Several lines of theory and research suggest that power (e.g., social dominance) and status (e.g., social prominence and positive peer regard) are enjoyed by those blessed with good looks. The present work addresses the relations among physical attractiveness, power, status, and aggression from a resource control theoretic perspective that suggests that group members find power holders physically attractive, even if they are aggressive. Teacher ratings of physical attractiveness, social dominance, peer reception, aggression, and social skills were collected on 153 preschoolers (3–6 years) from a Midwestern city. Positive peer regard was derived via sociometric nominations. Raters unfamiliar with the children assessed their physical attractiveness from photographs. Results show that teachers' perceptions of physical attractiveness are a function of power, status, and social skills. Additionally, teachers rated aggressive children who employ both prosocial and coercive strategies of resource control (bistrategic controllers) to be among the most physically attractive. These relations did not emerge for raters unbiased by children's behavior. Results suggest social dominance achieved via prosocial means begets attractiveness ratings, even if accompanied by high levels of aggression. The implications for intervention are discussed.
“Beauty is power; a smile is its sword. Charles Reade"
Beauty is and has been I believed to be a marked social asset. Accordingly physical attractiveness is perceived to be associated with intelligence (Eagly et al., 1991 and Feingold, 1992), self-sufficiency (Dion & Berscheid, 1974), social competence (Eagly et al., 1991 and Langlois et al., 2000), prosociality (Dion, 1973 and Langlois and Styczynski, 1979), and friendliness (Dion, Berscheid, & Walster, 1972). Even young children express clear social preferences for beauty, perhaps stemming from these stereotyped assumptions (Dion, 1973). Teachers have higher expectations of and are more lenient toward attractive children (Clifford and Walster, 1973 and Dion, 1974). As adults, the attractive make more money than the unattractive (10–15% more; Hammermesh & Biddle, 1994).
The belief that beauty advances social power is thus very nearly cliché, perhaps with good reason. Yet surprisingly little work has been done linking physical attractiveness in young children to various indices of power (e.g., social dominance) and status (e.g., social prominence, positive peer regard). The present study attempts to address this gap by examining the perceived physical attractiveness of young children in relation to measures of power and social status (and associated strategies such as aggression): Does attractiveness advance power and status, or do power and status make one attractive (even if one is aggressive)? Finally, what role does a child's appearance play in his/her attainment of status within the peer group?
This study, though not definitive, suggests that it is not necessarily beauty that wins power unidirectionally, but also it is the wielding of power (i.e., via effective resource control) together with prosociality (in a unique combination) that is socially appealing and therefore deemed as physically attractive. In many ways, bistrategic controllers (and prosocial controllers) have qualities of good leaders in that they are extraverted, confident, and socially central (e.g., Stogdill, 1974). The highly socially dominant and socially prominent bistrategic preschoolers, though as aggressive as coercive controller, already win positive peer regard. The evident skills and social savvy of these children challenge us to readdress the theoretical models (and concomitant methods) on which we rely for intervention purposes and fostering well-being in children.
