Fitting the mind to the World

Average faces are attractive, but what is average depends on experience. We examined the effect of brief exposure to consistent facial distortions on what looks normal (average) and what looks attractive. Adaptation to a consistent distortion shifted what looked most normal, and what looked most attractive, toward that distortion. These normality and attractiveness aftereffects occurred when the adapting and test faces differed in orientation by 90° (∓45° vs. −45°), suggesting adaptation of high-level neurons whose coding is not strictly retino-topic. Our results suggest that perceptual adaptation can rapidly recalibrate people's preferences to fit the faces they see. The results also suggest that average faces are attractive because of their central location in a distribution of faces (i.e., prototypicality), rather than because of any intrinsic appeal of particular physical characteristics. Recalibration of preferences may have important consequences, given the powerful effects of perceived attractiveness on person perception, mate choice, social interactions, and social outcomes for individuals.

[1]  R. Zajonc.  Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. , 1968 .

[2]  E. Rosch.  ON THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF PERCEPTUAL AND SEMANTIC CATEGORIES1 , 1973 .

[3]  F. Moore.  Cognitive development and the acquisition of language , 1973 .

[4]  J. Frisby.  Seeing: Illusion, Brain and Mind , 1979 .

[5]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Implicit Learning and Generalization of the "Mere Exposure" Effect , 1983 .

[6]  D. Berry,et al.  Cross-Cultural Agreement in Perceptions of Babyfaced Adults , 1987 .

[7]  R. Bornstein.  Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. , 1989 .

[8]  J. Langlois,et al.  Attractive Faces Are Only Average , 1990 .

[9]  John B. Pittenger.  Article Commentary: On the Difficulty of Averaging Faces: Comments on Langlois and Roggman , 1991 .

[10]  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 .

[11]  Ann O’leary,et al.  Adaptation to form distortion of a familiar shape , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  M. Cunningham,et al.  Article Commentary: Averaged Faces Are Attractive, but Very Attractive Faces Are Not Average , 1991 .

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

[14]  D R Proffitt,et al.  Visual learning in the perception of texture: simple and contingent aftereffects of texture density. , 1996, Spatial vision.

[15]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Averageness, Exaggeration, and Facial Attractiveness , 1996 .

[16]  M. Farah.  Is face recognition ‘special’? Evidence from neuropsychology , 1996, Behavioural Brain Research.

[17]  Michael J. Berry,et al.  Adaptation of retinal processing to image contrast and spatial scale , 1997, Nature.

[18]  Michael A. Stadler,et al.  Handbook of implicit learning , 1998 .

[19]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  A shape-contrast effect for briefly presented stimuli. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  D. Perrett,et al.  Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness , 1998, Nature.

[21]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Are Average Facial Configurations Attractive Only Because of Their Symmetry? , 1999 .

[22]  Randy Thornhill,et al.  Facial attractiveness , 1999, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[23]  Otto H. MacLin,et al.  Figural aftereffects in the perception of faces , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[24]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Revisiting the Perception of Upside-Down Faces , 2000, Psychological science.

[25]  M. Tarr,et al.  The Fusiform Face Area is Part of a Network that Processes Faces at the Individual Level , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  J. Haxby,et al.  The distributed human neural system for face perception , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  C. Clifford,et al.  A functional angle on some after-effects in cortical vision , 2000, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[28]  G. Rhodes,et al.  The Attractiveness of Nonface Averages: Implications for an Evolutionary Explanation of the Attractiveness of Average Faces , 2000, Psychological science.

[29]  N. Kanwisher.  Domain specificity in face perception , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  G. Rhodes,et al.  Sex-typicality and attractiveness: are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive? , 2000, British journal of psychology.

[31]  Leslie A. Zebrowitz,et al.  Do facial averageness and symmetry signal health? , 2001, Evolution and human behavior : official journal of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society.

[32]  A. O'Toole,et al.  Prototype-referenced shape encoding revealed by high-level aftereffects , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  Michael A. Webster,et al.  Influence of adaptation on the perception of distortions in natural images , 2001, J. Electronic Imaging.

[34]  David K. A. Barnes,et al.  correction: Early visual experience and face processing , 2001, Nature.

[35]  Trading faces , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[36]  D. Maurer,et al.  Neuroperception: Early visual experience and face processing , 2001, Nature.

[37]  C. Chubb,et al.  The size-tuning of the face-distortion after-effect , 2001, Vision Research.

[38]  G. Rhodes,et al.  GENERALIZATION OF MERE EXPOSURE EFFECTS TO AVERAGED COMPOSITE FACES , 2001 .

[39]  C. Clifford.  Perceptual adaptation: motion parallels orientation , 2002, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[40]  D. Perrett,et al.  Facial attractiveness judgements reflect learning of parental age characteristics , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[41]  G. Rhodes,et al.  It’s not just average faces that are attractive: Computer-manipulated averageness makes birds, fish, and automobiles attractive , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[42]  C. Clifford,et al.  Pulling Faces: An Investigation of the Face-Distortion Aftereffect , 2003, Perception.

[43]  James M. Donovan.  Facial Attractiveness : Evolutionary , Cognitive , and Social Perspectives , 2003 .