact , 2007, Neuropsychologia.

[23]  Benjamin Y Hayden,et al.  Economic principles motivating social attention in humans , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[24]  Gillian Rhodes,et al.  “Just another pretty face”: A multidimensional scaling approach to face attractiveness and variability , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Olivier Corneille,et al.  Is positivity a cue or a response option? Warm glow vs evaluative matching in the familiarity for attractive and not-so-attractive faces , 2005 .

[26]  B. Monin.  The warm glow heuristic: when liking leads to familiarity. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[27]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  Sexually selective cognition: beauty captures the mind of the beholder. , 2003, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  E. C. Chao.  Generalized Estimating Equations , 2003, Technometrics.

[29]  D. Wright,et al.  An own gender bias and the importance of hair in face recognition. , 2003, Acta psychologica.

[30]  R. Balaji,et al.  You Are Always on My Mind , 2003 .

[31]  C. Senior,et al.  Beauty in the Brain of the Beholder , 2003, Neuron.

[32]  D. Ariely,et al.  Beautiful Faces Have Variable Reward Value fMRI and Behavioral Evidence , 2001, Neuron.

[33]  Lee H. V. Wickham,et al.  Typicality and Face Recognition: A Critical Re-Evaluation of the Two Factor Theory , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[34]  J. Brigham,et al.  Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in memory for faces: A meta-analytic review , 2001 .

[35]  N. Lavie,et al.  Changing Faces: A Detection Advantage in the Flicker Paradigm , 2001, Psychological science.

[36]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty , 1998 .

[37]  Thomas R. Alley,et al.  Attractiveness and the memorability of faces : Only a matter of distinctiveness? , 1997 .

[38]  D. Perrett,et al.  Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness , 1994, Nature.

[39]  D. Buss,et al.  Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. , 1993, Psychological review.

[40]  T. Valentine,et al.  Towards an Exemplar Model of Face Processing: The Effects of Race and Distinctiveness , 1992, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

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

[42]  L. Albright,et al.  Interpersonal perception in a social context. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[43]  J. Brigham.  Target Person Distinctiveness and Attractiveness as Moderator Variables in the Confidence-Accuracy Relationship in Eyewitness Identifications , 1990 .

[44]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Interpersonal Perception: A Social Relations Analysis , 1988 .

[45]  M. Cunningham.  Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty , 1986 .

[46]  Leah L. Light,et al.  Why Attractive People are Harder to Remember , 1981 .

[47]  J. Fleishman,et al.  Judged Attractiveness in Recognition Memory of Women's Faces , 1976, Perceptual and motor skills.

[48]  Kk Dion.  What is beautiful is good. , 1972, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[49]  J. F. Cross,et al.  Sex, race, age, and beauty as factors in recognition of faces , 1971 .

[50]  D. Campbell,et al.  Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. , 1959, Psychological bulletin.

[51]  D. Broadbent.  A mechanical model for human attention and immediate memory. , 1957, Psychological review.

[52]  Rick H. Hoyle,et al.  Handbook of structural equation modeling , 2012 .

[53]  Matthew G. Rhodes,et al.  The own-age bias in face recognition: a meta-analytic and theoretical review. , 2012, Psychological bulletin.

[54]  T. Malloy,et al.  Status-based asymmetry in intergroup responses: Implications for intergroup reconciliation. , 2011, Cultural diversity & ethnic minority psychology.

[55]  Agneta Herlitz,et al.  Women's own-gender bias in face recognition memory. , 2011, Experimental psychology.

[56]  Michael C. Neale,et al.  Biometrical Models in Behavioral Genetics , 2009 .

[57]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Variance Components , 2003 .

[58]  Cameron Anderson,et al.  Power, Approach, and Inhibition , 2003 .

[59]  Peter E Morris,et al.  Attractiveness, distinctiveness, and recognition of faces: attractive faces can be typical or distinctive but are not better recognized. , 2003, The American journal of psychology.

[60]  L. Albright,et al.  Experimental Validity Brunswik, Campbell, Cronbach, and Enduring Issues , 2000 .

[61]  L. Mealey,et al.  Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: a monozygotic co-twin comparison. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[62]  K. Grammer,et al.  Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. , 1994, Journal of comparative psychology.

[63]  C. Stangor,et al.  Memory for expectancy-congruent and expectancy-incongruent information: A review of the social and social developmental literatures. , 1992 .

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

[65]  Lori A. Roggman,et al.  Infant preferences for attractive faces: Rudiments of a stereotype? , 1987 .

[66]  H D Ellis,et al.  The effect of attractiveness on recognition memory for faces. , 1973, The American journal of psychology.

[67]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[68]  T. Valentine.  The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology a Unified Account of the Effects of Distinctiveness, Inversion, and Race in Face Recognition , 2022 .