Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. 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:

Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness

Abstract

THE finding that photographic1–4 and digital5 composites (blends) of faces are considered to be attractive has led to the claim that attractiveness is averageness5. This would encourage stabilizing selection, favouring phenotypes with an average facial structure5. The 'averageness hypothesis' would account for the low distinctive-ness of attractive faces6 but is difficult to reconcile with the finding that some facial measurements correlate with attractiveness7,8. An average face shape is attractive but may not be optimally attractive9. Human preferences may exert directional selection pressures, as with the phenomena of optimal outbreeding and sexual selection for extreme characteristics10–14. Using composite faces, we show here that, contrary to the averageness hypothesis, the mean shape of a set of attractive faces is preferred to the mean shape of the sample from which the faces were selected. In addition, attractive composites can be made more attractive by exaggerating the shape differences from the sample mean. Japanese and Caucasian observers showed the same direction of preferences for the same facial composites, suggesting that aesthetic judgements of face shape are similar across different cultural backgrounds. Our finding that highly attractive facial configurations are not average shows that preferences could exert a directional selection pressure on the evolution of human face shape.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Galton, F. J. Nature 18, 97–100 (1878).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Galton, F. J. Anthrop. Inst. Gt Br. Ir. 8, 132–142 (1878).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jastrow, J. Science 6, 165–168 (1885).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stoddard, J. T. Science 8, 89–91 (1886).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Langlois, J. H. & Roggman, L. A. Psychol. Sci. 1, 115–121 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Light, L. L., Hollander, S. & Kayra-Stuart, F. Personal. social Psychol. Bull. 7, 269–276 (1981).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cunningham, M. R. J. pers. soc. Psychol. 50, 925–935 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cunningham, M. R., Barbee, A. P. & Pike, C. L. J. pers. soc. Psychol. 59, 61–72 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Alley, T. R. & Cunningham, M. R. Psychol. Sci. 2, 123–125 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. ten Cate, C. & Bateson, P. Evolution 42, 1355–1358 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Andersson, M. Nature 299, 818–820 (1982).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kirkpatrick, M. & Ryan, M. J. Nature 350, 33–38 (1991).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Møller, A. P. Nature 357, 238–240 (1992).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Enquist, M. & Arak, A. Nature 361, 446–448 (1993).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cross, J. F. & Cross, J. Devl Psychol. 5, 433–439 (1971).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bernstein, I. H., Lin, T. & McLellan, P. Percept. Psychophys. 32, 495–503 (1982).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Symons, D. The Evolution of Human Sexuality (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Brennan, S. E. Leonardo 18, 170–178 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Benson, P. J. & Perrett, D. I. Image vis. Comput. 9, 123–129 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Benson, P. J. & Perrett, D. I. Perception 22, 257–262 (1993).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Perrett, D., May, K. & Yoshikawa, S. Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature 368, 239–242 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1038/368239a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/368239a0

This article is cited by

Comments

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.

Search

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