ArticlePDF Available

Smiling, body position, and interpersonal attraction

Authors:

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1, regardless of her body position, a woman who smiled the majority of the time (70%) was seen as more interpersonally attractive than a woman who seldom smiled (20%). When the woman seldom smiled, she was rated as more interpersonally attractive when she displayed open body positions than when she displayed closed body positions. In Experiment 2, the closed body position/smiling and nonsmiling effect was replicated. Subjects’ eye gazes were monitored while they viewed the slides of the woman. Regardless of the smiling condition, subjects looked at the woman’s face about 55% of their total looking time.
Bulletin
of
the Psychonomic Society
1978, Vol. 12 (1)
.21-24
Smiling, body position, and
interpersonal attraction
HUGH
McGINLEY, PATSY McGINLEY,
and
KAREN
NICHOLAS
University
of
Wyoming, Laramie, Wyoming 82071
Two experiments were conducted. In
Experiment
I, regardless of her body position, awoman
who smiled
the
majority of the time (70%) was seen as more interpersonally
attractive
than
awoman who seldom smiled (20%). When
the
woman seldom smiled, she was
rated
as more
interpersonally
attractive
when she displayed open body positions
than
when
she
displayed
closed body positions. In Experiment 2, the closed body position/smiling
and
nonsmiling effect
was replicated.
Subjects'
eye gazes were monitored while they viewed the slides of
the
woman.
Regardless of
the
smiling condition, subjects looked
at
the
woman's face
about
55% of
their
total looking time.
McGinley, leFevre, and McGinley (1975) and
McGinley, Nicholas, and McGinley (1978) found
that
a
female stranger was evaluated more positively when she
displayed open as opposed to closed body positions.
Although body positions were manipulated, there was
no attempt to systematically manipulate other non-
verbal information about the stranger.
Given the importance of the face in the expression of
emotions, it seems that a valuable extension of the
McGinley et al. (1975, 1978) studies would be to inves-
tigate.the concomitant effects of body position and facial
expression on interpersonal attraction. Obviously, how-
ever, facial expressions per se are multitudinous, and a
specific aspect of them , such as smiling, would be a
reasonable choice for an initial investigation .'
Though smiles can be used for deviated purposes such
as deceit (Ekman &Friesen, 1975), they are more com-
monly associated with friendliness, happiness, and joy
(Izard, 1971). Without discussing the possible innateness
of smiling and its inherent relationship to pleasant inter-
nal stimuli or to the removal of unpleasant internal stim-
uli, it seems safe to say that from early infancy humans
are exposed to others who smile and that those smiles
are usually temporally associated with rewarding inter-
personal interactions that satisfy physical and social
needs. As a result of these associations, the smile becomes
aconditioned stimulus that elicits emotional responses
that commonly stimulate evaluative positive overt re-
sponses. This interpretation is generally consistent with
Lott and Lott 's (1972) theory of interpersonal liking.
Empirically speaking, a female stranger who expresses
open body positions
is
seen as more interpersonally
attractive than one who displays closed body positions.
If smiling elicits positive evaluative responses, the effect
of combining smiling and body positions should lead to
higher attraction when a person expresses open body
positions and smiles a lot than when the person expresses
Requests for reprints should be sent to Hugh McGinley,
Department of Psychology , University of Wyoming, Laramie,
Wyoming 8207 1.
closed positions and smiles or when the person smiles
little and displays either open or closed body positions.
In the first experiment, subjects were shown slides of
a stranger displaying either open or closed body positions
and either smiling or not smiling. Experiment 1prompted
the second experiment, in which the subjects' eye-gaze
behavior was monitored to see if the stranger's smiling
or unsmiling face was attended to differentially:
EXPERIMENT 1
Method
Subjects. Ninety-six female student s from introductory
psychology classes at
the
University of Wyoming volunteered to
participate in the experiment. The subjects met in small groups
of from two to seven people.
Materials and Equipment. We used 50 color slides
of
a model
stranger, a Kodak 860Z projector, two Hunter timers, the Inter-
personal Judgment Scale (IJS) (Byrne , 1971), bipolar scales of
evaluations, and a postexperimental questionnaire.
The 50 slides consisted
of
10 neutral
body
position slides of
the stranger and 10 slides each of open body position/smiling,
open body position/nonsmiling, closed
body
position/smiling,
and closed body position/nonsmiling. Two independent judges
selected the slides from over 400 taken of the female model
stranger. Only slides consistently rated as depicting the stranger
in open, neutral, or closed body positions and smiling or not
smiling were used. The criterion for rating consistency was that
both judges agreed on a slide's rating during an initial and retest
judgment. Within the smiling category,
body
positions were
matched (i.e., a body position was presented in both a smiling
and nonsmiling mode). The open body slides showed the model
in various combinations of the following: leaning backward, legs
stretched out , knees apart , one ankle crossed over the other
. knee, elbows far away from her body, hands held outward, and
arms held outward from her body either at her side or elevated .
The closed body slides showed that model in some combination
of the following: elbows next to her body, arms crossed, hands
folded in her lap, knees pressed together, feet together, and legs
crossed at either the knees or the ankles. In the 10 neutral slides,
the model was typically leaning back , her legs slightly stretched
out and slightly apart, hands resting on her lap or on her thighs ,
and arms held relatively close to her sides.
The US (Byrne, 1971) consisted of six seven-alternative items
having to do with intelligence , personal liking, working together,
personal adju stment, morality , and knowledge of current events .
As is typical for attraction research using the US, the ratings '
21
22 McGINLEY, McGINLEY, AND NICHOLAS
Body Position
Note-
Values
with different superscripts differ at p <.01.
The standard error
of
the mean for the IJS-Attraction and
Evaluation-Attraction data, respectively, were .44 and .67.
For both sets
of
data, the higher the score the more positive the
attraction.
EXPERIMENT 2
Perhaps, given the relatively short viewing time for
each slide (5.5 sec), subjects who saw the smiling stranger
were attracted to her smile and spent less time looking
at her body and, therefore, were not influenced by body
position. The largest difference in the evaluations occur-
red when the stranger expressed closed positions and
Table 1
Mean Attraction Scores for Body Position
and Smiling Conditions, Experiment I
because the subjects indicated they knew the stranger).
For the US score, there was a borderline body position
effect [F(1,89) =3.61, P< .07] and a smiling effect
[F(1,89) =33.77,
p<
.OOl]. However, the Body Position
by Smiling interaction was noteworthy [F(1 ,89) =3.66,
p < .07] . To avoid a Type
II
error (which is likely where
there is a borderline level
of
significance for a main effect
and a borderline interaction
of
another variable with that
main effect), simple effects analyses were conducted.
Analyses showed that the stranger was rated as most.
attractive when she smiled; when she smiled a majority
of
the time, there was no effect for body position. When
she smiled very little (20%), she was viewed as less
attractive. The latter effect, however, was affected by
body position; the stranger was seen as less attractive in
the closed than in the open body positions. The bipolar
scales
of
evaluation data led to similar findings. There
was a significant smiling effect [F(1,89) =12.42, p <
.001] and, although there was no main effect for body
position, the Body Position by Smiling interaction was
significant [F(1,89) =3.96, p < .05]. Simple effects
analyses for these data led to the same conclusion as did
those for the US data. Means for both attraction meas-
ures are shown in Table 1. In summary, when there was
a higher percentage of smiling by the stranger (70%),
body position did not matter; body position made a
difference if she smiled little (20%). The latter conclusion
was supported by the McGinley et al.
(1975,1978)
find-
ing that a nonsmiling stranger displaying open body posi-
tions was seen as more evaluatively positive than on dis-
playing closed positions.
The effect
of
the smiling variable on the body position
variable can be seen in Figures 1 and 2. Two judges read
the responses to the postexperimental questionnaire.
There was no evidence that the subjects were intuitively
aware of the hypothesized relationship between smiling,
body position, and interpersonal attraction.
Closed
22.87a
15.44C
Open
22.75a
17.79b
Evaluation-Attraction
Closed
ll
.l3a
7.78C
US-Attraction
Open
1l.l3a
9.44b
70%
20%
Smiling
made with the liking and working together items were summed
as a single measure
of
interpersonal attraction. A high score indi-
cated interpersonal attraction (positive evaluation). A secondary
measure
of
attraction was made by having the subjects rate the
stranger on four seven-interval bipolar scales
of
evaluation
(sweet-sour, clean-dirty, bad-good, and cruel-kind). The ratings
were summed to a single score from 4 (negative) to 28 (positive).
The postexperimental questionnaire consisted of six ques-
tions designed to gather information about the subjects' percep-
tion
of
the experiment. The questions were (a) what were you
supposed to do; (b) what kind of results do you think we expect
to find; (c) were your judgm ents about the woman based on how
you felt about her or on how you thought we expected you to
respond (explain); (d) what was the purpose of asking you to
make judgments about the woman ; (e) specifically, how do you
think we expected you to feel about the woman;
(f)
what
other comments do you have?
Procedure. When the subjects arrived at the psychology
laboratory, they were met by a female experimenter wearing a
white laboratory coat. She introduced herself and explained that
the experiment, as the subjects had been told prior to volunteer-
ing, involved person perception. The subjects were told that they
would receive limited information about a female stranger and
that the information was in the form of 20 color slides that had
been taken of the woman while she conversed about various
topics. The experimenter then told the subjects that they would
be asked to make judgments about the woman, based on the in-
formation received. The lights were dimmed and the subjects
were shown the slides. The slides were shown on a wall screen
to a projected size of approximately 120 x 180 cm. Each slide
was shown for 5 .5 sec; the inter slide interval was approximately
.75 sec. Following the slide presentation, the subjects made
interpersonal judgments about the stranger and filled out the
postexperimental questionnaire.
The experimental manipulation was made using four dif-
ferent sets of slides: (a) Open body position/smiling, where
10 neutral body positon slides were interspersed with 10 open
body position slides of the stranger. The stranger was smiling in
all 10 of the open body posiiton slides and in four of the neutral
body position slides. (b) Closed body position/smiling, where the
same 10 neutral slides were interspersed with 10 closed body
position slides. All of the closed body position slides and four
of
the neutral body slides showed the stranger smiling. (c) Open
body position/nonsmiling, where 10 neutral body position slides
were mixed in with 10 open body position slides. None of the
open body position slides showed the stranger smiling; however,
she was shown smiling in four of the neutral body position
slides. The open body positions were matched to those shown in
the open body position/smiling condition. (d) Closed body
position/nonsmiling, where the 10 neutral slides were inter-
spersed with 10 closed body position slides. None of the closed
body position slides showed the stranger smiling. As in the other
conditions, the stranger was smiling in four of the neutral body
position slides. The body position manipulation, then, consisted
of 50% neutral and 50% either open or closed body position
slides, while the smiling manipulation consisted
of
either 20%
(4/20) or 70% (14/20) smiling across the 20 slides.
Hypothesis. In accord with prior results (McGinley et al.,
1975, 1978), we hypothesized a body position effect where the
stranger would be rated as more interpersonally attractive when
she expressed open body positions than when she expressed
closed body positions. Also, we speculated that the stranger
would be evaluated more positively when she smiled frequently
than
when
she
seldom
smiled
.
Furthermore,
we
speculated
that
with respect to the attraction elicited by the stranger, the order
of the experimental conditions from high to low would be
smiling-open, smiling-closed, nonsmiling-open, and nonsmiling-
closed.
Resultsand
Discussion
Attraction scores were analyzed by analysis
of
vari-
ance with unequal ns (three subjects' data were omitted
either smiled frequently or seldom (Table I) . If these
differences were also associated with significant differ-
ences in where subjects looked at the stranger, one could
conjecture that the body position effect was negated in
the smiling conditions, not because of a strong effect of
the smiles per se, but because the smiles resulted in the
subjects' inattention to the body position. To test this
possibility, we monitored the subjects' eye-gaze patterns
while they viewed the slidesof the stranger.
Method
Subjects. Thirty-nine female students from the University
of California at San Diego volunteered to serve as subjects. They
were obtained through bulletin board advertisement and direct
solicitation. The subjects ranged from freshmen to graduate
students but were mostly freshmen and sophomores. Each sub-
ject was seen individually and was paid $2 for her participation.
Materials and Equipment. With minor exceptions, the ma-
terials and equipment were the same as those used in Experi-
ment 1. The bipolar scales were not used and only the slides
from the closed body position/smiling and closed body position/
nonsmiling conditions were used. The slides were projected to a
size of approximately 80 x 120 em. The slide time was 5.5 sec,
while the interslide time was .75 sec. Also, a Whittaker Eye
View monitor and pupillometer system was used to record the
subjects' eye movements." The eye movement data were reo
corded on a Sony 3650 videocorder and then analyzed at a later
date. These data were scored for time spent looking at the face
of the stranger. The times were recorded in seconds and tenths
of seconds and were twice measured by a singlejudge. The data
that were used in the analyses were the average of the two
face-viewing times. The interrater coefficient of reliability for
the two time measures was .99.
Procedure. The procedure was the same as in Experiment I,
except that in this experiment the subject was told that her
pupillary response would be monitored while she viewed the
pictures of the stranger and thought about what kind of person
the stranger was. Also, for each subject, the eye monitoring
equipment had to be aligned; the alignment took between
2 and 5 min.
Results and Discussion
The attraction data showed that subjects who saw the
closed body position/smiling slides were more interper-
sonally attracted to the stranger than were those who saw
the closed body position/nonsmiling slides. The means
were, respectively, 10.61 and 7.95 [t(37) =4.94, p <
.0 I] . This result is consistent with that in Experiment 1.
The looking data were based on 38 subjects, as the
data for one subject could not be used. Analysis of these
data revealed no difference in face-viewing behavior be-
tween subjects who viewed the smiling pictures and those
who viewed the stranger smiling very little . On the aver-
age, subjects spent about 55% of their viewing time look-
ing at the stranger's face. Face-viewing times ranged
from 30% to 95% of the total looking time. Usually, the
subjects looked at the stranger's face, scanned across
various parts of her body, then looked back at her face.
Although Experiment 2 was conducted as a descrip-
tive study, we thought that a smiling face would attract
more visual attention. However, the smiling and nonsmil-
ing faces attracted similar visual attention. Perhaps the
subjects modified their eye-gaze behavior because they
were aware
of
our interest in where they looked while
viewing the slides. This possibility, however, was not
SMILINGAND BODY POSITION 23
Figure 1. Examples of open body positions with a smiling
(a) and nonsmiling stranger (b).
supported by responses to the postexperimental ques-
tionnaire. When the experimenter introduced the experi-
mental task to the subjects, he spoke
of
monitoring the
pupil for size changes but did not mention recording eye
gaze. A majority
of
the subjects, in their responses to
the postexperimental questionnaire, referred to the rela-
24
McGINLEY,
McGINLEY,
AND
NICHOLAS
Figure~
.
Examples of closed body positions with a smiling
(a) and nonsmiling stranger
(b).
tionship between pupil size and emotional state,
but
not
one mentioned that the experimenter might be interested
in where she was looking while viewing the slides.
CONCLUSION
Although
both
body position and smiling are aspects of
human behavior that frequently and consistently occur during
interpersonal interactions, very little is known about their
effects on the perceived attraction of the interacting individuals.
While the results of the present experiments shed some light on
the effects
of
these variables, the generalizations that can be
made from these effects are limited because : (a) the lack of a
difference between open and closed body position when the
stranger smiled frequently may have been due to a limiting
effect of the attraction scale; (b) a single stranger was used and
since physical attractiveness is known to be related to inter-
personal attraction, the results may have been confounded with
the subjects' perceptions of the stranger's physical attractiveness;
and (c) only female subjects and a female stranger were used .
With these limitations in mind, the results of the two experi-
ments indicate that both smiling and body position influence
interpersonal attraction, but that these variables interact such
that high smiling negates the attraction effect of body position
on interpersonal attraction. Overall, these results warrant the
further investigation of the concomitant effects of personal
nonverbal behaviors on interpersonal attraction.
REFERENCES
BYRNE,
D. The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic
Press, 1971.
EKMAN,
P., &
FRIESEN,
W. V. Unmasking the face.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J : Prentice-Hall, 1975.
IZARD,
C. E. The face
of
emotion. New York: Appleton-
Century-Crofts, 1971.
LoTI, A. J., &LOTI, B. E. The power of liking: Consequences
of interpersonal attitudes derived from a liberalized view of
secondary reinforcement. In 1. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances
in experimental social psychology (Vol. 6). New York:
Academic Press, 1972. Pp. 109-148.
MCGINLEY,
H.,
LEFEVRE,
R., &
MCGINLEY,
P. The influ-
ence of a communicator's body position on opinion change
in others. Journal
of
Personality and Social Psychology,
1975, 31, 486-490.
MCGINLEY
, H.,
NICHOLAS,
K., &
MCGINLEY,
P. Effects of
body position and attitude similarity on interpersonal
attraction and opinion change . Psychological Reports ,
1978, 42, 127-138.
NOTES
1. In their 1975 study, McGinley et al. had nearly equal
numbers
of
smiles in their open and closed body position condi-
tions, seven and six respectively . The faces were inked
out
in
the 1978 study .
2. The Whittaker equipment was borrowed from the Navy
Personnel Development and Research Center, San Diego, Cali-
fornia. Our thanks to Ed Aiken and Tom Duffy for the loan of
the equipment. Also, we wish to thank Jean Mandler and the
psychology department at the University of California at San
Diego for allowing us the use of research facilities.
(Receivedfor publication March 6,1978.)
... . Voir quelqu'un sourire est un plaisir (Shore & Heerey, 2011). Il n'est donc pas surprenant que les sourires contribuent à des premières impressions positives (Hess, Beaupré, & Cheung, 2002) et que les personnes souriantes soient perçues comme agréables (McGinley, McGinley, & Nicholas, 1978), honnêtes (Thornton, 1943), chaleureuses (Bayes, 1972), et compétentes (Reis, Wilson, Monestere, Bernstein, Clark, & Seidl, 1990). Mais, bien que le sourire soit universellement reconnu en tant qu'expression de bonheur (Ekman, 1989;Frank & Stennett, 2001) et que ses effets bénéfiques aient été observés dans différentes cultures (Lau, 1982;Matsumoto & Kudoh, 1993;Otta, Abrosio, & Hoshino, 1996), le langage des sourires est source de malentendus entre des individus, entre des groupes sociaux différent et des nations différentes. ...
... As stated Ekman, smiles are frequently displayed and easily produced (Ekman, 1992;Ekman et Friesen, 1982). They elicit positive impressions (Hess et al., 2002) such that smiling individuals are perceived to be warm (Bayes, 1972), attractive (McGinley et al., 1978), competent (Reis et al., 1990) and polite (Mueser, Grau, Sussman, & Rosen, 1984). These positive effects are not surprising given that the pleasure of seeing a smile might act as a powerful social reward (Shore & Heerey, 2011). ...
Article
Facial expressions are the core of our social life, but the exact mechanisms underlying their perception and interpretation are yet to be explained. The goal of this dissertation was to use the human smile as a case study in order to shed more light on the processing of facial expression. We first examined the role of eye contact and facial mimicry in the judgments of smiles. The findings revealed that smiles accompanied by eye contact have more emotional impact and elicit more corresponding smiling than smiles accompanied with averted gaze (Chapter 2). Moreover, studies involving children and adult participants (Chapter 3) show that facial mimicry is involved not only in perceptions of smile authenticity but also in the development of general emotional competence. Still, in order to define facial mimicry and explore its effects we need to specify what exactly is mimicked. A second series of studies (Chapter 4) provided initial support for the social-functional typology of reward, affiliative and dominance smiles and showed that the endorsement of these smiles – as well as general expressivity norms – can be predicted by a country’s demographic history, namely the homogeneity of its population over the centuries. The ongoing experiments investigate the morphology and the time course of the three functional smiles. Combined, our findings highlight the role of embodied simulation and bodily experience in the processing of smiles in particular and facial expression in general.
... Perhaps because smiling signals positive interpersonal intensions, research consistently shows positive effects of smiling on communication outcomes; people feel happier and smile more in the presence of people whose facial expressions indicate happiness (i.e., smiling); in addition, smiling people are often given more positive interpersonal ratings than people with neutral expressions [27][28]. Krumhuber and colleagues [29] found that even people who exhibit a smile that is not perceived as genuine are rated more likeable, attractive, trustworthy, and cooperative compared to people who assume a neutral expression. ...
... The results of our study offer strong evidence that enhancing certain facial expressions on avatar representation can influence interactants' communication experience in virtual environments, at least among zero-acquaintance individuals. These findings support the rich literature on nonverbal cues in that increased smiling led to more positive outcomes [27][28], [56][57]. Our findings have practical implications for designers of virtual environments; introducing subtle changes in facial expressions may lead to a more positive experience between interactants. ...
Article
Full-text available
Previous studies demonstrated the positive effects of smiling on interpersonal outcomes. The present research examined if enhancing one’s smile in a virtual environment could lead to a more positive communication experience. In the current study, participants’ facial expressions were tracked and mapped on a digital avatar during a real-time dyadic conversation. The avatar’s smile was rendered such that it was either a slightly enhanced version or a veridical version of the participant’s actual smile. Linguistic analyses using the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) revealed that participants who communicated with each other via avatars that exhibited enhanced smiles used more positive words to describe their interaction experience compared to those who communicated via avatars that displayed smiling behavior reflecting the participants’ actual smiles. In addition, self-report measures showed that participants in the ‘enhanced smile’ condition felt more positive affect after the conversation and experienced stronger social presence compared to the ‘normal smile’ condition. These results are particularly striking when considering the fact that most participants (>90%) were unable to detect the smiling manipulation. This is the first study to demonstrate the positive effects of transforming unacquainted individuals’ actual smiling behavior during a real-time avatar-networked conversation.
... The expressive component, the smile, seems to have evolved in part to facilitate social interactions, signaling the desire for social affiliation (Abe, Beetham, & Izard, 2002). Additionally, we tend to attribute likeable traits to people who smile, such as attractiveness, competence, sociability, and sincerity (McGinley, Blau, & Takai, 1984;McGinley, McGinley, & Nicholas, 1978;O'Doherty, Winston, & Critchley, 2003;Reis, Wilson, & Monestere, 1990). The feeling/ motivational component of happiness also tends to lead to socially affiliative behaviors. ...
... The present study, of course, does not establish causality between the child characteristics examined, such as happiness and social status. Many studies, however, demonstrate that smiles tend to elicit specific patterns of thoughts and behaviors in others (McGinley et al., 1978(McGinley et al., , 1984O'Doherty et al., 2003;Provine, 1997;Reis et al., 1990). In all likelihood, many of the children with higher levels of happiness in the present study elicited prosocial feelings, thoughts, and behaviors from other children in their classrooms, motivating more frequent nominations as being "liked" in the spring. ...
Article
A recent meta-analysis found that across studies individual differences in aspects of children's emotionality predict social status [Dougherty, L.R., (2006). Children's emotionality and social status: a meta-analytic review. Social Development, 15, 394–417.]. In the present study we extended these findings by examining the emotion of interest and child characteristics (positive emotionality, attention control, and sex) that might moderate relations between negative emotionality and social status. Based on a sample of 154 middle-class, rural, predominantly Caucasian 1st- and 2nd-grade children, individual differences in interest and happiness correlated with children's social status. High levels of negative emotionality (i.e., anger and/or sadness), however, attenuated the otherwise beneficial social effects of interest, happiness, and attention control. Overall, emotionality and attention control accounted for 24% of the variance in peer nominations for being liked. We discuss implications for the promotion of young children's social development.
... Theorists have proposed that smiling evolved specifically as a social behavior that communicates a lack of threat to others (Shariff & Tracy, 2011), making it central for approaching novel social partners. Empirically, smiling has long been recognized as a behavior that encourages approach specifically from strangers (Connolly & Smith, 1972;Walsh & Hewitt, 1985), confers impressions of trust (Schmidt, Levenstein, & Ambadar, 2012), and is associated with perceptions of attractiveness (McGinley, McGinley, & Nicholas, 1978;Reis et al., 1990). ...
... Expressive cues, such as a larger than average smile, could suggest happiness and congeniality (Lanzetta & Orr, 1986;McGinley, McGinley, & Nicholas, 1978), highly arched eyebrows could suggest nonthreatening interest and social approachability (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1989;Izard, 1971;M. M. 3 The Multiple Fitness approach emphasizes the attractiveness of personal features that are optimal in size, proportion, or form. ...
Article
Full-text available
The consistency of physical attractiveness ratings across cultural groups was examined. In Study 1, recently arrived native Asian and Hispanic students and White Americans rated the attractiveness of Asian, Hispanic, Black, and White photographed women. The mean correlation between groups in attractiveness ratings was r = .93. Asians, Hispanics, and Whites were equally influenced by many facial features, but Asians were less influenced by some sexual maturity and expressive features. In Study 2, Taiwanese attractiveness ratings correlated with prior Asian, Hispanic, and American ratings, mean r = .91. Supporting Study 1, the Taiwanese also were less positively influenced by certain sexual maturity and expressive features. Exposure to Western media did not influence attractiveness ratings in either study. In Study 3, Black and White American men rated the attractiveness of Black female facial photos and body types. Mean facial attractiveness ratings were highly correlated ( r = .94), but as predicted Blacks and Whites varied in judging bodies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Chapter
This chapter is concerned with the role of nonverbal behavior in the self-presentation of men of known and established social power. It is focused on nonverbal behaviors emitted in a very specific and relatively unique situation, namely the presidential debates. These debates provide a national audience the opportunity to contrast and compare the stress-handling capabilities of two persons, each of whom seeks to convince the audience that the nation would prosper more in his or her competent and trustworthy hands than it would in those of the opponent.
Chapter
Anaerobic and structural acrylic adhesives (acrylics) are closely related members of the large acrylic adhesive family. They are reactive systems which cure by redox-initiated free radical polymerization. It is difficult to make a clear distinction between the two classes of adhesives. Many aspects of the chemistry, compositions, and terminology overlap.
Article
99 undergraduate women from Japan and 78 women and 54 men from the United States viewed slides of a Japanese woman who either smiled frequently (was shown smiling in 70% of the slides) or infrequently (was shown smiling in 20% of the slides) while displaying either open or closed body positions. Subjects from Japan rated the woman as the most interpersonally attractive when she smiled frequently and expressed closed body positions and the least attractive when she smiled frequently and expressed open body positions. In contrast, college men and women from the United States rated the same model as the most interpersonally attractive when she smiled frequently and expressed open body positions and the least attractive when she smiled infrequently and used closed body positions.
Article
Examined the effect of female encouragement on male initiation of interaction in a social environment. In 4 conditions, a female confederate established eye contact with a male in a drinking establishment. Eye contact was established once or multiple times within a 5-min period. After eye contact was established, the confederate smiled or did not smile. In a 5th condition, the female smiled and looked down in the general direction of the designated S. The dependent variable was whether the S approached and talked to the confederate within a 10-min period. Two attractive female confederates were each assigned 10 Ss in each of the 5 conditions. The highest approach behavior (60%) was observed in the condition in which there was repeated eye contact plus smiling. In each of the remaining 4 conditions, the confederate was approached less than 20% of the time. (5 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Investigated whether, while discussing his or her views, a communicator who exhibits limb-outward or open body positions would effect greater opinion change in an addressee than a communicator who exhibits limb-inward or closed body positions. 96 female college undergraduates whose attitudes were premeasured perused an attitude questionnaire of a female student and then viewed pictures that were taken of her while she discussed her beliefs. Some Ss viewed open body position pictures of the communicator, while others viewed closed body position pictures. Retesting of the Ss' opinions showed a change toward the communicator's viewpoint for Ss who had viewed "open" pictures compared with Ss who had viewed "closed" pictures of the communicator (p < .01).
Chapter
This chapter focuses on the expected consequences of interpersonal attitudes derived from a theoretical position in which persons who evoke attitudes are conceptualized as secondary reinforcers. The intent is to show that interrelated hypotheses regarding consequences can be generated by placing the concept of attitude within a learning theory framework, that a substantial number of empirical relationships can be interpreted as supporting these hypotheses, and that the behavioral effects of interpersonal attraction have far-reaching social implications, making the potential application of verified propositions an enticing possibility. The chapter proposes a number of expectations for the behavior of individuals when liked or disliked persons (or their symbolic representations) are present either prior to, during, or contingent upon the behavior. It illustrates by reference to data on human behavior that findings relevant to the effects of differential liking for persons by one another can be systematized and explained by the general behavior principles relating to secondary reinforcers and that interpersonal attitudes affect a wide variety of socially significant behavior. The chapter discusses the areas of applicability of the power of liking.
Article
Addressees, who were similar or dissimilar in attitude to a communicator, viewed slides of the communicator which showed her displaying either open or closed body positions. Addressees who were similar in attitude to the communicator evaluated her more positively than addressees who were dissimilar to her. Given attitude similarity between addressees and the communicator, addressees evaluated the communicator more positively when she displayed open body positions than when she displayed closed body positions. In general addressees' opinion changes were directly related to their positive evaluation of the communicator but in some cases the addressees' awareness of the experimental manipulation altered the effect on opinion.
Effects of body position and attitude similarity on interpersonal attraction and opinion change McGinley et al. had nearly equal numbers of smiles in their open and closed body position conditions , seven and six respectively
  • K Mcginley
MCGINLEY, H., NICHOLAS, K., & MCGINLEY, P. Effects of body position and attitude similarity on interpersonal attraction and opinion change. Psychological Reports, 1978, 42, 127-138. NOTES 1. In their 1975 study, McGinley et al. had nearly equal numbers of smiles in their open and closed body position conditions, seven and six respectively. The faces were inked out in the 1978 study.
had nearly equal numbers of smiles in their open and closed body position conditions, seven and six respectively . The faces were inked out in the 1978 study
  • Mcginley Study
In their 1975 study, McGinley et al. had nearly equal numbers of smiles in their open and closed body position conditions, seven and six respectively. The faces were inked out in the 1978 study.