The role of facial hair in women's perceptions of men's attractiveness, health,
masculinity and parenting abilities
Barnaby J. Dixson ⁎, Robert C. Brooks
Evolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth & Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Kensington, Sydney 2052 NSW, Australia
Initial receipt 23 August 2012
Final revision received 24 February 2013
Facial hair strongly inﬂuences people's judgments of men's socio-sexual attributes. However, the nature of
these judgments is often contradictory. The levels of intermediate facial hair growth presented to raters and
the stage of female raters' menstrual cycles might have inﬂuenced past ﬁndings. We quantiﬁed men's and
women's judgments of attractiveness, health, masculinity and parenting abilities for photographs of men who
were clean-shaven, lightly or heavily stubbled and fully bearded. We also tested the effect of the menstrual
cycle and hormonal contraceptive use on women's ratings. Women judged faces with heavy stubble as most
attractive and heavy beards, light stubble and clean-shaven faces as similarly less attractive. In contrast, men
rated full beards and heavy stubble as most attractive, followed closely by clean-shaven and light stubble as
least attractive. Men and women rated full beards highest for parenting ability and healthiness. Masculinity
ratings increased linearly as facial hair increased, and this effect was more pronounced in women in the fertile
phase of the menstrual cycle, although attractiveness ratings did not differ according to fertility. Our ﬁndings
conﬁrm that beardedness affects judgments of male socio-sexual attributes and suggest that an intermediate
level of beardedness is most attractive while full-bearded men may be perceived as better fathers who could
protect and invest in offspring.
© 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Androgen-dependent facial and bodily traits are positively associ-
ated with men's health (Thornhill & Gangestad, 2006), immunity
(Rantala et al., 2012), dominance and competitive ability (Archer,
2009). Masculine men may also achieve greater mating and repro-
ductive success (Rhodes, Simmons, & Peters, 2005). Yet averaged
across experiments, women either prefer less masculine faces (Perrett
et al., 1998) or weakly prefer masculine faces (Rhodes, 2006).
However, women's preferences for facial cues of masculinity vary,
growing strongest when men are rated for short-term relationships
(Little, Connely, Feinberg, Jones, & Roberts, 2011), and during the most
fertile part of their menstrual cycle (Gangestad & Thornhill, 2008).
The beard is a highly sexually dimorphic androgen-dependent trait
that varies markedly among men (Randall, 2008). While this implies a
sexually selected origin for beardedness, there is no consensus on the
relative importance of female mate choice and male-male competi-
tion in shaping facial hair. Given that facial hair growth begins at
puberty and continues throughout adulthood, it is not surprising
that beards augment perceptions of maturity and masculinity
(Addison, 1989; Neave & Shields, 2008). However, associations
between other personality traits and beards are highly polarized. On
the one hand, bearded men are ascribed positive attributes such as
self-conﬁdence, courage, sincerity, generosity and industriousness
(Kenny & Fletcher, 1973; Pellegrini, 1973; Hellström & Tekle, 1994).
On the other hand, beards are judged as less socially appeasing and
more aggressive (Addison, 1989; Muscarella & Cunningham, 1996;
Neave & Shields, 2008).
Findings on the attractiveness of facial hair are equally mixed. In
some cases full beards increased male attractiveness (Pellegrini, 1973;
Hatﬁeld & Sprecher, 1986; Reed & Blunk, 1990), while others found
they did not (Feinman & Gill, 1977; Wogalter & Hosie, 1991;
Muscarella & Cunningham, 1996; Dixson & Vasey, 2012). These
mixed ﬁndings may have resulted, in part, from using written
questionnaires (Feinman & Gill, 1977), fake beards (Wood, 1986)or
facial hair created using make-up pencils (Muscarella & Cunningham,
1996). Where natural photographs have been used, typically only full
beards or clean-shaven faces were presented (e.g. Dixson & Vasey,
2012), which does not capture variation in men's ability to grow facial
hair. Interestingly, Neave and Shields (2008) found using computer-
generated images that varied in grades of facial hair that light stubble
was most attractive to women.
In the present study, a sample of men, each of whom were
photographed as clean-shaven, lightly stubbled, heavily stubbled and
fully bearded, were rated for attractiveness, healthiness, masculinity
Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241
⁎Corresponding author. Evolution & Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological,
Earth & Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, Kensington,
Sydney 2052 NSW, Australia.
E-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org (B.J. Dixson).
1090-5138/$ –see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Evolution and Human Behavior
journal homepage: www.ehbonline.org
and parenting abilities. Analysis 1 compared ratings between men and
women. We predicted that men would judge full beards more favorably
than women because of the strong role of beards in judgments of social
dominance and threat (Dixson & Vasey, 2012). Conversely, we
predicted that women may judge more bearded faces to be more
attractive than clean-shaven faces but that a threshold of masculinity
may be preferred, with lightly stubbled faces considered most attractive
(after Neave & Shields, 2008). Women's preferences for masculine traits
are known to become stronger during the late follicular, more fertile,
period of the menstrual cycle when any beneﬁts of mating with a more
masculine partner can be realized (Gangestad & Thornhill, 2008). Thus,
in Analysis 2 we tested the prediction that heavier stubble and hence
greater masculinity would be more attractive at the period of the
menstrual cycle when conception is more likely.
2. Materials and methods
Ten men of European descent (mean age ± SD = 23.50 ±
3.57 years), each of whom had dark brown head and facial hair
were photographed in each of four conditions in the following order:
fully bearded (at least 6 weeks without shaving), clean-shaven, with
5 days (light stubble) and 10 days of beard growth (heavy stubble).
Men posed smiles generated using the Facial Action Coding System
(Ekman, Friesen, & Hager, 2002). Photographs were taken using a
Canon digital camera (8.0 megapixels resolution), 150 cm from the
participant under controlled lighting. Images were cropped so only
the face and neck were shown (Fig. 1).
Studies were completed online at www.bodylab.biz. Participants
viewed each of the 10 faces once, with 4 faces clean-shaven and 2
faces in each of the other three categories of facial hair. Which faces
were assigned to which condition was determined at random for each
participant, as was the order in which faces were presented. Subjects
rated each face for attractiveness, healthiness, masculinity and
parenting abilities using six-point Likert scales (0 = very low–5=
very high). After completing the ratings participants provided details
on their age, sex, ethnicity and sexual orientation. Female participants
also stated how many days ago their most recent menstrual bleeding
began, whether they were pregnant, post-menopausal or using
2.3. Statistical analyses
Attractiveness, health, masculinity and parenting ability ratings
were dependent variables in a MANOVA where facial hair was the
within-subject factor. Sex in Analysis 1 and reproductive status in
Analysis 2 were entered as between-subject factors.
2.4. Analysis 1: Male and female perceptions of beardedness
2.4.1. Analysis 1: Participants
Self-identiﬁed homosexual and asexual participants were exclud-
ed from analyses, as were female participants that were pregnant,
were post-menopausal or used hormonal contraceptives. Eight
percent of the female sample were bisexual and were retained, as
they are sexually attracted to men as well as women. Their inclusion
did not interact with any dependent variables (all Pvalues ≥0.249).
The ﬁnal sample size was 177 heterosexual men (mean age ± SD =
32.18 ± 10.30 years) and 351 women (27.94 ± 8.23 years), of
whom 79.9% were European, 8.4% were Asian, 4.2% were Native
American, 1.8% were African, Middle Eastern or Australasian and 5.7%
elected not to deﬁne their ethnicity.
2.4.2. Analysis 1: Results
There was a signiﬁcant main effect of facial hair and a signiﬁcant
sex × facial hair interaction for attractiveness ratings (Table 1).
Women rated heavy stubble as signiﬁcantly more attractive than
clean-shaven, light stubble and full beards (all t
Fig. 1. An example of the stimuli used in this study. Images show the same man when
clean-shaven, with light stubble, heavy stubble and a full beard.
Multivariate repeated-measures analysis of variance of the effects of facial hair and sex on perceptual ratings.
Facial hair Facial hair × sex
Pillai's trace 0.373 0.040
MANOVA 25.55 12 515 b0.001 0.373 1.80 12 515 0.045 0.040
7.02 2.8 1491.6 b0.001 0.013 2.66 2.8 1491.6 0.050 0.005
44.74 2.9 1521.1 b0.001 0.078 1.09 2.9 1521.1 0.349 0.002
14.03 2.9 1548.5 b0.001 0.026 2.58 2.9 1548.5 0.053 0.005
50.19 2.9 1525.4 b0.001 0.087 0.57 2.9 1525.4 0.631 0.001
Pillai's trace 0.053
MANOVA 7.30 4 523 0.000 0.053
Attractiveness 5.84 1 526 0.016 0.011
Parenting 5.17 1 526 0.023 0.010
Health 1.23 1 526 0.267 0.002
Masculinity 2.67 1 526 0.103 0.005
Greenhouse–Geisser adjusted df (rounded to one decimal place).
237B.J. Dixson, R.C. Brooks / Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241
Pb0.001). In contrast, men rated full beards, heavy stubble and
clean-shaven as more attractive than light stubble (all t
Pb0.05). Men gave higher attractiveness ratings than women for full
= 2.97, P= 0.003) and clean-shaven faces (t
P= 0.005), but not for light (t
= 1.09, P= 0.274) or heavy
= 0.04, P= 0.968; Fig. 2A).
Facial hair signiﬁcantly affected ratings of parenting abilities, health
and masculinity. However, the only main effect of sex was for parenting
Fig. 2. Mean ratings (+SD) for clean-shaven, light stubble, heavy stubble and full beards when judging physical attractiveness (A), parenting skills (B), health (C) and masculinity
(D). White bars show female ratings and gray bars show male ratings.
Multivariate repeated-measures analysis of variance of the effects of facial hair and fertility on ratings.
Facial hair Facial hair × fertility
Pillai's trace 0.478 0.071
MANOVA 32.72 12 428 b0.001 0.478 1.32 24 858 0.139 0.036
8.08 2.9 1267.0 b0.001 0.018 0.26 5.8 1267.0 0.952 0.001
38.83 2.9 1284.6 b0.001 0.081 1.20 5.9 1284.6 0.306 0.005
3.18 2.9 1288.9 0.024 0.007 1.07 5.9 1288.9 0.379 0.005
55.56 2.9 1264.4 b0.001 0.112 2.05 5.8 1264.4 0.059 0.009
Pillai's trace 0.020
MANOVA 1.10 8 874 0.364 0.010
Attractiveness 0.48 2 439 0.619 0.002
Parenting 0.07 2 439 0.931 0.000
Health 0.30 2 439 0.740 0.001
Masculinity 3.00 2 439 0.051 0.013
Greenhouse–Geisser adjusted df (rounded to one decimal place).
238 B.J. Dixson, R.C. Brooks / Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241
abilities, with women giving signiﬁcantly higher ratings than men
=2.27,P= 0.023). There was a marginally signiﬁcant interaction
between sex and facial hair for health ratings (Table 1), so that
comparedto men women gave higher health ratings for light and heavy
stubble but not clean-shaven or full beards (Fig. 2C). However, none of
the paired comparisons were statistically signiﬁcant (all t
PN0.05). There were no other interaction effects involving sex
(Table 1). Full beards were rated signiﬁcantly higher than other facial
hair categories for parenting abilities (all t
≥6.78, all Pb0.001;
Fig. 2B), healthiness (all t
≥2.87, all Pb0.01; Fig. 2C) and
masculinity (all t
≥3.91, all Pb0.001; Fig. 2D).
2.5. Analysis 2: Female fertility and perceptions of beardedness
2.5.1. Analysis 2: Participants
Analysis 2 used a sub-sample of Analysis 1 in which only the
responses of regularly cycling women who reported the onset of
menstrual bleeding between 0 and 28 days ago were used. Participants
whose menstrual bleeding fell between 0–5and15–28 days before the
trial were categorized as the “low-fertility”phase and those whose
bleeding fell between days 6 and 14 were classed as the “high-fertility”
phase (Penton-Voak et al., 1999; Little, Jones, & DeBruine, 2008). A total
of 182 women were in the low-fertility category (mean age =28.80 ±
8.53 years), 100 women were in the high-fertility category (mean
age = 27.93 ± 6.94 years) and 160 women used hormonal contra-
ceptives (mean age = 27.12 ± 6.63 years). More than half of the
participants (78.3%) were European, 8.6% were Asian, 3.9% were Native
American, 1.5% were African, Middle Eastern or Australasian and 7.7%
elected not to deﬁne their ethnicity.
2.5.2. Analyses 2: Results
Facial hair signiﬁcantly affected women's ratings of attractiveness,
parenting abilities, health and masculinity (Table 2). Fertility and its
associated interactions with other factors did not alter ratings, apart
from a marginal effect on masculinity ratings. Rated masculinity
increased linearly as facial hair increased, with full beards receiving
signiﬁcantly higher ratings than clean-shaven, light and heavy stubble
≥4.29, all Pb0.001). However, high-fertility participants
gave signiﬁcantly higher ratings for full beards than low-fertility
= 3.68, Pb0.001) and contraceptive users (t
2.62, P= 0.009; Fig. 3D).
Irrespective of fertility, women's attractiveness ratings were
signiﬁcantly higher for heavy stubble than other degrees of
beardedness (all t
≥3.63, all Pb0.001; Fig. 3A). Full beards
received signiﬁcantly higher parenting skill ratings than other levels
of facial hair (all t
≥5.67, all Pb0.001; Fig. 3B). Full beards also
received higher health ratings than light (t
= 2.81, P= 0.005)
and heavy stubble (t
= 2.24, P= 0.025), but not clean-shaven
= 0.97, P= 0.335). Clean-shaven faces were judged as
healthier than light stubble (t
= 2.13, P= 0.033) but not heavy
= 1.56, P= 0.121; Fig. 3C). Very similar results
were found using a measure of likelihood of conception (see
Supplementary material, available on the journal's website at
Fig. 3. Women's mean ratings (+SD) for clean-shaven, light stubble, heavy stubble and full beards when judging physical attractiveness (A), parenting skills (B), health (C) and
masculinity (D). Data are split by participant's fertility with white bars depicting low fertility, gray bars representing high fertility and black bars indicating ratings by participants
who were using hormonal contraceptives.
239B.J. Dixson, R.C. Brooks / Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241
While ratings of masculinity rose monotonically with beardedness,
the effects of facial hair on attractiveness, health and parenting ratings
were non-linear. In almost all cases, light stubble received the lowest
ratings, with heavy stubble or full beards judged more favorably and
clean-shaven faces faring as well or almost as well. Attractiveness was
the only property that males and females rated differently, but the
interaction between sex and health ratings was marginally signiﬁcant
as women gave higher health ratings for light and heavy stubble than
men. Both men and women rated light stubble as least attractive and
heavy stubble as most (women) or equal most (men) attractive.
However, women rated clean-shaven and fully bearded faces less
attractive than heavy stubble. The fact that women and men differ
signiﬁcantly in how they rate the attractiveness of different levels of
beardedness may reﬂect dual signaling functions of male facial hair.
Facial hair correlates not only with maturity and masculinity, but
also with dominance and aggression (Neave & Shields, 2008). Men,
judging other men, might be sensitive to the overall level of masculine
threat and aggression signaled through full beards (Dixson & Vasey,
2012). Women, by contrast, may balance the beneﬁts of an intra-
sexually competitive masculine partner against the costs of mating
with a too-masculine partner. Our ﬁnding that women prefer heavy
stubble contrasts with previous studies in which attractiveness
ratings were highest for either clean-shaven faces (Feinman & Gill,
1977; Wogalter & Hosie, 1991; Muscarella & Cunningham, 1996)or
full beards (Pellegrini, 1973; Hatﬁeld & Sprecher, 1986; Reed & Blunk,
1990). However, it is similar to Neave and Shields (2008), who found
women preferred light stubble, with the lowest ratings given to fully
bearded and clean-shaven faces. Neave and Shields (2008) found, as
we did, that perceived masculinity rose linearly with facial hair. They
concluded that light stubble is preferred over clean-shaven faces as an
unambiguous signal of post-pubertal sexual maturity, while not
achieving the overly masculine appearance of heavy stubble and full
beards. Interestingly, in our study light stubble was perceived as the
least healthy, particularly by men, lowest on parenting skills and the
least attractive. Although these effects are subtle and further research
is necessary, it may be that these negative ratings reﬂect discrimina-
tion against the more patchy light stubble and suggests a threshold of
density and distribution may be necessary for beards to function as an
attractive signal. Our study does not include a sufﬁciently broad
sample of males to tease apart this interaction and future research
that includes a greater sample with a wider range of natural variation
of beardedness would be valuable.
Women's discrimination against full beards in attractiveness
ratings may be due to costs of mating with a too-masculine man.
Highly masculine men tend to have lower romantic attachment, less
interest in long-term relationships and report engaging in more short-
term relationships (Rhodes et al., 2005; Boothroyd, Jones, Burt,
DeBruine, & Perrett, 2008). While a highly masculine partner might
impose costs, women's preferences are known to shift more towards
masculine men when the likelihood of conception is higher (Gang-
estad & Thornhill, 2008). We found that participants with higher
potential fertility gave full-bearded faces higher masculinity ratings
than did low-fertility participants, suggesting a sensitivity of women
in the fertile phase to masculinity. However, fertility was unrelated to
attractiveness ratings, as thick stubble was always most attractive and
light stubble always least attractive. Our ﬁndings are similar to a
recent study demonstrating that women's preferences for facial hair
do not change with fertility or among pre-menopausal, post-
menopausal or pregnant women (Dixson, Tam, & Awasthy, 2012).
Thus, although facial hair is a clear signal of sexual maturity and
masculinity, preferences among women appear not to be linked to
reproductive status or fertility, as is the case for numerous sexually
dimorphic androgen-dependent traits. However, our study used a
count-back system to estimate fertility. While this is common in
studies of women's mate preferences, such procedures are prone to
measurement error, inaccuracies in recalling the onset of bleeding and
natural individual variation between participants in onset and
duration of the period of high fertility (Fehring, Schneider, & Raviele,
2006; Small, Manatunga, & Marcus, 2007). Future studies would
beneﬁt from using more direct measures of fertility to fully test shifts
in preferences for facial hair over the menstrual cycle.
In addition to being perceived as less invested in long-term
romantic relationships, masculine-looking men are perceived as likely
to provide low paternal investment (Perrett et al., 1998; Kruger,
2006). Our results suggest that this does not generally hold for beards.
Indeed, little is known regarding the socio-sexuality of men who
typically choose to wear beards and whether or not they are less
romantically committed to long-term relationships than men who opt
to be clean-shaven. Despite the strong association between beards
and perceptions of social dominance, threat and aggressiveness
(Neave & Shields, 2008; Dixson & Vasey, 2012), we found that
women rated parental abilities of men with full beards highest.
However, beards augment perceived age, social maturity, industri-
ousness, sincerity and ambition (Kenny & Fletcher, 1973; Pellegrini,
1973; Hellström & Tekle, 1994), all of which are strongly valued by
women in long-term partners (Buss, 1989). Further, masculine traits
associated with aggression and dominance may provide direct
beneﬁts such as protection to long-term mates (Snyder et al., 2011),
which could explain why beards received higher parental ability
ratings. Alternatively, our use of smiling stimuli may have offset the
negative effects associated with higher masculinity attributed to full
beards. Thus, compared to neutral facial expressions, a posed open
smile is judged as signiﬁcantly more attractive, kind, sympathetic,
ambitious and intelligent (Otta, Abrosio, & Hoshino, 1996). Facial hair
is known to interact with facial expression in perceptions of emotional
states (Dixson & Vasey, 2012). Thus, the combination of pro-social
attributes ascribed to smiling faces could explain why full beards in
concert with smiling facial expressions were judged to have greater
parenting skills despite the higher ratings for masculinity.
It is possible that prevailing cultural perceptions of facial hair also
contribute to how beardedness was judged in our study. Frequencies
and styling fashions of men's beards varies over time and among
cultures. For example, the frequency of mustaches, sideburns, full
beards and clean-shaven appearances among men in London from
1842 to 1972 each had distinct peaks in popularity (Robinson, 1976).
While this may merely reﬂect arbitrary trends in tastes, Barber (2001)
found using Robinson's data that men were more bearded when there
were more men of marriageable age in the mating market.
Preferences for masculine facial shape are known to be greater
among women living in countries with the lowest standards of
healthcare (DeBruine, Jones, Crawford, Welling, & Little, 2010) and
highest-income inequality (Brooks et al., 2011), and it would be
interesting to know if a similar pattern pertains to facial hair.
Although our sample was large, both men's and women's responses
to the stimuli might reﬂect the aggregate outcome of preferences
across the sample and future studies testing whether or not
judgments of facial hair vary across demographic and ecological
settings would be valuable.
Our repeated-measures design, while powerful, did not include
individuals unable to grow full beards, nor did it account for the actual
levels of the target's testosterone, which inﬂuences men's potential to
grow full beards (Randall, 2008). Further, we cannot account for the
effects of the experimental procedure of removing facial hair on men's
conﬁdence, which could have inﬂuenced how they were rated. Subtle
effects of this kind are known to inﬂuence experimental results; for
example, women rate photographs of men wearing red t-shirts as
more attractive than men wearing other colors of shirt, even when
shirts are not visible in the photograph (Roberts, Owen, & Havlicek,
2010). Likewise, wearing a false beard augments men's feelings of
masculinity and conﬁdence (Wood, 1986).
240 B.J. Dixson, R.C. Brooks / Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241
As a further caveat to our study, photographs of each subject were
all taken in the same sequence of beard growth, beginning with the
full-beard condition, followed by clean-shaven and the two interme-
diate stages of natural re-growth. It is therefore possible that because
the photographing sessions were not counterbalanced that the
target's conﬁdence or even level of interest in participating changed
from one photographic session to another, which would confound the
clean-shaven and light stubble compared to the heavy stubble and full
beard conditions. Thus, we cannot tell the extent to which our results
depend on the beards themselves or the targets' self-conﬁdence as a
result of the beard manipulation. Our results do support the view that
facial hair signiﬁcantly affects perceptions of male socio-sexual
attributes. The challenge for future research is to uncover how
individual differences among men choosing to wear beards and how
pattern, density and distribution of their beards are perceived using a
larger and more variable sample of men.
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx.
Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression?
The Behavioral and Brain Sciences,32, 249–266.
Addison, W. E. (1989). Beardedness as a factor in perceived masculinity. Perceptual and
Motor Skills,68, 921–922.
Barber, N. (2001). Mustache fashion covaries with a good marriage market for women.
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior,25, 261–272.
Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., DeBruine, L. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2008). Facial
correlates of sociosexuality. Evolution and Human Behavior,29, 211–218.
Brooks, R., Scott, I. M., Maklakov, A. A., Kasumovic, M. M., Clark, A. P., & Penton-Voak, I. S.
(2011). National income inequality predicts women's preferences for masculinized
faces better than health does. Proceedings of the Royal Society B,278, 810–812.
Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary
hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences,12,1–14.
DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Crawford, J. R., Welling, L. L. M., & Little, A. C. (2010). The
health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: Cross-cultural variation in
women's preferences for masculinized male faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B,
Dixson, B. J., & Vasey, P. L. (2012). Beards augment perceptions of men's age, social
status, and aggressiveness, but not attractiveness. Behavioral Ecology,23, 481–490.
Dixson,B. J., Tam, J. C., & Awasthy, M. (2012). Do women'spreferences for men'sfacial hair
change with reproductive status? Behavioral Ecology,1–9.
Ekman, P., Friesen, W. V., & Hager, J. C. (2002). Facial action coding system. Salt Lake
City, UT: Research Nexus, Network Research Information.
Fehring, R. J., Schneider, M., & Raviele, K. (2006). Variability in the phases of the
menstrual cycle. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing,35,
Feinman, S., & Gill, G. W. (1977). Females' response to males' beardedness. Perceptual
and Motor Skills,44, 533–534.
Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (2008). Human oestrus. Proceedings of the Royal Society
Hatﬁeld, E., & Sprecher, S. (1986). Mirror, mirror: The importance of looks in everyday life.
Albany: State University of New York Press.
Hellström, Å., & Tekle, J. (1994). Person perception through facial photographs: Effects
of glasses, hair, and beard on judgments of occupation and personal qualities.
European Journal of Social Psychology,24, 693–705.
Kenny, C. T., & Fletcher, D. (1973). Effects of beardedness on person perception.
Perceptual and Motor Skills,37, 413–414.
Kruger, D. J. (2006). Male facial masculinity inﬂuences attributions of personality and
reproductive strategy. Personal Relationships,13, 451–463.
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2008). Preferences for variation in masculinity
in real male faces change across the menstrual cycle: Women prefer more
masculine faces when they are more fertile. Personality and Individual Differences,
Little, A. C., Connely, J., Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2011). Human
preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and
smell. Behavioral Ecology,22, 862–868.
Muscarella, F., & Cunningham, M. R. (1996). The evolutionary signiﬁcance and social
perception of male pattern baldness and facial hair. Ethology and Sociobiology,17,
Neave, N., & Shields, K. (2008). The effects of facial hair manipulation on female
perceptions of attractiveness, masculinity, and dominance in male faces. Personality
and Individual Differences,45, 373–377.
Otta, E., Abrosio, F. F. E., & Hoshino, R. L. (1996). Reading a smiling face: Messages
conveyed by various forms of smiling. Perceptual and Motor Skills,82, 1111–1121.
Pellegrini, R. J. (1973). Impressions of the male personality as a function of beardedness.
Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior,10,29–33.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., &
Minamisawa, R. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature,399,
Perrett, D. I., Lee, K. J., Penton-Voak, I., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., Burt, D. M., Henzi, S.
P., Castles, D. L., & Akamatsu, S. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial
attractiveness. Nature,394, 884–887.
Randall, V. A. (2008). Androgens and hair growth. Dermatologic Therapy,21, 314–328.
Rantala, M. J., Moore, F. R., Skrinda, I., Krama, T., Kivleniece, I., Kecko, S., & Krams, I.
(2012). Evidence for the stress-linked immunocompetence handicap hypothesis in
humans. Nature Communications,3, 694.
Reed, J. A., & Blunk, E. M. (1990). The inﬂuence of facial hair on impression formation.
Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal,18, 169–175.
Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of
Rhodes, G., Simmons, L. W., & Peters, M. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior:
Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior,26,
Roberts, S. C., Owen, R. C., & Havlicek, J. (2010). Distinguishing between perceiver and
wearer effects in clothing color-associated attributions. Evolutionary Psychology,8,
Robinson, D. E. (1976). Fashions in shaving and trimming of the beard: The men of the
Illustrated London News, 1842–1972. The American Journal of Sociology,81,
Small, C. M., Manatunga, A. K., & Marcus, M. (2007). Validity of self-reported menstrual
cycle length. Annals of Epidemiology,17, 163–170.
Snyder, J. K., Fessler, D. M. T., Tiokhin, L., Frederick, D. A., Lee, S. W., & Navarrete, C. D.
(2011). Trade-offs in a dangerous world: Women's fear of crime predicts
preferences for aggressive and formidable mates. Evolution and Human Behavior,
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental
stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evolution and Human
Wogalter, M. S., & Hosie, J. A. (1991). Effects of cranial and facial hair on perceptions of
age and person. Journal of Social Psychology,131, 589–591.
Wood, D. R. (1986). Self-perceived masculinity between bearded and nonbearded
males. Perceptual and Motor Skills,62, 769–770.
241B.J. Dixson, R.C. Brooks / Evolution and Human Behavior 34 (2013) 236–241