Although decades of research have identified facial features relating to people's evaluations of faces, specific features have largely been examined in isolation from each other. Recent work shows that considering the relative importance of these features in face evaluations is important to test theoretical assumptions of impression formation. Here, we examined how two facial features of evolutionary interest, facial attractiveness and facial-width-to-height ratio (FWHR), relate to evaluations of faces across two cultures. Because face evaluations are typically directly measured via self-reports, we also examined whether these features exert differential effects on both direct and indirect face evaluations. Evaluations of standardized photos naturally varying in facial attractiveness and FWHR were collected using the Affect Misattribution Procedure in the United States and Turkey. When their relative contributions were considered in the same model, facial attractiveness, but not FWHR, related to face evaluations across cultures. This positive attractiveness effect was stronger for direct versus indirect evaluations across cultures. These findings highlight the importance of considering the relative contributions of facial features to evaluations across cultures and suggest a culturally invariant role of attractiveness when intentionally evaluating faces.

Charles University Prague Czech Republic

Kadir Has University Istanbul Turkey

UniQus Istanbul Turkey

University of North Carolina at Greensboro Greensboro NC USA

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Alaei R., Deska J. C., Hugenberg K., Rule N. O. (2022). People attribute humanness to men and women differently based on their facial appearance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(2), 400–422. 10.1037/pspi0000364 PubMed DOI

Alrajih S., Ward J. (2014). Increased facial width-to-height ratio and perceived dominance in the faces of the UK’s leading business leaders. British Journal of Psychology, 105(2), 153–161. 10.1111/bjop.12035 PubMed DOI

Andrews T. J., Ewbank M. P. (2004). Distinct representations for facial identity and changeable aspects of faces in the human temporal lobe. NeuroImage, 23(3), 905–913. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.060 PubMed DOI

Bates D., Mächler M., Bolker B., Walker S. (2014). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models using lme4 (arXiv:1406.5823). arXiv. 10.48550/arXiv.1406.5823 DOI

Boduroglu A., Shah P., Nisbett R. E. (2009). Cultural differences in allocation of attention in visual information processing. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 40(3), 349–360. 10.1177/0022022108331005 PubMed DOI PMC

Carré J. M., McCormick C. M. (2008). In your face: Facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275(1651), 2651–2656. 10.1098/rspb.2008.0873 PubMed DOI PMC

Carré J. M., Morrissey M. D., Mondloch C. J., McCormick C. M. (2010). Estimating aggression from emotionally neutral faces: Which facial cues are diagnostic? Perception, 39(3), 356–377. 10.1068/p6543 PubMed DOI

Cassidy B. S., Krendl A. C., Stanko K. A., Rydell R. J., Young S. G., Hugenberg K. (2017). Configural face processing impacts race disparities in humanization and trust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 73, 111–124. 10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.018 PubMed DOI PMC

Chiu R. K., Babcock R. D. (2002). The relative importance of facial attractiveness and gender in Hong Kong selection decisions. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 13(1), 141–155. 10.1080/09585190110092857 DOI

Deska J. C., Lloyd E. P., Hugenberg K. (2018). Facing humanness: Facial width-to-height ratio predicts ascriptions of humanity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(1), 75–94. 10.1037/pspi0000110 PubMed DOI

Dion K., Berscheid E., Walster E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(3), 285–290. 10.1037/h0033731 PubMed DOI

Dion K. K., Pak A. W.-P., Dion K. L. (1990). Stereotyping physical attractiveness: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21(2), 158–179. 10.1177/0022022190212002 DOI

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. Psychological Bulletin, 110(1), 109–128. 10.1037/0033-2909.110.1.109 DOI

Eagly A. H., Steffen V. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(4), 735–754. 10.1037/0022-3514.46.4.735 DOI

Eagly A. H., Wood W. (2012). Social role theory. In Van Lange P., Kruglanski A., Higgins E., Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 458–476). Sage Publications Ltd. 10.4135/9781446249222.n49 DOI

Eisenbruch A. B., Grillot R. L., Maestripieri D., Roney J. R. (2016). Evidence of partner choice heuristics in a one-shot bargaining game. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(6), 429–439. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2016.04.002 DOI

Fisher M., Cox A. (2009). The influence of male facial attractiveness on women’s receptivity. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 3(1), 49–62. 10.1037/h0099332 DOI

Fletcher G. J. O., Simpson J. A., Thomas G. (2000). Ideals, perceptions, and evaluations in early relationship development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 933–940. 10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.933 PubMed DOI

Geniole S. N., Denson T. F., Dixson B. J., Carré J. M., McCormick C. M. (2015). Evidence from meta-analyses of the facial width-to-height ratio as an evolved cue of threat. PLoS One, 10(7), e0132726. 10.1371/journal.pone.0132726 PubMed DOI PMC

Haselhuhn M. P., Ormiston M. E., Wong E. M. (2015). Men’s facial width-to-height ratio predicts aggression: A meta-analysis. PLoS One, 10(4), e0122637. 10.1371/journal.pone.0122637 PubMed DOI PMC

Hehman E., Leitner J. B., Gaertner S. L. (2013). Enhancing static facial features increases intimidation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(4), 747–754. 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.015 DOI

Henrich J., Heine S. J., Norenzayan A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2-3), 61–83. 10.1017/S0140525X0999152X PubMed DOI

Hoffmann H., Kessler H., Eppel T., Rukavina S., Traue H. C. (2010). Expression intensity, gender and facial emotion recognition: Women recognize only subtle facial emotions better than men. Acta Psychologica, 135(3), 278–283. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.012 PubMed DOI

Jaeger B., Jones A. L. (2022). Which facial features are central in impression formation? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(2), 553–561. 10.1177/19485506211034979 DOI

Johnston V. S., Hagel R., Franklin M., Fink B., Grammer K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(4), 251–267. 10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00066-6 DOI

Jones A. L., Jaeger B. (2019). Biological bases of beauty revisited: The effect of symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism on female facial attractiveness. Symmetry, 11(2), 279. 10.3390/sym11020279 DOI

Kleisner K., Priplatova L., Frost P., Flegr J. (2013). Trustworthy-looking face meets brown eyes. PLoS One, 8(1), e53285. 10.1371/journal.pone.0053285 PubMed DOI PMC

Kosinski M. (2017). Facial width-to-height ratio does not predict self-reported behavioral tendencies. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1675–1682. 10.1177/0956797617716929 PubMed DOI

Kuznetsova A., Brockhoff P. B., Christensen R. H. B. (2017). Imertest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. 10.18637/jss.v082.i13 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. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390–423. 10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390 PubMed DOI

Lenth R. (2018). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means (1.2.3) [R; R]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=emmeans

Little A. C., Jones B. C., DeBruine L. M. (2011). Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1571), 1638–1659. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0404 PubMed DOI PMC

Ma D. S., Correll J., Wittenbrink B. (2015). The Chicago face database: A free stimulus set of faces and norming data. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4), 1122–1135. 10.3758/s13428-014-0532-5 PubMed DOI

McArthur L. Z., Baron R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90(3), 215–238. 10.1037/0033-295X.90.3.215 DOI

Montagne B., Kessels R. P. C., Frigerio E., de Haan E. H. F., Perrett D. I. (2005). Sex differences in the perception of affective facial expressions: Do men really lack emotional sensitivity? Cognitive Processing, 6(2), 136–141. 10.1007/s10339-005-0050-6 PubMed DOI

Nieuwenhuis S., Forstmann B. U., Wagenmakers E.-J. (2011). Erroneous analyses of interactions in neuroscience: A problem of significance. Nature Neuroscience, 14(9), 1105–1107. 10.1038/nn.2886 PubMed DOI

Nisbett R. E., Peng K., Choi I., Norenzayan A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291–310. 10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291 PubMed DOI

Nosek B. A. (2007). Implicit–explicit relations. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 65–69. 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00477.x DOI

Oosterhof N. N., Todorov A. (2008). The functional basis of face evaluation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(32), 11087–11092. 10.1073/pnas.0805664105 PubMed DOI PMC

Ozener B. (2012). Facial width-to-height ratio in a Turkish population is not sexually dimorphic and is unrelated to aggressive behavior. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(3), 169–173. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.08.001 DOI

Payne B. K., Burkley M. A., Stokes M. B. (2008). Why do implicit and explicit attitude tests diverge? The role of structural fit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(1), 16–31. 10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.16 PubMed DOI

Payne B. K., Cheng C. M., Govorun O., Stewart B. D. (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(3), 277–293. 10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.277 PubMed DOI

Payne B. K., Govorun O., Arbuckle N. L. (2008). Automatic attitudes and alcohol: Does implicit liking predict drinking? Cognition & Emotion, 22(2), 238–271. 10.1080/02699930701357394 DOI

Payne K., Lundberg K. (2014). The affect misattribution procedure: Ten years of evidence on reliability, validity, and mechanisms. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(12), 672–686. 10.1111/spc3.12148 DOI

Perrett D. I., Burt D. M., Penton-Voak I. S., Lee K. J., Rowland D. A., Edwards R. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(5), 295–307. 10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00014-8 DOI

Rhodes G., Simmons L. W., Peters M. (2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2), 186–201. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.014 DOI

Ross D. A., Gauthier I. (2015). Holistic processing in the composite task depends on face size. Visual Cognition, 23(5), 533–545. 10.1080/13506285.2015.1049678 PubMed DOI PMC

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(2), e0192018. 10.1371/journal.pone.0192018 PubMed DOI PMC

Saribay S. A., Kleisner K. (2018). Are political views and religiosity related to facial morphology? Evidence from a Turkish sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 124, 25–30. 10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.035 DOI

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, 266(1431), 1913–1917. 10.1098/rspb.1999.0866 PubMed DOI PMC

Schwartz A. J., Boduroglu A., Gutchess A. H. (2014). Cross-cultural differences in categorical memory errors. Cognitive Science, 38(5), 997–1007. 10.1111/cogs.12109 PubMed DOI

Slepian M. L., Young S. G., Harmon-Jones E. (2017). An approach-avoidance motivational model of trustworthiness judgments. Motivation Science, 3(1), 91–97. 10.1037/mot0000046 DOI

Stirrat M., Perrett D. I. (2010). Valid facial cues to cooperation and trust: Male facial width and trustworthiness. Psychological Science, 21(3), 349–354. 10.1177/0956797610362647 PubMed DOI

Sutherland C. A. M., Liu X., Zhang L., Chu Y., Oldmeadow J. A., Young A. W. (2018). Facial first impressions across culture: Data-driven modeling of Chinese and British perceivers’ unconstrained facial impressions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(4), 521–537. 10.1177/0146167217744194 PubMed DOI

Sutherland C. A. M., Oldmeadow J. A., Santos I. M., Towler J., Michael Burt D., Young A. W. (2013). Social inferences from faces: Ambient images generate a three-dimensional model. Cognition, 127(1), 105–118. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.12.001 PubMed DOI

Thornhill R., Gangestad S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 452–460. 10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5 PubMed DOI

Todorov A. (2008). Evaluating faces on trustworthiness. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 208–224. 10.1196/annals.1440.012 PubMed DOI

Todorov A., Olivola C., Dotsch R., Mende-Siedlecki P. (2014). Social attributions from faces: Determinants, consequences, accuracy, and functional significance. Annual Review of Psychology, 66(1), 519–545. 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143831 PubMed DOI

Třebický V., Fialová J., Kleisner K., Roberts S. C., Little A. C., Havlíček J. (2015). Further evidence for links between facial width-to-height ratio and fighting success: Commentary on Zilioli et al. (2014). Aggressive Behavior, 41(4), 331–334. 10.1002/ab.21559 PubMed DOI

Tsujimura H., Banissy M. J. (2013). Human face structure correlates with professional baseball performance: Insights from professional Japanese baseball players. Biology Letters, 9(3), 20130140. 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0140 PubMed DOI PMC

Weston E. M., Friday A. E., Liò P. (2007). Biometric evidence that sexual selection has shaped the hominin face. PLoS One, 2(8), e710. 10.1371/journal.pone.0000710 PubMed DOI PMC

Wheeler L., Kim Y. (1997). What is beautiful is culturally good: The physical attractiveness stereotype has different content in collectivistic cultures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(8), 795–800. 10.1177/0146167297238001 DOI

Whitehouse A. J. O., Gilani S. Z., Shafait F., Mian A., Tan D. W., Maybery M. T., Keelan J. A., Hart R., Handelsman D. J., Goonawardene M., Eastwood P. (2015). Prenatal testosterone exposure is related to sexually dimorphic facial morphology in adulthood. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 282(1816), 20151351. 10.1098/rspb.2015.1351 PubMed DOI PMC

Willis J., Todorov A. (2006). First impressions: Making up your mind after a 100-Ms exposure to a face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592–598. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x PubMed DOI

Wilson J. P., Rule N. O. (2015). Facial trustworthiness predicts extreme criminal-sentencing outcomes. Psychological Science, 26(8), 1325–1331. 10.1177/0956797615590992 PubMed DOI

Zebrowitz L. A., Collins M. A. (1997). Accurate social perception at zero acquaintance: The affordances of a Gibsonian approach. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(3), 204–223. 10.1207/s15327957pspr0103_2 PubMed DOI

Zebrowitz L. A., Fellous J.-M., Mignault A., Andreoletti C. (2003). Trait impressions as overgeneralized responses to adaptively significant facial qualities: Evidence from connectionist modeling. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 7(3), 194–215. 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0703_01 PubMed DOI

Zebrowitz L. A., Montepare J. (2006). The ecological approach to person perception: Evolutionary roots and contemporary offshoots. In Evolution and social psychology (pp. 81–113). Psychosocial Press.

Zebrowitz L. A., Wang R., Bronstad P. M., Eisenberg D., Undurraga E., Reyes-García V., Godoy R. (2012). First impressions from faces among U.S. and culturally isolated Tsimane’ people in the Bolivian rainforest. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1), 119–134. 10.1177/0022022111411386 DOI