Benedict Christopher Jones

Many studies have reported that faces with less distinctive (i.e., more average or prototypical) shapes are perceived to be more attractive. This preference for faces with less distinctive shapes is often explained in terms of a psychological adaptation in which putative health cues are considered attractive. While evidence that individuals with less distinctive face shapes are actually healthier than those with distinctive face shapes is mixed, there is good evidence that faces with less distinctive shapes are perceived to be healthier. To date, only one study has tested whether preferences for average faces are mediated by health perceptions, finding that health perceptions partially mediated the negative relationship between facial attractiveness and distinctiveness. However, facial distinctiveness was assessed using distinctiveness ratings, which are only modestly correlated with objective measures of shape distinctiveness. Consequently, we tested whether health perceptions mediated the negative relationship between facial attractiveness and shape distinctiveness using a sample of 50 male and 50 female face images for which it has previously been reported that both health and attractiveness ratings were negatively correlated with an objective measure of shape distinctiveness. Mediation analysis showed that ∼63% (95% CI [40%, 80%], p < .001) of the negative relationship between facial attractiveness and shape distinctiveness could be attributed to the effects of health perceptions. This finding contributes to growing evidence that preferences for face shapes with low distinctiveness occur, at least in part, because less distinctive faces appear to be healthier.

Individuals displaying cues of higher mate value (e.g., attractive characteristics) are thought to represent a greater threat to pair bonds and, consequently, elicit greater jealousy. Previous studies reporting that more feminine potential rivals elicit greater jealousy in women used stimuli in which feminine characteristics were experimentally manipulated and assessed jealousy using forced-choice methods. However, this method for assessing perceptions has recently been criticised for lacking ecological validity. Consequently, in the current study, women rated how jealous they would feel if rivals depicted in natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face photographs were flirting with their romantic partner. Facial femininity was assessed using objective analyses of shape and via third-party ratings of facial femininity. For heterosexual participants, women reported significantly greater jealousy when imagining more feminine women flirting with their romantic partner. This pattern of results was also seen for lesbian participants, although the correlation between rival femininity and jealousy was significantly weaker for lesbian participants than it was for heterosexual participants. Collectively, these results present further evidence that facial femininity of potential rivals influences women’s reported jealousy, particularly in heterosexual women, and is further evidence for the proposal that putative markers of the mate value of rivals play a role in women’s jealousy.

Researchers have suggested that men with more masculine facial characteristics have stronger immune systems but are perceived to be less likely to invest resources in partners and offspring. How women resolve this putative trade-off between the costs and benefits of choosing a masculine mate have previously been reported to be associated with women's openness to uncommitted relationships (i.e., their sociosexuality) and self-perceived mate value. However, not all studies have reported these links and the methods used to assess masculinity preferences in studies reporting these patterns of results (forced-choice tests using stimuli in which masculinity was experimentally manipulated) have recently been criticized for having low ecological validity. Consequently, we tested whether sociosexuality or self-perceived mate value predicted women's masculinity preferences when masculinity preferences were assessed using ratings of individual natural (i.e., unmanipulated) male faces. Our analyses show no evidence that individual differences in women's sociosexuality or self-perceived mate value significantly predicted masculinity preferences. Thus, our results do not support the proposal that sociosexuality and/or self-perceived mate value are important sources of individual differences in women's preferences for male facial masculinity.

Romantic-partner choice is a fundamental human behaviour. However, the factors that influence partner choice remain poorly understood. Here we investigated (1) how women’s first impressions of potential partners’ physical attractiveness and potential for abusive behaviour based on face images influence hypothetical dating decisions and (2) possible moderating effects of individual differences in women’s sensation seeking, sociosexual orientation (i.e., openness to uncommitted sexual relationships), current partnership status, and self-perceived mate value (i.e., self-rated attractiveness). Physical attractiveness of potential dates, but not perceptions of potential for abusive behaviour, was a strong predictor of reported dating intentions, but this effect of physical attractiveness was weaker among women who scored higher on sensation seeking. None of the other individual-difference variables had significant effects. Collectively, these findings present further evidence for the importance of physical attractiveness in dating and partner choices and highlight the role sensation seeking appears to play in individual differences in the effect of men’s physical attractiveness on women’s dating intentions.

Infant faces have been shown to be particularly motivating stimuli for women. No studies, however, have compared mothers and nonmothers in whether parity modulates approach motivation toward emotional infant faces. We studied 54 Finnish first-time mothers and 42 nonmothers in a pay-per-view key-press task where the participants were shown 20 infant faces with smiling and crying expressions. Participants were able to adjust the time each face was visible. In addition, salivary testosterone, estradiol, and cortisol levels were measured and their impact on motivation toward infants analyzed. When controlling for the hormonal levels, happy infant faces were viewed longer than crying faces and there was no difference in mean viewing times between mothers and nonmothers. An interaction between parity and emotion emerged: Mothers were more motivated to view happy faces and less motivated to view crying infant faces than nonmothers. Testosterone had a significant effect on viewing times: The higher the testosterone levels were, the shorter amount of time infant faces were viewed. This indicates that testosterone is inversely associated with approach motivation to emotional infant stimuli. This study is the first to compare mothers and nonmothers in a task measuring motivational responses to infant stimuli and indicates that the difference between the approach motivation caused by happy and distressed infant emotions might be more heightened in new mothers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Purpose: People can judge others’ ages from face images somewhat accurately and tend to rateyounger adults’ faces as more attractive than older adults’ faces. However, individual diff erences inthe strength of this preference for younger adult faces have also been reported, whereby peopleborn to older parents (i.e., people whose parents were older when the participant was born) showedweaker preferences for younger adult faces. However, work showing this pattern of results used facestimuli in which cues of age were experimentally manipulated using computer-graphics methods andmany researchers have recently raised concerns about how well fi ndings obtained using such stimuligeneralise to ratings of natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face images. Methods: In light of the above, we tested whether people born to older parents showed weakerpreferences for younger faces when rating the attractiveness of natural (i.e., unmanipulated) faceimages. Results: Although our analyses demonstrated that participants generally showed strong preferencesfor younger adult faces, the strength of these preferences was not signifi cantly correlated withparental age at birth. Conclusions: Thus, our results do not support the proposal that parental age at birth infl uencespreferences for facial cues of age.

Facial attractiveness influences important social outcomes and most studies investigating possible predictors of facial attractiveness have tested for effects of shape symmetry, averageness (i.e., the converse of distinctiveness), and sexual dimorphism (i.e., masculinity–femininity). These studies have typically either tested for these possible effects by experimentally manipulating shape characteristics in faces images or have tested only for bivariate correlations between shape characteristics and attractiveness judgments. However, these two approaches have been criticised for lacking ecological validity and providing little insight into the independent contributions of symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism, respectively. Moreover, the few studies that have investigated the independent contributions of symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism have reported mixed results. Here we measured shape symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism from face images and assessed their independent contribution to attractiveness ratings. Linear mixed effects models showed that facial attractiveness was significantly predicted by averageness in male and female faces and femininity in female faces, but not by masculinity in male faces or symmetry. These results are consistent with other recent work suggesting that averageness and femininity, rather than symmetry and masculinity, predict facial attractiveness.

Many researchers have proposed that women perceive men with masculine face shapes to be less suitable as parents and long-term partners than men with feminine face shapes, causing women to find masculine men more attractive for short-term than long-term relationships. However, recent work shows that results obtained using the type of experimentally manipulated stimuli that were employed in studies presenting evidence for these claims are not necessarily observed when natural (i.e., unmanipulated) face stimuli were used to suggest that the evidence for these claims may need to be revaluated. Consequently, we tested for possible relationships between ratings of natural male faces for parenting- and relationship-related traits and shape masculinity (Study 1) and also tested whether women's preferences for shape masculinity were stronger when natural male faces were rated for short-term relationships than when natural male faces were rated for long-term relationships (Studies 2 and 3). We saw no evidence for either of these predictions, instead finding that men with more attractive faces were perceived to be better parents and better long-term partners. Thus, our findings do not support the widely held view that masculine men are more attractive for short-term relationships because they are perceived to be unlikely to invest time and effort in their romantic partners and offspring.

Health perceptions are thought to play an important role in human mate preferences. Although many studies have investigated potential relationships between health ratings of faces and facial symmetry, prototypicality, and sexual dimorphism, findings have been mixed across studies. Consequently, we tested for potential relationships between health ratings of faces and the symmetry, prototypicality, and sexual dimorphism of those faces’ shapes. When these three shape characteristics were considered in separate regression models, we observed significant positive relationships between health ratings and both shape symmetry and prototypicality. By contrast, health ratings and sexual dimorphism were not significantly correlated in these analyses. However, in analyses in which symmetry, prototypicality, and sexual dimorphism were entered simultaneously as predictors in a single model, prototypicality, but not symmetry, was significantly correlated with health ratings. Moreover, sexual dimorphism predicted health ratings of female, but not male, faces in these analyses. Collectively, these results suggest that the relationship between symmetry and health ratings is, at least partly, driven by the effect of prototypicality on health perceptions and highlight the importance of considering multiple aspects of face shape when investigating factors that predict perceived health.

Perceptions of the trustworthiness of faces predict important social outcomes, including economic exchange and criminal sentencing decisions. However, the specific facial characteristics that drive trustworthiness perceptions remain poorly understood. Here we investigated this issue by exploring possible relationships between ratings of the trustworthiness of face images and objective assessments of two aspects of face shape that researchers have previously argued are important for perceptions of trustworthiness: distinctiveness and sexual dimorphism. Here we report that faces with more distinctive shapes are rated as less trustworthy, but that sexual dimorphism of face shape is not significantly correlated with trustworthiness ratings. These results suggest that distinctiveness of face shape plays a more important role in trustworthiness perceptions than does sexual dimorphism and suggest that perceptions of trustworthiness may stem, at least in part, from the ‘anomalous-is-bad’ stereotype.