Physical Appearance and Trait Judgements. By Alex Stevens, Hope Childree, Laura Perry, Amy Sapp, and Emily Lunsford

Transcription

1 Physical Appearance and Trait Judgements By Alex Stevens, Hope Childree, Laura Perry, Amy Sapp, and Emily Lunsford

2 Previous Research The idea that physical appearance is associated with the attribution of certain traits has been examined in various studies. One of the earliest experiments on this topic created the what is beautiful is good stereotype (Dion, Berscheid & Walster, 1972). This study had 60 participants rate individuals on socially desirable traits, future success, and happiness. Each participant was given three photos of a relatively attractive person, average-looking person, and relatively unattractive person. They were told that perception accuracy was the purpose of this study; however, the experimenters were actually interested in how the participants rated people on marital satisfaction, parental happiness, social and professional happiness, and overall happiness. Participants were asked to rate each person on personality traits that were on a scale from exciting to dull Then, they were asked to assess another list of personality traits on a different rating scale that ranged from least likely to mostly likely to possess a trait. What were the results? Results ultimately suggested that the physically attractive people in the photos were assumed to have more socially desirable characteristics compared to the unattractive individuals. In addition, results indicated that attractive men and women had higher estimates for obtaining more prestigious occupations and happier marriages (Dion et al., 1972).

3 Previous Research Other studies have placed emphasis on perception in determining how people evaluate others. (Lorenzo, Biesanz & Human, 2010). This experiment focused on the ratings of positivity and accuracy in terms of personality/first impressions. Seventy-three participants were placed in 10 groups that ranged from 5 to 11 people, and each person met with one another for a 3-minute interaction. After each interaction, each participant was given a questionnaire that was made up of 21 items found on the Big Five Inventory assessment. The assessment consisted of an assortment of personality traits, and it was scaled from disagree strongly (1) to agree strongly (7). Participants were then asked to rate how physically attractive they thought each person they encountered was. What were the results? Participants rated attractive individuals with greater positivity and normative accuracy. In other words, perception played a role in how individuals acknowledged and evaluated one another. Levels of attractiveness may have caused participants to either pay more or less attention to one another, therefore influencing the amount of understanding and positive judgements (Lorenzo et. al., 2010)

4 Previous Research Lucker, Beane and Helmreich (1981) 102 male and 128 female participants who were from the University of Texas. Participants were shown 12 different people (six male and six female) who they had to rate (Lucker et al., 1981). They were shown each slide for 2.5 min(lucker et al., 1981). The participants rated the pictures on attractiveness on a nine-point scale. ( very ugly - very attractive ) (Lucker et al., 1981). Then they rated them on 12 personality traits (intelligent, unintelligent; warm, cold; assured, unassured; ambitious, unambitious; sexy, unsexy; sad, happy; friendly, hostile; threatening, nonthreatening; conceited, not conceited; competent, incompetent; masculine, feminine; active, passive) (Lucker et al., 1981). Lastly, they were asked how much do you think you would like this person? the scale was from dislike very much - like very much (Lucker et al., 1981). The results showed that there was a significant difference between personality traits in the amount of variance accounted for by attractiveness ratings (Lucker et al., 1981). Friendliness and warmth were found to not be strongly related to one s attractiveness. Sexiness, femininity, and liking were found to be strongly related to attractiveness of the person (Lucker et al., 1981).

5 Previous Research In Van Leeuwen s (2004) experiment there were 36 participants (20 female and 16 male) who were undergraduates(van Leewan 2004). They were instructed to look at a computer screen that would display words that were either positive or negative (Van Leewan 2004). The words would be in the foreground while there was a face of a person (male/female; attractive, unattractive) in the background during the experimental condition or just a plain oval in the baseline condition (Van Leewan 2004). 64 words were shown- 32 positive and 32 negative (Van Leewan 2004). Each word appeared on a matched face (attractive/unattractive), a mismatched face and an oval (Van Leewan 2004). The participant had to press a computer button if they thought the word was positive or negative (Van Leewan 2004). They were told to ignore the background picture ( Van Leewan 2004). The results showed that when an attractive face was in the background participants were faster at depicting positive versus negative words (Van Leewan 2004). They took a longer time to identify negative words when there was an attractive face in the background (Van Leewan 2004). Female faces made participants respond slower to negative words versus positive ones (Van Leewan 2004).

6 Methods Hypothesis o Attractive people will be rated higher on five positive attributes than unattractive people. Participants o 50 females, between the ages of (M=21.48, SD=2.41) o Participants randomly assigned to attractive (n=23) or unattractive (n=27) condition Materials: Pen, coin, photos, questionnaires

7 Methods, ctd. Participants given photo of attractive or unattractive male.

8 Methods, ctd. Participants asked to rate person in five positive attributes, using Likert scale of 1-4 (1 is unlikely to have, 4 is likely to have) o o o o o Intelligence Warmth Ambition Friendliness Confidence

9 Results Independent sample t-test compared individual traits combine responses for overall comparison

10 Results for Individual Traits Levene s test not significant Warmth t(48)=3.96, p<.001 Confidence t(48)=7.57, p<.001 Friendliness t(48)=3.19, p=.003 Intelligence t(48)= -1.81, p=.08 Ambition t(48)=.601, p=.55

11 Results for Overall Comparison Levene s test not significant Overall mean for attractive (SD = 1.64) Overall mean for unattractive (SD = 1.19) t(48)=5.4, p<.001

12

13 Discussion Hypothesis: -The attractive photo will yield a higher average for positive traits than the not attractive photo. - The participants will perceive the attractive person to be more likely to possess positive traits.

14 Discussion Results Interpreted: - A significant difference was found for the overall responses between the attractive and not attractive conditions - 3 of the 5 individual traits were significantly difference - Warmth, Confidence, and Friendliness - Not Intelligence or Ambition

15 Discussion Related to Previous Research: - Dion, Berscheid, and Walster (1972) found the attractive photo to have a higher perceived possession of socially desirable characteristics. - Our findings were consistent with this

16 Discussion Related to Previous Research: - Lorenzo, Biesanz, and Human (2010) found that more attractive people were rated with higher positivity. - Our findings were consistent with this

17 Discussion Related to Previous Research: - Lucker, Beane and Helmreich (1981) found sexiness, femininity and liking to be strongly related to attractiveness. These traits can be categorized as positive traits. - Our findings are consistent with this. - However, they also found that friendliness and warmth were only weakly related to attractiveness - This is not so consistent with our findings or the findings of other research suggesting that other factors may come into play.

18 Discussion Related to Previous Research: - Van Leeuwen (2004) found that positive words were more correctly identified when a photo of an attractive person was in the background. - This is similar to the implicit bias test and reveals internal biases towards attractive people - Our findings are consistent with this

19 Discussion Limitations: - Time - Sample Size/Type - Photographs were not standardized - Individual Experimenter Error

20 Discussion Implications: - Support for the theory - Other traits and characteristics outside of social traits should be researched further such as intelligence and ambition.