Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 277

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Are Attractive People Rewarding? Sex Differences in the Neural Substrates of Facial Attractiveness

Open access
Cloutier, Jasmin, Heatherton, Todd F., Whalen, Paul J., Kelley, William M.·2008·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

The current study examined the neural substrates of facial attractiveness judgments. Based on the extant behavioral literature, it was hypothesized that brain regions involved in identifying the potential reward value of a stimulus would be more active when men viewed attractive women than when women viewed attractive men. To test this hypothesis, we conducted an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment during which participants provided explicit attractiveness judgments for faces of the opposite sex. These individual ratings were subsequently used to perform analyses aimed at identifying the brain regions preferentially responsive to attractive faces for both sex groups. The results revealed that brain regions comprising the putative reward circuitry (e.g., nucleus accumbens [NAcc], orbito-frontal cortex [OFC]) showed a linear increase in activation with increased judgments of attractiveness. However, further analysis also revealed sex differences in the recruitment of OFC, which distinguished attractive and unattractive faces only for male participants.

Overview

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 · 10.1162/jocn.2008.20062

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Cloutier, J., Heatherton, T. F., Whalen, P. J., & Kelley, W. M.
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2008-06-01
Volume
20
Issue
6
Pages
941-951
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2125754846
Cited by
277
References
31
FWCI
19.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.