Proc. R. Soc.

B (2008) 275, 2651–2656

doi:10.1098/rspb.2008.0873
Published online 19 August 2008

In your face: facial metrics predict aggressive

behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and
professional hockey players
Justin M. Carré1 and Cheryl M. McCormick1,2,*
1
Department of Psychology, and 2Centre for Neuroscience, Brock University,
500 Glenridge Avenue, St Catharines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1
Facial characteristics are an important basis for judgements about gender, emotion, personality,
motivational states and behavioural dispositions. Based on a recent finding of a sexual dimorphism in
facial metrics that is independent of body size, we conducted three studies to examine the extent to which
individual differences in the facial width-to-height ratio were associated with trait dominance (using a
questionnaire) and aggression during a behavioural task and in a naturalistic setting (varsity and
professional ice hockey). In study 1, men had a larger facial width-to-height ratio, higher scores of trait
dominance, and were more reactively aggressive compared with women. Individual differences in the facial
width-to-height ratio predicted reactive aggression in men, but not in women (predicted 15% of
variance). In studies 2 (male varsity hockey players) and 3 (male professional hockey players), individual
differences in the facial width-to-height ratio were positively related to aggressive behaviour as measured by
the number of penalty minutes per game obtained over a season (predicted 29 and 9% of the variance,
respectively). Together, these findings suggest that the sexually dimorphic facial width-to-height ratio may
be an ‘honest signal’ of propensity for aggressive behaviour.
Keywords: aggression; sex differences; dominance; sexual selection; face

1. INTRODUCTION masculinity), but it also has a negative impact on the

Most studies that have investigated facial characteristics immune system ( Folstad & Karter 1992). Therefore, only
and sexual selection have focused on what is perceived as high-quality (i.e. healthy, good ‘genes’) men can afford to
attractive to an observer (Rhodes 2006). Some evidence display these characteristics without suffering the costs of
suggests that certain facial judgements may reflect parasite loads ( Folstad & Karter 1992).
inherent processing mechanisms in that newborns’ In addition to providing information as to the
preferences for faces parallel those of adults (e.g. Langlois personality and health of a target, some recent studies
et al. 1987; Slater et al. 2000). Although judgements of suggest that characteristics of the face may also provide
attractiveness also are influenced by experience (e.g. cues as to the behavioural tendencies of the target. For
Peskin & Newell 2004), perception of attractiveness is example, women’s judgements of the extent to which a
thought be part of human evolutionary heritage, perhaps man was interested in infants based on his face predicted
as an honest signal of health ( Thornhill & Gangestad his actual interest in infants (as measured in a laboratory
1999). Sexual dimorphism in the face is one such signal task; Roney et al. 2006). Raters’ judgements of facial
that may have been shaped by intra- and intersexual masculinity (Rhodes et al. 2005) and dominance (Mazur
selection (Little et al. 2008). For instance, men with et al. 1994) predicted sexual behaviour of men. People
masculine facial features may have obtained increased also show some accuracy at identifying ‘cheaters’ in a
access to valued resources (i.e. resources important for Prisoner’s Dilemma game based on facial photographs
survival and reproduction) because they are regarded as ( Verplaetse et al. 2007). Together, these findings suggest
socially and physically dominant by their rivals (Mueller & that people can make accurate inferences about others’
Mazur 1996; Swaddle & Reierson 2002). Also, facial personality traits and behavioural dispositions based on
masculinity is generally found attractive in men, perhaps certain signals conveyed by the face. The precise facial
serving as an honest signal of health (Rhodes 2006; metrics used to make these trait judgements are not well
Rhodes et al. 2007). Further, a recent study found a understood (Danel & Pawlowski 2007). Recently, Weston
positive correlation between salivary testosterone concen- et al. (2007) described the facial width-to-height ratio, a
trations and ratings of facial masculinity (Penton-Voak & sexual dimorphism in the structure of the face that was
Chen 2004). The immunocompetence handicap hypo- independent of body size, from a morphometric analysis of
thesis posits that testosterone is responsible for the an ontogenetic series of skulls. In brief, males and females
development of male secondary sex traits (e.g. facial were found to have different growth trajectories that
diverge at puberty for bizygomatic width and not for upper
facial height, leading to a width-to-height facial dimorph-
* Author and address for correspondence: Department of Psychol-
ogy, Brock University, 500 Glenridge Avenue, St Catharines, ism (greater ratio in men than in women) that is
Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1 (cmccormick@brocku.ca). independent of increased body size. The sex difference

Received 26 June 2008

Accepted 25 July 2008 2651 This journal is q 2008 The Royal Society

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 work is properly cited.
2652 J. M. Carré & C. M. McCormick Facial metrics and aggression

in the facial width-to-height ratio emerged around

puberty, which is when sex differences in facial structure
related to body size appear, in part due to increased
testosterone concentrations at puberty in boys ( Verdonck
et al. 1999). Thus, the sexual dimorphism in facial width-
to-height may reflect a sexual selection pressure that is
independent of selection for body size.
Here, we conducted three studies to examine the extent
to which the face width-to-height ratio predicted dom-
inance and aggressive behaviour. In study 1, we first
examined whether the facial width-to-height sexual
dimorphism, previously described in skulls ( Weston et al.
2007), can be found in the photographs of faces. We also
investigated the extent to which within-sex variability in
the width-to-height ratio in the upper face was associated
with within-sex variability in a sexually dimorphic
personality trait, dominance, and in behavioural aggres-
sion. Dominance and aggression were chosen as measures
because facial signals of dominance and/or aggression may
Figure 1. An example of the measures used for facial width-
not only influence mate preference (intersexual selection),
to-height ratio. Vertical lines represent the distance between
but may also be important signals moderating intermale the left and the right zygion (bizygomatic width). Horizontal
behaviour (intrasexual selection). For studies 2 and 3, we lines represent the distance between the upper lip and brow
examined whether a relationship between individual (upper facial height).
differences in the facial width-to-height ratio would
predict aggressive behaviour outside of a laboratory For study 3, photographs were obtained for every player
setting. The association between facial width-to-height who played on the Canadian teams of the NHL during the
ratio and aggressive behaviour (defined as the number of 2007–2008 season (Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers,
penalty minutes obtained per game) was tested in male Montreal Canadiens, Ottawa Senators, Toronto Maple
varsity hockey players (study 2) and in professional ice Leafs and Vancouver Canucks) whose pictures were available
hockey (Canadian teams in the National Hockey League on the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network
(NHL); study 3). (ESPN) website (nZ126). Two pictures had to be excluded
because the individuals were not facing forward and the tilt of
the head would compromise the measurement of the facial
2. MATERIAL AND METHODS width-to-height ratio. Further, we excluded photographs
(a) Participants from goalkeepers (nZ12) because these individuals are
In study 1, 88 undergraduate students (37 men and 51 typically not in a position to obtain penalties (the measure
women; mean ageZ18.98 years, s.d.Z1.15) took part for of aggression). The final sample was nZ112. Facial width-
course credit and a $5 honorarium. Eighty-two per cent of the to-height ratios were calculated as in studies 1 and 2. All
participants self-identified as Caucasian, with the remaining measurements had good inter-rater reliability (facial height:
18 per cent representing a diversity of ethnicities. All rZ0.97, p!0.001; facial width: rZ0.996, p!0.001; width-
procedures of the study were approved by the university’s to-height ratio: rZ0.96, p!0.001).
ethical review committee.
(c) Trait dominance
(b) Face ratios Participants completed a 10-item questionnaire assessing
In study 1, photographs were taken with a Nikon D50 digital trait dominance (International Personality Item Pool scales;
camera. IMAGEJ (NIH open-source software) was used to Goldberg et al. 2006). Some examples of items include ‘Like
measure the distance between the lip and brow (height of having authority over others’ and ‘Want to be in charge’.
upper face) and the left and right zygion (bizygomatic width) Responses were scored on a Likert scale ranging from K2
of the digitized images, based on Weston et al. (2007; (very inaccurate) to C2 (very accurate), and had high
figure 1). Inter-rater reliability was high for all measures reliability (Cronbach’s alphaZ0.82).
(distance between left and right zygion: rZ0.996, p!0.001;
distance between the lip and brow: rZ0.989, p!0.001; (d) Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm
width-to-height ratio: rZ0.985, p!0.001). To measure aggressive behaviour, we used a modified version
For study 2, photographs were obtained from 21 of the Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm ( PSAP;
undergraduate male varsity hockey players (mean ageZ Cherek 1981). This measure is positively correlated with
22.81 years, s.d.Z1.29) from the university’s website (all various self-report measures of aggression (Gerra et al. 2007;
players whose pictures were available except for goalkeepers Golomb et al. 2007). In brief (see also Carré & McCormick
because these individuals are typically not in a position to 2008), participants were led to believe that they would be
obtain penalties, the measure of aggression) and measured as paired with a same-sex partner (in actuality, an E-PRIME
in study 1. All the pictures were facing forward; however, computer program) on a task that required them to select
some individuals did not have a neutral expression (i.e. some among three response options to earn points that would be
were smiling). All measurements had good inter-rater exchangeable for money. Pressing response option no. 1 a
reliability (facial height: rZ0.98, p!0.001; facial width: hundred consecutive times would cause the point counter on
rZ0.94, p!0.001; width-to-height ratio: rZ0.90, p!0.001). the screen to enlarge, flash several times with positive signs

Proc. R. Soc. B (2008)

 Facial metrics and aggression J. M. Carré & C. M. McCormick 2653

around it, and increase the point counter total by one. It was Table 1. Mean (s.e.m.) for women (nZ51) and men (nZ37)
explained to participants that the point counter might for each of the variables measured in study 1.
flash several times with negative signs around it, resulting in
a one-point decrease in the point counter total. They were women men t (d.f.Z86) p-value
told that this meant that their partner (actually the computer
program) had stolen a point, and each stolen point would be face ratio 1.80 (0.10) 1.86 (0.13) 2.33 0.02
added to the partner’s counter. Participants could respond by trait domi- 5.8 (5.5) 8.35 (5.5) 2.15 0.04
nance
continuing to select option no. 1 (point reward) or could
PSAP
switch to option no. 2 or 3. Pressing option no. 2 ten times
responses
would steal a point from their partner; however, participants aggression 209 (151) 278 (145) 2.18 0.03
were instructed that they were randomly assigned to the reward 2486 (406) 2423 (302) K0.80 0.43
experimental condition whereby they, unlike their partner, protection 294 (164) 316 (127) 0.66 0.51
would not keep any points stolen. Pressing option no. 3 ten
times would protect their point counter against theft of points
for a brief time. Thus, the dependent variables from the PSAP
measure were option nos. 1 (reward earned), 2 (aggression) 600

aggressive behaviour
and 3 (protection). Selection of option no. 2 was considered
reactive aggression because the participants did not increase
reward, and in fact lost opportunity to increase reward, each 400
time option no. 2 was selected.
200
(e) Study 1 procedure
Participants arrived in groups of two or four and first
completed a demographic and trait dominance questionnaire. 0
1.50 1.65 1.80 1.95 2.10
Next, participants were photographed while in a seated
position and maintaining a neutral facial expression. Partici- face width-to-height ratio
pants were escorted to separate rooms for the PSAP Figure 2. Scatter plot depicting the relationship between face
procedure. The PSAP took approximately 40 min to width-to-height ratio and aggressive behaviour in under-
complete, after which they completed a brief questionnaire graduate men (nZ37, rZ0.38 and pZ0.02).
designed to assess whether they were aware of the deception
used in the experiment. Responses confirmed that partici- 3. RESULTS
pants believed that they were playing against another person. (a) Study 1
Tests for gender differences in trait dominance, facial ratio
and aggressive behaviour consisted of MANOVA and
(f ) Aggression measure in studies 2 and 3 follow-up t-tests. There was a main effect of gender
The penalty minutes that each player accrued per number of (F5,82Z3.04, pZ0.01): men had a greater facial ratio
games played during the 2007–2008 season (obtained from the (t86Z2.33, pZ0.02, Cohen’s dZ0.50); scored higher on
Ontario University Athletics website for study 2 and from trait dominance (t86Z2.15, pZ0.04, Cohen’s dZ0.46);
ESPN’s website for study 3) were used as the measure of and were more aggressive than women (t86Z2.18, pZ0.03,
aggression. Penalties included behaviours such as slashing, Cohen’s dZ0.47). Men and women did not differ in reward
cross-checking, high-sticking, boarding, elbowing, checking (t86ZK0.80, pZ0.43, Cohen’s dZ0.18) or protection
from behind, fighting and so on. These behaviours meet the (t86Z0.66, pZ0.51, Cohen’s dZ0.15) responses (table 1).
classic definition of aggressive behaviour as any act that is Separate regression analyses for men and women were
intended to harm another individual, who, in turn, is motivated computed with trait dominance and face ratio as predictors
to avoid the behaviour (Baron & Richardson 1994). of aggressive behaviour. For men, face ratio predicted
15 per cent of unique variance in aggressive behaviour
(g) Statistics (R 2Z0.18, F2,34Z3.60, pZ0.04; t36Z2.50, pZ0.02;
Gender differences in trait dominance and facial width- figure 2), but trait dominance was not a significant
to-height ratio were examined using multivariate analysis of predictor of aggression ( pZ0.27). Furthermore, the face
variance (MANOVA), with follow-up t-tests. Multiple linear ratio by trait dominance interaction was not significant
regression analysis was used to examine the relationship (R 2changeZ0.001, F1,33Z0.04, pZ0.84). For women, face
between predictor variables (trait dominance, facial width- ratio and trait dominance did not predict aggressive
to-height ratio and trait dominance by facial width-to-height behaviour (R 2Z0.03, F2,41Z0.66, pZ0.52), nor did the
ratio interaction) and aggressive behaviour as measured by interaction (R 2changeZ0.003, F1,40Z0.14, pZ0.72).
the PSAP. The main assumptions underlying linear
regression (e.g. outliers, linear relationship between pre- (b) Study 2
dictors and criterion, multicollinearity, independence of Individual differences in face ratio in male hockey players
observations, homoscedasticity and errors normally distrib- explained 29.2 per cent of the variance in penalty minutes
uted) were examined and were all met. Also, Pearson’s per game played (rZ0.54, pZ0.01; figure 3).
correlation coefficients were computed to examine the
bivariate association between the facial width-to-height ratio (c) Study 3
and aggressive behaviour in varsity and professional ice Individual differences in the face width-to-height
hockey players. All analyses conducted were two-tailed and explained a significant proportion of the variance in
the level of significance was set at p!0.05. aggressive behaviour (rZ0.30, pZ0.005) in NHL hockey

Proc. R. Soc. B (2008)

2654 J. M. Carré & C. M. McCormick Facial metrics and aggression

3.00 individual differences in facial width-to-height ratio and

whether this facial metric is used to guide behaviour.
penalty minutes per game

2.50 Another possibility is that the relationship observed

2.00 between the facial metric and aggressive behaviour was
partly influenced by the posture of the head in the
1.50 photographs (e.g. more aggressive men may tilt their
1.00 head upwards and thereby foreshorten the vertical
measurement of the face). It is also possible that stronger
0.50 relationships would have been observed between the facial
0 ratio and aggressive behaviour if direct measurements of
1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.1 the face were made instead of using photographs and had
face width-to-height ratio we been able to control facial expression in the faces of the
hockey players.
Figure 3. Scatter plot depicting the relationship between face
width-to-height ratio and aggressive behaviour (penalty There was no relationship between trait dominance and
minutes per game) in male varsity hockey players (nZ21, aggressive behaviour in our sample, although individual
rZ0.54 and pZ0.01). differences in trait dominance were associated with self-
report measures of trait aggression in both men and
women in other studies (Archer & Webb 2006; Johnson
players. Separate correlation coefficients were also com-
et al. 2007). This disparity may reflect that the PSAP is a
puted for each individual team (figure 4). All correlation
behavioural measure designed to assess situation-specific
coefficients were in the positive direction and ranged from
reactive aggression, whereas the other studies measured a
0.17 to 0.51.
broader range of aggression (physical, verbal, hostile and
anger) across several situations using self-report.
4. DISCUSSION However, the higher trait dominance in men than in
In sum, a sexually dimorphic width-to-height ratio (menO women found here is consistent with previous studies
women) in the upper face was evident in the photographs using similar self-report measures (Budaev 1999; Costa
of an unselected sample of undergraduates, and this ratio et al. 2001). Furthermore, the sex difference in aggressive
predicted aggression in men assessed in a validated behaviour on the PSAP is consistent with that reported in
laboratory behavioural task and in a naturalistic setting the literature (reviewed in Archer 2004). The fact that
(varsity and professional ice hockey players). Weston et al. there were no sex differences in reward or protection
(2007) first reported the sexually dimorphic facial width- responding on the PSAP suggests that men were equally
to-height ratio in an analysis of a series of human skulls motivated to earn reward and avoid punishment (i.e.
representing different stages of ontogeny. They found that point subtractions).
the sex difference emerged around puberty, which is when There is much research literature addressing the role of
sex differences in facial structure related to body size the face in social interactions, and there is some literature
appear, in part due to increased testosterone concen- indicating that faces can be used to gauge certain
trations at puberty in boys ( Verdonck et al. 1999). This personality traits above chance (e.g. Penton-Voak et al.
finding is consistent with a recent study demonstrating a 2006). Such judgements are made in less than 40 ms,
positive correlation between salivary testosterone concen- made with high consistency and have some predictive
trations and ratings of facial masculinity (Penton-Voak & values (Bar et al. 2006; Willis & Todorov 2006; Ballew &
Chen 2004). The sex difference in the facial ratio observed Todorov 2007). For example, women’s judgements of the
in skulls was independent of body size and of other size- extent to which a man was interested in infants based on
related facial variation, and thus suggests that this sexual his face predicted his actual interest in infants (Roney et al.
dimorphism may reflect a selection pressure that is 2006). Judgements of competence, intelligence and
independent of body size ( Weston et al. 2007). A similar leadership based on only the facial appearance of political
sexual dimorphism in the face, which was independent candidates (and independent of age and attractiveness)
of body size, was also reported in chimpanzees ( Weston predicted the outcome of the elections ( Todorov et al.
et al. 2004). 2005). Judgements of dominance predicted career success
The data obtained here suggest that for men variation (Mueller & Mazur 1996) and age at first copulation
in the width-to-height ratio from neutral faces may be an ( Mazur et al. 1994). Another study reported that
honest signal of propensity for aggressive behaviour. participants’ judgements of the personality traits of
Clearly, an angry facial expression is a direct way to power (competence, dominance and facial maturity) and
communicate one’s emotional state and behavioural warmth (likeability and trustworthiness) in the faces of
intent. However, it remains possible that subtle cues CEOs of Fortune 500 companies predicted the profits of
from a neutral face may have been selected because they the CEO’s company (Rule & Ambady 2008). However,
provide information as to an individual’s behavioural whether the actual success of the individuals whose faces
dispositions. Notably, angry facial expressions consist were judged is partly due to shared societal stereotypes
of lowering the brow and raising the upper lip, a pattern of (e.g. the success of attractive people is in part because they
muscle activity that increases the facial width-to-height are judged as more intelligent; Zebrowitz et al. 2002)
ratio. From an evolutionary perspective, these findings continues to be debated.
suggest that selection pressures may have shaped the The novel finding of the present study is that individual
perceptual system to be especially attuned to cues of differences in facial characteristics predict behaviour:
threat and/or aggression. However, it will be important Variability in a sexually dimorphic facial metric in men,
to examine the extent to which people are sensitive to which is independent of body size, predicted aggressive

Proc. R. Soc. B (2008)

 Facial metrics and aggression J. M. Carré & C. M. McCormick 2655

(a) 3.5
3.0

penalty minutes
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5
face width-to-height ratio
(b) 3.5 (c)
penalty minutes

3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
(d ) 3.5 (e)
3.0
penalty minutes

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
( f ) 3.5 ( g)
3.0
penalty minutes

2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.1 2.3 2.5
face width-to-height ratio face width-to-height ratio
Figure 4. Scatter plots depicting the relationship between face width-to-height ratio and aggressive behaviour (number of
penalty minutes per game played) in male professional hockey players for the six Canadian teams in the NHL (nZ112) as a
group (a) and for each individual team (b–g): (a) all Canadian NHL teams (rZ0.30), (b) Calgary Flames (rZ0.17),
(c) Edmonton Oilers (rZ0.20), (d ) Montreal Canadiens (rZ0.39), (e) Ottawa Senators (rZ0.51), ( f ) Toronto Maple Leafs
(rZ0.37) and ( g) Vancouver Canucks (rZ0.24).

behaviour in a laboratory setting and in male hockey REFERENCES

players. The relationship between within-sex variation in Archer, J. 2004 Sex differences in aggression in real-world
facial width-to-height and aggressive behaviour might settings: a meta-analytic review. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 8,
reflect a common relationship to a third variable, such as 291–322. (doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.4.291)
organizational effects of testosterone as part of sexual Archer, J. & Webb, I. 2006 The relation between scores on the
differentiation in adolescence, which influences both the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire and aggressive acts,
impulsiveness, competitiveness, dominance, and sexual
development of the physique and the nervous system
jealousy. Aggress. Behav. 32, 464–473. (doi:10.1002/ab.
(reviewed in Sisk & Zehr 2005; McCormick & Mathews
20146)
2007). The relationship between facial morphology and Ballew II, C. C. & Todorov, A. 2007 Predicting political
aggressive behaviour suggests that this characteristic may elections from rapid and unreflective face judgments. Proc.
be an honest signal, perhaps comparable to honest signals Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 17 948–17 953. (doi:10.1073/
in other species that predict factors such as phenotypic pnas.0705435104)
quality ( Vanpe et al. 2007) or aggressive intent (Morestz & Bar, M., Neta, M. & Linz, H. 2006 Very first impressions.
Morris 2006; Laidre & Vehrencamp 2008). Emotion 6, 268–278. (doi:10.1037/1528-3542.6.2.269)
Baron, R. A. & Richardson, D. R. 1994 Human aggression,
All procedures of the study were approved by the university’s 2nd edn. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
ethical review committee.
Budaev, S. V. 1999 Sex differences in the big five
We thank Megan Kontrimas, Kerendu Womboso and Joshua personality factors: testing an evolutionary hypothesis.
Dyck for their assistance in data collection, and also Pro- Pers. Individ. Dif. 26, 801–813. (doi:10.1016/S0191-88
fessor Cathy Mondloch for the technical advice on the 69(98)00179-2)
photography of the faces. Research support was provided Carré, J. M. & McCormick, C. M. 2008 Aggressive behavior
by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council and change in salivary testosterone concentrations predict
Discovery Grant to C.M.M and by a NSERC Canada willingness to engage in a competitive task. Horm. Behav.
Graduate Scholarship to J.M.C. 54, 403–409. (doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008.04.008)

Proc. R. Soc. B (2008)

2656 J. M. Carré & C. M. McCormick Facial metrics and aggression

Cherek, D. R. 1981 Effects of smoking different doses of Peskin, M. & Newell, F. N. 2004 Familiarity breeds
nicotine on human aggressive behaviour. Psychopharma- attraction: effects of exposure on the attractiveness of
cology 75, 339–345. (doi:d10.1007/BF00435849) typical and distinctive faces. Perception 33, 147–157.
Costa, P., Terracciano, A. & McCrae, R. 2001 Gender (doi:10.1068/p5028)
differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and Rhodes, G. 2006 The evolutionary psychology of facial
surprising findings. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 81, 322–331. beauty. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 57, 199–226. (doi:10.1146/
(doi:10.1037//0022-3514.81.2.322) annurev.psych.57.102904.190208)
Danel, D. & Pawlowski, B. 2007 Eye-mouth-eye angle as a Rhodes, G., Simmons, L. W. & Peters, M. 2005 Attractive-
good indicator of face masculinization, asymmetry, and ness and sexual behavior: does attractiveness enhance
attractiveness (Homo sapiens). J. Comp. Psychol. 121, mating success. Evol. Hum. Behav. 26, 186–201. (doi:10.
221–225. (doi:10.1037/0735-7036.121.2.221) 1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.014)
Folstad, I. & Karter, A. J. 1992 Parasites, bright males, and Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, Y., Palermo, R., Simmons, L. W.,
the immunocompetence handicap. Am. Nat. 139, Peters, M., Lee, K., Halberstadt, J. & Crawford, J. R. 2007
603–622. (doi:10.1086/285346) Perceived health contributes to the attractiveness of facial
Gerra, G., Zaimovic, A., Raggi, M. A., Moi, G., Branchi, B., symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism. Perception
Moroni, M. & Brambilla, F. 2007 Experimentally induced 36, 1244–1252. (doi:10.1068/p5712)
aggressiveness in heroin-dependent patients treated with Roney, J. R., Hanson, K. N., Durante, K. M. & Maestripieri,
buprenorphine: comparison of patients receiving metha- D. 2006 Reading men’s faces: women’s mate attractive-
done and healthy subjects. Psychiatry Res. 149, 201–203. ness judgments track men’s testosterone and interest in
(doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2006.02.013) infant. Proc. R. Soc. B 273, 2169–2175. (doi:10.1098/rspb.
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., 2006.3569)
Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R. & Gough, H. 2006 The Rule, N. O. & Ambady, N. 2008 The face of success:
international personality item pool and the future of inferences from chief executive officers’ appearance
public-domain personality measures. J. Res. Pers. 40, predict company profits. Psychol. Sci. 19, 109–111.
84–96. (doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007) (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02054.x)
Golomb, B. A., Cortez-Perez, M., Jaworski, B. A., Mednick, Sisk, C. L. & Zehr, J. L. 2005 Pubertal hormones organize the
S. & Dimsdale, J. 2007 Point Subtraction Aggression adolescent brain and behavior. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 26,
Paradigm: validity of a brief schedule of use. Violence Vict. 163–174. (doi:10.1016/j.yfrne.2005.10.003)
22, 95–103. (doi:10.1891/vv-v22i1a006) Slater, A., Bremner, G., Johnson, S. P., Sherwood, P.,
Johnson, T., Burk, J. & Kirkpatrick, L. 2007 Dominance Hayes, R. & Brown, E. 2000 Newborn infants’ preference
and prestige as differential predictors of aggression and for attractive faces: the role of internal and external facial
testosterone levels in men. Evol. Hum. Behav. 28, features. Infancy 1, 265–274. (doi:10.1207/S15327078
345–351. (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.04.003) 1N0102_8)
Laidre, M. E. & Vehrencamp, S. L. 2008 Is bird song a Swaddle, J. P. & Reierson, G. W. 2002 Testosterone increases
reliable signal of aggressive intent? Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. perceived dominance but not attractiveness in human
62, 1207–1211. (doi:10.1007/s00265-007-0539-3) males. Proc. R. Soc. B 269, 2285–2289. (doi:10.1098/rspb.
Langlois, J. H., Roggman, L. A., Casey, R. J., Ritter, J. M., 2002.2165)
Rieser-Danner, L. A. & Jenkins, V. Y. 1987 Infant Thornhill, R. & Gangestad, S. W. 1999 Facial attractiveness.
preferences for attractive faces: rudiments of a stereo- Trends Cogn. Sci. 3, 452–460. (doi:10.1016/S1364-
type. Dev. Psychol. 23, 363–369. (doi:10.1037/0012- 6613(99)01403-5)
1649.23.3.363) Todorov, A., Mandisodza, A. N., Goren, A. & Hall, C. C.
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Waitt, C., Tiddeman, B. P., 2005 Inferences of competence from faces predict election
Feinberg, D. R., Perrett, D. I., Apicella, C. L. & Marlow, outcomes. Science 308, 1623–1626. (doi:10.1126/science/
F. W. 2008 Symmetry is related to sexual dimorphism in 1110589)
faces: data across culture and species. PLoS ONE 3, 1–8. Vanpe, C. et al. 2007 Antler size provides an honest signal of
(doi:10.1371/journal.oone.0002106) male phenotypic quality in roe deer. Am. Nat. 169,
Mazur, A., Halpern, C. & Udry, J. R. 1994 Dominant looking 481–493. (doi:10.1086/512046)
male teenagers copulate earlier. Ethol. Sociobiol. 15, 87–94. Verdonck, A., Gaethofs, M., Carels, C. & de Zegher, F. 1999
(doi:10.1016/0162-3095(94)90019-1) Effect of low-dose testosterone treatment on craniofacial
McCormick, C. M. & Mathews, I. Z. 2007 HPA function in growth in boys with delayed puberty. Eur. J. Orthod. 21,
adolescence: role of sex hormones in its regulation and the 137–143. (doi:10.1093/ejo/21.2.137)
enduring consequences of exposure to stressors. Pharma- Verplaetse, J., Vanneste, S. & Braeckman, J. 2007 You can
col. Biochem. Behav. 86, 220–223. (doi:10.1016/j.pbb. judge a book by its cover: the sequel. A kernel of truth in
2006.07.012) predicting cheating detection. Evol. Hum. Behav. 28,
Morestz, J. A. & Morris, M. R. 2006 Phylogenetic analysis of 260–271. (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehave.2007.04.006)
the evolution of a signal of aggressive intent in northern Weston, E. M., Friday, A. E., Johnstone, R. A. & Schrenk, F.
swordtail fishes. Am. Nat. 168, 336–349. (doi:10.1086/ 2004 Wide faces or large canines? The attractive versus the
506920) aggressive primate. Proc. R. Soc. B 271, S416–S419.
Mueller, U. & Mazur, A. 1996 Facial dominance of West (doi:10.1098/rsbl.2004.0203)
Point cadets as a predictor of later military rank. Soc. Forces Weston, E. M., Friday, A. E. & Lio, P. 2007 Biometric
74, 823–850. (doi:10.2307/2580383) evidence that sexual selection has shaped the hominin
Penton-Voak, I. S. & Chen, J. Y. 2004 High salivary face. PLoS ONE. 2, 1–8. (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.
testosterone is linked to masculine male facial appearance 0000710)
in humans. Evol. Hum. Behav. 24, 229–241. (doi:10.1016/ Willis, J. & Todorov, A. 2006 First impressions: making up
j.evolhumbehav.2004.04.003) your mind after a 100-Ms exposure to a face. Psychol. Sci.
Penton-Voak, I. S., Pound, N., Little, A. C. & Perrett, D. I. 17, 592–598. (doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x)
2006 Personality judgments from natural and composite Zebrowitz, L. A., Hall, J. A., Murphy, N. A. & Rhodes, G.
facial images: more evidence for a “kernel of truth” in 2002 Looking smart and looking good: facial cues to
social perception. Soc. Cogn. 24, 490–524. (doi:10.1521/ intelligence and their origins. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 28,
soco.2006.24.5.607) 238–249. (doi:10.1177/0146167202282009)

Proc. R. Soc. B (2008)