Literature DB >> 16777723

Correlated preferences for facial masculinity and ideal or actual partner's masculinity.

Lisa M DeBruine1, Benedict C Jones, Anthony C Little, Lynda G Boothroyd, David I Perrett, Ian S Penton-Voak, Philip A Cooper, Lars Penke, David R Feinberg, Bernard P Tiddeman.   

Abstract

Studies of women's preferences for male faces have variously reported preferences for masculine faces, preferences for feminine faces and no effect of masculinity-femininity on male facial attractiveness. It has been suggested that these apparently inconsistent findings are, at least partly, due to differences in the methods used to manipulate the masculinity of face images or individual differences in attraction to facial cues associated with youth. Here, however, we show that women's preferences for masculinity manipulated in male faces using techniques similar to the three most widely used methods are positively inter-related. We also show that women's preferences for masculine male faces are positively related to ratings of the masculinity of their actual partner and their ideal partner. Correlations with partner masculinity were independent of real and ideal partner age, which were not associated with facial masculinity preference. Collectively, these findings suggest that variability among studies in their findings for women's masculinity preferences reflects individual differences in attraction to masculinity rather than differences in the methods used to manufacture stimuli, and are important for the interpretation of previous and future studies of facial masculinity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16777723      PMCID: PMC1560296          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3445

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  22 in total

1.  Facial attractiveness.

Authors: 
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health?

Authors:  Gillian Rhodes; Janelle Chan; Leslie A Zebrowitz; Leigh W Simmons
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-08-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Sex-contingent face after-effects suggest distinct neural populations code male and female faces.

Authors:  Anthony C Little; Lisa M DeBruine; Benedict C Jones
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2005-11-07       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 4.  Estrogen, bone, growth and sex: a sea change in conventional wisdom.

Authors:  M M Grumbach
Journal:  J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.634

Review 5.  Testosterone and dominance in men.

Authors:  A Mazur; A Booth
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 12.579

6.  What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness.

Authors:  M R Cunningham; A P Barbee; C L Pike
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1990-07

7.  Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces.

Authors:  A C Little; D M Burt; I S Penton-Voak; D I Perrett
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  Testosterone increases perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human males.

Authors:  John P Swaddle; Gillian W Reierson
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2002-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Women's preferences for male behavioral displays change across the menstrual cycle.

Authors:  Steven W Gangestad; Jeffry A Simpson; Alita J Cousins; Christine E Garver-Apgar; P Niels Christensen
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2004-03

10.  Fitting the mind to the world: face adaptation and attractiveness aftereffects.

Authors:  Gillian Rhodes; Linda Jeffery; Tamara L Watson; Colin W G Clifford; Ken Nakayama
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2003-11
View more
  40 in total

Review 1.  Facial attractiveness: evolutionary based research.

Authors:  Anthony C Little; Benedict C Jones; Lisa M DeBruine
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2011-06-12       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Facial width-to-height ratio predicts self-reported dominance and aggression in males and females, but a measure of masculinity does not.

Authors:  Carmen E Lefevre; Peter J Etchells; Emma C Howell; Andrew P Clark; Ian S Penton-Voak
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 3.703

3.  The Faith of Sacrifice: Leadership Trade-Offs in an Afro-Brazilian Religion.

Authors:  Montserrat Soler
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2016-12

4.  The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces.

Authors:  Lisa M DeBruine; Benedict C Jones; John R Crawford; Lisa L M Welling; Anthony C Little
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2010-03-17       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Socio-sexuality and episodic memory function in women: further evidence of an adaptive "mating mode".

Authors:  David S Smith; Benedict C Jones; Kevin Allan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-08

6.  The Relative Importance of Sexual Dimorphism, Fluctuating Asymmetry, and Color Cues to Health during Evaluation of Potential Partners' Facial Photographs : A Conjoint Analysis Study.

Authors:  Justin K Mogilski; Lisa L M Welling
Journal:  Hum Nat       Date:  2017-03

7.  Does masculinity matter? The contribution of masculine face shape to male attractiveness in humans.

Authors:  Isabel M L Scott; Nicholas Pound; Ian D Stephen; Andrew P Clark; Ian S Penton-Voak
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Testosterone responses to competition in men are related to facial masculinity.

Authors:  Nicholas Pound; Ian S Penton-Voak; Alison K Surridge
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Facial cues of dominance modulate the short-term gaze-cuing effect in human observers.

Authors:  Benedict C Jones; Lisa M DeBruine; Julie C Main; Anthony C Little; Lisa L M Welling; David R Feinberg; Bernard P Tiddeman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Preferences across the menstrual cycle for masculinity and symmetry in photographs of male faces and bodies.

Authors:  Marianne Peters; Leigh W Simmons; Gillian Rhodes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.