Science stuff: men and women both prefer face to body - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

loquitur · 09-30-2009, 06:46 AM

First the oh-so-serious abstract of the study:

Quote:

A number of traits have been proposed to be important in human mate choice decisions. However, relatively little work has been conducted to determine the relative importance of these traits. In this study, we assessed the relative importance of the face and body in judgments of human physical attractiveness. One hundred twenty-seven men and 133 women were shown images of 10 individuals of the opposite sex. Participants rated the images for their attractiveness for either a short-term relationship or a long-term relationship. Images of the face and the body were rated independently before participants were shown and asked to rate the combined face and body images. Face ratings were found to be the best predictor of the ratings of combined images for both sexes and for both relationship types. Females showed no difference in ratings between short- and long-term conditions, but male ratings of female bodies became relatively more important for a short-term relationship compared with a long-term relationship. Results suggest that faces and bodies may be signaling different information about potential mates.

Now to translate this into everyday English:

Quote:

I’ll save you all the nitty-gritty, scientific-y details and just give you the good news. Forget about your diet and focus on your face cream if you’re in the market for a long-term mate. A new study by Dr. Currie at Royal Society University in London confirmed that men and women approach long-term relationships in a similar way—both genders pay way more attention to gorgeous faces than hot bodies. When it comes to short-term relationships ... well, women were more likely to go for face over body while the dudes placed much more importance on the body than the face. Shocker. Gives a whole new meaning to the term “butter face.”

So, what do you think? Does this study match your experience? Do the anecdotes line up with the data?

GreyWolf · 09-30-2009, 07:12 AM

This makes sense to me, in an evolutionary sense. Humans, and males in particular, are extremely visual. It is our most highly developed sense. The different generic shapes of the human body are quite distinguishable at a distance, and males use this as a cue to decide whether or not an approaching stranger is a threat (i.e. male) or a potential mate (female). To a lesser extent, this is true for females as well, although an approaching female is less of a threat to her than a male approaching a male. And an approaching male is MORE of a threat to her than a female approaching a male. Knowing the sex of the approaching stranger gives one time to make appropriate preparations for the encounter. So the ability to distinguish sex at a distance is important, and carries strong survival functionality.

The face however, is how we generally recognise the identity of someone. Babies are instinctively drawn to faces. Shown pictures of concrete items (trucks, houses, animals), abstract items (colours or random lines), and human bodies and faces, they will focus first/longest on faces, then on bodies. Very suggestive of this study. Since the face is so important to us from such a young age, and for some very good reasons, it makes sense that faces that please us are going to be the most important to us. And generally, symmetric features, with clear skin, alert eyes, and smiling mouths are going to more pleasing to us.

For me, after the unconscious, instinctive sweep of a woman's body when I first see her (c'mon... it's INSTINCTIVE!!), I do settle on the face (for social reasons as well), but especially if she has a pleasing one.

Jinn · 09-30-2009, 08:24 AM

Anyone have access to the full-text PDF? I like abstracts and all, but I really do prefer to see the entire study.

And from a gut "yea, that sounds about right", this study confirms what I instinctively believe to be true.

snowy · 09-30-2009, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jinn

Anyone have access to the full-text PDF? I like abstracts and all, but I really do prefer to see the entire study.

And from a gut "yea, that sounds about right", this study confirms what I instinctively believe to be true.

I do. If you'd like it, shoot me a PM with an email address.

09-30-2009, 07:12 AM	#2 (permalink)
GreyWolf Sober Location: Eastern Canada	This makes sense to me, in an evolutionary sense. Humans, and males in particular, are extremely visual. It is our most highly developed sense. The different generic shapes of the human body are quite distinguishable at a distance, and males use this as a cue to decide whether or not an approaching stranger is a threat (i.e. male) or a potential mate (female). To a lesser extent, this is true for females as well, although an approaching female is less of a threat to her than a male approaching a male. And an approaching male is MORE of a threat to her than a female approaching a male. Knowing the sex of the approaching stranger gives one time to make appropriate preparations for the encounter. So the ability to distinguish sex at a distance is important, and carries strong survival functionality. The face however, is how we generally recognise the identity of someone. Babies are instinctively drawn to faces. Shown pictures of concrete items (trucks, houses, animals), abstract items (colours or random lines), and human bodies and faces, they will focus first/longest on faces, then on bodies. Very suggestive of this study. Since the face is so important to us from such a young age, and for some very good reasons, it makes sense that faces that please us are going to be the most important to us. And generally, symmetric features, with clear skin, alert eyes, and smiling mouths are going to more pleasing to us. For me, after the unconscious, instinctive sweep of a woman's body when I first see her (c'mon... it's INSTINCTIVE!!), I do settle on the face (for social reasons as well), but especially if she has a pleasing one. __________________ *The secret to great marksmanship is deciding what the target was AFTER you've shot.*

09-30-2009, 08:24 AM	#3 (permalink)
Jinn Lover - Protector - Teacher Location: Seattle, WA	Anyone have access to the full-text PDF? I like abstracts and all, but I really do prefer to see the entire study. And from a gut "yea, that sounds about right", this study confirms what I instinctively believe to be true. __________________ "I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel