Cited by 166Evolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorAnimal Behavior and ReproductionBullying, Victimization, and Aggression

Men’s facial width-to-height ratio predicts aggression: a meta-analysis.

Open access
Haselhuhn, Michael P., Ormiston, Margaret E., Wong, Elaine M.·2015·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Recent research has identified men's facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) as a reliable predictor of aggressive tendencies and behavior. Other research, however, has failed to replicate the fWHR-aggression relationship and has questioned whether previous findings are robust. In the current paper, we synthesize existing work by conducting a meta-analysis to estimate whether and how fWHR predicts aggression. Our results indicate a small, but significant, positive relationship between men's fWHR and aggression.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0122637

Cites

30 of 30 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?

  • Living adult males with relatively narrower faces tend both to be less reactively aggressive and to be perceived as being less aggressive, to the point of being assessed as having more human-like minds.

    “In support of the behavioral significance of recent anatomical changes, living adult males with relatively narrower faces tend both to be less reactively aggressive and to be perceived as being less aggressive (Carré and McCormick, 2008; Haselhuhn et al., 2015), to the point of being assessed as having more human-like minds (Deska et al., 2018).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haselhuhn, M. P., Ormiston, M. E., & Wong, E. M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Riverside (US)
  • London Business School (GB)
Corresponding author
Haselhuhn, Michael P.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2015-04-07
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
e0122637
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1977696913
Cited by
166
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 4
FWCI
2.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Keywords
facial width-to-height ratio, aggression, facial morphology, men, aggression prediction, replication robustness
MeSH terms
Aggression, Body Height, Face, Humans, Male

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