| Literature DB >> 23144734 |
Vinet Coetzee1, Stella J Faerber, Jaco M Greeff, Carmen E Lefevre, Daniel E Re, David I Perrett.
Abstract
Little is known about mate choice preferences outside Western, educated, industrialised, rich and democratic societies, even though these Western populations may be particularly unrepresentative of human populations. To our knowledge, this is the first study to test which facial cues contribute to African perceptions of African female attractiveness and also the first study to test the combined role of facial adiposity, skin colour (lightness, yellowness and redness), skin homogeneity and youthfulness in the facial attractiveness preferences of any population. Results show that youthfulness, skin colour, skin homogeneity and facial adiposity significantly and independently predict attractiveness in female African faces. Younger, thinner women with a lighter, yellower skin colour and a more homogenous skin tone are considered more attractive. These findings provide a more global perspective on human mate choice and point to a universal role for these four facial cues in female facial attractiveness.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23144734 PMCID: PMC3483252 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Pearson’s correlations.
| Attractiveness | Adiposity | CIELab L* | CIELab a* | CIELab b* | PIH | Heterogeniety | |
|
| −.216 | – | |||||
|
| .363* | .095 | – | ||||
|
| .194 | −.025 | .383* | – | |||
|
| .410** | .084 | .890*** | .484*** | – | ||
|
| −.366* | .062 | −.121 | −.180 | −.250 | – | |
|
| −.421** | .139 | −.124 | −.162 | −.251 | .870*** | – |
|
| −.287 | −.137 | −.017 | .105 | −.074 | −.124 | .015 |
p≤0.1, * p≤0.05, ** p≤0.01, *** p≤0.001. N = 44. CIELab values indicate lightness (L*), redness (a*) and yellowness (b*), PIH indicates post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation ratings and Heterogeneity indicates Skin heterogeneity ratings.
Regression analysis of facial attractiveness judgements.
| β | F | p | Effect size | |
|
| 5.510 | 0.001 | 0.420 | |
| Skin colour | 0.193 | 6.076 | 0.018 | 0.138 |
| Age | –0.114 | 7.820 | 0.008 | 0.171 |
| Skin Heterogeneity | –0.182 | 4.943 | 0.032 | 0.115 |
| Facial adiposity | –0.182 | 4.382 | 0.043 | 0.104 |
| Facial adiposity2 | 0.061 | 0.498 | 0.485 | 0.013 |
Results obtained using the simultaneous regression method. Facial adiposity and facial adiposity2 were centered to address collinearity between the variables. Effect size: R2 (model); Partial eta squared (ηp 2; variables). N = 44.
Figure 1Composite images of female faces with low and high attractiveness.
Composite images of the 10 women rated (A) least attractive, and (B) most attractive by African university students. Images produced with wavelet magnitude textural processing in Psychomorph. Due to the blending process involved in producing composite images, skin heterogeneity differences between the two groups are somewhat obscured.