Beauty is in the ease of the beholding: A neurophysiological test of the averageness theory of facial attractiveness

Abstract

Multiple studies show that people prefer attractive over unattractive faces. But what is an attractive face and why is it preferred? Averageness theory claims that faces are perceived as attractive when their facial configuration approximates the mathematical average facial configuration of the population. Conversely, faces that deviate from this average configuration are perceived as unattractive. The theory predicts that both attractive and mathematically averaged faces should be processed more fluently than unattractive faces, whereas the averaged faces should be processed marginally more fluently than the attractive faces. We compared neurocognitive and behavioral responses to attractive, unattractive, and averaged human faces to test these predictions. We recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) and reaction times (RTs) from 48 adults while they discriminated between human and chimpanzee faces. Participants categorized averaged and high attractive faces as “human” faster than low attractive faces. The posterior N170 (150 – 225 ms) face-evoked ERP component was smaller in response to high attractive and averaged faces versus low attractive faces. Single-trial EEG analysis indicated that this reduced ERP response arose from the engagement of fewer neural resources and not from a change in the temporal consistency of how those resources were engaged. These findings provide novel evidence that faces are perceived as attractive when they approximate a facial configuration close to the population average and suggest that processing fluency underlies preferences for attractive faces.

Electrophysiological evidence of perceived sexual attractiveness for human female bodies varying in waist-to-hip ratio

“…By contrast, artificially modified (stretched) unattractive faces affected P1 and P2 amplitudes, rather than the N170. Along similar lines, another study (Trujillo, Jankowitsch, & Langlois, 2014) observed a smaller N170 for more attractive, as well as averaged faces, compared to less attractive faces. This suggested that the N170 might in fact be sensitive essentially to the typicality of a face (i.e.…”

Effects of facial attractiveness on personality stimuli in an implicit priming task: an ERP study

“…32,33 In the present study, the ERPs in the incongruent condition expectedly showed larger negativity N2 in comparison with those in the congruent condition. A similar study also found that an incongruent condition elicits a much more negative deflection (N300) than incongruent stimuli.…”

Unattractive infant faces elicit negative affect from adults

“…Researchers have found that neural activities related to attractiveness perception are engaged even when participants are not explicitly asked to judge it (Aharon et al, 2001; Trujillo, Jankowitsch, & Langlois, 2014), which furthers the argument that EMG can be used to reliably assess differential reactions from participants. Specifically, attractiveness effects have been found in the activation of zygomaticus major (ZM; pulling the corner of the lips into a smile; a positive affect response) and unattractiveness effects in the activation of corrugator supercili (CS; knitting the brow; a negative affect response) and levator labii superioris (LLS; raising the nostril; a disgust response) (Gerger, Leder, Tinio, & Schacht, 2011; Principe & Langlois, 2011).…”