Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness

Abstract

Facial symmetry has been proposed as a marker of developmental stability that may be important in human mate choice. Several studies have demonstrated positive relationships between facial symmetry and attractiveness. It was recently proposed that symmetry is not a primary cue to facial attractiveness, as symmetrical faces remain attractive even when presented as half faces (with no cues to symmetry). Facial sexual dimorphisms ('masculinity') have been suggested as a possible cue that may covary with symmetry in men following data on trait size/symmetry relationships in other species. Here, we use real and computer graphic male faces in order to demonstrate that (i) symmetric faces are more attractive, but not reliably more masculine than less symmetric faces and (ii) that symmetric faces possess characteristics that are attractive independent of symmetry, but that these characteristics remain at present undefined.

Relative digit lengths predict men’s behavior and attractiveness during social interactions with women

“…Evidence indicates that lower 2D:4D may be associated with more masculine facial features (Neave et al 2003) and such features may in turn increase male attractiveness (e.g., Johnston et al 2001), at least under conditions in which the man's social behavior is nonthreatening (see introductory section). Evidence that lower 2D:4D is associated with lower facial symmetry (Fink et al 2004), however, suggests that androgen exposure may positively influence facial attractiveness via its effects on masculinity but negatively impact attractiveness via its effects on symmetry (see Penton-Voak et al 2001 for evidence that masculinity and symmetry may be somewhat independent characteristics of male faces). Higher prenatal androgens might also increase the probability of developing a more muscular physique, and recent research has demonstrated female preferences for mesomorphic body types (e.g., Dixson et al 2003;Maisey et al 1999).…”

Evidence for adaptive design in human gaze preference

“…However, many researchers have noted that opposite-sex biases in preferences for facial cues are difficult to explain in terms of perceptual bias alone (e.g. Penton-Voak et al 2001;Little & Jones 2003), but are a strong prediction of accounts of face preferences that propose attractiveness judgements may function to maximize the benefits of mate choice (e.g. Little & Jones 2003;Rhodes 2006).…”

Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces

“…For example, Jones et al (2001) have shown that the attractiveness-symmetry relationships may be mediated by perceived health and Little et al (2001) and Penton-Voak et al (2001), using different methodologies, have shown opposite-sex face sensitivity in symmetry preference. Little et al (2001) have also demonstrated that symmetry preference differs according to self-rated attractiveness in women.…”

“…Studies of naturally occurring human facial asymmetries provide evidence that symmetrical faces are attractive, showing that measured symmetry is positively correlated with attractiveness judgements (facialmetric measures (Grammer & Thornhill 1994;Scheib et al 1999;Jones et al 2001) and psychophysical measures (Mealey et al 1999;Penton-Voak et al 2001)). Consistent with preferences for naturally occurring symmetry in real faces, four recent computer graphic studies (Rhodes et al 1998(Rhodes et al , 2001bPerrett et al 1999;Little et al 2001; but see Swaddle & Cuthill 1995) have shown preferences for faces manipulated to increase symmetry.…”