Maestripieri et al. review literature on positive bias toward attractive targets and present evidence for a mating-based evolutionary account of this bias. Specifically, they propose that positive bias toward attractive targets does not reflect specific stereotypes about beauty, but instead evolved from the tendency to use attractiveness as a criterion for mate selection. Their account emphasizes evolved individual predispositions as a primary cause for the bias, but neglects the role of contextual factors. Here we argue that a full understanding of the attractiveness bias requires attention to contextual factors or affordances. Below, we provide a few examples to highlight the role of such factors in the perception of attractiveness and in attractiveness bias.
First, contextual factors such as relationship status and sex ratio affect the perception of attractiveness. Indeed, studies have shown that participants who are in a committed relationship derogate the attractiveness of opposite-sex others (Meyer et al. Reference Meyer, Berkman, Karremans and Lieberman2011) or even reduce attention to them (Maner et al. Reference Maner, Gailliot, Rouby and Miller2007b; Miller et al. Reference Miller, Prokosch and Maner2012), compared with those who are single. Likewise, research has shown that attractiveness ratings are recalibrated as a function of contextual cues signaling the sex ratio in one's environment, such that symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive for the majority sex and less attractive for the minority sex (Watkins et al. Reference Watkins, Jones, Little, DeBruine and Feinberg2012).
A related line of research involves subjecting people to various contextual cues and examining how this exposure affects their perceptions of attractiveness. For example, Ariely and Loewenstein (Reference Ariely and Loewenstein2006) exposed participants to sexually arousing cues, which led men to perceive relatively less appealing women as more attractive.
Second, there is ample evidence showing that ecological factors moderate the attractiveness bias. For example, the pathogen-prevalence hypothesis states that high pathogen load increases the relative importance of genetic quality and parental investment on offspring survival, accentuating preferences for mate characteristics associated with immunocompetence (e.g., physical attractiveness). In line with this proposition, research suggests that people in countries with a higher prevalence of pathogens (Gangestad & Buss Reference Gangestad and Buss1993) or individuals who are more vulnerable to contagious diseases (DeBruine et al. Reference DeBruine, Jones, Crawford, Welling and Little2010) value physical attractiveness in mates more than people in areas with lower prevalence or who are less vulnerable to disease. Causal evidence for this hypothesis comes from studies that manipulate pathogen threat. In these studies, people primed with pathogen prevalence preferred higher attractiveness features in potential mates as compared with participants in a control group (e.g., facial symmetry; Lee & Zietsch Reference Lee and Zietsch2011; Little et al. Reference Little, DeBruine and Jones2010).
Similarly, the cultural-ecological moderation hypothesis states that the attractiveness bias is most evident in individualistic settings that promote an experience of independence from context and weaker or nonexistent in settings that promote an experience of embedded interdependence (Anderson et al. Reference Anderson, Adams and Plaut2008; Fiske Reference Fiske1991). Individualistic settings promote a free-market construction of social connection in which choice, attractiveness, and other determinants of preferential selection become important for social outcomes (such as friendship, mating, and employment). In less individualistic settings, attractiveness exerts less influence on interpersonal outcomes because there are fewer affordances for choice of social connections based on personal preferences. Support for this hypothesis comes from a program of research that examined both (1) the association of participant attractiveness with self-reported life outcomes and (2) effects of target attractiveness on participants' judgments of expected target outcomes across two sources of cultural-ecological variation: a comparison between participants in U.S. and Ghanaian settings (characterized by affordances for individualism and embedded interdependence, respectively) (Anderson et al. Reference Anderson, Adams and Plaut2008) and a comparison between participants from urban and rural settings within the United States (Plaut et al. Reference Plaut, Adams and Anderson2009). Consistent with the hypothesis, the impact of attractiveness on outcome ratings was greater in the United States and urban settings than in Ghanaian and rural settings.
These examples of past research highlight the effects of context on the attractiveness bias. Our current research considers the impact of another contextual factor, the Internet, which is becoming increasingly prevalent in people's lives (Baym Reference Baym2015; Dutta et al. Reference Dutta, Geiger and Lanvin2015). Given the relatively high ease and freedom of choosing, establishing, and ending Internet-based connections, the cultural-ecological moderation hypothesis would suggest that attractiveness, as a determinant of selection, will have a larger influence on social outcomes in online than in offline contexts. Alternatively, it is possible the relatively lower salience and lower distinctiveness of physical attractiveness in online connections may decrease the attractiveness bias compared with an offline setting. Our research tests these competing predictions.
To summarize, a consideration of contextual factors for the attractiveness bias helps to illuminate the ecological foundations of mind. Preferences for attractive others interact with ecological systems that differentially afford the development of these predispositions into observed psychological habits. A complete account of the attractiveness bias must consider not only processes of natural evolution that produce genetic predispositions, but also contexts and processes of cultural evolution whereby people may (re)produce the ecological structures that afford and amplify those genetic predispositions.
Maestripieri et al. review literature on positive bias toward attractive targets and present evidence for a mating-based evolutionary account of this bias. Specifically, they propose that positive bias toward attractive targets does not reflect specific stereotypes about beauty, but instead evolved from the tendency to use attractiveness as a criterion for mate selection. Their account emphasizes evolved individual predispositions as a primary cause for the bias, but neglects the role of contextual factors. Here we argue that a full understanding of the attractiveness bias requires attention to contextual factors or affordances. Below, we provide a few examples to highlight the role of such factors in the perception of attractiveness and in attractiveness bias.
First, contextual factors such as relationship status and sex ratio affect the perception of attractiveness. Indeed, studies have shown that participants who are in a committed relationship derogate the attractiveness of opposite-sex others (Meyer et al. Reference Meyer, Berkman, Karremans and Lieberman2011) or even reduce attention to them (Maner et al. Reference Maner, Gailliot, Rouby and Miller2007b; Miller et al. Reference Miller, Prokosch and Maner2012), compared with those who are single. Likewise, research has shown that attractiveness ratings are recalibrated as a function of contextual cues signaling the sex ratio in one's environment, such that symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive for the majority sex and less attractive for the minority sex (Watkins et al. Reference Watkins, Jones, Little, DeBruine and Feinberg2012).
A related line of research involves subjecting people to various contextual cues and examining how this exposure affects their perceptions of attractiveness. For example, Ariely and Loewenstein (Reference Ariely and Loewenstein2006) exposed participants to sexually arousing cues, which led men to perceive relatively less appealing women as more attractive.
Second, there is ample evidence showing that ecological factors moderate the attractiveness bias. For example, the pathogen-prevalence hypothesis states that high pathogen load increases the relative importance of genetic quality and parental investment on offspring survival, accentuating preferences for mate characteristics associated with immunocompetence (e.g., physical attractiveness). In line with this proposition, research suggests that people in countries with a higher prevalence of pathogens (Gangestad & Buss Reference Gangestad and Buss1993) or individuals who are more vulnerable to contagious diseases (DeBruine et al. Reference DeBruine, Jones, Crawford, Welling and Little2010) value physical attractiveness in mates more than people in areas with lower prevalence or who are less vulnerable to disease. Causal evidence for this hypothesis comes from studies that manipulate pathogen threat. In these studies, people primed with pathogen prevalence preferred higher attractiveness features in potential mates as compared with participants in a control group (e.g., facial symmetry; Lee & Zietsch Reference Lee and Zietsch2011; Little et al. Reference Little, DeBruine and Jones2010).
Similarly, the cultural-ecological moderation hypothesis states that the attractiveness bias is most evident in individualistic settings that promote an experience of independence from context and weaker or nonexistent in settings that promote an experience of embedded interdependence (Anderson et al. Reference Anderson, Adams and Plaut2008; Fiske Reference Fiske1991). Individualistic settings promote a free-market construction of social connection in which choice, attractiveness, and other determinants of preferential selection become important for social outcomes (such as friendship, mating, and employment). In less individualistic settings, attractiveness exerts less influence on interpersonal outcomes because there are fewer affordances for choice of social connections based on personal preferences. Support for this hypothesis comes from a program of research that examined both (1) the association of participant attractiveness with self-reported life outcomes and (2) effects of target attractiveness on participants' judgments of expected target outcomes across two sources of cultural-ecological variation: a comparison between participants in U.S. and Ghanaian settings (characterized by affordances for individualism and embedded interdependence, respectively) (Anderson et al. Reference Anderson, Adams and Plaut2008) and a comparison between participants from urban and rural settings within the United States (Plaut et al. Reference Plaut, Adams and Anderson2009). Consistent with the hypothesis, the impact of attractiveness on outcome ratings was greater in the United States and urban settings than in Ghanaian and rural settings.
These examples of past research highlight the effects of context on the attractiveness bias. Our current research considers the impact of another contextual factor, the Internet, which is becoming increasingly prevalent in people's lives (Baym Reference Baym2015; Dutta et al. Reference Dutta, Geiger and Lanvin2015). Given the relatively high ease and freedom of choosing, establishing, and ending Internet-based connections, the cultural-ecological moderation hypothesis would suggest that attractiveness, as a determinant of selection, will have a larger influence on social outcomes in online than in offline contexts. Alternatively, it is possible the relatively lower salience and lower distinctiveness of physical attractiveness in online connections may decrease the attractiveness bias compared with an offline setting. Our research tests these competing predictions.
To summarize, a consideration of contextual factors for the attractiveness bias helps to illuminate the ecological foundations of mind. Preferences for attractive others interact with ecological systems that differentially afford the development of these predispositions into observed psychological habits. A complete account of the attractiveness bias must consider not only processes of natural evolution that produce genetic predispositions, but also contexts and processes of cultural evolution whereby people may (re)produce the ecological structures that afford and amplify those genetic predispositions.