Skip to main content
PMC home page
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 1999 Sep 22;266(1431):1913–1917. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0866

Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes.

J E Scheib 1, S W Gangestad 1, R Thornhill 1
PMCID: PMC1690211  PMID: 10535106

Abstract

Cues of phenotypic condition should be among those used by women in their choice of mates. One marker of better phenotypic condition is thought to be symmetrical bilateral body and facial features. However, it is not clear whether women use symmetry as the primary cue in assessing the phenotypic quality of potential mates or whether symmetry is correlated with other facial markers affecting physical attractiveness. Using photographs of men's faces, for which facial symmetry had been measured, we found a relationship between women's attractiveness ratings of these faces and symmetry, but the subjects could not rate facial symmetry accurately. Moreover, the relationship between facial attractiveness and symmetry was still observed, even when symmetry cues were removed by presenting only the left or right half of faces. These results suggest that attractive features other than symmetry can be used to assess phenotypic condition. We identified one such cue, facial masculinity (cheek-bone prominence and a relatively longer lower face), which was related to both symmetry and full- and half-face attractiveness.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (111.9 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Charlesworth B. Mutation-selection balance and the evolutionary advantage of sex and recombination. Genet Res. 1990 Jun;55(3):199–221. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300025532. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cunningham M. R., Barbee A. P., Pike C. L. What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990 Jul;59(1):61–72. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.59.1.61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Furlow B., Gangestad S. W., Armijo-Prewitt T. Developmental stability and human violence. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Jan 7;265(1390):1–6. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gangestad S. W., Thornhill R. Menstrual cycle variation in women's preferences for the scent of symmetrical men. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 May 22;265(1399):927–933. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0380. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Grafen A. Biological signals as handicaps. J Theor Biol. 1990 Jun 21;144(4):517–546. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5193(05)80088-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Grammer K., Thornhill R. Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. J Comp Psychol. 1994 Sep;108(3):233–242. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.108.3.233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Houle D. Comparing evolvability and variability of quantitative traits. Genetics. 1992 Jan;130(1):195–204. doi: 10.1093/genetics/130.1.195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Mealey L., Bridgstock R., Townsend G. C. Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: a monozygotic co-twin comparison. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Jan;76(1):151–158. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.76.1.151. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  10. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [Google Scholar]
  11. Penton-Voak I. S., Perrett D. I., Castles D. L., Kobayashi T., Burt D. M., Murray L. K., Minamisawa R. Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature. 1999 Jun 24;399(6738):741–742. doi: 10.1038/21557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Rikowski A., Grammer K. Human body odour, symmetry and attractiveness. Proc Biol Sci. 1999 May 7;266(1422):869–874. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0717. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Simpson J. A., Gangestad S. W., Christensen P. N., Leck K. Fluctuating asymmetry, sociosexuality, and intrasexual competitive tactics. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Jan;76(1):159–172. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Thornhill R., Møller A. P. Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1997 Nov;72(4):497–548. doi: 10.1017/s0006323197005082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Waynforth D. Fluctuating asymmetry and human male life-history traits in rural Belize. Proc Biol Sci. 1998 Aug 22;265(1405):1497–1501. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1998.0463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Whitlock M. The heritability of fluctuating asymmetry and the genetic control of developmental stability. Proc Biol Sci. 1996 Jul 22;263(1372):849–853. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1996.0125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES