The Attractiveness Advantage At Work: A Cross-Disciplinary Integrative Review

Abstract

Compared with people of average attractiveness, the highly attractive earn roughly 20 percent more and are recommended for promotion more frequently. The dominant view of this "attractiveness advantage" is one of taste-based discrimination, whereby attractive individuals are preferred without justification in economic productivity. We conduct a comprehensive review of research on attractiveness discrimination, finding relatively more evidence that this phenomenon constitutes, to some extent, statistical (as opposed to solely taste-based) discrimination, in which decision makers assume that attractive people are more competent and discriminate based on instrumental motives. We then review research that speaks to whether decision makers might be correct in assuming that attractive workers are more productive, finding that the attractive possess a slight advantage in human and a notable advantage in social capital. We finally review studies evaluating whether an advantage exists beyond that explained by capital differences. We find that the current body of work provides inconclusive evidence of taste-based but relatively more conclusive evidence of statistical discrimination processes. Our integrative view suggests how attractiveness biases can be detected more effectively, and points to key directions for future research on the sources of the attractiveness advantage. We conclude by discussing the promise of an integrative approach to understanding other achievement gaps, such as those on the basis of gender, race, and social class.

The college admissions contribution to the labor market beauty premium

“…However, despite the many positive findings on labor market discrimination by facial beauty, the existing literature has largely ignored the possibility that the beauty premium may begin before entry into the labor market. 4 (See Nault et al (2020) for a comprehensive review of the literature on the labor market beauty premium in economics and management.) Identifying the source of the beauty premium is important both to better understand labor market discrimination and to better target antidiscrimination regulations based on personal appearance.…”

“…(See Nault et al. (2020) for a comprehensive review of the literature on the labor market beauty premium in economics and management.) Identifying the source of the beauty premium is important both to better understand labor market discrimination and to better target antidiscrimination regulations based on personal appearance.…”

Hacking attractiveness biases in hiring? The role of beautifying photo-filters

“…The role of beautifying photo-filters Dion, Berscheid and Walster (1972) were among the first to report that less attractive individuals were ascribed fewer positive characteristics than more attractive individuals. A large body of research has since supported the existence of this bias, showing that physically less attractive individuals are evaluated as less socially and intellectually competent, dominant and mentally healthy (Shapir and Shtudiner, 2021;Nault, Pitesa, and Thau, 2020;Solano-Gómez, and Smith-Castro, 2017;Shtudiner, 2019;Feingold, 1992;Hosoda, Stone-Romero and Coats, 2003). The attractiveness bias influences most domains of interpersonal interaction (Westfall, Millar, and Walsh, 2016;Feingold, 1992), and the occupational domain is no exception.…”

Is beauty more than skin deep? Attractiveness, power, and nonverbal presence in evaluations of hirability

“…In this view, physical appearance is not relevant to an individual's qualifications; good-looking individuals' disproportionately favorable outcomes in organizations represent error derived from stereotypes in which attractive people are assumed to have other positive characteristics (Dion et al, 1972;Frevert & Walker, 2014). A recent metaanalytic review (Nault et al, 2020(Nault et al, , p. 1104) added nuance to this long-standing explanation, finding evidence that attractiveness bias often represents "statistical discrimination" (a preference based on expected performance) rather than "taste-based discrimination" (a preference unrelated to expected performance). That is, organizational evaluators favor attractive people because they believe such people are more competent and productive than others.…”

“…Commentators have argued that there are situations in which attractiveness itself-distinct from the interpersonal skills it facilitates-may be a valid job-relevant characteristic, whether directly (as in the case of cosmetics salespeople, who are expected to display an attractive appearance to demonstrate their products) or indirectly (as in the case of executives, whose attractiveness elicits more trust from others ;Miller, 2011). No one study can provide a definitive answer to these questions, but we hope this research contributes to the larger conversation about how organizations can make just and accurate personnel decisions (e.g., Nault et al, 2020).…”