CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 136Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionFace Recognition and Perception

Cross-cultural variation in men’s preference for sexual dimorphism in women’s faces

Open access
Marcinkowska, Urszula M., Kozlov, Mikhail V., Cai, Huajian, Contreras-Garduño, Jorge, Dixson, Barnaby J., Oana, Gavita A., Kaminski, Gwenaël, Li, Norman P. +9 more·2014·Biology Letters
DOI 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0850PMC PMC4013689
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Both attractiveness judgements and mate preferences vary considerably cross-culturally. We investigated whether men's preference for femininity in women's faces varies between 28 countries with diverse health conditions by analysing responses of 1972 heterosexual participants. Although men in all countries preferred feminized over masculinized female faces, we found substantial differences between countries in the magnitude of men's preferences. Using an average femininity preference for each country, we found men's facial femininity preferences correlated positively with the health of the nation, which explained 50.4% of the variation among countries. The weakest preferences for femininity were found in Nepal and strongest in Japan. As high femininity in women is associated with lower success in competition for resources and lower dominance, it is possible that in harsher environments, men prefer cues to resource holding potential over high fecundity.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0850

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The evidence on the impact of ethnicity on the attractiveness halo effect is inconsistent.

    “Therefore, the evidence in this regard is inconsistent and additional research would be needed to shed light on this matter.”

    From What is beautiful is still good: the attractiveness halo effect in the era of beauty filters (2024) · cites this paper as [21]

    The Results report no significant difference in facial-femininity preferences between Caucasian and non-Caucasian respondents, and the Discussion reports no other-race effect. The paper examines attractiveness preferences, but the passages found for ethnicity and the halo effect do not address whether ethnicity affects the attractiveness halo effect or whether evidence on that question is inconsistent. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Buss DM. 1989 Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav. Brain Sci. 12, 1-49. (doi:10.1017/ S0140525X00023992) · DOI · Paper page
  2. Penton-Voak IS, Jacobson A, Trivers R. 2004 Population differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 25, 355-370. (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.06.002) · DOI
  3. Puts AP, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. 2012 Sexual selection on human faces and voices. J. Sex Res. 49, 227-243. (doi:10.1080/00224499.2012.658924) · DOI
  4. Srael H. 1969 Pubertal influence upon the growth and sexual differentiation of the human mandible. Arch. Oral. Biol. 14, 583-590. (doi:10.1016/0003- 9969(69)90181-2) · DOI
  5. Jones D. 1995 Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny. Curr. Anthropol. 36, 723-748. (doi:10.1086/204427) · DOI
  6. Little AC, Connely J, Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Roberts SC. 2011 Human preference for masculinity differs according to context in faces, bodies, voices, and smell. Behav. Ecol. 22, 862 -868. (doi:10.1093/ beheco/arr061) · DOI
  7. Little AC, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Feinberg DR. 2008 Symmetry and sexual dimorphism in human faces: interrelated preferences suggest both signal quality. Behav. Ecol. 19, 902-908. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ arn049) · DOI
  8. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. 2006 Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27, 131-144. (doi:10.1016/j. evolhumbehav.2005.06.001) · DOI
  9. Moore FR, Law Smith MJ, Taylor V, Perrett DI. 2011 Sexual dimorphism in the female face is a cue to health and social status but not age. Pers. Individ. Differ. 50, 1068-1073. (doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011. 01.026) · DOI
  10. Confer JC, Perilloux C, Buss DM. 2010 More than just a pretty face: men's priority shifts toward bodily attractiveness in short-term versus long-term mating contexts. Evol. Hum. Behav. 31, 348-353. (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.002) · DOI
  11. Schmitt DP. 2005 Sociosexuality from Argentina to Zimbabwe: a 48-nation study of sex, culture, and strategies of human mating. Behav. Brain Sci. 28, 247-275. (doi:10.1017/S0140525X05000051) · DOI · Paper page
  12. Welling LLM, Jones BC, DeBruine LM, Smith FG, Feinberg DR, Little AC, Al-Dujaili EAS. 2008 Men report stronger attraction to femininity in women's faces when their testosterone levels are high. Horm. Behav. 54, 703-708. (doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008. 07.012) · DOI
  13. Jones BC, Little AC, Watkins CD, DeBruine LM. 2011 Reported sexual desire predicts men's preferences for sexually dimorphic cues in women's faces. Arch. Sex. Behav. 40, 1281 -1285. (doi:10.1007/s10508- 010-9721-1) · DOI
  14. Schaller M, Murray DR. 2008 Pathogens, personality and culture: disease prevalence predicts worldwide variability in sociosexuality, extraversion and openness to experience. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95, 212-222. (doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.212) · DOI · Paper page
  15. Perrett DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak IS, Rowland DR, Yoshikawa S, Burt DM, Akamatsu S. 1998 Effects of rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org Biol. Lett. 10: 20130850 sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature 394, 884-887. (doi:10.1038/29772) · DOI
  16. Law Smith MJ, Deady DK, Moore FR, Jones BC, Cornwell RE, Stirrat M, Lawson JF, Feinberg DR, Perrett DI. 2012 Maternal tendencies in women are associated with estrogen levels and facial femininity. Horm. Behav 61, 12 -16. (doi:10.1016/j. yhbeh.2011.09.005) · DOI
  17. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Crawford JR, Welling LLM, Little AC. 2010 The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces. Proc. R. Soc. B 277, 2405-2410. (doi:10.1098/rspb. 2009.2184) · DOI
  18. Moore FR et al. 2013 Cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for cues to sex-and stress- hormones in the male face. Biol. Lett. 9, 20130050. (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2013.0050) · DOI
  19. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Crawford JR, Welling LM. 2011 Further evidence for regional variation in women's masculinity preferences. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 813 -814. (doi:10.1098/rspb. 2010.2200) · DOI
  20. Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. 2000 The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behav. Brain Sci. 23, 573-644. (doi:10.1017/ S0140525X0000337X) · DOI
  21. Rantala MJ, Coetzee V, Moore FR, Skrinda I, Kecko S, Krama T, Kivleniece I, Krams I. 2013 Facial attractiveness is related to women's cortisol and body fat, but not with immune responsiveness. Biol. Lett. 9, 20130255. (doi:10.1098/rsbl. 2013.0255) · DOI
  22. Tiddeman B, Burt DM, Perrett DI. 2001 Computer graphics in facial perception research. IEEE Comp. Graph. Appl. 21, 42 -50. (doi:10.1109/38.946630) · DOI
  23. DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Little AC, Finlay GS. 2010 Are attractive men's faces masculine or feminine? The importance of controlling confounds in face stimuli. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 36, 751 -758. (doi:10.1037/a0016457) · DOI
  24. Meissner CA, Brigham JC. 2001 Thirty years of investigating the own-race bias in face memory for faces: a meta-analytic review. Psychol. Public Policy Law 7, 1-35. (doi:10.1037/1076-8971.7.1.3) · DOI
  25. Little AC, Jones BC, Feinberg DR, Perrett DI. 2013 Men's strategic preferences for femininity in female faces. Br. J. Psychol. (doi:10.1111/bjop.12043) · DOI
  26. Simpson JA, Gangestad SW. 1992 Sociosexuality and romantic partner choice. J. Pers. 60, 31 -51. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00264.x) · DOI
  27. de Barra M, DeBruine LM, Jones BC, Mahmud ZH, Curtis VA. 2013 Illness in childhood predicts face preferences in adulthood. Evol. Hum. Behav. 34, 384-389. (doi:10. 1016/j.evolhumbehav.2013.07.001) · DOI
  28. Muehlenbein MP, Bribiescas RG. 2005 Testosterone mediated immune functions and male life histories. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 17, 527-558. (doi:10.1002/ ajhb.20419) · DOI
  29. Olatunji BO, Tomarken A, Puncochar BK. 2013 Disgust propensity potentiates evaluative learning of aversion. Emotion 13, 881 -890. (doi:10.1037/ a0032743) · DOI
  30. Gangestad SW, Haselton MG, Buss DM. 2006 Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychol. Inq. 17, 75 -95. (doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1702_1) · DOI
  31. Lee AJ, Dubbs SL, Kelly AJ, von Hippel W, Brooks RC, Zietsch BP. 2013 Human facial attributes, but not perceived intelligence, are used as cues of health and resource provision potential. Behav. Ecol. 24, 779 -787. (doi:10.1093/beheco/ars199) · DOI
  32. Stephen ID, Scott IM, Coetzee V, Pound N, Perrett DI, Penton-Voak IS. 2012 Cross-cultural effects of color, but not morphological masculinity, on perceived attractiveness of men's faces. Evol. Hum. Behav 33, 260-267. (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.003) · DOI
  33. Brooks R, Scott IM, Maklakov AA, Kasumovic MM, Clark AP, Penton-Voak IS. 2011 National income inequality predicts women's preferences for masculinized faces better than health does. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 810-812. (doi:10.1098/rspb. 2010.0964) rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org Biol. Lett. 10: 20130850 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marcinkowska, U. M., Kozlov, M. V., Cai, H., Contreras-Garduño, J., Dixson, B. J., Oana, G. A., Kaminski, G., Li, N. P., Lyons, M. T., Onyishi, I. E., Prasai, K., Pazhoohi, F., Prokop, P., Rosales Cardozo, S. L., Sydney, N., Yong, J. C., & Rantala, M. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
  • Universidad de Guanajuato (MX)
  • UNSW Sydney (AU)
  • Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  • Laboratoire Cognition, Langues, Langage, Ergonomie (FR)
  • Singapore Management University (SG)
  • University of Liverpool (GB)
  • University of Nigeria (NG)
  • Model College, Kathmandu, Nepal
  • Shiraz University (IR)
  • University of Trnava (SK)
  • Department of Psychology, University of Ibagué, Ibagué, Colombia
  • Universidade Federal do Paraná (BR)
Corresponding author
Marcinkowska, Urszula M.
ORCID
Venue
Biology Letters
Publisher
The Royal Society
Published
2014-04
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
20130850
ISSN
  • 1744-9561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-957X
DOI
10.1098/rsbl.2013.0850
PMC
PMC4013689
OpenAlex
W2131886274
Cited by
136
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5
FWCI
27.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
royalsociety.org/journals/ethics-policies/data-sharing-mining/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Biology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Singapore Management University Institutional Knowledge (InK) (Singapore Management University) (submittedVersion)
  • Institutional Repository of Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Turun Yliopisto
  • Autoritatea Natională pentru Cercetare Stiintifică
  • Unitatea Executiva pentru Finantarea Invatamantului Superior, a Cercetarii, Dezvoltarii si Inovarii (PN-II-RU-PD-2011-3-0131)
  • Turun Yliopistosäätiö
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
Keywords
sexual dimorphism, facial femininity, mate preferences, cross-cultural variation, attractiveness, facial morphology, national health, resource holding potential, fecundity, mate competition
MeSH terms
Adult, Choice Behavior, Cues, Culture, Face, Female, Fertility, Health Status, Humans, Male, Sex Characteristics, Sexual Partners, Femininity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review