Studies in social perception traditionally use as stimuli frontal portrait photographs. It turns out, however, that 2D frontal depiction may not fully capture the entire morphological diversity of facial features. Recently, 3D images started to become increasingly popular, but whether their perception differs from the perception of 2D has not been systematically studied as yet. Here we investigated congruence in the perception of portrait, left profile, and 360° rotation photographs. The photographs were obtained from 45 male athletes under standardized conditions. In two separate studies, each set of images was rated for formidability (portraits by 62, profiles by 60, and 360° rotations by 94 raters) and attractiveness (portraits by 195, profiles by 176, and 360° rotations by 150 raters) on a 7-point scale. The ratings of the stimuli types were highly intercorrelated (for formidability all rs > 0.8, for attractiveness all rs > 0.7). Moreover, we found no differences in the mean ratings between the three types of stimuli, neither in formidability, nor in attractiveness. Overall, our results clearly suggest that different facial views convey highly overlapping information about structural facial elements of an individual. They lead to congruent assessments of formidability and attractiveness, and a single angle view seems sufficient for face perception research.

Faculty of Science Charles University Prague Czechia

National Institute of Mental Health Klecany Czechia

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Baldassare M., Feller S. (1975). Cultural variations in personal space: theory, methods, and evidence. Ethos 3, 481–503. 10.1525/eth.1975.3.4.02a00020 DOI

Berssenbrügge P., Berlin N. F., Kebeck G., Runte C., Jung S., Kleinheinz J., et al. . (2014). 2D and 3D analysis methods of facial asymmetry in comparison. J. Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 42, e327–e334. 10.1016/j.jcms.2014.01.028 PubMed DOI

Biederman I., Gerhardstein P. C. (1993). Recognizing depth-rotated objects: evidence and conditions for three-dimensional viewpoint invariance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 19, 1162–1182. 10.1037/0096-1523.19.6.1162 PubMed DOI

Brooks R. C., Shelly J. P., Jordan L. J. W., Dixson B. (2015). The multivariate evolution of female body shape in an artificial digital ecosystem. Evol. Hum. Behav. 36, 351–358. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.02.001 DOI

Bryan R., Perona P., Adolphs R. (2012). Perspective distortion from interpersonal distance is an implicit visual cue for social judgments of faces. PLoS ONE 7:e45301. 10.1371/journal.pone.0045301 PubMed DOI PMC

Caharel S., Jiang F., Blanz V., Rossion B. (2009). Recognizing an individual face: 3D shape contributes earlier than 2D surface reflectance information. Neuroimage 47, 1809–1818. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.05.065 PubMed DOI

Calder A. J., Rhodes G., Johnson M., Haxby J. (eds.). (2011). Oxford Handbook of Face Perception. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Chelnokova O., Laeng B. (2011). Three-dimensional information in face recognition: an eye-tracking study. J. Vis. 11:27. 10.1167/11.13.27 PubMed DOI

Cooper E. A., Piazza E. A., Banks M. S. (2012). The perceptual basis of common photographic practice. J. Vis. 12:8. 10.1167/12.5.8 PubMed DOI PMC

Cornelissen P. L., Cornelissen K. K., Groves V., McCarty K., Tovée M. J. (2018). View-dependent accuracy in body mass judgements of female bodies. Body Image 24, 116–123. 10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.12.007 PubMed DOI

Crookes K., Ewing L., Gildenhuys J. D., Kloth N., Hayward W. G., Oxner M., et al. . (2015). How well do computer-generated faces tap face expertise? PLoS ONE 10:e0141353. 10.1371/journal.pone.0141353 PubMed DOI PMC

Danel D. P., Valentova J. V., Sanchez O. R., Leongomez J. D., Varella M. A. C., Kleisner K. (2018). A cross-cultural study of sex-typicality and averageness: correlation between frontal and lateral measures of human faces. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 30:e23147. 10.1002/ajhb.23147 PubMed DOI

Davidenko N. (2007). Silhouetted face profiles: a new methodology for face perception research. J. Vis. 7:6. 10.1167/7.4.6 PubMed DOI

Diener E., Wolsic B., Fujita F. (1995). Physical attractiveness and subjective well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69, 120–129.

Dixson B. J., Lee A. J., Sherlock J. M., Talamas S. N. (2016). Beneath the beard: do facial morphometrics influence the strength of judgments of men's beardedness? Evol. Hum. Behav. 38, 164–174. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.08.004 DOI

Dixson B. J., Rantala M. J. (2015). The role of facial and body hair distribution in women's judgments of men's sexual attractiveness. Arch. Sex. Behav. 45, 877–889. 10.1037/0022-3514.69.1.120 PubMed DOI

Dixson B. J., Vasey P. L., Sagata K., Sibanda N., Linklater W. L., Dixson A. F. Arch. Sex. Behav. (2011) 40:1271 10.1007/s10508-010-9680-6 PubMed DOI

Dixson B. J. W., Duncan M. J. M., Dixson A. F. (2015). The role of breast size and areolar pigmentation in perceptions of women's sexual attractiveness, reproductive health, sexual maturity, maternal nurturing abilities, and age. Arch. Sex. Behav. 44, 1685–1695. 10.1007/s10508-015-0516-2 PubMed DOI

Dunn T. J., Baguley T., Brunsden V. (2014). From alpha to omega: a practical solution to the pervasive problem of internal consistency estimation. Br. J. Psychol. 105, 399–412. 10.1111/bjop.12046 PubMed DOI

Enlow D. H., Hans M. H. G., McGrew L. (eds.) (1996). Essentials of Facial Growth. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Saunders.

Erkelens C. (2018). Multiple photographs of a perspective scene reveal the principles of picture perception. Vision 2:26 10.3390/vision2030026 PubMed DOI PMC

Fink B., Grammer K., Matts P. J. (2006). Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27, 433–442. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.007 DOI

Hall E. T. (1966). The Hidden Dimension. New York, NY: Doubleday and Co.

Hayward W. G. (2003). After the viewpoint debate: where next in object recognition? Trends Cogn. Sci. 7, 425–427. PubMed

Hehman E., Leitner J. B., Gaertner S. L. (2013). Enhancing static facial features increases intimidation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 747–754. 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.015 DOI

Holzleitner I. J., Perrett D. I. (2016). Perception of strength from 3D faces is linked to facial cues of physique. Evol. Hum. Behav. 37, 217–229. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.11.004 DOI

Hu S., Xiong J., Fu P., Qiao L., Tan J., Jin L., et al. . (2017). Signatures of personality on dense 3D facial images. Sci. Rep. 7, 73. 10.1038/s41598-017-00071-5 PubMed DOI PMC

Jaeger B., Wagemans F. M. A., Evans A. M., van Beest I. (2018). Effects of facial skin smoothness and blemishes on trait impressions. Perception 47, 608–625. 10.1177/0301006618767258 PubMed DOI

jamovi project (2018). jamovi (Version 0.9). Available online at: https://www.jamovi.org

JASP Team (2018). JASP (Version 0.9.0.1). Available online at: https://jasp-stats.org/

Jeffery L., Rhodes G., Busey T. (2007). Broadly tuned, view-specific coding of face shape: opposing figural aftereffects can be induced in different views. Vision Res. 47, 3070–3077. 10.1016/j.visres.2007.08.018 PubMed DOI

Jenkins R., White D., Van Montfort X., Mike Burton A. (2011). Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition 121, 313–323. 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.001 PubMed DOI

Jiang F., Blanz V., O'Toole A. J. (2006). Probing the visual representation of faces with adaptation. Psychol. Sci. 17, 493–500. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01734.x PubMed DOI

Johnston D. J., Hunt O., Johnston C. D., Burden D. J., Stevenson M., Hepper P. (2005). The influence of lower face vertical proportion on facial attractiveness. Eur. J. Orthod. 27, 349–354. 10.1093/ejo/cji023 PubMed DOI

Jones A. L., Kramer R. S. S., Ward R. (2012). Signals of personality and health: the contributions of facial shape, skin texture, and viewing angle. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 38, 1353–1361. 10.1037/a0027078 PubMed DOI

Jones B. C., Little A. C., Burt D. M., Perrett D. I. (2004). When facial attractiveness is only skin deep. Perception 33, 569–576. 10.1068/p3463 PubMed DOI

Kordsmeyer T. L., Hunt J., Puts D. A., Ostner J., Penke L. (2018). The relative importance of intra- and intersexual selection on human male sexually dimorphic traits. Evol. Hum. Behav. 39, 424–436. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.03.008 DOI

Kościnski K. (2009). Current status and future directions of research on facial attractiveness. Anthropol. Rev. 72, 45–65. 10.2478/v10044-008-0015-3 DOI

Kościnski K., Zalewska M. (2017). Compatibility of facial perception between frontal and profile view,. in 4th Annual Conference Polish Society for Human and Evolution Studies, Krakow.

Lefevre C. E., Lewis G. J., Bates T. C., Dzhelyova M., Coetzee V., Deary I. J., et al. (2012). No evidence for sexual dimorphism of facial width-to-height ratio in four large adult samples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 33, 623–627. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.03.002 DOI

Little A. C. (2014). Facial attractiveness. WIREs Cogn. Sci. 5, 621–634. 10.1002/wcs.1316 PubMed DOI

Little A. C., Jones B. C., Debruine L. M. (2011). Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B-Biological Sci. 366, 1638–1659. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0404 PubMed DOI PMC

Maple J. R., Vig K. W., Beck F. M., Larsen P. E., Shanker S. (2005). A comparison of providers' and consumers' perceptions of facial-profile attractiveness. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 128, 690–696. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.09.030 PubMed DOI

Meyer-Marcotty P., Stellzig-Eisenhauer A., Bareis U., Hartmann J., Kochel J. (2011). Three-dimensional perception of facial asymmetry. Eur. J. Orthod. 33, 647–653. 10.1093/ejo/cjq146 PubMed DOI

Minear M., Park D. (2004). A lifespan database of adult facial stimuli. Behav. Res. Methods instrum. Comput. 36, 630–633. 10.3758/BF03206543 PubMed DOI

Murphy K. E. (1994). Preference for profile orientation in portraits. Empir. Stud. Arts 12, 1–7. 10.2190/MUD5-7V3E-YBN2-Q2XJ DOI

Mydlová M., Dupej J., Koudelová J., Velemínská J. (2015). Sexual dimorphism of facial appearance in ageing human adults: a cross-sectional study. Forensic Sci. Int. 257:519.e1-519.e9. 10.1016/j.forsciint.2015.09.008 PubMed DOI

Nomura M., Motegi E., Hatch J. P., Gakunga P. T., Ng'ang'a P. M., Rugh J. D., et al. . (2009). Esthetic preferences of european american, hispanic american, japanese, and african judges for soft-tissue profiles. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 135, S87–S95. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.02.019 PubMed DOI

Penton-Voak I. S., Jones B. C., Little A. C., Baker S., Tiddeman B. P., Burt D. M., et al. . (2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 268, 1617–1623. 10.1098/rspb.2001.1703 PubMed DOI PMC

Perilloux C., Cloud J. M., Buss D. M. (2012). Women's physical attractiveness and short-term mating strategies. Pers. Individ. Dif. 54, 490–495. 10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.028 DOI

Rhodes G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 57, 199–226. 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208 PubMed DOI

Rowland H. M., Burriss R. P. (2017). Human colour in mate choice and competition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 372:20160350. 10.1098/rstb.2016.0350 PubMed DOI PMC

Rule N. O., Ambady N., Adams R. B. (2009). Personality in perspective: judgmental consistency across orientations of the face. Perception 38, 1688–1699. 10.1068/p6384 PubMed DOI

Saribay S. A., Biten A. F., Meral E. O., Aldan P., Třebický V., Kleisner K. (2018). The Bogazici face database: standardized photographs of Turkish faces with supporting materials. PLoS ONE 13:e0192018. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192018 PubMed DOI PMC

Sell A. N., Lukaszewski A. W., Townsley M. (2017). Cues of upper body strength account for most of the variance in men's bodily attractiveness. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 284:20171819. 10.1098/rspb.2017.1819 PubMed DOI PMC

Shafiee R., Korn E. L., Pearson H., Boyd R. L., Baumrind S. (2008). Evaluation of facial attractiveness from end-of-treatment facial photographs. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 133, 500–508. 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.048 PubMed DOI

Soh J., Chew M. T., Wong H. B. (2007). An Asian community's perspective on facial profile attractiveness. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 35, 18–24. 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2007.00304.x PubMed DOI

Sorokowska A., Sorokowski P., Hilpert P., Cantarero K., Frackowiak T., Ahmadi K., et al. (2017). Preferred interpersonal distances: a global comparison. J. Cross. Cult. Psychol. 48, 577–592. 10.1177/0022022117698039 DOI

Spyropoulos M. N., Halazonetis D. J. (2001). Significance of the soft tissue profile on facial esthetics. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 119, 464–471. 10.1067/mod.2001.113656 PubMed DOI

Sulikowski D., Burke D., Havlíček J., Roberts S. C. (2015). Head tilt and fertility contribute to different aspects of female facial attractiveness. Ethology 121, 1002–1009. 10.1111/eth.12412 DOI

Sutherland C. A. M., Young A. W., Rhodes G. (2017). Facial first impressions from another angle: how social judgements are influenced by changeable and invariant facial properties. Br. J. Psychol. 108, 397–415. 10.1111/bjop.12206 PubMed DOI

Tan K. W., Tiddeman B., Stephen I. D. (2018). Skin texture and colour predict perceived health in Asian faces. Evol. Hum. Behav. 39, 320–335. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.02.003 DOI

Tarr M. J., Bülthoff H. H. (1995). Is human object recognition better described by geon structural descriptions or by multiple views? Comment on Biederman and Gerhardstein (1993). J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 21, 1494–1505. 10.1037/0096-1523.21.6.1494 PubMed DOI

Thornhill R., Gangestad S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn. Sci. 3, 452–460. 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5 PubMed DOI

Thorstenson C. A. (2018). The social psychophysics of human face color: review and recommendations. Soc. Cogn. 36, 247–273. 10.1521/soco.2018.36.2.247 DOI

Tigue C. C., Pisanski K., O'Connor J. J., Fraccaro P. J., Feinberg D. R. (2012). Men's judgments of women's facial attractiveness from two- and three-dimensional images are similar. J. Vis. 12:3. 10.1167/12.12.3 PubMed DOI

Toole A. J. O., Price T., Vetter T., Bartlett J. C., Blanz V. (1999). 3D shape and 2D surface textures of human faces: the role of “ averages ” in attractiveness and age. Image Vision Comput. 18, 9–19. 10.1016/S0262-8856(99)00012-8 DOI

Tovée M. J., Cornelissen P. L. (2001). Female and male perception of female physical attractiveness in front-view and profile. Br. J. Psychol. 92, 391–402. 10.1348/000712601162257 PubMed DOI

Třebický V., Fialová J., Kleisner K., Havlíček J. (2016). Focal length affects depicted shape and perception of facial images. PLoS ONE 11:e0149313. 10.1371/journal.pone.0149313 PubMed DOI PMC

Tsankova E., Kappas A. (2016). Facial skin smoothness as an indicator of perceived trustworthiness and related traits. Perception 45, 400–408. 10.1177/0301006615616748 PubMed DOI

Valentine T., Darling S., Donnelly M. (2004). Why are average faces attractive? The effect of view and averageness on the attractiveness of female faces. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 11, 482–487. PubMed

Valentová J., Roberts S. C., Havlíček J. (2013). Preferences for facial and vocal masculinity in homosexual men: the role of relationship status, sexual restrictiveness, and self-perceived masculinity. Perception 42, 187–197. 10.1068/p6909 PubMed 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

Valenzano D. R., Mennucci A., Tartarelli G., Cellerino A. (2006). Shape analysis of female facial attractiveness. Vision Res. 46, 1282–1291. 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.024 PubMed DOI

Possible Differences in Visual Attention to Faces in the Context of Mate Choice and Competition

Immunoactivation Affects Perceived Body Odor and Facial but Not Vocal Attractiveness

Attractive and healthy-looking male faces do not show higher immunoreactivity

Facial attractiveness and preference of sexual dimorphism: A comparison across five populations

Predictors of Fighting Ability Inferences Based on Faces