tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/attractiveness-27573/articlesAttractiveness – The Conversation2024-02-12T17:16:27Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2232192024-02-12T17:16:27Z2024-02-12T17:16:27ZDating apps: how the order you view potential matches can affect which way you swipe<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/574896/original/file-20240212-22-sx5reu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C16%2C5536%2C3895&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The order in which you view faces may affect which way you swipe</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/beautiful-happy-woman-sending-love-text-599470442">pathdoc/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>If you’re planning to celebrate Valentine’s Day with a new partner, there’s a good chance that <a href="https://www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/pnas.1908630116">you met online</a>, which surveys suggest is fast becoming the most popular way people get together. Of course, searching through profile after profile brings with it a variety of difficulties. </p>
<p>Perhaps surprisingly, research shows that one of those problems is simply trying to avoid being influenced by the order in which you view those profiles.</p>
<p>“Sequential effects” (or “serial dependence”) is a type of bias known in the field of psychology. Researchers have found that the previous item in a sequence affects how you judge the current item, whether this involves grading <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-psychological-biases-mean-order-matters-when-we-judge-items-in-sequence-70942">Olympic performances</a> or <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0013164410387344">students’ essays</a>. </p>
<p>We also know that people’s judgements of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1068/p7116">facial attractiveness</a> show this bias. The direction of the effect can go in one of two ways – the attractiveness of the current face is either pulled towards our opinion of the previous one (assimilation) or pushed away from it (contrast). </p>
<p>This may depend on how similar we think the two faces are in other aspects like <a href="https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0082226">gender or ethnicity</a>. High similarity between faces tends to lead to more assimilation. Low similarity produces less assimilation, or may even lead to contrast. </p>
<p>For instance, if the last photo you saw was very attractive and the one you’re currently considering shares several features in common (for example, both are south Asian women with long, dark hair) then you’re more likely to rate this one as attractive too.</p>
<p>These biases also apply to <a href="https://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2778156">other trait judgements</a> like trustworthiness, intelligence and dominance. So in the same way that our opinions about attractiveness are influenced by the previous face we saw, judgements about numerous other qualities are too.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Man swiping and liking profiles on relationship site or application" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/574897/original/file-20240212-26-yb5mcw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It can be worth taking a moment before you swipe.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/dating-app-site-mobile-phone-screen-1204256557">Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>To complicate matters, it isn’t clear whether these sequential effects are caused by a perceptual bias (what we thought of the previous face might change how we see the current one) or a response bias (how we physically responded to the previous face might affect our next response) since researchers typically ask participants to rate every face during the study. </p>
<p>But <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13506285.2021.1995558">one UK study from 2021</a> tried to separate out these explanations by asking participants to view (but not respond to) the previous face before rating the current one. The results showed a contrast effect, where judgements of the current face shifted away from the attractiveness of the face seen before it (given by a different set of participants). Therefore, the direction of bias might depend on whether we’re simply viewing faces or having to actively judge them.</p>
<p>Of course, attractiveness judgements often take the form of a binary decision (“hot or not”) when viewing dating profiles, much like the left or right swipe used by platforms such as Tinder. Researchers have also found sequential effects with <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/srep22740">this type of judgement</a>. </p>
<p>Participants in a 2016 study viewed a sequence of faces and decided whether each was “attractive” or “unattractive”. The results demonstrated an assimilation effect – participants were more likely to rate a face as attractive when they thought the preceding face was attractive than when it was unattractive.</p>
<p>While research has shown that photos play <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/1357054.1357181">the biggest role</a> in a dating profile’s overall attractiveness, other factors such as <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0265407519878787">language errors</a> in the text can influence our judgements. Interestingly, in one study where pictures and text from the same dating profile were rated by different people, there was <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563211001786">a correlation</a> between the rated attractiveness given to the photos and the (separately rated) text that accompanied them. </p>
<p>Since ratings of perceived confidence were also collected, the researchers were able to show that physically attractive people tended to write accompanying text which came across as more confident, with this text judged to be more attractive by others.</p>
<p>So what can we take away from all these studies? You may already know about plenty of biases that people show when perceiving the world. For instance, people are susceptible to spotting <a href="https://kids.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frym.2017.00067">faces in inanimate objects</a> or more likely to attribute positive qualities <a href="https://theconversation.com/halo-effect-do-attractive-people-really-look-less-guilty-how-the-evidence-is-changing-220349">to attractive people</a>. </p>
<p>However, you may not have been aware that viewing sequences of things can change your judgements. That’s not to say that choosing your current partner was entirely due to the quality of the profile that happened to pop up before theirs, but it may well have played a role.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223219/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Kramer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Something to bear in mind if you find yourself swiping through profiles on a dating app later today.Robin Kramer, Senior Lecturer in the School of Psychology, University of LincolnLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2203492024-02-01T12:42:41Z2024-02-01T12:42:41ZHalo effect: do attractive people really look less guilty? How the evidence is changing<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/567991/original/file-20240105-16-l5dgrq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C15%2C2616%2C1917&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Witness for the Prosecution was a 1957 film about a supposedly conscientious woman testifying against her husband. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.alamy.com/dietrichlaughton-witness-for-the-prosecution-1957-image236825116.html?imageid=67079CF2-84AD-4647-8D62-1004A2F7ECE0&p=1894192&pn=undefined&searchId=2957f60faf41b160bd1bf39e7ece4f9e&searchtype=0&login=1">Allstar Picture Library Limited/Alamy Stock Photo</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>You might think attractive people get preferential treatment in life – and research suggests you’d be right. Some psychologists have shown this can even help people get a lighter prison sentence. More recently, however, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/17470218231218651">our own study</a> suggests that this “halo effect” is, in fact, more complicated. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/basics/halo-effect">halo effect</a> is a psychological term describing how an initial good impression of someone positively colours our subsequent perceptions of them.</p>
<p>Our first impressions are <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x">formed quickly</a> when we meet new people and they bias how we behave towards them. When we judge a person to be attractive, this can cause us to believe they also have other socially desirable traits, such as being interesting or funny.</p>
<p>Studies show that, as a result, attractive people may <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0022103176900731">receive more help</a> from strangers, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13504851.2011.587758">earn higher wages</a>, and get more <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165176512005599">job opportunities</a>.</p>
<h2>Cognitive biases</h2>
<p>One place in which you’d really hope that appearance doesn’t affect decisions is in court. The problem, however, is that jurors show biases just like other people. </p>
<p>Studies into real cases have found that inmates who people think look <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797615590992">less trustworthy</a> may be more likely to receive death sentences, while <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/bf01065855">baby-faced defendants</a> in small claims courts may be more likely to win cases involving intentional actions. And, as you might now suspect, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224545.1985.9922900">more attractive defendants</a> seem to receive more lenient sentences.</p>
<p>That said, it can be difficult to work out the causes of effects found in studies conducted in real-world situations, and there are often many possible explanations. For this reason, studies in the laboratory can be the best way to investigate specific research questions.</p>
<p>In lab studies, participants typically feature in the role of mock jurors. Again, these tend to show evidence that attractive people receive more lenient punishments for <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb01552.x">most types of crime</a>. </p>
<p>Attractiveness <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01639625.2020.1844364">doesn’t always</a> influence mock juror decisions though. The attractiveness of the defendant may interact with other factors, such as the <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15074507/">attractiveness of the plaintiff</a> or whether the jurors have <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2466/pr0.102.3.727-733">a chance to deliberate</a> with each other.</p>
<p>However, previous laboratory-based studies also show limitations. First, they often focus on only one type of crime, so it isn’t clear whether attractiveness may play a role in the sentencing of some crimes but not others. Second, these studies present a single image of their supposed criminals even though real juries typically see defendants moving around and from different angles, which could change jurors’ perceptions of defendents’ attractiveness. </p>
<p>Finally, many studies investigate the impact of attractiveness by comparing decisions based on just one “high attractive” versus one “low attractive” defendant. In reality, attractiveness is a continuous measure, so this simplified comparison of the two extremes may not show what’s really going on. Plus the two faces chosen are unlikely to be representative of all such faces – a particular face might be very attractive, but will also have many other specific qualities that make it different.</p>
<h2>New findings</h2>
<p>In a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/17470218231218651">recent study</a>, my collaborators and I tackled these limitations by including several different descriptions of crimes, supposedly perpetrated by the defendant, for each of three crime types (robbery, sexual assault, murder). </p>
<p>We also presented short video clips to our mock jurors rather than photos of the defendants. Finally, we used 60 different “defendants” varying in attractiveness. In this way, we hoped that our findings might better apply to the processes evident in the real world.</p>
<p>During the experiment, some of the participants judged the attractiveness of the defendants. On each of the 60 trials, they were presented with a five-second video clip of a smartly dressed man testifying in court (with the sound removed) and rated the attractiveness using a zero (very unattractive) to nine (very attractive) scale.</p>
<p>Other participants judged the perceived guilt of the men (again, with the sound removed to avoid being influenced by what was being said). Each video clip was accompanied by a crime description and participants rated whether they thought the man was innocent or guilty using a zero (definitely innocent) to nine (definitely guilty) scale. We then used the men’s attractiveness ratings to see if these predicted the guilt ratings they received.</p>
<p>Our results provided some evidence that more attractive defendants were rated as less guilty of murder but more guilty of sexual assault, with no bias observed for robbery. However, these effects were all small in size. In other words, even if there was some influence of attractiveness on perceived guilt, it would be of little importance in the real world.</p>
<p>Given that researchers typically find that more attractive people receive lighter sentences, we argue that the lack of an effect of attractiveness in our study is likely due to the improvements in our design. Of course, there are still many differences between our study and jurors’ experiences that we didn’t investigate. For instance, the way that defendants speak in court may influence perceptions, as might their gender.</p>
<p>Since attractiveness is known to bias judgements in a number of contexts, why might it fail to influence decisions of guilt or innocence in court? </p>
<p>We suggest the seriousness of the crime could trump any biases due to the defendant’s appearance. Although we may think more favourably about attractive people in daily life, this halo effect could dissipate when we are faced with decisions about robbery or murder. </p>
<p>In such circumstances, we would hope that the evidence carries most of the weight in our decision-making processes.</p>
<p>Although there may be good reason for jealousy when considering the way attractive people are treated in general, justice may overcome such things in the courtroom.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220349/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robin Kramer does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Recent research suggests jurors are less likely to be lenient on attractive defendants than previously thought.Robin Kramer, Senior Lecturer in the School of Psychology, University of LincolnLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1966072022-12-20T10:04:34Z2022-12-20T10:04:34ZChristmas films: there might be some truth to stories about hometown romances, according to research<p>The festive season seems to be a good time for love, or so many Christmas films would have us believe. One incredibly popular trope is “<a href="https://screenrant.com/reddit-best-christmas-movie-tropes/">the return</a>” – where the main character, usually with a successful career in the city, returns to their hometown for the festive period.</p>
<p>In their rustic homely surroundings, they come to realise that their life as a singleton in the city has been a sham, fall in love with some kind-hearted local hero or an old flame, <em>et voilà</em> – we have the magic of Christmas!</p>
<p>While certainly clichéd, the trope of “the return” may actually be based on a kernel of truth. Psychologists have <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Attraction-Explained-The-science-of-how-we-form-relationships/Swami/p/book/9780367645793">long known</a> that a powerful spark of attraction and romance is familiarity. In contrast to the commonsense idea that familiarity breeds contempt, familiarity actually breeds liking.</p>
<p>So if you, like these cinematic heroes and heroines, are looking for love in your hometown this Christmas, here is the evidence that might help you with your search.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Quarter life, a series by The Conversation" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/451343/original/file-20220310-13-1bj6csd.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em><strong><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/quarter-life-117947?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=UK+YP2022&utm_content=InArticleTop">This article is part of Quarter Life</a></strong>, a series about issues affecting those of us in our twenties and thirties. From the challenges of beginning a career and taking care of our mental health, to the excitement of starting a family, adopting a pet or just making friends as an adult. The articles in this series explore the questions and bring answers as we navigate this turbulent period of life.</em></p>
<p><em>You may be interested in:</em></p>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/five-dating-tips-from-the-georgian-era-186847?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=UK+YP2022&utm_content=InArticleTop">Five dating tips from the Georgian era</a></em></p>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/workplace-romance-four-questions-to-ask-yourself-before-dating-someone-from-the-office-187809?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=UK+YP2022&utm_content=InArticleTop">Workplace romance: four questions to ask yourself before dating someone from the office</a></em></p>
<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/online-dating-fatigue-why-some-people-are-turning-to-face-to-face-apps-first-184910?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=UK+YP2022&utm_content=InArticleTop">Online dating fatigue – why some people are turning to face-to-face apps first</a></em></p>
<hr>
<h2>The allure of the familiar</h2>
<p>In one <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/002210319290055O">classic American study</a>, researchers had four women attend university classes in different frequencies. One never went to class, another attended five classes, the third attended ten, and the fourth attended class 15 times over a semester.</p>
<p>At the end of the semester, it was found that the more classes the women attended, the more other students liked them and wanted to spend time with them. Familiar faces are not only <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.422?casa_token=6eWr_gkdehMAAAAA:3Ov1SPOUxliDoN5DUyQbXUzlMuJBaAiLz-1Jqsv76RglPGCG-dik973zAU6TatYSKgCGgV2w6nMVow">liked more</a>, they are also more likely to make us <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0146167201277011?casa_token=TVKT6DXu6KgAAAAA:gQa3dYxSj_lW1FdCgALnqaUtLjcK8I0IJI7b9XO9NJXrd2t9HoXoTSha8AJAfw_xidjw3_Wyduc">smile</a>.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sGhc9J_pC28?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>One <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Attraction-Explained-The-science-of-how-we-form-relationships/Swami/p/book/9780367645793">reason</a> why familiar stimuli tend to be liked is because our brains process them more easily – or “fluently”, in the parlance of neuroscientists – and this fluency is experienced more positively.</p>
<p>Evolutionary factors may also play a hand in shaping our reactions to familiar people. In general, novel stimuli tend to breed feelings of uncertainty and result in wary reactions. But greater familiarity usually means we know the stimulus to be harmless and we’re more likely to respond favourably as a result.</p>
<p>So, when the main character in a Christmas movie returns to their hometown, familiarity fosters attraction because they seek the positive rewards that familiar others provide. Feelings of comfort and safety with others contribute to liking. Indeed, so powerful is the effect of familiarity that <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9781315663074/psychology-interpersonal-relationships-ellen-berscheid-pamela-regan">some psychologists</a> have said it is “perhaps the most basic” of all principles of attraction.</p>
<h2>Beauty maps</h2>
<p>Familiarity may also work its magic in a more global sense.
To show this, I attempted to put together an <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886908001724?casa_token=RxXkT7HE1JAAAAAA:RJy8f8XGz-2OUVJ5lMydQoCrPasVEEDFi3nHDAFGklDoLcz1nzM8sYKDlDCJ39Vv2yi0Pll1">empirical “beauty map”</a> of London. Over 400 participants in each of London’s 33 boroughs were asked to rate how attractive they thought people in each of the boroughs were, as well as how familiar they were with each borough.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vIBBVzy5UoQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Our data showed that people in richer boroughs tended to be rated as more attractive than those from poorer boroughs. But more interesting was the fact that attractiveness ratings were also strongly associated with ratings of familiarity. When participants were more familiar with a borough, they rated its residents as more physically attractive. Although limited to London, what this study shows is that our understanding of geographical space can impact who we think is attractive.</p>
<p>In another <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/psp.487?casa_token=rPJWwr307eEAAAAA:VRBF-gR2dMk7Xp_9Zhow2Z71GtGiPWVOeczwwVfSoSGpnESrOjfL6oRd32XOrPIDxChBW00feF5HLQ">study</a> conducted in the Netherlands, researchers interviewed residents in the village of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vriezenveen">Vriezenveen</a> about the effects of geography on partner choice. Residents preferred partners from their own village, who were more familiar and had similar knowledge that comes from sharing an upbringing in the same neighbourhood.</p>
<p>In contrast, residents of villages further away were perceived as being less trustworthy, “a different sort of people”. Even the littlest things – like washing windows on a Sunday – were taken as evidence of that difference. Such beliefs matter because they can affect who we interact and form relationships with. If you believe that people from your hometown are more familiar and trustworthy, then it would make sense to find yourself a partner there.</p>
<p>So if you’re single this Christmas, might it be a good idea to head back to your hometown? The people there will be more familiar, but bear in mind that real life is not a Christmas movie. Just because the trope of “the return” may have a kernel of truth, doesn’t mean that it’s a principle by which to organise your life.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196607/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Viren Swami does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We are unsurprisingly attracted to the familiar.Viren Swami, Professor of Social Psychology, Anglia Ruskin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1523492020-12-28T13:32:28Z2020-12-28T13:32:28Z7 research-based resolutions that will help strengthen your relationship in the year ahead<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/498728/original/file-20221202-16594-93wqvq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=90%2C98%2C4792%2C3121&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Consider some science-backed ways to keep the home fires burning in 2023.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/senior-couple-holding-numbers-2023-while-royalty-free-image/1431943120">DjordjeDjurdjevic/E+ via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The new year is going to be better. It has to be better. Maybe you’re one of the <a href="https://www.finder.com/new-years-resolution-statistics">74% of Americans</a> in one survey who said they planned on hitting the reset button on Jan. 1 and resolving to improve. Those <a href="http://maristpoll.marist.edu/marist-poll-national-results-analysis-4/">New Year’s resolutions most commonly focus on</a> eating healthier, exercising, losing weight and being a better person. </p>
<p>Admirable goals, to be sure. But focusing on body and mind neglects something equally important: your romantic relationship. Couples with <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2007.00393.x">better marriages report higher well-being</a>, and one study found that having a better romantic relationship not only promoted well-being and better health now but that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08952841.2020.1838238">those benefits extend into the future</a>. </p>
<p>The lesson is clear: Your relationship is important. Resolve to get it right. </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean you have to be perfect. But here are seven resolutions based on recent psychological research that you can make this New Year to help keep your relationship going strong. </p>
<h2>1. Set yourself up for success</h2>
<p>Adjust your mindset so you see your relationship as a key <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00373.x">source of positive experiences</a>. <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=v2ai_5wAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">Psychologists like me</a> call this boosting your social approach motivation. Instead of merely trying to avoid relationship problems, those with an approach motivation seek out the positives and <a href="http://peplab.web.unc.edu/files/2020/11/Don-Fredrickson-Algoe-JPSP-In-press-Approach-Paper-In-Press-.pdf">use them to help the relationship</a>.</p>
<p>Here’s how: Imagine a conversation with your partner. Having more of an approach motivation allows you to focus on positive feelings as you talk and to see your partner as more responsive to you. Your partner gets a burst of positivity, too, and in return sees you as more responsive. One partner’s good vibes spill over to the other partner, ultimately benefiting both. After a year when your relationship may have felt unprecedented external strains, laying the foundation to take advantage of any positives is good place to start. </p>
<h2>2. Be optimistic</h2>
<p>While things in the past may not have always gone how you wanted, it’s important to be optimistic about the future. But the right kind of optimism matters. A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12342">2020 research study</a> from <a href="https://cns.utexas.edu/directory/item/84-human-dev-family-sci/3008-farnish-krystan?Itemid=349">Krystan Farnish</a> and <a href="https://cns.utexas.edu/directory/item/14-human-ecology/259-neff-lisa-a?Itemid=349">Lisa Neff</a> found that generally looking on the bright side of life allowed participants to deal with relationship conflict more effectively – as they put it, better able to “shake it off” – than did those who were optimistic specifically about their relationship.</p>
<p>It seems that if people focus all their rosy expectations just on their relationship, it encourages them to anticipate few negative experiences with their partner. Since that’s unrealistic even in the best relationships, it sets them up for disappointment. </p>
<h2>3. Increase your psychological flexibility</h2>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006">Try to go with the flow</a>. In other words, work on accepting your feelings without being defensive. It’s OK to adjust your behaviors – you don’t always have to do things the way you always have or go the places you’ve always gone. Stop being stubborn and experiment with being flexible.</p>
<p>A 2020 study by <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Karen_Twiselton">Karen Twiselton</a> and colleagues found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12344">when you’re more flexible psychologically</a>, relationship quality is higher, in part because you experience more positive and fewer negative emotions. For example, navigating the yearly challenge of holidays and family traditions is a relationship minefield. However, if both partners back away from a “must do” mentality in favor of a more adaptable approach, relationship harmony will be greater. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="couple calmly enjoying tea together" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376237/original/file-20201221-19-5dpxqg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When you’re both in a good headspace, it’s easier to keep the relationship moving in the right direction.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/couple-asian-young-adult-feeling-relax-making-and-royalty-free-image/1283799454">skaman306/Moment via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4. It’s OK to put ‘me’ before ‘we’</h2>
<p>It’s easy for some people to play the self-sacrificing martyr in their romantic relationship. If this sounds like you, try to focus more on yourself. It doesn’t make you a bad person or a bad partner. When you’re psychologically healthy, your partner and your relationship also benefit. </p>
<p>Researchers have identified <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000231">four main traits that are part of good mental health</a>: openness to feelings, warmth, positive emotions and straightforwardness. These traits help with being more clear about who you are, feeling better about who you are, expressing greater optimism and less aggression, exploiting others less and exhibiting less antisocial behavior. You can see how what’s good for you in this case would be good for your partner too.</p>
<h2>5. Do something for your partner</h2>
<p>But it’s not all about you. Putting your partner first some of the time and catering to your partner’s desires is part of being a couple. A 2020 study by <a href="https://carleton.ca/psychology/people/johanna-peetz/">Johanna Peetz</a> and colleagues found that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12357">prioritizing your partner</a> makes you feel closer to them, increases positive feelings, reduces negative ones and boosts perceived relationship quality. </p>
<p>In the new year, look for ways to give your partner some wins. Let them get their way from time to time and support them in what they want to do, without exclusively prioritizing your own wants and needs. </p>
<h2>6. Don’t be so hard on yourself</h2>
<p>So many New Year’s resolutions focus on body image. Aspirations to eat better and work out often stem from the same goal: a hotter body. Yet, research from <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Xue_Lei8">Xue Lei</a> shows that you may not really know what your partner wants you to look like.</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12451">Women tend to overestimate how thin</a> male partners want them to be. Similarly, men believe that female partners want them to be more muscular than women say they do. It may seem harmless, but in both cases individuals are more critical and demanding toward themselves, in part based on misreading what a partner truly desires.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="couple embrace while sitting on the grass" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/376239/original/file-20201221-13-1snhov6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Caring physical contact has a lot of upsides for your relationship.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/gay-couple-latino-and-european-millennial-men-royalty-free-image/1159681114">Drazen_/E+ via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>7. Stay in touch</h2>
<p>I saved the easiest item on the list for last: Touch your partner more. When <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cheryl_Carmichael">Cheryl Carmichael</a> and colleagues followed 115 participants over a 10-day period, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620929164">they found that initiating and receiving touch</a> – things like holding hands, cuddling, kissing – were associated with both a boost in closeness and relationship quality. Importantly, being touched by your partner has the added benefit of making you feel more understood and validated. Who couldn’t use more of that in the coming year?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/152349/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gary W. Lewandowski Jr. does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Psychology studies suggest a variety of ways you can strengthen your bond and increase your satisfaction with your partner.Gary W. Lewandowski Jr., Professor of Psychology, Monmouth UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1468262020-10-09T12:29:04Z2020-10-09T12:29:04ZDoing good may make people look better<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/361427/original/file-20201002-22-1mfcufc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=569%2C264%2C4780%2C3248&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A Feed Your City volunteer bundling food to be given away in Atlanta on Sept. 19, 2020.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/feed-your-city-volunteer-prepares-food-packages-for-atlanta-news-photo/1228619404">Paras Griffin/Getty Images for Feed Your City Challenge/Atlanta GA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Giving is good for you.</p>
<p>For years, researchers have been finding that people who <a href="https://www.ipearlab.org/media/publications/Konrath_2013_power_of_volunteering.pdf">support charities or volunteer for causes can benefit</a> from being generous.</p>
<p>For example, they might learn new things, meet new people or make others whom they care about happier. Researchers have also found that giving may <a href="https://www.miqols.org/resources/WHR19.pdf#page=69">make the givers themselves happier</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02248794%22%22">more confident</a> and even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.1100%22%22">physically healthier</a>.</p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=1jKw67MAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">experts</a> on the <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=yrFC-2EAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">science of giving</a>, we looked into whether there’s another possible upside to doing good: physical attractiveness. It may seem surprising, but across three peer-reviewed studies, we found that others rate people who give money or volunteer for nonprofits, give to their friends and even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0899764020950835">register as organ donors</a> as more attractive. We also found that more attractive people are also more likely to give in various ways.</p>
<p>While our findings may raise eyebrows, we actually weren’t too surprised – the personal benefits of being generous are well established in our field. </p>
<h2>3 studies</h2>
<p>Our first study examined data from a large, <a href="https://www.norc.org/Research/Projects/Pages/national-social-life-health-and-aging-project.aspx">nationally representative sample of older U.S. adults</a>. We found that seniors who volunteered were rated as more attractive by interviewers than those who did not volunteer – despite the fact that the raters were unaware of respondents’ volunteering status. </p>
<p>The second study analyzed data from a <a href="https://addhealth.cpc.unc.edu/">nationally representative sample of U.S. teens</a> for several years. We found that those who volunteered as teenagers were rated as more attractive once they became young adults. We also found the reverse: Those rated as more attractive by interviewers as teenagers were more likely to volunteer when they grew up. Again, raters did not know about participants’ volunteering history.</p>
<p>Our third study used data collected from <a href="https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/wlsresearch/">a sample of Wisconsin teenagers from 1957 until 2011</a>. We found that teens whose yearbook photos were rated as more attractive by 12 raters were more likely to give money over 40 years later, compared to their less attractive peers. We also found that these adult givers were rated as more attractive by interviewers than nongivers around 13 years later, when they were around the age of 72.</p>
<p>In all three studies, raters were asked to give their opinions on how good-looking participants were, using a rating scale where lower numbers meant less attractive, and higher numbers meant more so. Although beauty can be in the eye of the beholder, <a href="https://doi.apa.org/record/1995-17400-001">people often agree</a> on who is more or less attractive. </p>
<h2>A halo effect</h2>
<p>Our results suggest that giving could make people better-looking, and that being more attractive could make people more likely to donate to charity or volunteer.</p>
<p>These findings build on previous research indicating that <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691158174/beauty-pays">beauty confers a “halo</a>” – people attribute other positive characteristics to them, such as intelligence and good social skills.</p>
<p>These halos may explain why attractive people tend to marry <a href="https://academic.oup.com/sf/article-abstract/89/3/983/2235623">better-looking and more educated spouses</a> and are more likely to be employed and <a href="https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/000282806776157515">make more money</a>.</p>
<p>Those higher earnings, logically, mean that good-looking people have more money to give away. They also <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390">make more friends</a>, which means they have larger social networks – subjecting them to more requests to donate and volunteer.</p>
<h2>Not just a bias toward beauty</h2>
<p>Because we were aware of this beauty bias, in all three of our studies, we statistically controlled for demographic factors such as gender, marital status and income.</p>
<p>We also controlled for respondents’ mental health, physical health and religious participation, given their links to both attractiveness and giving.</p>
<p>So, we know that our results are not explained by these preexisting differences. In other words, it is not merely that more attractive people are more likely to be married, richer, healthier or happier – and therefore more likely to give.</p>
<p>But, there could be other alternative explanations that were not measured.</p>
<h2>Why this happens</h2>
<p>We would love to know whether doing good actually causes people to be more good-looking. But it is not possible to figure that out for sure.</p>
<p>For example, in studies on what smoking does to your health, scientists could not require some participants to be long-term smokers and other participants to avoid tobacco altogether. Such arrangements would not be ethical or even possible.</p>
<p>Similarly, we can’t require some participants to be long-term givers and others to never volunteer or support charities. Most people give in some way, so asking them to stop would not be realistic, or even ethical.</p>
<p>Still, by following what a group of specific individuals do over time, we can discover whether giving at one time can predict whether someone will be more physically attractive at another time – just like we know that people who smoke have <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/basic_info/risk_factors.htm">higher rates of lung cancer</a> than those who don’t.</p>
<p>Overall, using the best available evidence, we find that it is indeed possible that doing good today may make you appear better-looking tomorrow.</p>
<p>[<em>You need to understand the coronavirus pandemic, and we can help.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=coronavirus-help">Read The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>To be sure, we don’t know why beauty and doing good are linked. But it’s possible that people who take care of others are also more likely to take care better care of themselves. This possibility is supported by our previous research showing that volunteers are more likely to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.11.043">get flu shots</a> and take other health precautions.</p>
<p>Taken together, our three studies confirm the link between moral and physical beauty that was described in ancient Greece by the <a href="https://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/usappho/sph99.htm">poet Sappho</a>: “He who is fair to look upon is good, and he who is good, will soon be fair also.”</p>
<p>Our findings also contradict myths that beautiful people are shallow or mean, as suggested in the movie “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E8I-Qzmbqnc">Legally Blonde</a>” and countless other <a href="https://www.theringer.com/movies/2020/8/28/21404539/teen-movie-mean-girls-ranking-regina-george-heathers">“mean-girls” films about teens</a>. </p>
<p>Instead, we have found another way that doing good could be good for you.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146826/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sara Konrath receives funding from Americorps (formerly the Corporation for National and Community Service. She is affiliated with the Center for Empathy and the Visual Arts at the Minneapolis Institute for Art. She consults for OK Cupid, an online dating site, but they were not involved in this research project in any way. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Femida Handy affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania in the US and York University in Canada </span></em></p>Two scholars have found links between generosity and physical attractiveness.Sara Konrath, Associate Professor, Indiana University, Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, IUPUIFemida Handy, Professor of Social Policy at the School of Social Policy and Practice, University of PennsylvaniaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1232352019-09-27T11:19:17Z2019-09-27T11:19:17ZBeautiful people don’t always win in the workplace<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/294432/original/file-20190926-51410-12m9akj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Consumers react differently to beautiful service employees.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ruben M Ramos/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Beautiful people tend to have a lot more luck in the work world. </p>
<p>Research has shown people deemed attractive <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2015.04.002">get paid more</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(99)00014-2">receive better job evaluations</a> and are generally <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1927">more employable</a>. It’s even been shown that <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2357756">good-looking CEOs bring better stock returns</a> for their companies.</p>
<p>In part, this may be because companies believe consumers are more likely to buy things from beautiful employees, which is perhaps why <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/06/02/the-rise-and-fall-of-abercrombies-look-policy/">retailers like Abercrombie & Fitch</a> have used looks as criteria in their hiring process. Abercrombie says it <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2015/04/24/abercrombie-ditches-shirtless-models-with-new-policies.html">stopped doing that</a> in 2015. </p>
<p>There’s some evidence, however, that this worker “beauty premium” may be wearing off – at least when it comes to employees who interact with consumers. In television commercials, for example, <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/10/18/17995804/bumble-spotify-dove-real-people-in-advertisements">retailers and other companies are increasingly using real people</a> – with all their physical flaws – rather than photoshopped models to give their brands an “authentic” feel. </p>
<p>Research several colleagues and <a href="https://udayton.edu/directory/business/management_and_marketing/zhang-chun.php">I conducted</a> recently suggests that companies may be wise to take this approach with customers. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.04.016">Our studies</a> show occasions where the beauty premium doesn’t hold – and can even backfire. </p>
<h2>Beauty can create distance</h2>
<p>In our first study, we wanted to better understand how consumers respond to attractive service employees. </p>
<p>We invited 309 college students to read the same description of being served dinner at a restaurant and then look at an image of a person we described as their waiter. </p>
<p>Participants randomly viewed either a male or female server whose facial features were edited to depict high or low levels of attractiveness, based on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/676967">prior research defining beauty</a>. Separately, we used similar objective measures of attractiveness to rate participants on the same scale. </p>
<p>We then asked participants to rate the attractiveness of the server and how “psychologically close” they felt to him or her. Participants also graded customer satisfaction, the service quality and the likability of the waiter on a scale from low to high. </p>
<p>We found that how close a consumer felt toward the waiter correlated with how they rated the quality of service they received. That is, if they felt distance from the waiter, they were more likely to give him or her poor marks. Furthermore, we found that people who thought the server was attractive but were themselves not good-looking – using our objective beauty assessment – were more likely to feel distance.</p>
<p>We wanted to know whether this distance was actually more about how they perceived themselves than any objective measure. So we conducted a second similar study for which we recruited 237 people who were waiting to board a flight at China’s third-largest airport, located in Guangzhou. We asked them to read a scenario about receiving meal or other service from a flight attendant while aboard the plane and view a picture of the employee. Just as in the first study, participants randomly viewed either “attractive” or “unattractive” flight attendants. </p>
<p>They then rated the attractiveness of the attendant as well as themselves and indicated whether they believe there’s a connection between beauty and skill. They also rated the service received. </p>
<p>We found that participants who saw themselves as less good-looking felt more distance from an attractive flight attendant and were also more likely to perceive the service as lower quality. In addition, participants who said there isn’t a connection between beauty and skill also tended to assess attractive employees’ service as low quality. </p>
<p>A third and final study, in which we surveyed consumers at a shopping mall who had just had a face-to-face encounter with a service employee, further confirmed the results of the first two. In each study, we found a clear connection between beautiful workers and unpleasant customer experiences for people who are less attractive. </p>
<p>So in a world that admires and hires beautiful people, our research suggests there’s a potential downside, at least in the service sector. </p>
<p>[ <em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>. ]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/123235/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chun Zhang receives funding from School of Business Administration, University of Dayton. </span></em></p>New research shows how attractive employees can rub some customers the wrong way.Chun Zhang, Assistant Professor of Marketing, University of DaytonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1092972019-01-04T12:11:25Z2019-01-04T12:11:25ZWhy we want to build a machine that can predict a person’s attractiveness<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252419/original/file-20190103-32154-d401od.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/multiracial-serious-people-lineup-mugshot-standing-399773986?src=dabeswLFO40WY0KxOyxSuw-1-4">Akhenaton Images/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is an age-old question – what makes someone attractive? We often say things like “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” but while this romantic notion may bring comfort to those dealt a poor hand in life, it also gives the impression that the foundations of attractiveness are elusive and unpredictable. It suggests that what each of us sees as an attractive trait – whether physical or psychological – is so variable that everyone must be looking for something different. </p>
<p>While there is variety in what each of us regards as beautiful, cutting through this noise are common and consistent preferences. Psychological traits such as a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2011.03.006">sense of humour</a>, <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-37429-001">intelligence</a> and <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.947">kindness</a> are generally sought after. Similarly, physical attributes such as <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(95)00074-7">waist-to-hip ratio</a> (the difference in waist and hip circumference), <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22216228">sex-typical voice pitch</a> (basically, our expectation that men will have deep voices, and women high voices), and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090513899000148">facial symmetry</a> are also reliably desirable. Finding someone who could take or leave <em>some</em> of these characteristics may be easy, but one would have a hard time finding someone yearning to meet a sour-faced, selfish and dull person who refuses to take a shower.</p>
<p>While researchers have taken steps to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992">comprehensively catalogue</a> the preferences of men and women, we still don’t know which traits are the most important contributors to a person’s attractiveness. What we do know is that not all attractive traits are preferred equally. This can be revealed using some basic psychological tasks, such as asking people to design a partner by allocating points to enhance their characteristics (similar to designing a character in a video game). </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/252463/original/file-20190104-32151-17345jy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=552&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Attractiveness is not skin deep.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/beautiful-woman-face-close-studio-on-288371504?src=3P7FPbeH0PQS6pAVH8JvcA-1-4">Irina Bg/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>When given only a small points budget, tough choices have to be made – and some characteristics normally attractive in their own right tend to fade into the background. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12051582">One study</a> found that creativity and talents were trumped by the likes of intelligence and social status during the task. Interestingly, basic kindness tends to be one of the top traits when building the ideal long-term partner.</p>
<p>These tasks are great for assessing the individual traits that make up mate preferences. But they do not necessarily capture how people make judgements about the attractiveness of living, breathing human beings. They may tell us that humour is important, for instance, but we balance a range of criteria in assessing attractiveness. A funny personality may seem less appealing in a person who is selfish. </p>
<p>Looking deeper into this, these tasks don’t acknowledge the often complicated relationship between characteristics. For example, while the task might allow someone to design a partner who is low in intelligence but high in creativity, these attributes tend to go <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028961300024X">hand in hand</a> in the real world. </p>
<p>This leaves us in the position where we know which traits are attractive, and have some idea of what preferences are prioritised over others. But by looking at different traits in isolation we are still missing the complete picture. Perhaps a better way to approach the problem would be to take an objective rating of a person’s attractiveness (by asking the public to rate them <a href="https://experiment.com/u/z8oDww">on a scale</a>, for example) and then figuring out what traits hold the most influence over that number.</p>
<p>Doing this would require taking a large sample of the population and measuring all the psychological and physical traits known to contribute to attractiveness. Then, by adding in objective measures of overall attractiveness – and a dash of machine learning – creating models capable of learning what traits matter the most.</p>
<p>This is not some science fiction idea – in fact it is something that my lab at Swansea University <a href="http://www.experiment.com/whatmatters">is currently crowdfunding</a>. Machine learning is a powerful tool that has already accomplished feats such as predicting biological sex with <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/113/14/E1968">a 93% accuracy</a> based on brain scans alone. While we won’t be scanning brains, we will be measuring dozens of our volunteers’ characteristics – including humour, intelligence, impulsivity, facial symmetry, strength, and more. </p>
<p>In the first instance, we will use this information to calculate how these attributes combine to predict how one perceives one’s own attractiveness. Then, we will extend this to predict objective judgements of attractiveness such as those made by the public after viewing online profiles of the volunteers. </p>
<p>This resulting model would be able to tell us that, for example, John’s rating of “seven out of 10” by the public is primarily driven by his high intelligence, but held back a bit by his lack of muscle mass. It might also tell us that his poor sense of humour would normally work against him, but is completely overshadowed by his high social status. It would also tell us which traits don’t really matter at all – that nobody really cares about John’s lack of hair. </p>
<p>After calibration, such a model would also be able to predict the attractiveness of new cases – without the need for public ratings. In other words, it could guess how the public would rate someone’s attractiveness, based on a small number of important traits. </p>
<p>Ultimately, this system could even be used to advise people on how they can make themselves more attractive to a wider range of people. One only has to look at the billions of dollars spent every year on <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497204001099">make up</a> and <a href="https://academic.oup.com/asj/article/33/4/604/204834">cosmetic surgery</a> alone to realise that there is a great public interest in what people can do to enhance their attractiveness. </p>
<p>Some enhancements, such as taking guitar lessons or learning magic tricks for example, may at first glance seem like good methods of self-improvement. However, ultimately, these may pale in comparison to the attractiveness boost experienced by finding a better-paid job or – perhaps controversially – simply trying to be a kinder person. But to know for sure, we need a method to sort the wheat from the chaff. Which is why we want to build a machine that can predict attractiveness.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/109297/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew G. Thomas does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Using physical and psychological traits, researchers are building a system which can rate a person’s attractiveness.Andrew G. Thomas, Lecturer in Psychology, Swansea UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1073642018-12-02T18:45:07Z2018-12-02T18:45:07ZHow a candidate’s looks may be swinging your vote (without you even realising it)<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247923/original/file-20181129-170232-1aogmk1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=14%2C3%2C2410%2C1992&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Compiling images from real American politicians with the help of the Victoria Police Criminal Identification Unit, the authors built six "ideal" candidates to test how attractiveness shifts votes.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ssqu.12540">Rodrigo Praino, Daniel Stockemer/Social Science Quarterly</a>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>If someone asks you why you chose the election candidate you voted for, you will likely have a good answer. Maybe you agree with the candidate’s policy stances. Maybe you support his/her party. Maybe you are tired of the corruption, bad policies, or inaction of the people in power. These are all perfectly acceptable answers. One reason you probably will not mention is that you voted for this person because he or she is good-looking. Certainly not. This is not an acceptable answer.</p>
<p>Yet you probably did.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12540">study</a> just published by myself and Daniel Stockemer with the help of Victoria Police in Melbourne, we used data on elections to the US Congress to create the faces of six fictional candidates who were “ideal-looking” in terms of physical appearance. We then used statistical modelling and real election results to simulate what would have happened if the loser of some key races looked like one of our “ideal candidates”, but was otherwise identical to the real losing candidate.</p>
<p>In two-thirds of cases, the loser becomes a winner if he/she simply becomes better-looking. To put it simply, we find that if an election is competitive, candidate attractiveness can actually determine the result.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-politics/article/looking-like-a-winner-candidate-appearance-and-electoral-success-in-new-democracies/B9FE18A2FDE35B2600D835AA2C38AC2C">Research</a> shows that candidate appearance travels across cultures, ignoring even racial and ethnic differences. It appears that there is a fairly standard idea around the world of what is an attractive candidate, and voters everywhere prefer good-looking politicians. Research has shown that beautiful politicians are advantaged in <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-6435.2009.00452.x">Australia</a>, <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00720.x">Germany</a>, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004727270900142X">Finland</a>, the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-856X.12074">United Kingdom</a> and the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1532673X14532825">United States</a>.</p>
<p>But the story doesn’t end there. Scholars are still trying to understand all possible ramifications of the relationship between physical attractiveness and electoral success. But we know that ideology, institutions and voter behaviour all play a role in this fascinating relationship. </p>
<p>When it comes to ideology, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272716302201">recent research</a> shows that conservative politicians benefit more from physical attractiveness. In other words, right-wing politicians are better-looking than left-wing politicians and, therefore, benefit more from the “<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/business/worldbusiness/06iht-beauty.html">beauty premium</a>” at the ballot box.</p>
<p>In terms of institutions, a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1369148116687533">study</a> published by Daniel Stockemer and myself last year shows that the electoral system plays a role in whether or not candidate attractiveness matters in elections.</p>
<p>In brief, candidate attractiveness matters in majoritarian electoral systems – that is, systems where voters cast their vote for a specific candidate. The impact of candidate attractiveness fades in list-based proportional systems, where voters are asked to cast a ballot for a political party. </p>
<p>We find no evidence that attractive candidates are placed higher in party lists, which means that political parties and their structures appear to be immune to the appeal of candidate attractiveness. The conclusion is that institutions play an important role in determining whether or not candidate attractiveness affects voters’ decision-making.</p>
<p>Finally, when it comes to voter behaviour, the “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/09/the-beauty-premium/182676/">beauty premium</a>” doesn’t manifest itself only as extra votes gained at the ballot box. In a <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11109-018-9469-1">study</a> published last May, we found that attractive politicians get a “break” when they are involved in scandals. In particular, voters forgive attractive politicians involved in sex scandals, while politicians involved in financial scandals such as bribery or misappropriation of funds have a harder time at the ballot box after the scandal becomes public. Either way, this shows that voters not only generally vote for the most attractive candidate, but also are more willing to forgive those who look better.</p>
<p>So how about Donald Trump? This question pops up a lot, especially from people arguing that Trump is not the most physically attractive candidate to run for office. If we think hard enough, we can all think of numerous unattractive politicians who have been very successful at the ballot box all over the world. The key to understanding how this works is to focus on information.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/president-trump-will-change-the-united-states-and-the-world-but-just-how-remains-to-be-seen-68328">President Trump will change the United States and the world, but just how remains to be seen</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A few years ago, we ran an experiment using thousands of Canadian students at the University of Ottawa as research subjects. <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ssqu.12155">We found</a> that if voters have adequate information about the candidates running for office, they tend to cast their ballot based on this information.</p>
<p>If, on the other hand, voters possess little or no information, then the better-looking candidate wins the election. We concluded that, in high-information elections, candidate attractiveness plays a smaller role than in low-information elections. This answers the Donald Trump question, in the sense that American presidential elections are high-information contests and, therefore, voters know more things about the candidates than their physical appearance, and thus vote accordingly.</p>
<p>The problem is that research also shows that voters all over the world have become less and less informed about politics. For instance, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10361149850697">Australians</a> seem to be incapable of answering basic questions about Australian politics; <a href="https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.polisci.4.1.217">American</a> university graduates in the 2000s knew less about politics than high school graduates in the 1950s; and <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/ap.2012.34">European</a> citizens do worse than chance in answering true-or-false questions about the European Union.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/if-it-aint-broke-dont-fix-it-australia-should-stay-away-from-electronic-voting-101252">If it ain't broke, don't fix it: Australia should stay away from electronic voting</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In other words, we should expect that candidate attractiveness will determine more and more electoral outcomes in the near future. Of course, the major issue with people voting for good-looking candidates is that physical appearance is completely devoid of any policy content. Voters have no guarantee whatsoever that they will end up with policies that they agree with and support if they vote for someone just because that person is attractive.</p>
<p>After years engaged in this line of research, I have never met someone who confessed to having voted for someone else because he/she was good-looking. At the same time, I am also convinced that people do exactly that, even if unconsciously. </p>
<p>The only solution to this problem is to educate voters about politics, institutions and current issues.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107364/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Rodrigo Praino receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) and the Australian Government.</span></em></p>Research shows that in elections with low information and poor engagement, candidate attractiveness plays a significant role in how people vote.Rodrigo Praino, Senior Lecturer, College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/992622018-07-12T10:24:53Z2018-07-12T10:24:53ZDoes thinking you look fat affect how much money you earn?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227240/original/file-20180711-27027-9hsswi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is the scale telling the truth?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/cropped-image-woman-feet-standing-on-604196501?src=sFopdWh9s_6XEvAb68uQrA-1-71">VGstockstudio/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Two things people often think about are <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/better/money/americans-think-about-money-work-more-sex-survey-finds-n424261">money</a> and <a href="https://www.allure.com/story/national-judgement-survey-statistics">their appearance</a>. Past research has shown that there is a correlation between the two: <a href="https://www.uni-muenster.de/imperia/md/content/psyifp/aeechterhoff/wintersemester2011-12/vorlesungkommperskonflikt/hamermesh_beautylabormarket_amereconrev1994.pdf">People subjectively considered attractive earn more</a>.</p>
<p>And body weight plays a major role in attractiveness. A person’s body mass index – which adjusts a person’s weight for their height – and their success in the workplace <a href="https://wol.iza.org/articles/obesity-and-labor-market-outcomes/long">are linked</a>. Put simply, thin people, especially women, are rewarded more than their larger colleagues. But those studies only considered how other people perceive you. </p>
<p>In <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X17302617">our research</a>, we looked at the flip side: Does our own perception of our bodies, even when incorrect, make a difference? In other words, does thinking you look fat or skinny affect your wages? </p>
<p>Knowing if a worker’s own perception of his or her weight makes a difference – rather than only the employer’s – could help determine the best way to mitigate the impact of weight discrimination on earnings. In addition, a better understanding of gender differences in weight perception might help explain the persistent <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/gender-wage-gap-11006">gender wage gap</a>. </p>
<h2>Pressure to ‘look good’</h2>
<p>Americans spend billions of dollars each year on making minor changes to their appearance with <a href="http://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/2017/us-prestige-beauty-industry-adds-1-billion-in-sales-grows-6-percent-in-2016/">makeup, hair dye and other cosmetics</a>. We also spend billions trying to change our weight with diets, <a href="http://www.clubindustry.com/studies/ihrsa-reports-57-million-health-club-members-276-billion-industry-revenue-2016">gym memberships</a> and <a href="http://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2016/cosmetic-procedures-average-cost-2016.pdf">plastic surgery</a>.</p>
<p>Trying to live up to the pervasive images of “perfect” models and movie heroes has a dark side: body-shaming, anxiety and depression, as well as unhealthy strategies for weight loss or muscle gain. For example, anorexia nervosa involves the extreme over-perception of weight and <a href="http://www.nationaleatingdisorders.org/statistics-research-eating-disorders">claims the lives of roughly 10 percent of its victims</a>. It also has a financial cost. Having an eating disorder boosts annual health care costs <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335514000230">by nearly US$2,000</a> per person.</p>
<p>Why is there both external and internal pressure to look “perfect”? One reason is that society rewards people who are thin and healthy looking. Researchers have shown that body mass index is related to wages and income. Especially for <a href="https://wol.iza.org/articles/obesity-and-labor-market-outcomes/long">women</a>, there is a clear penalty at work for being overweight or obese. Some studies have also found an <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/freekvermeulen/2011/03/22/the-price-of-obesity-how-your-salary-depends-on-your-weight/#431b14393d9a">impact for men</a>, though a less noticeable one.</p>
<h2>Does weight perception matter?</h2>
<p>While the research literature is clear that labor market success is partly based on how employers and customers perceive your body image, no one had explored the other side of question. Does a person’s own perception of body image matter to earnings and other indicators of success in the workplace?</p>
<p>In simple terms, does it change your wages if you think of yourself as overweight when you are not? Or if you think of yourself as skinny, when in reality you are not, does this misperception affect your ability to find and keep a job?</p>
<p>We were interested in answering these questions because it is often easier to fix your own view of yourself than to fix the entire world’s.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X17302617">Our study</a> answered this question by tracking a large national random sample of the first wave of U.S. millennials, born in the early 1980s. We followed about 9,000 of them starting in 1997 when they were teenagers and ending 15 years later when the oldest was 31. Our research followed these respondents over a critical time period when bodies change from teenage shape into adult form and when people build their identities.</p>
<p>The survey asked respondents to report their actual weight and height. It also asked each to classify themselves each year as “very overweight,” “overweight,” “about the right weight,” “slightly underweight” or “very underweight.” This enabled us to compare each person’s clinically defined BMI category, such as being underweight, with his or her perception. </p>
<p>As in other research, women in our sample tend to over-perceive weight – they think they’re heavier than they are – while men tend to under-perceive theirs.</p>
<h2>What other people think matters more</h2>
<p>While self-perceived weight, especially when incorrect, can influence <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20919592">self-esteem</a>, <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/JPMH-11-2013-0071">mental health</a> and health behaviors, we found no relationship between the average person’s self-perception of weight and labor market outcomes like wages, weeks worked and the number of jobs.</p>
<p>In other words, it’s not what you think about your appearance that matters in the workplace, it’s just what other people think. Worrying if eating another cookie will make you look fat may harm your self-esteem, but thinking you’re overweight likely will not affect your earnings.</p>
<p>Because we find that women earn lower wages than men do even when accounting for weight perception differences, it appears the well-known gender pay gap is not due to differences in self-perceived weight.</p>
<p>While the continued gender penalty in the labor market is frustrating, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X17302617">our finding</a> that misperceived weight does not harm workers is more heartening. Weight misperception is common, but thinking you’re heavier or lighter than you are doesn’t dampen earnings.</p>
<p>At the same time, it’s important to remember that although self-perceived weight doesn’t appear to affect wages, it still takes a toll on mental and physical health.</p>
<p>Passing over heavier workers to hire or promote less productive but thinner workers is inefficient and unfair. Our results indicate that expanding efforts to reduce discrimination on the basis of body weight in the workplace is important. </p>
<p>Since employers’ perception of weight is what matters in the labor market, policies to reduce the social stigmatization of body weight, such as curbing <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/15/health/fat-shaming-feat/index.html">body-shaming</a>, make sense. Changing discrimination laws to include body type as a category would also help. For example, <a href="http://time.com/4883176/weight-discrimination-workplace-laws/">Michigan is the only state</a> that prohibits discrimination on the basis of weight and height. </p>
<p>We believe expanding such protections would make the labor market more efficient and fair.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99262/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new study explores whether how we perceive our body weight affects our prospects in the job market and at work.Patricia Smith, Professor of Economics, University of MichiganJay L. Zagorsky, Senior lecturer, Boston UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/885572018-01-03T20:16:09Z2018-01-03T20:16:09ZWe all want the same things in a partner, but why?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199578/original/file-20171217-17851-5erque.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Men and women rate warmth and trustworthiness as very important in their potential partner.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://unsplash.com/photos/-8UEuVWA-Tk">Photo by Priscilla Du Preez on Unsplash</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Whether it’s in reality TV or glossy magazines, sex appeal, fat bank accounts, kind eyes and cute smiles are often served up as the attributes that make for anyone’s dream partner. But these characteristics merely reflect gross exaggerations of important evolutionary qualities that we actually want in a long-term partner. </p>
<p>Based on research from both <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8721.00070">evolutionary and social psychology</a>, researchers have categorised how we appraise potential partners into three broad features. These are: the degree to which a partner exudes reproductive capacity (“vitality and attractiveness”), a partner’s ability to provide (“status and resources”), and the partner’s “warmth and trustworthiness”. </p>
<p>These features act as fundamental signals a potential partner has good genes and is a good investment.</p>
<h2>1. Vitality and attractiveness</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199581/original/file-20171217-17884-i2vfm3.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=513&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When we see attractiveness in someone, we see more than just sex appeal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/marcof/3791752852">mfrissen/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In pop culture, vitality and attractiveness can be represented as good looks or sex appeal. But it’s not completely accurate to reduce someone’s physical appearance to such characteristics when we’re considering them as a long-term partner. Yes, being attracted to a partner is fundamental to sexual desire and arousal, but when we take in a person’s physical appearance, we take in more than whether they’re good looking. </p>
<p>We seek to determine if they take care of their health, if they exude energy, and the extent to which they demonstrate charisma and appear outgoing. That is, the vitality and health of a person is what really matters, whether we are conscious of it or not. These qualities, reflected in a person’s physical appearance, signal they have <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11301543">some reproductive advantage</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/you-can-tell-if-someone-is-attracted-to-you-by-their-voice-81337">You can tell if someone is attracted to you by their voice</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There is some evidence to suggest men sometimes rate vitality and attractiveness higher than women, but the difference between the sexes is often small and extinguished when it comes to seeking a long-term partner. Various studies even find that men and women seeking long-term relationships <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8721.00070">regard this quality as less important</a> than warmth and trustworthiness in particular. </p>
<h2>2. Status and resources</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=254&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=254&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=254&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199595/original/file-20171218-17851-ibkdpt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=319&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A glamorous lifestyle isn’t what we want in a partner.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2322441/mediaviewer/rm1980690432">Focus Features, Michael De Luca Productions, Trigger Street Productions IMDb</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>What relationship science terms “status and resources” isn’t about the big bank account, luxurious house or car, or the high-paying job. We’re not all that materialistic, nor do we all deeply desire great wealth and social standing. In fact, studies show <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/38/16489.short">most people don’t need</a> a large amount of money to be happy in life. </p>
<p>So, status and resources is about the capacity to <em>provide</em> for one’s partner and family, not about a glamorous lifestyle. From this perspective, all we are really looking for is someone who has a decent job, appears financially secure and is willing to contribute to maintaining a family home. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-do-we-choose-a-partner-58217">How do we choose a partner?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So this quality is really about food, shelter, and other essentials for our partners and children – both now and into the future. </p>
<h2>3. Warmth and trustworthiness</h2>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199599/original/file-20171218-17854-1kpqgwh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Kind eyes and a loving smile aren’t everything.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332280/mediaviewer/rm3869227520">New Line Cinema, Gran Via, Avery Pix / IMDb</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Warmth and trustworthiness is <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9972554">rated as very important</a> in a potential partner by both men and women. </p>
<p>From songs and movies, we might think having kind eyes and a nice smile are enough to reflect warmth and trustworthiness. But these qualities are indicators of how caring a person is and the extent to which a potential mate can meet our fundamental need for love, comfort and security. According to research into <a href="https://www.elsevier.com/books/adult-attachment/gillath/978-0-12-420020-3">adult attachment</a>, our desire to seek comfort in times of threat and distress means we look to potential mates for signals of their capacity to be considerate, loving, kind and understanding at such times.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-opposites-rarely-attract-74873">Why opposites rarely attract</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So, a person who seems to exude a warm persona is likely to encompass attributes that ensure our attachment needs are met. The more reliable they are in meeting our needs for love, comfort and security, the more trusting we become of them. </p>
<p>Trustworthiness, in particular, is a <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20565183">strong quality</a> when it comes to stability in relationships. This is because trust <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-07168-005">reduces uncertainty</a> about the faithfulness and commitment of one’s partner. People who feel more trusting of their partner report feeling more satisfied in one’s relationship than those who experience a lack of trust.</p>
<p>Being warm and trustworthy not only signals a partner will take care of you emotionally, but that they will do the same with your children.</p>
<h2>Keep to realistic standards</h2>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=401&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/199612/original/file-20171218-17857-jcuvl6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=504&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">People who are willing to compromise are generally more satisfied.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Studies suggest people who see their current romantic partner as falling short of the above characteristics tend to <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0146167201274006">evaluate their relationships</a> more negatively than those who see their partner as embodying these qualities. </p>
<p>This finding is especially pronounced for people who set lofty ideals and aren’t willing to compromise, even when a partner doesn’t fall too short on these qualities. People who have some flexibility around the extent a partner embodies these qualities are likely to report greater relationship quality than those who show no sign of compromise.</p>
<p>So the moral to the story is it’s fine to maintain standards, but if standards are too unrealistic or lofty, a partner who largely embodies all three qualities will still be seen as falling short of the ideal.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/88557/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gery Karantzas receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is also the founder of <a href="http://www.relationshipscienceonline.com">www.relationshipscienceonline.com</a>. </span></em></p>What movies tell us is important in a parter – a nice smile or money – are exaggerations of fundamental evolutionary needs that actually do matter.Gery Karantzas, Associate professor in Social Psychology / Relationship Science, Deakin UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/668142016-10-12T11:33:55Z2016-10-12T11:33:55ZOne edition of Vogue featuring ‘real women’ will not solve the problem of body image<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/141258/original/image-20161011-11991-u62f52.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Real magazines.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-364798841/stock-photo-colognegermany-february-232013-popular-british-magazines-in-english-language-on-display-in-a-store-in-colognegermany.html?src=EqNwkgYMUucOMB1ss7OVqw-1-1">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="http://www.vogue.co.uk/">British Vogue</a> magazine has launched an issue in which they took the unusual step of only photographing “real” women for their fashion shoots. All the clothes were worn by professional women from multiple sectors, <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37549557">with not a single model among them</a>. </p>
<p>Many would consider this a surprising move. Vogue is, after all, a publication which usually seems devoted to filling its pages with the most attractive women on the planet. But what does “attractive” actually mean? Is it even possible to define what we consider to be attractive in others, and desirable in ourselves?</p>
<p>Some beauty ideals do show surprising levels of cultural stability. The first <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.261">cross cultural research</a> into facial attraction demonstrated high levels of similarity across cultures in the kinds of facial features which were rated most attractive by observers. </p>
<p>Indeed, when we consider the kinds of faces that newborn infants prefer to look at, these also tend to be the <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.261">faces which adults consider to be more attractive</a>. Children only grow to agree more with adults as they age. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"783658883093000192"}"></div></p>
<p>A notable exception, however, is body weight. Psychologists and anthropologists have documented strong preferences for female bodies in the obese and morbidly obese range in some groups, such as the <a href="http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(06)00058-4/abstract">Zulus of Kwa-Zulu Natal</a> or rural <a href="http://community.dur.ac.uk/l.g.boothroyd/papers/Boothroyd_et_al_2016_Nicaragua_paper1_crosssectional.pdf">Creoles of Nicaragua</a>. In Western societies, our preferences for female body size tend to peak at the bottom end of what could be considered a healthy weight in a European woman. </p>
<p>There is also <a href="http://media.leeds.ac.uk/files/2012/05/miriam-lowe.pdf">evidence that visual media</a> – television, film, magazines (like Vogue) and advertisements – may play a key role in perpetuating and spreading body ideals. </p>
<p>In my own lab, <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048691">we have demonstrated</a> that visual exposure to very thin bodies – even if they look unappealing and emaciated – can lead to observers favouring a thinner body ideal than they held before. Images of obese bodies can likewise lead to observers favouring a larger body ideal. </p>
<p>Of course, perhaps the most critical feature of these internalised body weight ideals, is their power to cause psychological distress in those who do not meet their own ideal. Decades of research has linked “<a href="http://www.scienceofeds.org/2013/05/24/the-genetics-of-thin-ideal-internalization/">thin-ideal internalisation</a>” and resulting body dissatisfaction to eating disorders in women, and women’s magazines have long been a target of interest for eating disorder researchers. </p>
<p>Women’s magazines typically include a large number of images of very slim women who are presented in a strongly aspirational fashion. Added to this, some individuals are particularly susceptible to comparing themselves with the standard they perceive to be set by others’ examples, a phenomenon known as social comparison.</p>
<p>Women with high social comparison tendencies often have elevated feelings of body dissatisfaction. It is unsurprising, then, that <a href="http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/presenters-stice.htm">research</a> has shown how young women with magazine subscriptions showed a drop in body satisfaction if they were vulnerable to these messages.</p>
<h2>An unhealthy media diet?</h2>
<p>The recent decision by Vogue to feature “normal” women in their November issue is particularly timely therefore. <a href="http://healthpsych.psy.vanderbilt.edu/media_and_body_image.htm">Psychological research</a> suggests that if visual media included a representative distribution of healthy and typical body weights in a target population, body ideals and body satisfaction might well be less problematic. </p>
<p>However, an ongoing media diet of very slim female bodies reinforces this hyper-thin ideal. And the commercial realities of magazine sales means that it is always going to be challenging for individual companies to break the mould. While the cosmetics company <a href="http://www.dove.com/uk/stories/campaigns/patches.html">Dove</a> uses a range of women as part of its marketing strategy, this is a very rare approach. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_XOa7zVqxA4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>So will British Vogue make significant changes to our national body ideals with one issue? Put simply, no. </p>
<p>The bias is already far too pervasive in society. Furthermore, the women featured may not be as thin as typical fashion models – but neither are they, on the whole, representative of the typical range of British women. </p>
<p>However, it is comforting to note that in <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048691">our experimental study</a>, we induced changes in body size ideals with only 30-40 images. An individual copy of Vogue contains many times this number of pictures, so I would certainly predict that the issue may temporarily improve the visual diet of regular readers. </p>
<p>Perhaps the most useful thing it will do is help the industry at large to move further in the right direction, and demonstrate what I hope will be a commercially viable approach for the future – for every body’s sake.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66814/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lynda Boothroyd receives funding from The Leverhulme Trust. </span></em></p>But glossy pages filled with non-models may be a step in the right direction.Lynda Boothroyd, Senior Lecturer in Psychology, Durham UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/645092016-10-05T10:02:20Z2016-10-05T10:02:20ZHow saying you’re multiracial changes the way people see you<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140199/original/image-20161003-20239-1atkaxm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Race and perceived beauty are closely intertwined.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-176175434/stock-photo-cultural-diversity-two-faces-colored-black-white-yin-yang-style.html?src=pp-same_model-176972174-2&ws=1">'Faces' via www.shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Last month, rapper Kanye West posted <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/style/2016/09/kanye-west-multi-racial-casting-call-backlash">a controversial casting call</a> for his clothing line, Yeezy, mandating “multiracial women only.” Many objected, arguing that West had insulted darker-skinned black women. </p>
<p>But Kanye was only adhering to something fairly common in <a href="https://psmag.com/the-idea-of-racial-hierarchy-remains-entrenched-in-americans-psyches-3dcf1cc3a815#.5zxexe2ka">a society that still operates under a racial hierarchy</a>: the belief that multiracial people are more attractive, what <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1070289X.2012.672838">sociologist Jennifer Sims has termed</a> the “biracial beauty stereotype.”</p>
<p>Attractiveness may seem like a trite and shallow topic for an academic to study or even care about. But as a sociologist who specializes in inequality, I believe there’s a great deal to unpack, particularly when exploring how attractiveness might lead to biases in the same way race and gender do. </p>
<p>It’s not just important to point out who we find attractive; just as important is why we find them attractive. I’ve been especially interested in how racial self-identification influences these perceptions, exploring this topic in a recent study.</p>
<h2>The gift of beauty</h2>
<p>A wide variety of research has demonstrated that how attractive you’re perceived to be can dramatically shape your life. For example, <a href="https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6348439.pdf">people who are seen as more attractive earn more money</a>, while in the classroom, <a href="http://rer.sagepub.com/content/62/4/413.short">teachers assume attractive people are more capable students</a>. </p>
<p>In addition, a <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155313">2016 study by sociologist Shawn Bauldry</a> found that more attractive people were much more likely to achieve social mobility. And as with many other aspects of American society, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886903002022">attractiveness has a racial element</a>, with black people on the bottom – seen as the least attractive – and white people perceived as most attractive.</p>
<p>But racialized attractiveness doesn’t operate in a strict dichotomy, with all black people automatically deemed uniformly unattractive.</p>
<p>Instead, <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/3090169?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents">it’s more of a spectrum</a>. Studies have shown that black people who look more stereotypically black (darker skin, bigger lips, wider noses) tend to be perceived as less attractive than those who look less stereotypically black (lighter skin, thin lips, straight hair). </p>
<p>This idea undergirds the biracial beauty stereotype, particularly for black people. The prevailing belief is that multiracial people will have fewer of the physical features that make black people appear unattractive. In other words, in the context of beauty, multiracial means “more white” or “less black.”</p>
<p>These sentiments are historically rooted and build on a <a href="http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.600.7562&rep=rep1&type=pdf">long history of racial stratification and color segmentation</a> facilitated by <a href="http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-0-387-79098-5_3">the media</a>, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=CyQEzCEV9XkC&pg=PA379&lpg=PA379&dq=Mulattoes+and+Blacks:+Intra-group+Color+Differences+and+Social+Stratification+in+Nineteenth-Century+Philadelphia&source=bl&ots=6vEQwFa3qI&sig=PSZzO96tJogilcvl0oGUkCZJQnU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwis1snHy6zPAhUn4YMKHcZYDNsQ6AEILzAF#v=onepage&q=Mulattoes%20and%20Blacks%3A%20Intra-group%20Color%20Differences%20and%20Social%20Stratification%20in%20Nineteenth-Century%20Philadelphia&f=false">social organizations</a> and other cultural forces. It all <a href="http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/45857099/Shades_of_Discrimination_Skin_Tone_and_W20160522-8650-5a7h11.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1474880806&Signature=iI3hClyhdNHBl6LWO4my9A9DgbE%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DShades_of_Discrimination_Skin_Tone_and_W.pdf">culminates in a preference for whiteness</a> that privileges black people who appear more like white people.</p>
<h2>Digging deeper</h2>
<p><a href="http://media.wix.com/ugd/5fff9b_76453571b1a54ed0bb5cd1bea7af4317.pdf">In a study I published in The Review of Black Political Economy</a>, I wanted to take this idea a step further. I wondered: What if people who identified as black simply said they were multiracial? Would people, in turn, tend to rate them as more attractive by virtue of how they self-identified? </p>
<p>In other words, is the simple suggestion that a person is not just black but black “plus something else” so powerful that others will think those people are more attractive irrespective of how they actually look?</p>
<p>Research already conducted by <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-010-0010-5">sociologist Siohban Brooks</a> and <a href="https://www.dukeupress.edu/g-strings-and-sympathy/?viewby=title">cultural anthropologist Katherine Frank</a> hinted this would be the case. In separate studies of American strip club patrons and workers, they found that female exotic dancers would tell customers they were multiracial as a way to make more money. They’d do this regardless of whether they actually identified this way, often fabricating a genealogy (“one-quarter Asian, one-quarter Native American, half black”) instead of just saying they were black.</p>
<p>For my investigation, I relied on regression analysis and a nationally representative survey, <a href="http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth">the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health</a>, which was originally conducted to track the social outcomes of adolescents through young adulthood. A diverse team of trained interviewers collected data on 3,200 black people. The interviewers recorded, among much other information, the skin tone of the respondent on a scale of one to five, hair color, eye color, race and how attractive they perceived the person on a scale from one to five. </p>
<p>The interviewers recorded their information, including attractiveness, about each respondent at the end of each interview – but only after they’d learned the respondent’s racial identification. </p>
<p>I tested whether multiracial black people were rated more attractive than monoracial black people even when accounting for racialized physical features: skin tone, hair color and eye color. </p>
<p>They were. Multiracial identification positively predicted attractiveness regardless of other physical features. In fact, it was a stronger predictor of attractiveness than skin tone – an astonishing finding considering the <a href="http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/03/04/sf.sou007.short">growing amount of research</a> demonstrating the strong negative effect of skin tone on social outcomes. </p>
<p>Not only were people who identified as multiracial rated as more attractive on average, but even the multiracial people with the darkest skin tones were rated as more attractive than the monoracial black people with lighter skin tones. In essence, this combination of results means that simply identifying as multiracial may make a black person appear more attractive to others, regardless of how he or she actually looks.</p>
<h2>The power of simple self-identification</h2>
<p>This complicates both our idea of race and our idea of attractiveness. </p>
<p>Research already suggests that perceived attractiveness influences people’s perception of characteristics completely unrelated to physical appearance. (For example, <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-015-9644-6">people who are perceived as more attractive are also thought to be happier and more competent</a>.) </p>
<p>As far as race is concerned, it adds to our understanding of how knowing someone’s racial identification can have astonishing cognitive effects. </p>
<p>Famously, MacArthur Fellow and social psychologist Jennifer Richeson found that the stress of interracial interactions may be so great that <a href="http://pss.sagepub.com/content/14/3/287.short">it temporarily decreases the memory and reasoning ability</a> of some white people as they struggle to not be perceived as racist. Conversely, <a href="http://guilfordjournals.com/doi/abs/10.1521/soco.2005.23.4.336">she found a similar phenomenon at play</a> for black people as they try to avoid conforming to racist stereotypes. And more recently, psychologists Adam Waytz, Kelly Marie Hoffman and Sophie Trawalter report that white people, in a display of dehumanization, <a href="http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/03/1948550614553642.abstract">generally think of black people as superhuman</a>, possessing abnormal strength, speed and pain tolerance.</p>
<p>The relationship between racial identification and attractiveness may operate similarly. It doesn’t matter what we see. The mere suggestion of a person’s blackness creates a cognitive hiccup that leads a sweeping judgment that influences how attractive they seem. </p>
<p>This, in turn, may influence how happy, competent and successful they appear – and, in the end, are.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/64509/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Robert L. Reece does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A sociologist wanted to know how simply self-identifying as ‘multiracial’ – regardless of how you actually looked – would influence your attractiveness.Robert L. Reece, Ph.D. Candidate in Sociology, Duke UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/582172016-05-26T20:08:53Z2016-05-26T20:08:53ZHow do we choose a partner?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122937/original/image-20160518-9487-1rgka5a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There’s nothing that everyone wants in a partner. But there are characteristics most men or women find attractive.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ileohidalgo/13945303272/">Leo Hidalgo/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>CHANGING FAMILIES: In this <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/changing-families">ten-part series</a>, we examine some major changes in family and relationships, and how that might in turn reshape law, policy and our idea of ourselves.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>We know a lot about why people choose different brands of dishwashing detergent, because companies spend billions of dollars investigating who buys what. But when it comes to the processes behind perhaps our most significant life choice – choosing a romantic partner – science knows surprisingly little. </p>
<p>One reason partner choice is hard to understand is because it’s a two-way street. A person can choose any dishwashing detergent they like, because the detergent has no choice in the matter, but choosing a partner doesn’t work that way. We need to understand not only what kind of people person A prefers, but also what kind of people prefer person A, how those two groups overlap, the influence of other competitors trying to elbow in on person A’s turf, and so on. It’s all very complex. </p>
<p>So let’s start simple(ish). Accordingly, I’ll focus on Western heterosexuals, on whom most of the research has been done.</p>
<h2>What everyone wants</h2>
<p>There’s nothing that everyone wants in a partner – everyone has their own idiosyncratic preferences – but there are characteristics most men or women find attractive. </p>
<p>As depressing as it is, a big part of romance and attraction is physical. It’s not just that everyone’s a unique snowflake destined to find their special complementary snowflake. Different people tend to agree a fair bit about who is more and less physically attractive, which sadly means there are haves and have-nots in the looks lottery. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=414&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122940/original/image-20160518-9501-4kkogc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=521&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Men generally prefer slim women, while women generally prefer men with a V-shape.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/nathaninsandiego/2751765930/">Nathan Rupert/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Body-wise, <a href="http://dfred.bol.ucla.edu/FrederickHaselton-2007-PSPB-MuscularityFitnessIndicator.pdf">women tend to prefer taller men</a> with a high shoulder-to-hip ratio (V-shape), and who are muscular (but not too muscular). </p>
<p>Men’s preferences, on the other hand, are dominated by a <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1740144507000769">strong predilection for slimness</a> (though not ultra-thinness). Much has been made of men’s apparent attraction to low waist-to-hip ratios (hourglass figures), but <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19013182">more recent research</a> suggests it is just a byproduct of slim women tending to have low waist-to-hip ratios. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122945/original/image-20160518-9491-5q0w38.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Miranda Kerr: ultra-feminine.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/evarinaldiphotography/6873397097/">Eva Rinaldi/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Public dismay about society’s heavy emphasis on beauty tends to focus on body image issues, but <a href="http://www.alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/Currie&Little_09_facevsbody_EHB.pdf">research suggests</a> a person’s face is even more important to overall attractiveness. This might sound nice, but isn’t really when you consider it’s harder to change a face than a body.</p>
<p>Both men and women tend to prefer geometrically average faces (that is, faces close to the shape of the average face for their gender, as opposed to distinctive faces). </p>
<p>People also tend to prefer left-right symmetrical faces, but this aspect of beauty is often oversold. Symmetry has only a tiny impact on facial attractiveness, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691809000407">accounting for only around 1%</a> of the total variation. So don’t worry too much about your wonky nostril or huge left eye or whatever. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=737&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=737&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=737&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=926&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=926&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122949/original/image-20160518-9501-bmhchl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=926&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Justin Bieber also has a feminine face.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-348418241/stock-photo-los-angeles-nov-justin-bieber-arrives-to-the-american-music-awards-on-november.html?src=44BzFHILh-u_m-LttR9-sA-1-0">DFree/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Men also prefer feminine female faces. This typically means, for example, big eyes and a small chin – think Miranda Kerr.</p>
<p>Strangely, women don’t tend to prefer masculine male faces: on average they show no strong preference either way. If anything, they prefer more feminine male faces, thus your Biebers and your Depps being international sex symbols. </p>
<p>It’s not all about looks, of course. Both men and women say they’d prefer a kind and intelligent partner. And <a href="http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(05)00076-0/abstract">both sexes like a good sense of humour</a>. But there’s a catch: women want a man who is funny, while men prefer a woman who finds <em>them</em> funny. </p>
<h2>Individual preferences</h2>
<p>There is plenty of individuality in preferences as well, some of which is based on the extent to which we <em>value</em> different traits in a partner. Few women prefer narrow shoulders on a man, but plenty don’t place much importance on shoulder width. Instead they see nice eyes, brains or jokes as more important.</p>
<p>So what causes individuals to differ in the traits they value more and less? </p>
<p>My colleagues and I studied thousands of genetically identical and nonidentical twins who ranked 13 traits (such as physical attractiveness, kindness, intelligence) in terms of their importance in a partner. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122941/original/image-20160518-9491-5e5n5k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">What’s inside also counts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/kiracronin/4477789530/">kira cronin/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We found that the genetically identical twin pairs had more similar rankings than genetically nonidentical twins. This implies that genes influence people’s preference rankings.</p>
<p>We’ve shown a similar thing with specific physical preferences, too, such as whether you prefer beard or clean-shaven, tall or short, <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049294">long hair or short hair</a>, or whether you tend to prefer <a href="http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/08/06/0956797615591770.abstract">digitally masculinised or feminised facial photos</a>. All these preferences are more similar in genetically identical twin pairs than in nonidentical twin pairs, again implying genetic influence on our individual preferences. </p>
<h2>Actual partner choices</h2>
<p>So how do these genetically influenced preferences translate into who actually partners with whom? </p>
<p>Since identical twins have similar partner preferences, we’d expect them to have similar partners as well, right? Well, they don’t – at least not in any meaningful way <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21508607">that my colleagues and I could detect</a> among thousands of twins and their partners.</p>
<p>This means there’s a lot of mismatched partners.</p>
<p>If this mismatch between genetically influenced preferences and actual partners emerged only in humans, we might wonder if modern society has somehow divorced our partner choices from our inherited preferences. However, the same pattern of results <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v441/n7089/abs/nature04564.html">has been observed in species of birds</a> that, like humans, <a href="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0013855">form pair bonds</a>. </p>
<p>So what’s the deal with the mismatch? Well, this is an open scientific question, but it probably boils down to the fact we can’t all get what we want. For one thing, most of us don’t meet enough people to find someone who fulfils all of our preferences. So right away we’re dealing with the best of the available, rather than a perfect match. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122951/original/image-20160518-9484-ped7c8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">We usually have to settle on someone who meets some but not all of our criteria.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/hmoong/8590592453/">Khánh Hmoong/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But what are the chances that the best of the available will be interested in us anyway, with our wonky nostril and obvious character flaws? </p>
<p>And then there are those other guys or gals with preferences similar to ours, trying to get in on this action as well, telling better jokes at Friday drinks and generally leaving us for dead. </p>
<p>So we settle for someone who doesn’t really match our preferences too well, but is basically alright, we suppose. Hopefully. </p>
<p>This must be part of the reason relationships are hard and often stressful. The consequences of mismatch between preferences and actual partners aren’t well studied in humans, but in finches females paired with a non-preferred partner <a href="http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2011/01/25/rspb.2010.2672">were found to have stress hormone levels</a> three times higher than those paired with a preferred partner. </p>
<p>Judging by the amount of relationship dysfunction and breakdown in our society (<a href="http://www.formerministers.dss.gov.au/15362/economic-value-of-marriage-family-and-relationship-breakdown/">estimated to cost A$14 billion per year</a> in Australia), this phenomenon probably isn’t limited to birds.</p>
<p>So it would be great to see more studies about the process of partner selection, what causes partners to match or not, and the consequences of mismatch. There’s so much we don’t understand, and the immense complexity of the process makes the search for answers both intimidating and exciting. Much like the search for a partner, I guess. </p>
<p><strong><em>Read the other instalments in the Changing Families series <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/changing-families">here</a>.</em></strong></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58217/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brendan Zietsch has received funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>We know a lot about why people choose different brands of dishwashing detergent. But when it comes to the processes behind choosing a romantic partner, science knows surprisingly little.Brendan Zietsch, ARC Future Fellow, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.