1 / 33

Dr Felix de Beaumont Heythrop College University of London

Dr Felix de Beaumont Heythrop College University of London. +. Beautiful Face?. +. Overview. Introduction Facial attractiveness main approaches Impression management; Is justice blind? Erotic capital Bodies & disorders Body dysmorphia ( ‘ugly syndrome’)

selia
Download Presentation

Dr Felix de Beaumont Heythrop College University of London

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Dr Felix de BeaumontHeythrop CollegeUniversity of London +

  2. Beautiful Face? +

  3. Overview • Introduction • Facial attractiveness main approaches • Impression management; Is justice blind? • Erotic capital • Bodies & disorders • Body dysmorphia ( ‘ugly syndrome’) • Addiction to cosmetic surgery • Men- Muscle- the Adonis complex • Summing up, future directions

  4. Psychological approaches to exp • Cognitive • Evolutionary • Social • Can we integrate all the theories into one package?

  5. Why are some faces always beautiful? • Beauty changes- History, Culture, Fashion • Attributes vary- masculine, feminine, gender blending

  6. Beauty through History

  7. Same applies to men and bodies

  8. Face processing • A fundamental human ability • Hard wired • Infants prefer prototypical faces, and attractive ones!! • We can recognise 1000s of faces

  9. Memory/recognition • We all know thousands of faces • Family, friends, celebrities, people who take the same bus everyday etc • Some stand out more than others • Can you accurately describe the faces you know- more people can accurately describe Cher than their own mothers !

  10. Signals & messages

  11. Judgements / reactions • Positive – negative dimension • Stereotypes • Prejudice • assumptions

  12. Active enhancement/exaggerationhistoric period- culture

  13. Golden Ratio

  14. Golden Ratio • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc4Y52uiSZQ

  15. Averaged faces more attractive?

  16. Cognitive approach • Langlois & Roggman, 1990 : attractive faces are only average. i.e. mathematical average • The more average, the more like a prototype ‘face’ and therefore more pleasing to the cognitive system

  17. Bio-evolutionary messages

  18. Symmetry & distinctiveness • Overly symmetrical facials features somewhat creepy, but symmetry is what most people try to achieve through surgery and cosmetics • Distinctiveness- that certain something that makes a face stand out. • Combination of average and distinctiveness could be a winner!

  19. Evolutionary approach in psychology • All about mate selection • Link to reproduction – window of reproduction? • Shorter life span in ancient man- we live longer now • Youthful adult features advertise sex; baby features illicit protectiveness • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO9tOuSrnrk&NR=1

  20. Social Learning

  21. Humans learn from the environment • Messages we receive • Learning adjusts perception • Human desire to agree with others within social group • 3 different approaches to beauty- we will look at integrated approaches

  22. Ashmore et al 1996 • Integration of cognitive, evolutionary and socio-cultural ideas into a multidimensional space • Three dimensions: sexiness, cuteness, fashionable • Combination of all three places thet arget in a particular area, and so decides attractiveness

  23. Dimensions- sexy, cute, trendy

  24. Cunningham et al 1995 • Multiple fitness model • Reflects perceivers implicit perception of a combination of features & cues • 5 categories: 3 relate to development/maturity and the final two about what the target does with themselves: expression, grooming

  25. Osborn 2006 • Draws on Ashmore, and Cunningham • Allows for cultural, social, and personal change • Series of filters • Initial impression crucial

  26. e.g. Ashmore et al. (1996) (sub) Cultural Beauty Identity Ideals Hendrick & Hendrick (1986 Judge Component Target Component STORGE High High Trendy PRAGMA 1 2 Cute ? EROS 3 Sexy MANIA LUDUS Low Low Filter One Biological Attractiveness Levels Filter Two Target’s Judged Attractiveness Filter Three Love Style

  27. Judge Component Target Component LIFEEXPERIENCES High eg. Park & Flink (1989) Thibaut & Kelley (1959) Low Target’s Judged Attractiveness

  28. Consequences of beauty? • Attribution & the fundamental attribution error • Halo effect • ‘what is beautiful is good’

More Related