Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 25, Issue 2 , Pages 88-101 , March 2004

The effect of nonphysical traits on the perception of physical attractiveness: Three naturalistic studies

  • Kevin M Kniffin

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author
    • Department of Anthropology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
    • Department of Anthropology, State University of New York (SUNY) at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY, USA
    • ,
  • David Sloan Wilson

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anthropology, State University of New York (SUNY) at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY, USA
    • Department of Biological Sciences, SUNY-Binghamptom, NY, USA

Received 9 January 2003 ,Accepted 29 January 2004.

References 

  1. Agocha VB, Cooper LM. Risk perceptions and safer-sex intentions: does a partner's physical attractiveness undermine the use of risk-relevant information?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999;25:746–759
  2. Ambady N, Hallahan M, Conner B. Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;77:538–547
  3. Ambady N, Rosenthal R. Half a minute: predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993;64:43l–441
  4. Buss D. Evolutionary psychology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 1999;
  5. Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1972;24:285–290
  6. Draper P, Harpending H. Father absence and reproductive strategy: an evolutionary perspective. Journal of Anthropological Research. 1982;38:255–273
  7. Ellis BJ, McFadyen-Ketchum S, Dodge KA, Pettit GS, Bates JE. Quality of early family relationships and individual differences in the timing of pubertal maturation in girls: a longitudinal test of an evolutionary model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;77:387–401
  8. Feingold A. Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin. 1992;111:304–341
  9. Felson RB, Bohrenstedt GW. “Are the good beautiful or the beautiful good?” The relationship between children's perceptions of ability and perceptions of physical attractiveness. Social Psychology Quarterly. 1979;42:386–392
  10. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 2000;23:573–644
  11. Gladue BA, Delaney JJ. Gender differences in perception of attractiveness of men and women in bars. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1990;16:378–391
  12. Gross AE, Crofton C. What is good is beautiful. Sociometry. 1977;40:85–90
  13. Henss R. Waist-to-hip ratio and female attractiveness: evidence from photographic stimuli and methodological considerations. Personality and Individual Differences. 2000;28:501–513
  14. Jensen-Campbell LA, Graziano WG, West SG. Dominance, prosocial orientation, and female preferences: do nice guys really finish last?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1995;68:427–440
  15. Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M. Maxims or myths of beauty?: a meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin. 2000;126:390–423
  16. Nisbett RE, Wilson TD. The halo effect: evidence for unconscious alteration of judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1977;35:250–256
  17. Orians GH, Heerwagen JH. Evolved responses to landscapes. In:  Barkow JH,  Cosmides L,  Tooby J editor. The adapted mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992;p. 555–580
  18. Owens G, Ford JG. Further consideration of the “What is good is beautiful” finding. Social Psychology. 1978;4l:73–75
  19. Rhodes G, Halberstadt J, Brajkovich G. Generalization of mere exposure effects to averaged composite faces. Social Cognition. 2001;l9:57–70
  20. Thornhill R. Darwinian aesthetics. In:  Crawford C,  Krebs D editor. Handbook of evolutionary psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1998;p. 543–572
  21. Thornhill R, Grammer K. The body and face of woman: one ornament that signals quality?. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1999;20:105–120
  22. Townsend JM, Levy GD. Effects of potential partners' costume and physical attractiveness on sexuality and partner selection. Journal of Psychology. 1990;124:371–389
  23. In:  Voland E,  Grammer K editor. Evolutionary aesthetics. Berlin: Springer; 2003;
  24. Watkins LM, Johnston L. Screening job applicants: the impact of physical attractiveness and application quality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 2000;8:76–84
  25. White R, Heerwagen JH. Nature and mental health: biophilia and biophobia. In:  Lundberg A editors. The environment and mental health: a guide for clinicians. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1998;p. 175–192
  26. Wilson DS, Near D, Miller RR. Machiavellianism: a synthesis of the evolutionary and psychological literatures. Psychological Bulletin. 1996;199:285–299
  27. Wilson DS, Near DC, Miller RR. Individual differences in Machiavellianism as a mix of cooperative and exploitative strategies. Evolution and Human Behavior. 1998;l9:203–212
  28. Zebrowitz L, Lee SY. Appearance, stereotype-incongruent behavior, and social relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 1999;25:569–584

PII: S1090-5138(04)00006-6

doi: 10.1016/S1090-5138(04)00006-6

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 25, Issue 2 , Pages 88-101 , March 2004

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution