What makes a face attractive and why do we have the preferences we do? Emergence of preferences early in development and cross-cultural agreement on attractiveness challenge a long-held view that our preferences reflect arbitrary standards of beauty set by cultures. Averageness, symmetry, and sexual dimorphism are good candidates for biologically based standards of beauty. A critical review and meta-analyses indicate that all three are attractive in both male and female faces and across cultures. Theorists have proposed that face preferences may be adaptations for mate choice because attractive traits signal important aspects of mate quality, such as health. Others have argued that they may simply be by-products of the way brains process information. Although often presented as alternatives, I argue that both kinds of selection pressures may have shaped our perceptions of facial beauty.

No abstract

No abstract

Diamond & Carey (1986) have argued that expertise in face recognition depends on the ability to code configural properties in addition to isolated features. We tested this hypothesis in two experiments by comparing the effect of inversion on recognition of 'own race' (high expertise) and 'other race' (low expertise) faces. Use of configural information should be associated with a larger inversion effect than use of isolated features, and therefore inversion should produce a larger recognition decrement for own race than for other race faces. In Expt 1 there was a larger inversion effect in reaction times for recognition of own race faces than other race faces, for both European and Chinese subjects (ceiling effects made interpretation of accuracy difficult). In Expt 2 a larger own race inversion effect was found for recognition accuracy, when test face pairs were randomly selected, but not when they were matched on isolated features. Our results are largely consistent with the hypothesis that expertise is associated with greater use of configural information in faces.

No abstract