Attractiveness plays a central role in human non-verbal communication and has been broadly examined in diverse subfields of contemporary psychology. Researchers have garnered compelling evidence in support of the evolutionary functions of physical attractiveness and its role in our daily lives, while at the same time, having largely ignored the significant contribution of non-visual modalities and the relationships among them. Acoustic and olfactory cues can, separately or in combination, strongly influence the perceived attractiveness of an individual and therefore attitudes and actions toward that person. Here, we discuss the relative importance of visual, auditory and olfactory traits in judgments of attractiveness, and review neural and behavioral studies that support the highly complex and multimodal nature of person perception. Further, we discuss three alternative evolutionary hypotheses aimed at explaining the function of multiple indices of attractiveness. In this review, we provide several lines of evidence supporting the importance of the voice, body odor, and facial and body appearance in the perception of attractiveness and mate preferences, and therefore the critical need to incorporate cross-modal perception and multisensory integration into future research on human physical attractiveness.

Department of Anthropology Center for Brain Behavior and Cognition Center for Human Evolution and Diversity The Pennsylvania State University University ParkPA United States

Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine Technische Universität DresdenDresden Germany

Department of Zoology Faculty of Science Charles UniversityPrague Czechia

Division of Psychology University of StirlingStirling United Kingdom

Institute of Psychology University of WroclawWroclaw Poland

Mammal Vocal Communication and Cognition Research Group School of Psychology University of SussexSussex United Kingdom

The Maria Grzegorzewska UniversityWarsaw Poland

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Aglioti S. M., Pazzaglia M. (2011). Sounds and scents in (social) action. Trends Cogn. Sci. 15 47–55. 10.1016/j.tics.2010.12.003 PubMed DOI

Allison T., Puce A., McCarthy G. (2000). Social perception from visual cues: role of the STS region. Trends Cogn. Sci. 4 267–278. 10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01501-1 PubMed DOI

Belin P., Zatorre R. J., Lafaille P., Ahad P., Pike B. (2000). Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex. Nature 403 309–312. 10.1038/35002078 PubMed DOI

Bruckert L., Lienard J.-S., Lacroix A., Kreutzer M., Leboucher G. (2006). Women use voice parameters to assess men’s characteristics. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 273 83–89. 10.1098/rspb.2005.3265 PubMed DOI PMC

Buggio L., Vercellini P., Somigliana E., Viganò P., Frattaruolo M. P., Fedele L. (2012). “You are so beautiful”∗: behind women’s attractiveness towards the biology of reproduction: a narrative review. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 28 753–757. 10.3109/09513590.2012.662545 PubMed DOI

Campanella S., Belin P. (2007). Integrating face and voice in person perception. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11 535–543. 10.1016/j.tics.2007.10.001 PubMed DOI

Confer J. C., Perilloux C., Buss D. M. (2010). More than just a pretty face: men’s priority shifts toward bodily attractiveness in short-term versus long-term mating contexts. Evol. Hum. Behav. 31 348–353. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.002 DOI

Currie T. E., Little A. C. (2009). The relative importance of the face and body in judgments of human physical attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 30 409–416. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.005 DOI

Davis C., Claridge G., Fox J. (2000). Not just a pretty face: physical attractiveness and perfectionism in the risk for eating disorders. Int. J. Eat. Disord. 27 67–73. PubMed

Douglas W. Y., Shepard G. H. (1998). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature 396 321–322. PubMed

Eagly A. H., Ashmore R. D., Makhijani M. G., Longo L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but..: a meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychol. Bull. 110 109–128. 10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109 DOI

Feinberg D. R. (2008). Are human faces and voices ornaments signaling common underlying cues to mate value? Evol. Anthropol. 17 112–118. 10.1002/evan.20166 DOI

Ferdenzi C., Delplanque S., Atanassova R., Sander D. (2016). Androstadienone’s influence on the perception of facial and vocal attractiveness is not sex specific. Psychoneuroendocrinology 66 166–175. 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.01.016 PubMed DOI

Ferdenzi C., Schaal B., Roberts S. C. (2010). Family scents: developmental changes in the perception of kin body odor? J. Chem. Ecol. 36 847–854. 10.1007/s10886-010-9827-x PubMed DOI

Fialová J., Roberts S. C., Havlíèek J. (2013). “Is the perception of dietary odour cues linked to sexual selection in humans?,” in Chemical Signals in Vertebrates 12, eds East M. L., Dehnhard M. (New York, NY: Springer; ), 161–169.

Gangestad S. W., Scheyd G. J. (2005). The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34 523–548. 10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143733 DOI

Gildersleeve K. A., Haselton M. G., Larson C. M., Pillsworth E. G. (2012). Body odor attractiveness as a cue of impending ovulation in women: evidence from a study using hormone-confirmed ovulation. Horm. Behav. 61 157–166. 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2011.11.005 PubMed DOI

Grammer K., Fink B., Moller A. P., Thornhill R. (2003). Darwinian aesthetics: sexual selection and the biology of beauty. Biol. Rev. 78 385–407. 10.1017/S1464793102006085 PubMed DOI

Gueguen N. (2001). Effect of perfume on prosocial behavior of pedestrians. Psychol. Rep. 88 1046–1048. 10.2466/pr0.2001.88.3c.1046 PubMed DOI

Havlíček J., Cobey K. D., Barrett L., Klapilová K., Roberts S. C. (2015). The spandrels of Santa Barbara? A new perspective on the peri-ovulation paradigm. Behav. Ecol. 26 1249–1260. 10.1093/beheco/arv064 DOI

Havlíček J., Roberts S. C. (2009). MHC-correlated mate choice in humans: a review. Psychoneuroendocrinology 34 497–512. 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2008.10.007 PubMed DOI

Havlíček J., Roberts S. C., Flegr J. (2005). Women’s preference for dominant male odour: effects of menstrual cycle and relationship status. Biol. Lett. 1 256–259. 10.1098/rsbl.2005.0332 PubMed DOI PMC

Havlíček J., Saxton T. K., Roberts S. C., Jozifkova E., Lhota S., Valentova J., et al. (2008). He sees, she smells? Male and female reports of sensory reliance in mate choice and non-mate choice contexts. Pers. Individ. Dif. 45 565–570. 10.1016/j.paid.2008.06.019 DOI

Hill A. K., Cárdenas R. A., Wheatley J. R., Welling L. L. M., Burriss R. P., Claes P., et al. (2016). Are there vocal cues to human developmental stability? Relationships between facial fluctuating asymmetry and voice attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 38 249–258. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.10.008 PubMed DOI PMC

Hill A. K., Hunt J., Welling L. L. M., Cárdenas R. A., Rotella M. A., Wheatley J. R., et al. (2013). Quantifying the strength and form of sexual selection on men’s traits. Evol. Hum. Behav. 34 334–341. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.05.004 DOI

Hill A. K., Puts D. A. (2016). “Vocal attractiveness,” in Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science, eds Weekes-Shackelford V., Shackelford T. K., Weekes-Shackelford V. A. (Cham: Springer International Publishing; ), 1–5.

Howrigan D. P., MacDonald K. B. (2008). Humor as a mental fitness indicator. Evol. Psychol. 6 652–666.

Hughes S. M., Miller N. E. (2016). What sounds beautiful looks beautiful stereotype: the matching of attractiveness of voices and faces. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 33 984–996. 10.1177/0265407515612445 DOI

Knowles K. K., Little A. C. (2016). Vocal fundamental and formant frequencies affect perceptions of speaker cooperativeness. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 69 1657–1675. 10.1080/17470218.2015.1091484 PubMed DOI

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. Psychol. Bull. 126 390–423. 10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390 PubMed DOI

Lass N. J., Hughes K. R., Bowyer M. D., Waters L. T., Bourne V. T. (1976). Speaker sex identification from voiced, whispered, and filtered isolated vowels. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 59 675–678. 10.1121/1.380917 PubMed DOI

Lerner R. M., Lerner J. V. (1977). Effects of age, sex, and physical attractiveness on child-peer relations, academic performance, and elementary school adjustment. Dev. Psychol. 13 585–590. 10.1037/0012-1649.13.6.585 DOI

Little A. C., Feinberg D. R., DeBruine L. M., Jones B. C. (2013). Adaptation to faces and voices: unimodal, cross-modal, and sex-specific effects. Psychol. Sci. 24 2297–2305. 10.1177/0956797613493293 PubMed DOI

Maestripieri D., Henry A., Nickels N. (2016). Explaining financial and prosocial biases in favor of attractive people: interdisciplinary perspectives from economics, social psychology, and evolutionary psychology. Behav. Brain Sci. 40:e19 10.1017/S0140525X16000340 PubMed DOI

Miller G. (2000a). Mental traits as fitness indicators: expanding evolutionary psychology’s adaptationism. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 907 62–74. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06616.x PubMed DOI

Miller G. (2000b). “Sexual selection for indicators of intelligence,” in Proceedings of the Novartis Foundation Symposium, (Chichester: John Wiley), 260–270. PubMed

Miller G. F. (1998). “How mate choice shaped human nature: a review of sexual selection and human evolution,” in Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology: Ideas, Issues, and Applications, eds Crawford C. B., Krebs D. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; ), 87–129.

Mitro S., Gordon A. R., Olsson M. J., Lundström J. N. (2012). The smell of age: perception and discrimination of body odors of different ages. PLoS ONE 7:e38110 10.1371/journal.pone.0038110 PubMed DOI PMC

Möller A. P., Pomiankowski A. (1993). Why have birds got multiple sexual ornaments? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 32 167–176. 10.1007/BF00173774 DOI

Moshkin M., Litvinova N., Litvinova E. A., Bedareva A., Lutsyuk A., Gerlinskaya L. (2012). Scent recognition of infected status in humans. J. Sex. Med. 9 3211–3218. 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02562.x PubMed DOI

O’Connor J. J. M., Fraccaro P. J., Pisanski K., Tigue C. C., Feinberg D. R. (2013). Men’s preferences for women’s femininity in dynamic cross-modal stimuli. PLoS ONE 8:e69531 10.1371/journal.pone.0069531 PubMed DOI PMC

Penton-Voak I. S., Perrett D. I., Castles D. L., Kobayashi T., Burt D. M., Murray L. K., et al. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature 399 741–742. 10.1038/21557 PubMed DOI

Peters M., Rhodes G., Simmons L. W. (2007). Contributions of the face and body to overall attractiveness. Anim. Behav. 73 937–942. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.07.012 DOI

Pipitone R. N., Gallup G. G. (2008). Women’s voice attractiveness varies across the menstrual cycle. Evol. Hum. Behav. 29 268–274. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2008.02.001 DOI

Pisanski K., Feinberg D. R. (2017). “Vocal attractiveness,” in Oxford Handbook of Voice Perception, ed. Belin P. (Oxford: Oxford University Press; ).

Pisanski K., Fraccaro P. J., Tigue C. C., O’Connor J. J. M., Feinberg D. R. (2014a). Return to Oz: voice pitch facilitates assessments of men’s body size. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 40 1316–1331. 10.1037/a0036956 PubMed DOI

Pisanski K., Hahn A. C., Fisher C. I., DeBruine L. M., Feinberg D. R., Jones B. C. (2014b). Changes in salivary estradiol predict changes in women’s preferences for vocal masculinity. Horm. Behav. 66 493–497. 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2014.07.006 PubMed DOI

Prokosch M. D., Yeo R. A., Miller G. F. (2004). Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability. Intelligence 33 203–213. 10.1016/j.intell.2004.07.007 DOI

Puts D. A., Bailey D. H., Cárdenas R. A., Burriss R. P., Welling L. L. M., Wheatley J. R., et al. (2013). Women’s attractiveness changes with estradiol and progesterone across the ovulatory cycle. Horm. Behav. 63 13–19. 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2012.11.007 PubMed DOI

Puts D. A., Hodges C. R., Cárdenas R. A., Gaulin S. J. C. (2007). Men’s voices as dominance signals: vocal fundamental and formant frequencies influence dominance attributions among men. Evol. Hum. Behav. 28 340–344. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.05.002 DOI

Puts D. A., Jones B. C., DeBruine L. M. (2012). Sexual selection on human faces and voices. J. Sex Res. 49 227–243. 10.1080/00224499.2012.658924 PubMed DOI

Rantala M. J., Eriksson C. J. P., Vainikka A., Kortet R. (2006). Male steroid hormones and female preference for male body odor. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27 259–269. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.11.002 DOI

Rikowski A., Grammer K. (1999). Human body odour, symmetry and attractiveness. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 266 869–874. 10.1098/rspb.1999.0717 PubMed DOI PMC

Roberts S. C., Kralevich A., Ferdenzi C., Saxton T. K., Jones B. C., DeBruine L. M., et al. (2011). Body odor quality predicts behavioral attractiveness in humans. Arch. Sex. Behav. 40 1111–1117. 10.1007/s10508-011-9803-8 PubMed DOI

Roberts S. C., Little A. C., Gosling L. M., Jones B. C., Perrett D. I., Carter V., et al. (2005). MHC-assortative facial preferences in humans. Biol. Lett. 1 400–403. 10.1098/rsbl.2005.0343 PubMed DOI PMC

Royet J.-P., Delon-Martin C., Plailly J. (2013). Odor mental imagery in non-experts in odors: a paradox? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7:87 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00087 PubMed DOI PMC

Saxton T. K., Burriss R. P., Murray A. K., Rowland H. M., Roberts S. C. (2009). Face, body and speech cues independently predict judgments of attractiveness. J. Evol. Psychol. 7 23–35. 10.1556/JEP.7.2009.1.4 DOI

Scherer K. R. (1986). Vocal affect expression: a review and a model for future research. Psychol. Bull. 99 143–165. 10.1037/0033-2909.99.2.143 PubMed DOI

Schleidt M., Hold B., Attili G. (1981). A cross-cultural study on the attitude towards personal odors. J. Chem. Ecol. 7 19–31. 10.1007/BF00988632 PubMed DOI

Sefcek J. A., Figueredo A. J. (2010). A life-history model of human fitness indicators. Biodemogr. Soc. Biol. 56 42–66. 10.1080/19485561003709214 PubMed DOI

Sell A., Bryant G. A., Cosmides L., Tooby J., Sznycer D., von Rueden C., et al. (2010). Adaptations in humans for assessing physical strength from the voice. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 277 3509–3518. 10.1098/rspb.2010.0769 PubMed DOI PMC

Singh D., Randall P. K. (2007). Beauty is in the eye of the plastic surgeon: waist–hip ratio (WHR) and women’s attractiveness. Pers. Individ. Dif. 43 329–340. 10.1016/j.paid.2006.12.003 DOI

Sorokowska A. (2013a). Assessing personality using body odor: differences between children and adults. J. Nonverbal Behav. 37 153–163. 10.1007/s10919-013-0152-2 PubMed DOI PMC

Sorokowska A. (2013b). Seeing or smelling? Assessing personality on the basis of different stimuli. Pers. Individ. Dif. 55 175–179. 10.1016/j.paid.2013.02.026 DOI

Sorokowski P., Koscinski K., Sorokowska A. (2013). Is beauty in the eye of the beholder but ugliness culturally universal? Facial preferences of Polish and Yali (Papua) people. Evol. Psychol. 11 907–925. 10.1177/147470491301100414 DOI

Thornhill R., Grammer K. (1999). The body and face of woman. Evol. Hum. Behav. 20 105–120. 10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00044-0 DOI

Valentova J. V., Varella M. A. C., Havlíček J., Kleisner K. (2017). Positive association between vocal and facial attractiveness in women but not in men: a cross-cultural study. Behav. Process. 135 95–100. 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.12.005 PubMed DOI

Wang S. S., Moon S.-I., Kwon K. H., Evans C. A., Stefanone M. A. (2010). Face off: implications of visual cues on initiating friendship on Facebook. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26 226–234. 10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.001 DOI

Watkins L. M., Johnston L. (2000). Screening job applicants: the impact of physical attractiveness and application quality. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 8 76–84. 10.1111/1468-2389.00135 DOI

Weeden J., Sabini J. (2005). Physical attractiveness and health in western societies: a review. Psychol. Bull. 131 635–653. 10.1037/0033-2909.131.5.635 PubMed DOI

Weisfeld G. E., Czilli T., Phillips K. A., Gall J. A., Lichtman C. M. (2003). Possible olfaction-based mechanisms in human kin recognition and inbreeding avoidance. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 85 279–295. PubMed

Winternitz J., Abbate J. L., Huchard E., Havlíček J., Garamszegi L. Z. (2017). Patterns of MHC-dependent mate selection in humans and nonhuman primates: a meta-analysis. Mol. Ecol. 26 668–688. PubMed

Zuk M., Ligon J. D., Thornhill R. (1992). Effects of experimental manipulation of male secondary sex characters on female mate preference in red jungle fowl. Anim. Behav. 44 999–1006. 10.1016/S0003-3472(05)80312-4 DOI

Immunoactivation Affects Perceived Body Odor and Facial but Not Vocal Attractiveness