We hypothesized that facial attractiveness represents a dual judgment, a combination of reward-based, sexual processes, and aesthetic, cognitive processes. Herein we describe a study that demonstrates that sexual and nonsexual processes both contribute to attractiveness judgments and that these processes can be dissociated. Female participants rated the general attractiveness of faces presented in either their left or right visual field. In order to examine sexual and nonsexual components of these judgments, general attractiveness ratings were correlated with ratings of these same faces made by two independent groups of raters in two specific contexts, one sexual and one nonsexual. Based on an items analysis, partial correlation coefficients were computed for each individual and used as the dependent variable of interest in a 2 (laterality: right, left) by 2 (context: sexual, nonsexual) ANOVA. This analysis revealed an interaction such that faces rated in a sexual context better predicted attractiveness ratings of faces shown in the left than right visual field, whereas faces rated in a nonsexual context better predicted attractiveness of faces shown in the right than left visual field. This finding is consistent with the assertion that sexual and nonsexual preferences involve predominantly lateralized processing routes that independently contribute to what is perceived to be attractive.
The face is the most important and instantly informative social stimulus that humans perceive. Even within the many other cues contained in a face, attractiveness plays an unequivocal role in how we perceive others. Facial attractiveness is similar to other cues of a face, such as identity, emotion, gender, and race, in that it leads to consistent stereotypical attributions (Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991). More attractive people are seen as happier and as more socially competent than less attractive people. Even though attractiveness leads to generalized stereotypes, it is a unique construct. Unlike other facial cues, such as a person’s age, identity, race, or gender, which represent stable characteristics about a person, attractiveness is by definition a subjective impression and thus cannot be considered an inherent quality of a face itself (Enquist, Ghirlanda, Lundqvist, & Wachtmeister, 2002). Nonetheless, high consensus exists in what people report finding attractive across genders, cultures, and age groups (Langlois et al., 2000). Even though different cultural groups have different ritualized forms of grooming to enhance beauty, different cultures tend to find the same faces attractive (Cunningham, Roberts, Barbee, Druen, & Wu, 1995). Additionally, infants show similar preferences for the same faces that adults find attractive (Langlois et al., 1987). All of this suggests that there is a strong universal component to what people find attractive about others.
A number of visual cues influence attractiveness (for a review, see Rhodes (2006)). Symmetry in faces is preferred over asymmetry, (Grammer & Thornhill, 1994), especially for the midline of a face versus the lateral region of a face (Springer et al., 2007). Sexual dimorphism, especially femininity, is considered attractive (Penton-Voak et al., 1999 and Perrett et al., 1998). Averageness—how close a face is to the prototypical face—is also seen as attractive. Faces that are closest to the average prototype for a specific gender are rated as highly attractive (Langlois & Roggman, 1990). Babyish features have also been linked to attractiveness, though not in all faces (Zebrowitz, Olsen, & Hoffman, 1993). Even though some of these cues may overlap, none of these cues alone are sufficient to explain attractiveness.
Despite the extensive work delineating what features are attractive, little theoretical work has examined the cognitive and neural mechanisms underlying attractiveness perceptions. The present study represents an initial step toward delineating two core components of the attractiveness judgment, differentiating between cognitive preferences for aesthetic beauty and reward-based sexual beauty in a face. Lateralized differences exist in several aspects of face processing, such as decoding emotion (e.g. Borod, 2000). However, few studies have examined lateralized differences in perceiving attractiveness. Examining potential lateralization of sexual and nonsexual preferences is one way to examine if each separately contribute to what is attractive.
