Facial features and unethical behavior – Doped athletes show higher facial width-to-height ratios than non-doping sanctioned athletes

Krenn, Bjoern; Buehler, Callum

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224472

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…How rule-breaking as an individual tendency towards norms favours behaving "right" or "wrong" concerns morality and remains an open question. Rule-breaking can lead to adverse outcomes (e.g., legal problems, scientific misconduct, aggression; [126][127][128][129][130][131][132]), but it also has advantages [133]. Examples of positive consequences of rule-breaking include being seen as a person with moral courage [134,135], good heart (e.g., nurses helping patients even when going against clinic statements; [136]), being creative [137], or becoming an entrepreneur (e.g., increasing your earnings by selling new products that overcome the established rules in the market; [138]).…”

Section: Conclusion-interindividual Differences In Rule-breaking Rese...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking the chance!–Interindividual differences in rule-breaking

Cubillos-Pinilla

Emmerling²

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While some individuals tend to follow norms, others, in the face of tempting but forbidden options, tend to commit rule-breaking when this action is beneficial for themselves. Previous studies have neglected such interindividual differences in rule-breaking. The present study fills this gap by investigating cognitive characteristics of individuals who commit spontaneous deliberative rule-breaking (rule-breakers) versus rule-followers. We developed a computerised task, in which 133 participants were incentivised to sometimes violate set rules which would–if followed–lead to a loss. While 52% of participants tended to break rules to obtain a benefit, 48% tended to follow rules even if this behaviour led to loss. Although rule-breakers experienced significantly more cognitive conflict (measured via response times and mouse movement trajectories) than rule-followers, they also obtained higher payoffs. In rule-breakers, cognitive conflict was more pronounced when violating the rules than when following them, and mainly during action planning. This conflict increased with frequent, recurrent, and early rule-breaking. Our results were in line with the Decision-Implementation-Mandatory switch-Inhibition model and thus extend the application of this model to the interindividual differences in rule-breaking. Furthermore, personality traits such as extroversion, disagreeableness, risk propensity, high impulsiveness seem to play a role in the appreciation of behaviours and cognitive characteristics of rule-followers and rule-breakers. This study opens the path towards the understanding of the cognitive characteristics of the interindividual differences in responses towards rules, and especially in spontaneous deliberative rule-breaking.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion-interindividual Differences In Rule-breaking Rese...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking the chance!–Interindividual differences in rule-breaking

Cubillos-Pinilla

Emmerling²

2022

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Was facial width-to-height ratio subject to sexual selection pressures? A life course approach

Hodges‐Simeon

Albert

Richardson

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual selection researchers have traditionally focused on adult sex differences; however, the schedule and pattern of sex-specific ontogeny can provide insights unobtainable from an exclusive focus on adults. Recently, it has been debated whether facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR; bi-zygomatic breadth divided by midface height) is a human secondary sexual characteristic (SSC). Here, we review current evidence, then address this debate using ontogenetic evidence, which has been under-explored in fWHR research. Facial measurements collected from males and females aged 3 to 40 (Study 1; US, n=2449), and 7 to 21 (Study 2; Bolivia, n=179) were used to calculate three fWHR variants (which we call fWHRnasion, fWHRstomion, and fWHRbrow) and two other common facial masculinity ratios (facial width-to-lower-face-height ratio, fWHRlower, and cheekbone prominence). We test whether the observed pattern of facial development exhibits patterns indicative of SSCs, i.e. differential adolescent growth in either male or female facial morphology leading to an adult sex difference. Results showed that only fWHRlower exhibited both adult sex differences as well as the classic pattern of ontogeny for SSCs—greater lower-face growth in male adolescents relative to females. fWHRbrow was significantly wider among both pre- and post-pubertal males in the 2D sample; post-hoc analyses revealed that the effect was driven by large sex differences in brow height, with females having higher placed brows than males across ages. In both samples, all fWHR measures were inversely associated with age; that is, human facial growth is characterized by greater relative growth in the mid-face and lower face relative to facial width. This trend continues even into middle adulthood. BMI was also a positive predictor of most of the ratios across ages, with greater BMI associated with wider faces. Researchers collecting data on fWHR should target fWHRlower and fWHRbrow and should control for both age and BMI.

show abstract

Was facial width-to-height ratio subject to sexual selection pressures? A life course approach

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sexual selection researchers have traditionally focused on adult sex differences; however, the schedule and pattern of sex-specific ontogeny can provide insights unobtainable from an exclusive focus on adults. Recently, it has been debated whether facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR; bi-zygomatic breadth divided by midface height) is a human secondary sexual characteristic (SSC). Here, we review current evidence, then address this debate using ontogenetic evidence, which has been under-explored in fWHR research. Facial measurements were collected from 3D surface images of males and females aged 3 to 40 (Study 1; US European-descent, n = 2449), and from 2D photographs of males and females aged 7 to 21 (Study 2; Bolivian Tsimane, n = 179), which were used to calculate three fWHR variants (which we call fWHRnasion, fWHRstomion, and fWHRbrow) and two other common facial masculinity ratios (facial width-to-lower-face-height ratio, fWHRlower, and cheekbone prominence). We test whether the observed pattern of facial development exhibits patterns indicative of SSCs, i.e., differential adolescent growth in either male or female facial morphology leading to an adult sex difference. Results showed that only fWHRlower exhibited both adult sex differences as well as the classic pattern of ontogeny for SSCs—greater lower-face growth in male adolescents relative to females. fWHRbrow was significantly wider among both pre- and post-pubertal males in the Bolivian Tsimane sample; post-hoc analyses revealed that the effect was driven by large sex differences in brow height, with females having higher placed brows than males across ages. In both samples, all fWHR measures were inversely associated with age; that is, human facial growth is characterized by greater relative elongation in the mid-face and lower face relative to facial width. This trend continues even into middle adulthood. BMI was also a positive predictor of most of the ratios across ages, with greater BMI associated with wider faces. Researchers collecting data on fWHR should target fWHRlower and fWHRbrow and should control for both age and BMI. Researchers should also compare ratio approaches with multivariate techniques, such as geometric morphometrics, to examine whether the latter have greater utility for understanding the evolution of facial sexual dimorphism.

show abstract

Facial features and unethical behavior – Doped athletes show higher facial width-to-height ratios than non-doping sanctioned athletes

Cited by 4 publications

References 49 publications

Taking the chance!–Interindividual differences in rule-breaking

Taking the chance!–Interindividual differences in rule-breaking

Was facial width-to-height ratio subject to sexual selection pressures? A life course approach

Was facial width-to-height ratio subject to sexual selection pressures? A life course approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About