Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue (한국심리학회지 : 문화 및 사회문제)

Korean Psychological Association of Culture and Social Issues (한국문화및사회문제심리학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Generation and Gender Differences in Physical Attractiveness and Likability Perception

세대와 성별에 따른 신체적 매력과 호감 지각의 집단 차이에 대한 검증

  • Received : 2020.12.04
  • Accepted : 2021.01.16
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The present study examined the relations between physical attractiveness and likability and we also investigated whether these variable's effects differ depending on generation (young and middle-aged) × evaluator gender (male and female) × target gender (male and female). Second, when assessing these variables, we figured out whether evaluators more preferred 'the same-sex preference' than 'the opposite-sex preference'. To that end, 120 college students participated in the 3D program to sample their ideal looks and bodies. Then, another 240 people (60 young men and women each, 60 middle-aged men and women each) evaluated the physical attractiveness, likeability, relationship preference, and personality of the sample. The result is that physical attractiveness is a positively related to likability. There were evaluator gender and target gender differences in the judgment of physical attractiveness, but there were generation and target gender differences in the judgment of likability. Lastly, the effect based on target-maker gender was different for evaluator gender in each factor evaluation. These results were discussed from the evolutionary and sociocultural perspectives on physical attractiveness.

본 연구는 신체적 매력과 호감 지각이 한국인의 세대(청년과 중년) × 평가자 성별(남과 여) × 타겟 성별(남과 여)에 따라 어떻게 다르게 나타나는지 알아보고자 했다. 또한, 평가자들이 같은 타겟을 평가할 때 평가자가 동성이 만든 타겟을 이성이 만든 타겟보다 더 신체적 매력과 호감을 높게 평가하는지도 알아보았다. 이를 위해 120명의 대학생을 참여시켜 3D 프로그램을 사용하여 이상적인 외모와 신체를 가진 타겟을 만들었다. 그다음, 또 다른 240명(청년 남녀 각 60명, 중년 남녀 각 60명)이 타겟의 신체적 매력, 호감도를 평가하였다. 분석 결과, 신체적 매력과 호감도는 정적 상관이 있었지만, 집단 간 차이의 패턴은 달랐다. 즉, 신체적 매력은 타겟의 성별과 평가자 성별에서 성차가 나타났지만 세대 차이는 나타나지 않았다. 호감도의 경우 타겟의 성별에 따른 차이와 세대 차이가 나타났지만, 평가자의 성차는 나타나지 않았다. 마지막으로 평가자들의 성별에 따라 같은 타겟에 대한 호감 지각에 차이가 나타났다. 이러한 결과를 신체적 매력에 대한 진화론적 관점과 사회문화적 관점에서 논의하였다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2018년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2018S1A5A2A01038779). 이 논문은 2017년도 중앙대학교 CAU GRS 지원에 의하여 작성 되었음.

References

  1. 김수정, 박수진, 정찬섭 (2006). 얼굴매력의 변화추세: 미스코리아 얼굴감성모형을 중심으로. 한국콘텐츠학회 종합학술대회 논문집, 4(2), 340-343.
  2. 김정미 (2014). 여성 응시자의 얼굴매력성과 의복유형이 면접관의 호감도, 성격특성 추론, 업무수행능력판단 및 채용의도에 미치는 영향. 전남대학교 대학원 박사학위논문.
  3. 박재흥. (2003). 세대 개념에 관한 연구: 코호트적 시각에서. 한국사회학, 37(3), 1-23.
  4. 임혜진, 최승원 (2017). 성격 특성 지각이 신체적 매력 지각에 미치는 영향: 정직성과 외향성을 중심으로. 한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물, 29(4), 423-445.
  5. 정병욱, 김영조 (2014). 매력적인 광고모델이 제품평가에 미치는 영향: 경쟁적 맥락과 제품유형의 효과. 한국심리학회지: 소비자 광고, 15(1), 145-156.
  6. 정태연, 장민희, 전미연, 손찬호, 박은미, 김동수, 박은미, 손찬호, 전미연, 장민희, 안혜정, 전경숙. (2015). 사회심리학 (pp. 1-619). 서울: 학지사.
  7. Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. M. (2001). Who attains social status? Effects of personality and physical attractiveness in social groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 116-132. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.116
  8. Andrews, T. M., Lukaszewski, A. W., Simmons, Z. L., & Bleske-Rechek, A. (2017). Cue-based estimates of reproductive value explain women's body attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 38(4), 461-467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.04.002
  9. Berry, D. S., & Miller, K. M. (2001). When Boy Meets Girl: Attractiveness and the Five-Factor Model in Opposite-Sex Interactions. Journal of Research in Personality, 35(1), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2000.2304
  10. Braun, S., Peus, C., & Frey, D. (2015). Is Beauty Beastly?. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie. 220(1), 98-108.
  11. Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of personality and social psychology, 50(3), 559-570. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.50.3.559
  12. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992
  13. Buss, D. M. (2016). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. Hachette UK.
  14. Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of personality and social psychology, 50(3), 559-570. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.50.3.559
  15. Chaiken, S., & Eagly, A. H. (1983). Communication modality as a determinant of persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 241-256. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.45.2.241
  16. Chan, E. Y. (2015). Physically-attractive males increase men's financial risk-taking. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36(5), 407-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.03.005
  17. Collins, R. L. (1996). For better or worse: The impact of upward social comparison on self-evaluations. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.119.1.51
  18. Crossley, K. L., Cornelissen, P. L., & Tovee, M. J. (2012). What Is an Attractive Body? Using an Interactive 3D Program to Create the Ideal Body for You and Your Partner. PLoS ONE, 7(11). : e50601. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050601.
  19. Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P., Druen, P. B., & Wu, C. H. (1995). "Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours": Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of personality and social psychology, 68(2), 261-279. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.68.2.261
  20. Dion, K., Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(3), 285-290. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033731
  21. Dion, K. K., Pak, A. W.-P., & Dion, K. L. (1990). Stereotyping Physical Attractiveness: A Sociocultural Perspective. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 21(2), 158-179.
  22. Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. (2001). The role of affect in the mere exposure effect: Evidence from psychophysiological and individual differences approaches. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(7), 889-898. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201277011
  23. Honekopp, J. (2006). Once more: is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Relative contributions of private and shared taste to judgments of facial attractiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(2), 199-209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.199
  24. Fisher, M., & Cox, A. (2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18(1), 20-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01307.x
  25. Furnham, A., Tan, T., & Mcmanus, C. (1997). Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Preferences for Body Shape: A Replication and Extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(4), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00169-9
  26. Garner, D. M., Garfinkel, P. E., Schwartz, D., & Thompson, M. (1980). Cultural expectations of thinness in women. Psychological Reports, 47(2), 483-491. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1980.47.2.483
  27. Henss, R. (1995). Waist-to-hip ratio and attractiveness. Replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 19(4), 479-488. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00093-L
  28. Jawahar, I. M., & Mattsson, J. (2005). Sexism and beautyism effects in selection as a function of self-monitoring level of decision maker. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(3), 563-573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.3.563
  29. Jones, A. L., & Jaeger, B. (2019). Biological bases of beauty revisited: The effect of symmentry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism on female facial attractiveness. Symmetry, 11(279). http://doi:10.3390/sym11020279.
  30. Junger, J., Kordsmeyer, T. L., Gerlach, T. M., & Penke, L. (2018). Fertile women evaluate male bodies as more attractive, regardless of masculinity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39(4), 412-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.03.007
  31. Kleck, R. E., & Rubenstein, C. (1975). Physical attractiveness, perceived attitude similarity, and interpersonal attraction in an opposite-sex encounter. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(1), 107-114. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076243
  32. Kopera, A. A., Maier, R. A., & Johnson, J. E. (1971). Perception of physical attractiveness: The influence of group interaction and group coaction on ratings of women. In Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association. American Psychological Association, 6(Pt.1), 317-318.
  33. Lemay Jr, E. P., Clark, M. S., & Greenberg, A. (2010). What is beautiful is good because what is beautiful is desired: Physical attractiveness stereotyping as projection of interpersonal goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(3), 339-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209359700
  34. Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2006). What is good is beautiful: Face preference reflects desired personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(6), 1107-1118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.04.015
  35. Lockwood, P., & Kunda, Z. (1997). Superstars and me: Predicting the impact of role models on the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(1), 91-103. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.91
  36. Morse, S. J., Gruzen, J., & Reus, H. (1976). The "eye of the beholder": A neglected variable in the study of physical attractiveness? Journal of Personality, 44(2), 209-225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1976.tb00119.x
  37. Prokopakis, E. P., Vlastos, I. M., Picavet, V., Trenite, G. N., Thomas, R., Cingi, C., & Hellings, P. W. (2013). The golden ratio in facial symmetry. Rhinology journal, 51(1). 18-21.
  38. Reysen, S. (2005). Construction of a new scale: The Reysen Likability Scale. Social Behavior and Personality, 33(2), 201-208. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2005.33.2.201
  39. Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(4), 659-669. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208842
  40. Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, S., Clark, A., Lee, K., McKay, R., & Akamatsu, S. (2001). Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-Western cultures: In search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception, 30(5), 611-625. https://doi.org/10.1068/p3123
  41. Richardson, D. R., & Green, L. R. (1999). Social sanction and threat explanations of gender effects on direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior: Official Journal of the International Society for Research on Aggression, 25(6), 425-434. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1999)25:6<425::AID-AB3>3.0.CO;2-W
  42. Schacht, A., Werheid, K., & Sommer, W. (2008). The appraisal of facial beauty is rapid but not mandatory. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(2), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.2.132
  43. Seidman, G., & Miller, O. S. (2013). Effects of gender and physical attractiveness on visual attention to Facebook profiles. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(1), 20-24. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0305
  44. Shahani-Denning, C. (2003). Physical attractiveness bias in hiring: What is beautiful is good. Hofstra Horizon, 14-17.
  45. Singh, D. (1993a). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of personality and social psychology, 65(2), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.2.293
  46. Singh, D. (1993b). Body shape and women's attractiveness. Human Nature, 4(3), 297-321. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02692203
  47. Singh, D. (1994). Is thin really beautiful and good? Relationship between waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and female attractiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(1), 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90116-3
  48. Singh, D., Dixson, B. J., Jessop, T. S., Morgan, B., & Dixson, A. F. (2010). Cross-cultural consensus for waist-hip ratio and women's attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(3), 176-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.09.001
  49. Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 656-666. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.656
  50. Stirrat, M., & Perrett, D. I. (2010). Valid facial cues to cooperation and trust: Male facial width and trustworthiness. Psychological Science, 21(3), 349-354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610362647
  51. Streeter, S. A., & McBurney, D. H. (2003). Waist-hip ratio and attractiveness. New evidence and a critique of "a critical test." Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(2), 88-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00121-6
  52. Swami, V., & Tovee, M. J. (2006). The influence of body mass index on the physical attractiveness preferences of feminist and nonfeminist heterosexual women and lesbians. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(3), 252-257. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00293.x
  53. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1996). The evolution of human sexuality. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 11(2), 98-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(96)81051-2
  54. Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2004). Thin Ideals in Music Television: A Source of Social Comparison and Body Dissatisfaction. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 35(1), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/eat.10214
  55. Tovee, M. J., & Cornelissen, P. L. (2001). Female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness in front view and profile. British Journal of Psychology, 92(2), 391-402. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712601162257
  56. Tovee, M. J., Edmonds, L., & Vuong, Q. C. (2012). Categorical perception of human female physical attractiveness and health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(2), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.05.008
  57. Trivers, R. L. (1974). Parent-offspring conflict. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 14(1), 249-264.
  58. Udry, J. R. (1965). Structural correlates of feminine beauty preferences in Britain and the United States: A comparison. Sociology & Social Research, 49(3), 330-342.
  59. Wilcox, K., & Laird, J. D. (2000). The impact of media images of super-slender women on women's self-esteem: Identification, social comparison, and self-perception. Journal of Research in Personality, 34(2), 278-286. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1999.2281
  60. Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2, Pt.2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0025848