What is smiling is beautiful and good

Reis, Harry T.; Wilson, Ilona Mcdougal; Monestere, Carla; Bernstein, Stuart E.; Clark, Kelly N.; Seidl, Edward; Franco, Michelle; Gioioso, Ezia; Freeman, Lori; Radoane, Kimberly

doi:10.1002/ejsp.2420200307

Cited by 192 publications

(170 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

150

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have shown that positive emotional faces make a positive impression, and we tend to evaluate more positive faces as more attractive (Golle et al, 2014;Oosterhof & Todorov, 2009;Reis et al, 1990;Schmidt et al, 2012). Thus, as also observed in the present study, the evaluation of positive faces depends on the intensity of happy expressions.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Asymmetric Effect of Expression Intensity on Evaluations of Facial Attractiveness

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many studies have shown that facial expression influences evaluations of attractiveness, but the effect of expression intensity remains unclear. In the present study, participants rated the expression intensity and attractiveness of faces with happy, neutral, or sad expressions. Sad faces, as anticipated, were judged as less attractive than neutral and happy faces. Among happy expressions, faces with more intense expressions were considered more attractive; for sad expressions, there was no significant relationship between rating and intensity. Multiple regression analyses further demonstrated that the attractiveness of a face with a sad expression could be predicted only by its baseline attractiveness (i.e., ratings of neutral expressions). We conclude that the intensity of positive and negative expressions asymmetrically influences evaluations of the attractiveness of a face. We discuss the results in terms of emotional contagion or sympathy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Asymmetric Effect of Expression Intensity on Evaluations of Facial Attractiveness

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Attractiveness We found a main effect of facial expression on attractiveness ratings, F(2, 238) = 70.05, MSE = 36.95, p < .001, η p 2 = .371, with smiling models being considered the most attractive (e.g., Reis et al, 1990). There was also a main effect of presentation format on this dimension, F(2, 238) = 11.39, MSE = 3.01, p < .001, η p 2 = .087, such that increasing attractiveness ratings were observed with longer exposures to the models.…”

Section: Impacts Of Facial Expression and Stimulus Format On Evaluatimentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Some studies have already established that averageness and symmetry of a face are important characteristics for the face to be perceived as attractive (e.g., G. Rhodes, 2006). Attractive faces are also perceived as more similar (e.g., Miyake & Zuckerman, 1993), more positive (Reis et al, 1990) and more familiar (e.g., Monin, 2003). This dimension has important consequences in different interpersonal processes, such as impression formation (e.g., Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991), social distance (e.g., Lee, Loewenstein, Ariely, Hong, & Young, 2008), perception of mate quality (G. Rhodes, Halberstadt, & Brajkovich, 2001) and feelings of attraction (Rodrigues & Lopes, 2016) .…”

Section: Dimensions Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 99%

The many faces of a face: Comparing stills and videos of facial expressions in eight dimensions (SAVE database)

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents subjective rating norms for a new set of Stills And Videos of facial Expressions-the SAVE database. Twenty nonprofessional models were filmed while posing in three different facial expressions (smile, neutral, and frown). After each pose, the models completed the PANAS questionnaire, and reported more positive affect after smiling and more negative affect after frowning. From the shooting material, stills and 5 s and 10 s videos were edited (total stimulus set = 180). A different sample of 120 participants evaluated the stimuli for attractiveness, arousal, clarity, genuineness, familiarity, intensity, valence, and similarity. Overall, facial expression had a main effect in all of the evaluated dimensions, with smiling models obtaining the highest ratings. Frowning expressions were perceived as being more arousing, clearer, and more intense, but also as more negative than neutral expressions. Stimulus presentation format only influenced the ratings of attractiveness, familiarity, genuineness, and intensity. The attractiveness and familiarity ratings increased with longer exposure times, whereas genuineness decreased. The ratings in the several dimensions were correlated. The subjective norms of facial stimuli presented in this article have potential applications to the work of researchers in several research domains. From our database, researchers may choose the most adequate stimulus presentation format for a particular experiment, select and manipulate the dimensions of interest, and control for the remaining dimensions. The full stimulus set and descriptive results (means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals) for each stimulus per dimension are provided as supplementary material.

show abstract

“…RONEY et al [2006] showed that kindliness and the liking of children perceived in a male face affected FacA independently of each other. Smiling increases FacA in both males and females [REIS et al 1990, RHODES et al 1999a, TATARUNAITE et al 2005. FacA is highest for smiles that show a lot of white teeth but that do not show the gums or the buccal corridors [MOORE et al 2005, ONG et al 2006, PAREKH et al 2006.…”

Section: Other Determinants Of Facial Attractivenessmentioning

confidence: 98%

Facial attractiveness: General patterns of facial preferences

Kościński

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review covers universal patterns in facial preferences. Facial attractiveness has fascinated thinkers since antiquity, but has been the subject of intense scientific study for only the last quarter of a century. Many facial features contribute to facial attractiveness: Averageness and symmetry are preferred by males and females, probably because they signal genetic quality and developmental stability. Men prefer highly feminized female faces because they reflect high estrogen levels and low testosterone levels. This indicates that the woman is reproductively healthy. Women, on the other hand, prefer a moderate level of male facial masculinity, since facial masculinity that is too pronounced signals high level of testosterone and, thereby, a poorly developed pro-family personality. In women, facial hair is detrimental to facial attractiveness. In men, the effect is not consistent. Faces with a clear complexion are attractive to both men and women. Men prefer light and smooth skin in women. Positive facial expressions also enhance facial attractiveness. Many factors, in particular skin condition and facial proportions, affect perceived age, which is an important component of facial attractiveness. Men in particular strongly prefer youthful-looking female faces. Facial preferences enable an individual to recognize reproductively fit mates. Therefore, facial preferences are adaptive, although non-adaptive mechanisms related to general brain function also play a role. KEY WORDS: physical attractiveness, facial esthetics, human face, beauty Everything is in the face CiceroFacial attractiveness is something that is intuitively perceived rather than measurable with instruments. Until recently, facial attractiveness was more a subject of interest for artists and philosophers than for scientists. However, physical attractiveness has proven to have such serious interpersonal and social consequences that science cannot exclude it from its realm of study. Moreover, scientific research on physical attractiveness is justified because it is connected to the

show abstract

What is smiling is beautiful and good

Cited by 192 publications

References 9 publications

Asymmetric Effect of Expression Intensity on Evaluations of Facial Attractiveness

Asymmetric Effect of Expression Intensity on Evaluations of Facial Attractiveness

The many faces of a face: Comparing stills and videos of facial expressions in eight dimensions (SAVE database)

Facial attractiveness: General patterns of facial preferences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About