Cited by 12Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFace Recognition and PerceptionAesthetic Perception and Analysis

Professional versus self-applied makeup: do makeup artists add value?

Batres, Carlota, Porcheron, Aurélie, Courrèges, Sandra, Russell, Richard·2021·Perception

Abstract

While a number of studies have investigated the effects of makeup on how people are perceived, the vast majority have used professionally applied makeup. Here, we tested the hypothesis that professional makeup is more effective than self-applied makeup. We photographed the same target women under controlled conditions wearing no makeup, makeup they applied themselves, and makeup applied by professional makeup artists. Participants rated the faces as appearing more attractive, more feminine, and as having higher status when wearing professional makeup than self-applied makeup. Secondarily, we found that participants perceived the professional makeup as appearing heavier and less natural looking than the self-applied makeup. This work shows that professional makeup is more effective than self-applied makeup and begins to elucidate the nature of makeup artistry. We discuss these findings with respect to personal decoration and physical attractiveness, as well as the notion of artists as experts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/03010066211029218

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Batres, C., Porcheron, A., Courrèges, S., & Russell, R.
Affiliations
  • Franklin & Marshall College (US)
  • Gettysburg College (US)
Corresponding author
Russell, Richard
Venue
Perception
Published
2021-07-02
Volume
50
Issue
8
Pages
709-719
ISSN
  • 0301-0066 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-4233
OpenAlex
W3173213326
Cited by
12
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3
FWCI
2.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Perception (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Cupola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College (Gettysburg College) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Aesthetic Perception and Analysis
Keywords
makeup, facial attractiveness, perceived femininity, perceived social status, makeup artistry, face perception
MeSH terms
Cosmetics, Face, Female, Humans

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