Dating and the Physical Attractiveness Stereotype

Physical attractiveness has long been an instigator of biased thinking, especially with regards to dating selection. For instance, due to the effects of physical attraction stereotypes adults who are more attractive tend to be treated more positively than their more unattractive counterparts (Rohner & Rasmussen, 2012, p. 239). The physical attraction stereotype describes that attractiveness of an individual can distort others perception of that individual’s character qualities (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005, p. 357). Higher attractive individuals tend to be perceived as having more positive qualities, while less attractive people tend to be perceived as having more negative qualities, no matter what qualities are actually present (Rohner & Rasmussen, 2012, p. 239). Although physical attractiveness stereotype does have roots in fact, that more attractive people do in fact tend to have more positive qualities, it is important to realize that it is our memory that is distorting our perception of individuals given qualities, whether they have the perceived qualities or not (Rohner & Rasmussen, 2012, p. 240).

With this idea in mind, Rohner and Rasmussen’s study involved the utilization of recognition bias to demonstrate the reasoning behind why individuals tend to pay attention to those details that conform to their own previously held beliefs, such as the physical attractiveness stereotype (2012, p. 240). For instance, a man remembering a pretty woman he was talking with as being nice and intelligent despite her obvious display of rudeness and low IQ. In this instance, the man is mistakenly remembering qualities he typically associates with attractive women, in reference to the woman he had talked to; the positive qualities are the kind of details his mind recalls due to the influence of his beliefs about the typical qualities of attractive women.

While working to further understand the physical attractiveness stereotype, Rohner and Rasmussen’s works determined that the physical attractiveness stereotype is not only quite genuine, but that it holds true through varying situations and individual differences as well (Rohner & Rasmussen, 2012, p. 239). In concordance with this, the recognition bias effect associated with the physical attractiveness stereotype has been shown to be extremely resistant to intervention. Recognition bias in fact rebuffed all attempts at intervention during Rohner and Rasmussen’s study, however more alternative tactics of diverting the harmful effects of the physical attraction stereotype (recognition bias by proxy) have been shown to be affective (2012, p. 240).

As a great example, colleagues Gross and McHale implemented a T-shirt dating method that has demonstrated a way to bring people together utilizing a stronger focus on common interests instead of physical attraction, therein reducing the rate of mate selection based a dimension entrenched in physical attraction biases (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2005, p. 362). By diverting individuals focus from physical attributes and refocusing individuals on their shared interests, the tenets of the physical attractiveness stereotype become much less influential (p. 362).

References

Rohner, J. C., & Rasmussen, A. (2012). Recognition bias and the physical attractiveness stereotype. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53(3), 239-246. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00939.x

Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2005). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems. SAGE Publications. Kindle Edition.

5 comments

  1. Asher Rodriguez

    As some have stated the physical attractiveness stereotype does not only manifest itself in relationships, but in most professional and social environments. According to researchers Frevert and Walker (2014) physical attractiveness has status characteristics. Status characteristics are “any characteristic of actors around which evaluations of and beliefs about them come to be organized”, such as gender, race, age, education, occupation, reading ability, and attractiveness. A status characteristic has two states, in terms of physical attractiveness this would be beautiful/attractive and ugly/unattractive. (Frevert & Walker, p. 314, 2014) They posit that the effects of attractiveness can be be felt even when no interaction takes place. (Frevert & Walker, p. 314, 2014) By taking it one step further the effects of attractiveness can accumulate in such a way that attractive individuals are able to gain influence that compounds and turns into social advantage. (Frevert & Walker, p. 314, 2014) Conversely, unattractive individuals lose influence and become socially disadvantaged. (Frevert & Walker, p. 314, 2014)

    An example of this is the “what is beautiful is good” hypothesis. (Frevert & Walker, p. 319, 2014) Those who posses a high state of attractiveness are also thought to possess other positive attributes, i.e., intelligence, thoughtful, caring, hardworking. This expectation of goodness or perceived competence even though only based on physical characteristics can cause individuals to be promoted and given priority status. (Frevert & Walker, p. 315, 2014) It’s sad this exists in our world and with the prevalence of media and the internet I see no way to stop this from happening. Perhaps if we try to change how we define attractiveness, maybe we’ll get one step closer to actually respecting one another for our differences.

    Frevert, T., & Walker, S. (2014). Physical Attractiveness and Social Status. Sociology Compass, 8(3), 313-323.

  2. Sadaka Maisah Archie

    The physical attractiveness has always been an interesting “debate.” A widely cited conclusion that was derived from research is people’s perception of others, “what is beautiful is good” (Eagly, Askmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991). This is a stereotype that links beauty to goodness. Furthermore, those that are physically attractive are perceived to have positive qualities. This perception can be applied to many aspects in life and careers. For example, this problem affects the entertainment business. I’ve seen many interviews of female actress stating a role they’ve audition for was given to the “prettier” actress. One many think this is an issue in entertainment because “everyone” is beautiful; Specific roles are geared towards a specific “look.” This creates much bias; bias towards those more “beautiful.” I know many physically attractive people that do not pertain to “what is beautiful is good” perception. In many of my personal experiences, it is actually opposite. Many of those people have such unattractive personalities and lack sense of morals and values. This topic has always been a social issue and I believe there are ways to prevent this perception of physical attractiveness means positive personal qualities.

    As the post mentions, not only adults believe the physical attractiveness, but children as well. I have a six year old niece and she’s already developed this perception of what is beautiful and attractive. To add, she’s already become “concerned” about her appearance. I believe she’s developed this perception through observation. Physical attractiveness is not discussed around her nor is she overly exposed to the perceptions of beauty. But, it’s my duty as an adult and her family member for her to understand that there is not a specific “look” that constitutes beauty and attractiveness. Lastly, it is important to have these conversations at a young age because as we develop, it tends to become difficult to change our perception of issues that have been instilled in our minds.

    References:

    Eagly, A. H., Ashmore, R. D., Makhijani, M. G., & Longo, L. C. (1991). What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological bulletin, 110(1), 109.

  3. Attractiveness is one of the factors in choosing a mate. When we talk about choosing a mate or preference it is a challenge to separate inborn preferences from cultural norms and gender roles. While it is agreed on by researchers that all human being love, we all do not define love the same way because of the variation in cultural norms, Taylor (2012). The differences are not only in how define love, but also how we experience it. There also different interpretations of love, attractiveness and relationships. Take attractiveness for instance. The primacy effect is when people are impacted by the first information they see and make a judgment based on that information (Schneider et al., 2012). Thus, giving support to the traditional saying, “judging a book by its cover.” There is a reliance on physical attractiveness to make judgments. One of first features where people make judgment or interpretation of attractiveness is the face. When it comes to facial beauty and preference, both men and women prefer symmetrical faces. Symmetry is where the placement and size of the features on one side of the face match those on the other. People are more attracted to symmetrical faces than to asymmetrical (not identical on both sides) ones, Cunningham (1986). Furthermore, according to Cunningham (1986) facial features also predicted personality attributions, altruistic inclinations, and reproductive interest. To a certain extent we are judged by our looks (Schneider et al., 2012). An example of a couple who is regarded as highly attractive with symmetrical faces is the movie stars Angelina Joelie and Brad Pitt. The reason Angelina Joelie and Brad Pitt would receive high attractiveness ratings is that they each possess the preferred facial features. Brad and Angelina are similar in symmetrical features. Specifically, they both share features such as, large eyes, prominent cheekbones, narrow chins, and a big smiles. Where they differ is in Angelina’s baby face features such as a small nose and small chin. Brads chin is large and masculine. Baby face features are linked with childlike or baby qualities. Interestingly prominent cheekbones are only present in male and female adults. I also think that other features such as good hair, height, weight, and complexion play a role in how attractive a person’s attractiveness is rated. Another reason people more attracted to symmetrical faces than to asymmetrical ones is because they indicate good health and good genes. Today males are expected to be muscular (perhaps more now than in previous generations) and women are expected to be thin (abnormally thin) as the ideal body types. This is a world view, not just a Western view.

    References

    Cunningham, M. R. (1986). Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(5), 925-935. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.925

    Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (Eds.). (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Taylor, E. S. (2012). Health Psychology, (8th ed.).

  4. Rebekah Christina Smith

    That is a very interesting study that has been done to show that people who are attractive are treated better than those who aren’t. It is also intriguing to see that oftentimes people are drawn to others based solely on their looks.
    However, I read a really funny article from the CEO of JP Morgan to a pretty woman that posted a question on a forum, what should I do to marry a rich guy? He basically told her that looks faded. He explained further in terms of wealth and stocks, that for a rich guy to marry a girl solely based on looks he is investing in a depreciating stock. After a few years, the rich man will have to invest more in order to keep the woman in good looking condition and essentially she isn’t worth that. He said that it is more beneficial for a rich guy to marry a woman that has a lot more going for her than just her looks. He closed his response saying that she has better chance of becoming rich than to marry rich.
    This is one part of looks matter that attractive people could find someone based on their looks; however, when adding other variables it isn’t the end all. It was interesting to see that just because someone is attractive doesn’t mean they will get what they want. This is contrary to the physical attractiveness stereotype that attractive people get what they want because it isn’t always the case. (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, p. 357)

    Hinrich, Lars. (2012) A reply from CEO of J.P. Morgan to a pretty girl seeking a rich husband. Retrieved from https://plus.google.com/113586474616634226716/posts/81fmXSswxYr.

    Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (Eds.). (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

  5. Delma Mae Wilt

    The physical attractiveness stereotype can be applied to many situations. I knew a woman that was turned down for a job because her appearance was different than others at the workplace. She was an intelligent, reliable person that was qualified for the job and would have been an asset to the company, but she was judged on her physical appearance. Her friend was the secretary for the vice-president of the company and overheard the comments that verified the reason for her being turned down for the position. Defendants are sometimes judged on their appearance and juries can use this bias to reach a verdict. Although pertinent information about the case in question is not completely ignored, physically attractive individuals are judged more favorably in courts of law (Hodgkiss & Handy, 2007).

    In reference to dating, many people jump into relationships based on physical attractiveness, only to find out later that they have nothing in common. More than likely, these types of relationships are going to fail. This is where I think meeting online might have an advantage. If you do not know what the other person looks like, you have the chance to get to know each other’s qualities without the bias of physical attractiveness.

    Adults are not the only ones that fall victim to the physical attractiveness stereotype. We also pass this type of bias to our children. If they mimic adult behavior, and we continue to be a society consisting of superficial biases, it would be unrealistic to expect those biases to be reduced. According to Langlois et al., 2000, children treat attractive children more positively than they treat unattractive children (as cited by Ramsey & Langlois, 2002). If adults cannot treat each other equally, how can we expect our children to?

    References:

    Hodgkiss, A., & Handy, C., (2007). The criminal face effect: Physical attractiveness and character integrity as determinants of perceived criminality. Retrieved from: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/iatl/reinvention/issues/launchissue/reinvention_launch_issue_hodgkiss_and_handy.pdf.

    Ramsey, J., & Langlois, J. (2002) Effects of the “beauty is good” stereotype on children’s information processing. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 81, 320-340.

Leave a Reply


Skip to toolbar