Literature DB >> 12597270

Masculine somatotype and hirsuteness as determinants of sexual attractiveness to women.

Alan F Dixson1, Gayle Halliwell, Rebecca East, Praveen Wignarajah, Matthew J Anderson.   

Abstract

Five questionnaire studies asked women to rate the attractiveness of outline drawings of male figures that varied in somatotype, body proportions, symmetry, and in distribution of trunk hair. In Study 1, back-posed figures of mesomorphic (muscular) somatotypes were rated as most attractive, followed by average, ectomorphic (slim), and endomorphic (heavily built) figures by both British and Sri Lankan women. In Study 2, computer morphing of somatotypes to produce an intergraded series resulted in a graded response in terms of perceived attractiveness which mirrored the findings of Study 1. In Study 3, back-posed figures were manipulated in order to change waist-to-hip ratios (WHR) and waist-to-shoulder ratios (WSR). A WHR of 0.8-0.9 and a WSR of 0.6 were rated as most attractive and these effects were more pronounced when modeling mesomorphic figures. In Study 4, symmetric figures of a mesomorphic somatotype were rated as less attractive than a normal (asymmetric) version of the same man. Study 5 showed that presence of trunk hair had a marked, positive effect upon women's ratings of attractiveness for both mesomorphic and endomorphic male figures. Women also judged figures with trunk hair as being older and they consistently rated endomorphic figures as being older than mesomorphs. These results are consistent with effects of sexual selection upon visual signals that advertise health, physical prowess, age, and underlying endocrine condition in the human male.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12597270     DOI: 10.1023/a:1021889228469

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Sex Behav        ISSN: 0004-0002


  17 in total

1.  The Curse of Curves: Sex Differences in the Associations Between Body Shape and Pain Expression.

Authors:  Jacob M Vigil; Chance R Strenth; Andrea A Mueller; Jared DiDomenico; Diego Guevara Beltran; Patrick Coulombe; Jane Ellen Smith
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2015-06

2.  Cues of upper body strength account for most of the variance in men's bodily attractiveness.

Authors:  Aaron Sell; Aaron W Lukazsweski; Michael Townsley
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Intrasexual Competition and Eating Restriction in Heterosexual and Homosexual Individuals.

Authors:  Norman P Li; April R Smith; Vladas Griskevicius; Margaret J Cason; Angela Bryan
Journal:  Evol Hum Behav       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 4.178

4.  Relative digit lengths predict men's behavior and attractiveness during social interactions with women.

Authors:  James R Roney; Dario Maestripieri
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2004-09

5.  Nine-month-old infants prefer unattractive bodies over attractive bodies.

Authors:  Michelle Heron-Delaney; Paul C Quinn; Kang Lee; Alan M Slater; Olivier Pascalis
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  2013-03-05

6.  Effects of Women's Short-Term Mating Orientation and Self-Perceived Attractiveness in Rating and Viewing Men's Waist to Chest Ratios.

Authors:  Ray Garza; Jennifer Byrd-Craven
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2020-10-14

Review 7.  An Evolutionary Perspective on Appearance Enhancement Behavior.

Authors:  Adam C Davis; Steven Arnocky
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2020-10-06

8.  What's in a Name? Sound Symbolism and Gender in First Names.

Authors:  David M Sidhu; Penny M Pexman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Why some women look young for their age.

Authors:  David A Gunn; Helle Rexbye; Christopher E M Griffiths; Peter G Murray; Amelia Fereday; Sharon D Catt; Cyrena C Tomlin; Barbara H Strongitharm; Dave I Perrett; Michael Catt; Andrew E Mayes; Andrew G Messenger; Martin R Green; Frans van der Ouderaa; James W Vaupel; Kaare Christensen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Physical attractiveness and sex as modulatory factors of empathic brain responses to pain.

Authors:  Kamila Jankowiak-Siuda; Krystyna Rymarczyk; Łukasz Żurawski; Katarzyna Jednoróg; Artur Marchewka
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 3.617

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.