Personality manipulations: Do they modulate facial attractiveness
, Fanchang Kong
, Yanli Zhong
, Hui Kou
Academy of Educational Science, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
School of Educational Science, Mianyang Normal University, Mianyang, China
School of Psychology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China
Key Laboratory of Cognition and Personality (Ministry of Education), School of Psychology, Southwest University, Chongqing, China
Received 15 May 2014
Received in revised form 20 June 2014
Accepted 21 June 2014
This study examines the inﬂuence of personality manipulations on female facial attractiveness ratings.
One hundred and twenty participants (60 males and 60 females) were randomly divided into three
groups (40 per group). Prior to the experiment, all participants rated 60 facial stimuli on attractiveness.
After two weeks, the participants again rated the same facial stimuli on attractiveness, when they were
presented with positive, negative, or no personality information. Results showed no signiﬁcant difference
in attractiveness scores among the three groups during the ﬁrst rating. However, during the second rat-
ing, a signiﬁcant effect for each group as well as a signiﬁcant interaction between attractiveness and the
group were found, with the attractiveness scores of all three groups differing signiﬁcantly for the faces
with high, medium, and low attractiveness (positive information group > no information group > nega-
tive information group, all p< 0.05). We ﬁnd that ‘‘what is good is beautiful,’’ with personality reﬂecting
desired traits as facial attractiveness. This phenomenon can also be called the ‘‘halo effect.’’ We can thus
presume that personality traits may contribute to judging facial attractiveness and that the personality
traits desired in a person are reﬂected in facial preference.
Ó2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Facial attractiveness reﬂects inner beauty, that is, spiritual and
moral beauty. The beauty-is-good stereotype (Dion, Berscheid, &
Walster, 1972) has been the focus of social psychological research
for more than three decades (Dion et al., 1972). The facial attrac-
tiveness stereotype illustrates that attractive individuals are
assumed to possess positive personality traits and to be morally
good (Dion et al., 1972; Langlois et al., 2000). Therefore, facial
attractiveness is positively related to socially favorable personality
traits such as friendliness, kindness, honesty, and trustworthiness
(Tsukiura & Cabeza, 2011). The attractiveness stereotype has
received extensive empirical support (Feingold, 1992). Evidence
gathered over the past 10 years has suggested that the key factors
used in judging facial attractiveness are averageness (Komori,
Kawamura, & Ishihara, 2009a,b), symmetry (Baudouin &
Tiberghien, 2004; Jones, DeBruine, & Little, 2007; Little, Burt,
Penton-Voak, & Perrett, 2001), and hormone-dependent facial fea-
tures (DeBruine, Jones, Smith, & Little, 2010; DeBruine et al., 2006;
Rennels, Bronstad, & Langlois, 2008). Although research on facial
attractiveness and health is prevalent in literature (Boothroyd,
Scott, Gray, Coombes, & Pound, 2013; Coetzee, Re, Perrett,
Tiddeman, & Xiao, 2011; Fink, Bunse, Matts, & D’Emiliano, 2012;
Gray & Boothroyd, 2012; Kramer & Ward, 2010; Marcinkowska
et al., 2014; Matthews, Rhee, Neuburg, Burzynski, & Nattinger,
2006; Reither, Hauser, & Swallen, 2009; Rhodes et al., 2007;
Stephen, Law Smith, Stirrat, & Perrett, 2009; Thornhill &
Gangestad, 2006), studies on personality attributions to facial
attractiveness remain lacking, particularly within an evolutionary
framework. Only a few studies have explored the association
between facial characteristics and personality in this domain
(Coetzee et al., 2011; Gray & Boothroyd, 2012; Jones, Kramer, &
Ward, 2012; Kramer & Ward, 2012).
Regarding facial symmetry, research has shown that people
who are facially symmetrical are emotionally healthy
(Shackelford & Larsen, 1997). This ﬁnding is based on the assump-
tion that facial symmetry is an indicator of physiological health.
Moreover, recent studies have extended and tested the hypothesis
0191-8869/Ó2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Corresponding author. Address: Academy of Educational Science, Huazhong
University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430074, China. Tel.: +86 151 0710
E-mail address: email@example.com (Y. Zhang).
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Personality and Individual Differences 70 (2014) 80–84
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
that facial symmetry may be related to certain personality charac-
teristics. In one study, 121 undergraduate students were asked to
use the 44-item Big-Five Inventory to rate digital photograph tar-
gets of 16 females of various races and ages (Noor & Evans,
2003). Targets with asymmetrical faces were rated to be signiﬁ-
cantly more neurotic, less agreeable, and less conscientious than
targets with normal faces. However, the study failed to detect an
effect of facial symmetry on facial attractiveness ratings. Similarly,
Fink et al. investigated associations between facial symmetry and
actual self-report personality assessed by using the 60-item NEO
Five-Factor Inventory among 120 undergraduate students (Fink,
Neave, Manning, & Grammer, 2005). In contrast to previous results,
the data collected from the aforementioned research conﬁrmed
that facial symmetry is positively associated with extraversion
but signiﬁcantly negatively related with agreeableness and open-
ness. In particular, neuroticism and conscientiousness are not sig-
niﬁcantly related with facial symmetry. Furthermore, the same
authors recorded 20 female faces with varying facial symmetries
and recruited 55 Caucasian volunteers to rate the faces based on
10 adjectives by using a seven-point Likert scale (Fink, Neave,
Manning, & Grammer, 2006). The results showed that faces with
high symmetry received signiﬁcantly high ratings on attractive-
ness and on some personality attributes such as sociability, intelli-
gence, and self-conﬁdence (Fink et al., 2006). Pound, Penton-Voak,
and Brown (2007) tested the ﬁndings of Fink et al. (2006) a signif-
icant positive association between self-reported extraversion and
facial symmetry by using a landmark-based measure of facial sym-
metry in males and females. These results are inconsistent with
those of previous experiments.
Gangestad and Thornhill (2003) showed that the degree of
facial masculinity is an indicator of honesty in men. However,
Thornhill and Gangestad (2006) argued that this ﬁnding may apply
to both sexes. Furthermore, facial masculinization was found to
covary with symmetry, thus resulting in the conclusion that facial
masculinity partly reﬂects underlying developmental stability and
disease resistance (Fink et al., 2006; Rhode & Arriaza, 2006). How-
ever, the ﬁndings of Rantala et al. (2013) challenged the view of
masculinity-health association, which indicated that adiposity,
compared with masculinity, serves as a more important cue to
immunocompetence in female mate choice. In addition, masculin-
ized faces, in relation to high levels of androgen, were considered
to possess fewer desirable personality traits compared with femi-
nized faces (Boothroyd, Jones, Burt, & Perrett, 2007; Kruger,
2006; Penton-Voak et al., 2001). Furthermore, Koehler, Simmons,
Rhodes, and Peters (2004) provided reliable measures of asymme-
try, which are perceived to be symmetrical, and of sexual dimor-
phism, which are perceived as feminine in females and
masculine in males; however, they did not examine the relation-
ship between facial sexual dimorphism and personality.
Previous studies have examined the relation among facial sym-
metry, masculinity, perceived dimorphism, and personality, but
the results found were mixed. Fink et al. (2005) showed that facial
symmetry contributes to personality attributes but they did not
consider other attractiveness factors, which hinders direct compar-
isons. Moreover, such associations may arise if perceived attrac-
tiveness covaries with other facial traits (such as averageness,
masculinity, and perceived dimorphism) that drive personality
attributions rather than if symmetry directly drives these attribu-
tions (Scheib, Gangestad, & Thornhill, 1999). Rhodes et al. found
that averageness, symmetry, and masculinity were all signiﬁcant
components of attractiveness, as rated from videos (Rhodes et al.,
2011). Furthermore, existing studies have investigated whether
facial attractiveness contributes to personality, but only a few
studies have explored whether personality contributes to facial
attractiveness because the effects are considered reciprocal.
Therefore, the present study explored whether integral facial
attractiveness, rather than one kind of traits (such as symmetry,
averageness, or dimorphism), is affected by personality informa-
tion. We hypothesized that facial attractiveness is signiﬁcantly
affected by personality information. In particular, the rating scores
on facial attractiveness were evaluated by following positive per-
sonality words in contrast to without personality words. Moreover,
the rating scores on facial attractiveness were reduced by follow-
ing negative personality words in contrast to without personality
The participants comprised 120 volunteers (60 males and 60
females) between 19 and 22 years old from native Chinese Han
in a university. Each participant signed an informed consent before
the procedure was fully explained. Participants were given small
tokens for their participation. All participants were right-handed
and had normal vision, with no self-reported history of neurologi-
cal or psychiatric disorder.
We collected 845 photographs of unfamiliar Chinese female
faces (approximately 20–30 years of age) with neutral emotional
expression from the Google database. Standardized facial stimuli
was validated from a recent study (Zhang et al., 2011), with 60
facial images (including 20 each with high, medium, and low
attractiveness) selected as experimental stimuli. Personality attri-
butes were also selected from a standardized personality word
pool (Kong, Zhang, & Chen, 2012). A total of 30 words were selected
to describe positive personality traits (e.g., decent, honest),
whereas the remaining 30 were selected to describe negative per-
sonality traits (e.g., evil, mean). The ratings demonstrated excellent
reliability (Cronbach’s alpha was 0.857 for positive personality
traits, and 0.869 for negative personality traits) by a sample of
125 college students. The visual stimuli was 2-character Chinese
words above the facial images.
The participants were randomly divided into three groups, with
ﬁrst group 18 boys, 22 girls (age ranges from 19 to 22 years old),
second group 21 boys, 19 girls (age ranges from 19 to 21 years
old), and third group 21 boys, 19 girls (age ranges from 19 to
22 years old). Prior to the experiment, all the participants rated
the 60 facial stimuli from 1 (lowest) to 9 (highest) in terms of
attractiveness. Each trial began with a ﬁxation cross (300 ms),
and the target stimulus (800 ms), followed by a 300-ms clear
screen, and ﬁnally followed by a 1500-ms responded screen.
After two weeks, the participants again rated the same 60 facial
stimuli from 1 (lowest) to 9 (highest). However, one of three con-
ditions (positive personality, negative personality, or no informa-
tion) was assigned to each group before the second rating. Two
words belonging to either the positive or negative personality
traits were randomly selected from the personality word pool to
describe the personality of each facial image before the partici-
pants rated the facial stimuli. The facial stimuli were then
randomly presented within two rating processes.
2.4. Statistical analyses
Data were analyzed using SPSS 17.0 for windows (SPSS Inc, Chi-
cago, Illinois). The repeated-measure ANOVA was conducted to
Y. Zhang et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 70 (2014) 80–84 81
compare the rating scores on facial attractiveness, with group
(positive/negative/no information) and gender (male/female) as
between factors, and attractiveness (high/medium/low) as a within
factor. For all analyses, p-values were corrected for deviation from
sphericity according to the Greenhouse–Geisser method. The
results section reports the main effects and interactions, based
on the main hypothesis of the study. Bonferroni post hoc test
was conducted when the main effect was signiﬁcant, and simple
effect test was performed when the interaction effect was
A repeated-measure ANOVA to analyze the attractiveness
scores for the ﬁrst time rating (ANOVA values are presented in
Table 1). There was a signiﬁcant main effect for attractiveness.
Bonferroni post hoc test revealed that the attractiveness scores dif-
fered signiﬁcantly [high (3.83 ± 0.03) > medium (3.62 ± 0.02) > low
(3.45 ± 0.02)] (all p< 0.001). However, there was no signiﬁcant
effect for gender or group, and no signiﬁcant attractiveness gen-
der group interaction.
A repeated-measure ANOVA to analyze the mean differences on
attractiveness scores for the second time rating (ANOVA values are
presented in Table 1). There was a signiﬁcant main effect for attrac-
tiveness. Bonferroni post hoc test revealed that the attractiveness
scores differed signiﬁcantly [high (3.83 ± 0.03) > medium
(3.62 ± 0.02) > low (3.45 ± 0.02)] (all p< 0.001). Specially, a signiﬁ-
cant main effect for group was found. Bonferroni post hoc test
revealed that the attractiveness scores of all three groups differed
signiﬁcantly [positive group (5.18 ± 0.14) > no information group
(4.44 ± 0.14) > negative group (3.10 ± 0.14)] (all p< 0.001). There
also was a signiﬁcant attractiveness group interaction. Simple
effect analysis revealed that attractiveness scores of all three
groups differed signiﬁcantly for high, medium, and low attractive
faces (positive group > no information group > negative group, all
p< 0.05). Furthermore, a paired-t test to compare the differences
of attractiveness scores between the ﬁrst time rating and the sec-
ond time rating. It showed that the differences were signiﬁcant
on positive group (ﬁrst time rating < the second time rating, all
p< 0.05) and negative group (ﬁrst time rating > the second time
rating, all p< 0.05) (see Fig. 1).
Meta-analyses indicate that attractive children and adults are
judged more positively than unattractive children and adults, even
by those who know them, and that attractive children and adults
exhibit more positive behaviors and traits than unattractive chil-
dren and adults (Langlois et al., 2000). However, we hypothesized
that personality trait manipulation could inﬂuence attractiveness
ratings, with participants giving high attractiveness scores when
they were presented with positive personality information about
a target and low attractiveness scores when they were presented
with negative personality information. Our results suggest that
the personality of an individual may affect his or her facial attrac-
tiveness evaluation and that personality correlates with facial
attractiveness. Positive personality characteristics can increase
perceptions of physical attractiveness, which is in line with exist-
ing research, e.g., Knifﬁn and Wilson (2004). A meta-analytic
review of research on physical attractiveness stereotype also sug-
gested that the subjects in such studies ascribed more favorable
personality traits and more successful life outcomes to attractive
targets than to unattractive targets (Eagly, Makhijani, Ashmore, &
Longo, 1991). These ﬁndings shed new light on the ‘‘what is beau-
tiful is good’’ stereotype. Furthermore, Little, Burt, and Perrett
(2006) found that if a trait is desired, then faces perceived to pos-
sess such a trait are considered more attractive than faces that do
not possess such a trait. Thus, possessing desirable personality
traits may be a factor in making a face attractive, and the person-
ality desired in a partner is reﬂected in face preference. We ﬁnd
that ‘‘what is good is beautiful,’’ with personality reﬂecting desired
traits as facially attractive. This phenomenon has also been called
the ‘‘halo effect’’ (Zebrowitz & Franklin, 2014).
Researchers have recently explored the relationships between
attractiveness and personality. A number of ﬁndings suggest posi-
tive associations between attractiveness and socially desirable
characteristics in individuals (e.g., facial attractiveness, olfactory
attractiveness, auditory attractiveness, and dancing ability)
(Pound et al., 2007). However, most studies have only explored
whether attractiveness is a predictive factor of good personality
traits. The major contribution of this study is the ﬁnding that per-
sonality characteristics may be linked to facial attractiveness, such
that positive personality characteristics can promote facial attrac-
tiveness, whereas negative personality characteristics can reduce
The putative mechanisms underlying the associations between
personality traits and facial attractiveness remain unclear. One
possibility relates to the effect of physiology on the developmental
processes of the face and on the sex-dependent aspects of person-
ality. For example, hormones (i.e., testosterone and estrogen) can
affect growth rates and facial proportions (Gangestad &
Thornhill, 2003). It suggests that asymmetry and negative person-
alities should be associated more than asymmetry and positive
personality. However, this requires further study. Another possible
explanation for this outcome is the mere exposure effect
(Bornstein, 1989), by which people show less favorable attitudes
toward novel stimuli than toward stimuli that they encounter fre-
quently. The participants may have attributed traits that are not
too favorable to asymmetrical, abnormal, or unfamiliar faces
because they undoubtedly have less exposure to asymmetrical or
abnormal faces than to normal faces. Attractive faces frequently
presented on TV or magazines carry a strong social-desirability
connotation, which leads us to believe that facial attractiveness
ANOVA examining attractive rating scores by group and participant gender.
Source 1st round of ratings 2nd round of ratings
df F p
df F p
Attractiveness 1.95 102.256 .000 .473 1.61 101.504 .000 .471
Attractiveness gender 1.95 2.627 .076 .023 1.61 1.953 .154 .017
Attractiveness group 3.90 1.636 .168 .028 3.21 2.810 .037 .047
Attractiveness gender group 3.90 1.362 .249 .023 3.21 1.395 .244 .024
Within-group error 221.87 182.93
Gender 1 .058 .811 .001 1 2.207 .140 .019
Group 2 .291 .748 .005 2 54.867 .000 .490
Gender group 2 .659 .519 .011 2 .351 .705 .006
Between-group error 114 114
82 Y. Zhang et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 70 (2014) 80–84
has an interactive effect on personality impressions. Thus, people
who are frequently judged to have a positive personality, either
those with good conduct, or those who are virtuous or honest,
are also judged to be facially attractive.
Future work should also explore whether the differential effects
of facial attractiveness, as well as other moderators, including
social status and age, exist across race. Although several studies
have explored facial attractiveness perception differences among
various race or gender groups (Lewis, 2012; Yamamoto, Ariely,
Chi, Langleben, & Elman, 2009), personality factors were rarely
considered. Additional research is also necessary to assess the
inﬂuence of personality information on rating male targets. More-
over, the present data suggest that the ﬁndings do not only apply
to facial attractiveness ratings, but also to personality attributions.
In summary, we hope that the results of this study will broaden
our understanding of the constellation of facial attractiveness,
personality, and social desirability, which comprise the beauty-
Our ﬁndings suggest that human preferences for faces are
shaped by adaptive mechanisms, which are driven by the interest
of good quality. In humans, this quality may not be restricted to
physical conditions, such as attractiveness, but may also relate to
certain personality characteristics. This ﬁnding indicates that
human interior psychological activity is related to exterior physical
feature, and that a human is the whole entity of psychology and
5. Ethics statement
Each participant signed an informed consent before the proce-
dure was fully explained. Approval was granted by the Research
Ethics Committee of the Academy of Educational Sciences, Huaz-
hong University of Science and Technology, China. All participants
were right-handed and had normal vision, with no self-reported
history of neurological or psychiatric disorder. All the authors have
approved the manuscript and agree with submission to your
esteemed journal. There are no conﬂicts of interest to declare.
This research was supported and granted by Chinese National
Natural Science Foundation at Youth Project (31200787), and
Huazhong University of Science and Technology Innovation Foun-
dation at Youth Project (2014AC012) to Yan Zhang. We thank all
participants for their time and interest as well as the editor and
reviewers for their valuable feedback.
Baudouin, J. Y., & Tiberghien, G. (2004). Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in
the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychologica, 117, 313–332.
Boothroyd, L. G., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2007). Partner
characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male
faces. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1161–1173.
Boothroyd, L. G., Scott, I., Gray, A. W., Coombes, C. I., & Pound, N. (2013). Male facial
masculinity as a cue to health outcomes. Evolutionary Psychology: An
International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to Psychology and Behavior, 11,
Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect – overview and meta-analysis of
research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265–289.
Coetzee, V., Re, D., Perrett, D. I., Tiddeman, B. P., & Xiao, D. (2011). Judging the health
and attractiveness of female faces: Is the most attractive level of facial adiposity
also considered the healthiest? Body Image, 8, 190–193.
DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Boothroyd, L. G., Perrett, D. I., Penton-Voak, I.
S., et al. (2006). Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual
partner’s masculinity. Proceedings Biological sciences/The Royal Society, 273,
DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., Smith, F. G., & Little, A. C. (2010). Are attractive men’s
faces masculine or feminine? The importance of controlling confounds in face
stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance,
Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285–290.
Eagly, A. H., Makhijani, M. G., Ashmore, R. D., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful
is good, but – a meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness
stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109–128.
Feingold, A. (1992). Gender differences in mate selection preferences: A test of the
parental investment model. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 125–139.
Fink, B., Bunse, L., Matts, P. J., & D’Emiliano, D. (2012). Visible skin colouration
predicts perception of male facial age, health and attractiveness. International
Journal of Cosmetic Science, 34, 307–310.
Fink, B., Neave, N., Manning, J. T., & Grammer, K. (2005). Facial symmetry and the
‘big-ﬁve’ personality factors. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 523–529.
Fink, B., Neave, N., Manning, J. T., & Grammer, K. (2006). Facial symmetry and
judgements of attractiveness, health and personality. Personality and Individual
Differences, 41, 491–499.
Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (2003). Facial masculinity and ﬂuctuating
asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 231–241.
Gray, A. W., & Boothroyd, L. G. (2012). Female facial appearance and health.
Evolutionary Psychology: An International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to
Psychology and Behavior, 10, 66–77.
Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., & Little, A. C. (2007). The role of symmetry in attraction
to average faces. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1273–1277.
Jones, A. L., Kramer, R. S., & Ward, R. (2012). Signals of personality and health: The
contributions of facial shape, skin texture, and viewing angle. Journal of
Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1353–1361.
Knifﬁn, K. M., & Wilson, D. S. (2004). The effect of nonphysical traits on the
perception of physical attractiveness – Three naturalistic studies. Evolution and
Human Behavior, 25, 88–101.
Koehler, N., Simmons, L. W., Rhodes, G., & Peters, M. (2004). The relationship
between sexual dimorphism in human faces and ﬂuctuating asymmetry.
Proceedings Biological Sciences/The Royal Society, 271(Suppl. 4), S233–236.
Komori, M., Kawamura, S., & Ishihara, S. (2009a). Averageness or symmetry: Which
is more important for facial attractiveness? Acta Psychologica, 131, 136–142.
Komori, M., Kawamura, S., & Ishihara, S. (2009b). Effect of averageness and sexual
dimorphism on the judgment of facial attractiveness. Vision Research, 49,
Kong, F., Zhang, Y., & Chen, H. (2012). ERP differences between processing of
physical characteristics and personality attributes. Behavioral and Brain
Functions: BBF, 8,49.
Kramer, R. S., & Ward, R. (2010). Internal facial features are signals of personality
and health. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A (Hove), 63,
Kramer, R. S., & Ward, R. (2012). Cues to personality and health in the facial
appearance of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Evolutionary Psychology: An
International Journal of Evolutionary Approaches to Psychology and Behavior, 10,
Kruger, D. J. (2006). Male facial masculinity inﬂuences attributions of personality
and reproductive strategy. Personal Relationships, 13, 451–463.
Fig. 1. Attractiveness scores among three groups for high, medium, and low attractiveness.
Y. Zhang et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 70 (2014) 80–84 83
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M.
(2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review.
Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390–423.
Lewis, M. B. (2012). A facial attractiveness account of gender asymmetries in
interracial marriage. PLoS One, 7, e31703.
Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Perrett, D. I. (2001). Self-perceived
attractiveness inﬂuences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and
symmetry in male faces. Proceedings Biological Sciences/The Royal Society, 268,
Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2006). What is good is beautiful: Face
preference reﬂects desired personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 41,
Marcinkowska, U. M., Kozlov, M. V., Cai, H. J., Contreras-Garduno, J., Dixson, B. J.,
Oana, G. A., et al. (2014). Cross-cultural variation in men’s preference for sexual
dimorphism in women’s faces. Biology Letters, 10.
Matthews, B. A., Rhee, J. S., Neuburg, M., Burzynski, M. L., & Nattinger, A. B. (2006).
Development of the facial skin care index: A health-related outcomes index for
skin cancer patients. Dermatologic Surgery: Ofﬁcial Publication for American
Society for Dermatologic Surgery, 32, 924–934 (discussion 934).
Noor, F., & Evans, D. C. (2003). The effect of facial symmetry on perceptions of
personality and attractiveness. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 339–347.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Baker, S., Tiddeman, B., Burt, D. M., et al.
(2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial
attractiveness. Proceedings Biological Sciences/The Royal Society, 268, 1617–1623.
Pound, N., Penton-Voak, I. S., & Brown, W. M. (2007). Facial symmetry is positively
associated with self-reported extraversion. Personality and Individual
Differences, 43, 1572–1582.
Rantala, M. J., Coetzee, V., Moore, F. R., Skrinda, I., Kecko, S., Krama, T., et al. (2013).
Adiposity, compared with masculinity, serves as a more valid cue to
immunocompetence in human mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society B:
Biological Sciences, 280,12.
Reither, E. N., Hauser, R. M., & Swallen, K. C. (2009). Predicting adult health and
mortality from adolescent facial characteristics in yearbook photographs.
Demography, 46, 27–41.
Rennels, J. L., Bronstad, P. M., & Langlois, J. H. (2008). Are attractive men’s faces
masculine or feminine? The importance of type of facial stimuli. Journal of
Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 34, 884–893.
Rhode, M. P., & Arriaza, B. T. (2006). Inﬂuence of cranial deformation on facial
morphology among prehistoric south central Andean populations. American
Journal of Physical Anthropology, 130, 462–470.
Rhodes, G., Lie, H. C., Thevaraja, N., Taylor, L., Iredell, N., Curran, C., et al. (2011).
Facial attractiveness ratings from video-clips and static images tell the same
story. PLoS One, 6, e26653.
Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, S., Palermo, R., Simmons, L. W., Peters, M., Lee, K., et al.
(2007). Perceived health contributes to the attractiveness of facial symmetry,
averageness, and sexual dimorphism. Perception, 36, 1244–1252.
Scheib, J. E., Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1999). Facial attractiveness, symmetry
and cues of good genes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,
Shackelford, T. K., & Larsen, R. J. (1997). Facial asymmetry as an indicator of
psychological, emotional, and physiological distress. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 72, 456–466.
Stephen, I. D., Law Smith, M. J., Stirrat, M. R., & Perrett, D. I. (2009). Facial skin
coloration affects perceived health of human faces. International Journal of
Primatology, 30, 845–857.
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (2006). Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental
stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evolution and Human
Behavior, 27, 131–144.
Tsukiura, T., & Cabeza, R. (2011). Shared brain activity for aesthetic and moral
judgments: implications for the Beauty-is-Good stereotype. Social Cognitive and
Affective Neuroscience, 6, 138–148.
Yamamoto, R., Ariely, D., Chi, W., Langleben, D. D., & Elman, I. (2009). Gender
differences in the motivational processing of babies are determined by their
facial attractiveness. PLoS One, 4, e6042.
Zebrowitz, L. A., & Franklin, R. G. (2014). The attractiveness halo effect and the
Babyface stereotype in older and younger adults: Similarities, own-age
accentuation, and older adult positivity effects. Experimental Aging Research,
Zhang, Y., Kong, F., Chen, H., Jackson, T., Han, L., Meng, J., et al. (2011). Identifying
cognitive preferences for attractive female faces: An event-related potential
experiment using a study-test paradigm. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 89,
84 Y. Zhang et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 70 (2014) 80–84