Facial self-perception: Its relation to objective appearance and self-concept

Pittenger, John B.; Baskett, Linda Musun

doi:10.3758/bf03333794

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with previous studies (e. g. Pittenger and Baskett, 1984;Noles et at., 1985), controls overestimated their symmetry. This overestimation was specific to their own face, suggesting that, in contrast to BDD patients, controls are adopting a self-serving bias in their self-estimation.…”

supporting

confidence: 82%

“…This overestimation of attractiveness in controls is consistent with the findings reported by Pittenger and Baskett (1984). Applying the mean rating by others as an objective measure of appearance, non-clinical students significantly overestimated the attractiveness of their own faces in both the memory and photograph conditions (Pittenger & Baskett, 1984).…”

supporting

confidence: 81%

“…Applying the mean rating by others as an objective measure of appearance, non-clinical students significantly overestimated the attractiveness of their own faces in both the memory and photograph conditions (Pittenger & Baskett, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The role of aesthetic sensitivity in body dysmorphic disorder.

Lambrou¹,

Veale²,

Wilson³

2011

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals with body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) are excessively preoccupied with an imagined or slight defect in appearance. Higher aesthetic sensitivity in facial proportions may explain why BDD patients are severely disturbed by a small defect in their appearance.Aesthetic sensitivity can be defined as an awareness and appreciation of beauty and harmony, with three components: i) perceptual (ability to differentiate variations in aesthetic proportions); ii) emotional (degree of emotion experienced when viewing beauty or ugliness); iii) evaluative (aesthetic standards, values and identity).Fifty BDD patients were compared with two non-clinical control groups; 50 art & design controls and 50 non-art controls. A facial photograph of the participant was manipulated using computer graphic techniques, to create a 9-image symmetry continuum. Presented with the continuum on a computer, participants selected and rated images representing their self-actual, self-ideal, idea of a perfect, most physically attractive, most pleasure and most disgust. Control symmetry continua examined the specificity of the disturbance.As predicted, BDD patients displayed increased accuracy in their self-actual estimation and greater sensitivity to aesthetic proportions. BDD patients were not distorted in their perceptual processing but appeared exclusively disturbed in their negative emotional/evaluative processing of their own face. However, BDD patients did not express a higher aesthetic standard of beauty compared to controls. A significant discrepancy between BDD patients' self-actual and self-ideal, resulting from an absent self-serving bias in their self-actual estimation, a bias notably exhibited by controls, may be the crucial determining factor and potential source of their disturbance. BDD patients also overvalued the importance of appearance and self-objectified. These aesthetic evaluations may interact with aesthetic perceptions and emotions to predispose them to and/or maintain the disorder.Investigating the role of personality/psychological factors, path analyses suggested that body shame mediates the relationship between aesthetic sensitivity and BDD symptomatology. Clinical implications are discussed.3

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 82%

supporting

confidence: 81%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The role of aesthetic sensitivity in body dysmorphic disorder.

Lambrou¹,

Veale²,

Wilson³

2011

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When objective ratings of physical attractiveness are correlated to self‐concept, this relationship disappears (16) or becomes negative, indicating that physical attractiveness in adolescence can have a negative effect on self‐concept (18). Findings such as these have led researchers to conclude that the judgment of physical appearance by others has much less of an effect on self‐concept than one’s own judgment (19).…”

Section: Self‐concept and Physical Appearancementioning

confidence: 99%

Self‐Concept in Youth with Congenital Facial Differences: Development and Recommendations for Medical Providers

Marik

Hoag

2012

Pediatric Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Congenital facial differences may impact a child's self-perception, activities and valuation, and what has been termed their "self-concept." This article reviews what constitutes self-concept, and its development during childhood and adolescence. The literature examining the role of physical appearance, specifically congenital facial differences on individuals' perceptions of self are reviewed in the context of psychosocial development. Positive self-concept can impact healthy behaviors, positive interactions with peers, and academic achievement. The role of mental health professionals in evaluating self-concept and objective measures of self-concept are discussed, and recommendations are made to assist medical practitioners regarding monitoring and encouragement of positive self-concept in children with congenital facial differences.

show abstract

“…Studies have also found a significant positive correlation between subjects' ratings of own self‐perceived attractiveness and those they received from third‐party raters (Pittenger and Basket ). However, self‐ratings of physical attractiveness appear to be positively correlated with a wider range of attributes than actual physical attractiveness (Feingold ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%