Literature DB >> 25339656

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

Carmen E Lefevre1, Peter J Etchells2, Emma C Howell3, Andrew P Clark4, Ian S Penton-Voak3.   

Abstract

Recently, associations between facial structure and aggressive behaviour have been reported. Specifically, the facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) is thought to link to aggression, although it is unclear whether this association is related to a specific dimension of aggression, or to a more generalized concept of dominance behaviour. Similarly, an association has been proposed between facial masculinity and dominant and aggressive behaviour, but, to date, this has not been formally tested. Because masculinity and fWHR are negatively correlated, it is unlikely that both signal similar behaviours. Here, we thus tested these associations and show that: (i) fWHR is related to both self-reported dominance and aggression; (ii) physical aggression, verbal aggression and anger, but not hostility are associated with fWHR; (iii) there is no evidence for a sex difference in associations between fWHR and aggression; and (iv) the facial masculinity index does not predict dominance or aggression. Taken together, these results indicate that fWHR, but not a measure of facial masculinity, cues dominance and specific types of aggression in both sexes.
© 2014 The Author(s) Published by the Royal Society. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aggression; dominance; facial morphology; facial width-to-height ratio; masculinity

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25339656      PMCID: PMC4272215          DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2014.0729

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Lett        ISSN: 1744-9561            Impact factor:   3.703


  18 in total

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

Authors:  Lisa M DeBruine; 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
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-06-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness.

Authors:  D I Perrett; K J Lee; I Penton-Voak; D Rowland; S Yoshikawa; D M Burt; S P Henzi; D L Castles; S Akamatsu
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1998-08-27       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women.

Authors:  Bernhard Fink; Nick Neave; Hanna Seydel
Journal:  Am J Hum Biol       Date:  2007 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.937

4.  Second to fourth digit ratio, testosterone and perceived male dominance.

Authors:  Nick Neave; Sarah Laing; Bernhard Fink; John T Manning
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2003-10-22       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  The aggression questionnaire.

Authors:  A H Buss; M Perry
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  1992-09

6.  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

7.  Social status moderates the relationship between facial structure and aggression.

Authors:  Stefan M M Goetz; Kraig S Shattuck; Robert M Miller; Jocelyn A Campbell; Elianna Lozoya; Glenn E Weisfeld; Justin M Carré
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2013-09-25

8.  Human adaptations for the visual assessment of strength and fighting ability from the body and face.

Authors:  Aaron Sell; Leda Cosmides; John Tooby; Daniel Sznycer; Christopher von Rueden; Michael Gurven
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 5.349

9.  Facial structure is a reliable cue of aggressive behavior.

Authors:  Justin M Carré; Cheryl M McCormick; Catherine J Mondloch
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2009-08-14

10.  In your face: facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players.

Authors:  Justin M Carré; Cheryl M McCormick
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-11-22       Impact factor: 5.349

View more
  12 in total

1.  Facial width-to-height ratio is associated with agonistic and affiliative dominance in bonobos (Pan paniscus).

Authors:  J S Martin; N Staes; A Weiss; J M G Stevens; A V Jaeggi
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Face Shape and Behavior: Implications of Similarities in Infants and Adults.

Authors:  Leslie A Zebrowitz; Robert G Franklin; Jasmine Boshyan
Journal:  Pers Individ Dif       Date:  2015-11-01

3.  Men's facial width-to-height ratio predicts aggression: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael P Haselhuhn; Margaret E Ormiston; Elaine M Wong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Facial width-to-height ratio relates to dominance style in the genus Macaca.

Authors:  Marta Borgi; Bonaventura Majolo
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 2.984

5.  Within-person variability in men's facial width-to-height ratio.

Authors:  Robin S S Kramer
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-03-10       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Presenting Your Best Self(ie): The Influence of Gender on Vertical Orientation of Selfies on Tinder.

Authors:  Jennifer R Sedgewick; Meghan E Flath; Lorin J Elias
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-04-21

7.  The influence of income and testosterone on the validity of facial width-to-height ratio as a biomarker for dominance.

Authors:  Emilou Noser; Jessica Schoch; Ulrike Ehlert
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Social motivation is associated with increased weight granted to cooperation-related impressions in face evaluation tasks.

Authors:  Lou Safra; Nicolas Baumard; Valentin Wyart; Coralie Chevallier
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Facial Width-To-Height Ratio (fWHR) Is Not Associated with Adolescent Testosterone Levels.

Authors:  Carolyn R Hodges-Simeon; Katherine N Hanson Sobraske; Theodore Samore; Michael Gurven; Steven J C Gaulin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Facial features and unethical behavior - Doped athletes show higher facial width-to-height ratios than non-doping sanctioned athletes.

Authors:  Bjoern Krenn; Callum Buehler
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.