Relationships: Physical attractiveness

Question 1

Explain the importance of physical attractiveness (Shackleford and Larson)

Answer 1

• Shackleford and Larson (1997), people with symmetrical faces are more attractive as they have an honest signal of genetic fitness (hard to fake facial symmetry).
• People are also attracted to baby-face features: large eyes, delicate chin and a small nose as they trigger an instinct of protection and caring.

Question 2

What is the halo effect -> Dion

Answer 2

• Dion -> Physically attractive people are rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful compared to unattractive people.
• belief that good looking people will have such characteristics makes them more attractive to us, so we behave more positively towards them.

Question 3

What is the ‘matching hypothesis’? (Walter et al)

Answer 3

• Walster -> People choose romantic partners who are roughly of similar physical attractiveness to each other.
• To do this we have to make a realistic judgement about our own ‘value’ to a potential partner.
• Balance of our desire for a partner for evolutionary/social/psych reasons with being rejected by someone out of our league.

Question 4

(+) explain research support for the halo effect (Palmer and Peterson)

Answer 4

• Palmer and Peterson (2012) found physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people.
• Persisted when people knew that the attractive people had no expertise.
• Obvious implications for the political process.

Question 5

(-) explain how theories of physical attraction do not account for individual differences (Villemez & Touhey)

Answer 5

• Not all people place importance on physical attractiveness.
  -> ppts completed a questionnaire to measure sexist attitudes (MACHO Scale, Villemez & Touhey, 1977).
  -> questions include: “a man has the right to physically displace his partner if she steps out of line”.
• PP who scored highly on the questionnaire, were more influenced by physical attractiveness, when making their judgement on likeability.

Question 6

(+) Explain research support for matching hypothesis (Feingold)

Answer 6

• Feingold (1988) – meta analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners.
• More realistic approach as they used actual partners.

Question 7

(-) explain how there is contradictory research for the matched hypothesis (Taylor)

Answer 7

• Taylor studied online dating site choices.
• online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were physically more attractive than them.

Question 8

(+) Explain how theories of physical attractiveness are consistent across of cultures (Cunningham) (Wheeler and Kim)

Answer 8

• Cunningham: Female features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and high eyebrows were rated as highly attractive by white, hispanic and asian males.

Question 9

List evaluations for theories of physical attractiveness

Answer 9

Positive:
- consistent across cultures
- research support for halo effect
-> support for matching hypothesis

Negative:
- contradictory research for matched hypothesis
- does not account individual differences