a04

• Explaining the importance of physical attractiveness

  The evolutionary theory is an explanation of why physical attractiveness is so important in forming relationships. Shackelford and Larsen found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive.
• Explaining symmetry's link with attractiveness


  Symmetry may be an honest signal of genetic fitness and people are also attracted to neotenous (baby-face) features like widely separated eyes, small noses, delicate chin as they trigger a protective instinct, a valuable resource especially for females wanting to reproduce.
• Physical attractiveness is not only in important at the beginning of the relationship


  McNulty found evidence that initnial attractiveness that brought partners together continued to be an important feature of the their relationship after marriage, for atleast several years.
• The physical attractiveness stereotype.

  Physical attractiveness may matter because we have preconceived ideas about the personality traits attractive people must have- they are universally positive. This is the physical attractiveness stereotype.
• Dion et al


  Summarises the physical attractiveness stereptype as 'what beautiful is good'. They that physically attractive people are always rated as king, caring, strong anf sociable. The belief that that attractive people have all of these characteristics makes the more attractive so we become positively towards them- an example of a self-fulfilling prophecy.
• The halo effect


  One distinguishing feature (in this case physical attractiveness) tends to have a disproportionate influence over a judgement of a person's other attributes/characteristics.
• The matching hypothesis

  Although physical attractiveness is desirable, common-sense tells us we cannot all form relationships with most atractive people. Walster proposed the matching hypothesis theory which states that people choose romantic partners, who are roughly of similar physical attractiveness to eachother.
• Compromise in choosing romantic partners

  We have to make a realistic judgement of our value to a potential partner. We desire the most physically attractive partner possible for all sorts of evolutionary, social, cultural and psychological reasons. However, we balance this against the wish to avoid being rejected by someone 'out of our league', and that is someone who is unlikely considered as physically attractivee.
• Research support for the halo effect

  Palmer and Peter found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgable and competent than unnatractive people. This halo effect was so powerful that even when the ppts knew these 'knowledgable' people had no particular expertise.
• Implications for the political process (Research support for the halo effect)

  There could be dangers for democracy if politicians are judged/voted for their physical attractiveness (Harris vs Trump). Also appeals to many other areas of everyday life, which confirms physical attractiveness is an important factor in the initial formation of relationships, romantic or otherwise.
• Individual differences

  Towhey asked male/female ppts to rate how much they would like a target individual based on their photograph and biographical information. Ppts also were asked to complete a questionnaire- the MACHO, which is designed to measure sexist attitudes and behaviours.
• Towhey's findings (Individual differences)


  Found that ppts who scored hihgly on the scale were more influence by the physical attractiveness of the target when making the judgement of likeability. Low scores showed the ppts was less sensitive to this influence. Shows effects of physically attractiveness can be moderated by other factors and so challenge the notion it is a significant consideration in relationships formation for all potential partners.
• Research support for the matching hypothesis

  The original research that attempted to confirm the matching hypthesis failed. This may be because the measurement of attractiveness was no reliable as the raters who judge only had a few seconds to do so. However there is some support.
• Feingold et al (Research support for the matching hypothesis)


  Conducted a meta-analysis of 17 studies and found a significant correlation between attractiveness of real-life partners. This is especially supportive of the matching hypthesis as the studies looked at actual partners, a more realistic/applicable approach which meant the study had high mundane realism.
• Role of cultural influences

  Research shows what is physically attractive is consistent among different cultures. Cunningham et al found that female features of large eyes, prominent cheekbones, small nose and high eyebrows were considered as highly attractive by white, hispanic and asian males. This implies that physical attractiveness may have evolutionary roots, perhaps as a signal of genetic fitness (especially symmetry).
• The physically attractive stereotype in other cultures (Role of cultural influences)

  The physically attractive stereotype is also culturally pervasive. Wheeler and Kim found Korean and American student judged physically attractive people to be more trustworthy, mature and friendly which means this stereotpye is strong in collectivist cultures as well.
• Research contradicting the matching hypothesis

  Taylor et al studied the activity logs of popular online dating sites. This was a real-life test of the matching hypothesis as it measured actual date choices which meant there was an externally valid measure of choice. Online daters sought dates with others who were more physically attractive than them. It seems that they did not consider the levels of their own physical attractiveness. Thus, this finding is not predicted by the matching hypthesis theory.
• Ambiguity in dater success (Research contradicting the matching hypothesis)


  It is unclear whether these online daters were successful in seeking dates with the most attractive potential partners available. It may be that constant rejections forced them to reconsider their choices and bring them into line with a realistic assessment of their own looks. This outcome would support the matching hypothesis.