Cargando…
Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces
The facial width-to-height ratio (face ratio), is a sexually dimorphic metric associated with actual aggression in men and with observers' judgements of aggression in male faces. Here, we sought to determine if observers' judgements of aggression were associated with the face ratio in fema...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2012
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3262816/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22276184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030366 |
_version_ | 1782221774970159104 |
---|---|
author | Geniole, Shawn N. Keyes, Amanda E. Mondloch, Catherine J. Carré, Justin M. McCormick, Cheryl M. |
author_facet | Geniole, Shawn N. Keyes, Amanda E. Mondloch, Catherine J. Carré, Justin M. McCormick, Cheryl M. |
author_sort | Geniole, Shawn N. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The facial width-to-height ratio (face ratio), is a sexually dimorphic metric associated with actual aggression in men and with observers' judgements of aggression in male faces. Here, we sought to determine if observers' judgements of aggression were associated with the face ratio in female faces. In three studies, participants rated photographs of female and male faces on aggression, femininity, masculinity, attractiveness, and nurturing. In Studies 1 and 2, for female and male faces, judgements of aggression were associated with the face ratio even when other cues in the face related to masculinity were controlled statistically. Nevertheless, correlations between the face ratio and judgements of aggression were smaller for female than for male faces (F(1,36) = 7.43, p = 0.01). In Study 1, there was no significant relationship between judgements of femininity and of aggression in female faces. In Study 2, the association between judgements of masculinity and aggression was weaker in female faces than for male faces in Study 1. The weaker association in female faces may be because aggression and masculinity are stereotypically male traits. Thus, in Study 3, observers rated faces on nurturing (a stereotypically female trait) and on femininity. Judgements of nurturing were associated with femininity (positively) and masculinity (negatively) ratings in both female and male faces. In summary, the perception of aggression differs in female versus male faces. The sex difference was not simply because aggression is a gendered construct; the relationships between masculinity/femininity and nurturing were similar for male and female faces even though nurturing is also a gendered construct. Masculinity and femininity ratings are not associated with aggression ratings nor with the face ratio for female faces. In contrast, all four variables are highly inter-correlated in male faces, likely because these cues in male faces serve as “honest signals”. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3262816 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2012 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-32628162012-01-24 Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces Geniole, Shawn N. Keyes, Amanda E. Mondloch, Catherine J. Carré, Justin M. McCormick, Cheryl M. PLoS One Research Article The facial width-to-height ratio (face ratio), is a sexually dimorphic metric associated with actual aggression in men and with observers' judgements of aggression in male faces. Here, we sought to determine if observers' judgements of aggression were associated with the face ratio in female faces. In three studies, participants rated photographs of female and male faces on aggression, femininity, masculinity, attractiveness, and nurturing. In Studies 1 and 2, for female and male faces, judgements of aggression were associated with the face ratio even when other cues in the face related to masculinity were controlled statistically. Nevertheless, correlations between the face ratio and judgements of aggression were smaller for female than for male faces (F(1,36) = 7.43, p = 0.01). In Study 1, there was no significant relationship between judgements of femininity and of aggression in female faces. In Study 2, the association between judgements of masculinity and aggression was weaker in female faces than for male faces in Study 1. The weaker association in female faces may be because aggression and masculinity are stereotypically male traits. Thus, in Study 3, observers rated faces on nurturing (a stereotypically female trait) and on femininity. Judgements of nurturing were associated with femininity (positively) and masculinity (negatively) ratings in both female and male faces. In summary, the perception of aggression differs in female versus male faces. The sex difference was not simply because aggression is a gendered construct; the relationships between masculinity/femininity and nurturing were similar for male and female faces even though nurturing is also a gendered construct. Masculinity and femininity ratings are not associated with aggression ratings nor with the face ratio for female faces. In contrast, all four variables are highly inter-correlated in male faces, likely because these cues in male faces serve as “honest signals”. Public Library of Science 2012-01-20 /pmc/articles/PMC3262816/ /pubmed/22276184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030366 Text en Geniole et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Geniole, Shawn N. Keyes, Amanda E. Mondloch, Catherine J. Carré, Justin M. McCormick, Cheryl M. Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title | Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title_full | Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title_fullStr | Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title_full_unstemmed | Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title_short | Facing Aggression: Cues Differ for Female versus Male Faces |
title_sort | facing aggression: cues differ for female versus male faces |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3262816/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22276184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030366 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT genioleshawnn facingaggressioncuesdifferforfemaleversusmalefaces AT keyesamandae facingaggressioncuesdifferforfemaleversusmalefaces AT mondlochcatherinej facingaggressioncuesdifferforfemaleversusmalefaces AT carrejustinm facingaggressioncuesdifferforfemaleversusmalefaces AT mccormickcherylm facingaggressioncuesdifferforfemaleversusmalefaces |