Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness


Testosterone-dependent secondary sexual characteristics in males may signal immunological competence1 and are sexually selected for in several species2,3. In humans, oestrogen-dependent characteristics of the female body correlate with health and reproductive fitness and are found attractive4,5,6. Enhancing the sexual dimorphism of human faces should raise attractiveness by enhancing sex-hormone-related cues to youth and fertility in females5,7,8,9,10,11, and to dominance and immunocompetence in males5,12,13. Here we report the results of asking subjects to choose the most attractive faces from continua that enhanced or diminished differences between the average shape of female and male faces. As predicted, subjects preferred feminized to average shapes of a female face. This preference applied across UK and Japanese populations but was stronger for within-population judgements, which indicates that attractiveness cues are learned. Subjects preferred feminized to average or masculinized shapes of a male face. Enhancing masculine facial characteristics increased both perceived dominance and negative attributions (for example, coldness or dishonesty) relevant to relationships and paternal investment. These results indicate a selection pressure that limits sexual dimorphism and encourages neoteny in humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Composite ‘average’ facial images.
Figure 2: Facial images of Caucasian and Japanese females and males that were ‘feminized’ and ‘masculinized’ 50% in shape.
Figure 3: The effect of feminization of face shape on judgements of female and male attractiveness.

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M. J. The evolution of mating preferences and the paradox of the lek. Nature 350, 33–88 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Andersson, M. Female choice for extreme tail length in a widowbird. Nature 299, 818–820 (1992).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Møller, A. P. Female swallow preference for symmetrical male sexual ornaments. Nature 357, 238–240 (1992).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Singh, D. Body shape and women's attractiveness—the critical role of waist-to-hip ratio. Hum. Nature 4, 297–3221 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Barber, N. The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: sexual selection and human morphology. Ethol. Sociobiol. 16, 395–424 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Manning, J. T., Scutt, D., Whitehouse, G. H. & Leinster, S. J. Breast asymmetry and phenotypic quality in women. Evol. Hum. Behav. 18, 2223–236 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Symons, D. The Evolution of Human Sexuality (Oxford Univ. Press, (1979)).

  8. Cunningham, M. R., Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 50, 925–935 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Buss, D. M. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav. Brain Sci. 122, 1–49 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnston, V. S. & Franklin, M. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Ethol. Sociobiol. 14, 183–199 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jones, D. Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny. Curr. Anthropol. 36, 723–748 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Grammer, K. & Thornhill, R. Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. J. Comp. Psychol. 108, 233–242 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Thornhill, R. & Gangestad, S. The evolution of human sexuality. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11, 98–102 (1996).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Perrett, D. I., May, K. A. & Yoshikawa, S. Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature 368, 239–242 (1994).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rowland, D. A. & Perrett, D. I. Manipulating facial appearance through shape and color. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 15, 70–76 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Langlois, J. H. & Roggman, L. A. Attractive faces are only average. Psychol. Sci. 1, 115–121 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P. & Druen, P. B. “Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours”: consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female attractiveness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 68, 261–279 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jackson, L. A. Physical Appearance and Gender: Sociobiology and Sociocultural Perspectives (State Univ. New York Press, Albany, (1992)).

  19. Deutsch, F. M., Zalenski, C. M. & Clark, M. E. Is there a double standard of ageing. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 16, 771–785 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Berry, D. S. & Wero, J. L. F. Accuracy of face perception: a view from ecological psychology. J. Pers. 61, 497–423 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Booth, A. & Dabbs, J. Testosterone and men's marriages. Social Forces 72, 463–477 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cunningham, M. R., Barbee, A. P. & Pike, C. L. What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial attractiveness. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59, 61–72 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gangestad, S. W. & Thornhill, R. The evolutionary psychology of extrapair sex: the role of fluctuating symmetry. Ethol. Hum. Behav. 18, 69–88 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Martin, R. D. & May, R. M. Outward signs of breeding. Nature 293, 7–9 (1990).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references


This work was supported by Unilever Research and the ESRC. We thank A. Whiten, R. Byrne, R. Barton, J. Lycett, S. Reicher, D. Carey, M. Ridley, J. Graves and D. Symons for comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to D. I. Perrett.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Perrett, D., Lee, K., Penton-Voak, I. et al. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature 394, 884–887 (1998).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing