Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 19;8:2181. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02181

Table 1.

Evaluations (mean and standard deviation) in each dimension as a function of model’s sex and facial expression.

Angry
Neutral
Happy
Total
M SD M SD M SD M (SD)
Attractiveness
Female 2.35a (0.80) 3.13b (0.92) 4.29c (1.25) 3.261 (0.81)
Male 2.10a (0.74) 2.98b (0.88) 3.84c (1.27) 2.972 (0.83)
Total 2.23d (0.73) 3.06e (0.86) 4.07f (1.21)
Familiarity
Female 3.24a (1.27) 3.59b (1.24) 4.41c (1.50) 3.751 (1.17)
Male 3.07a (1.23) 3.55b (1.20) 4.26c (1.45) 3.622 (1.15)
Total 3.15d (1.23) 3.57e (1.19) 4.33f (1.43)
Intensity
Female 5.00a (0.89) 3.44b (0.89) 5.02a (1.05) 4.491 (0.72)
Male 4.99a (0.90) 3.48b (0.85) 4.82c (0.98) 4.431 (0.67)
Total 5.00d (0.83) 3.46e (0.84) 4.92d (0.97)
Valence
Female 2.59a (0.65) 3.69b (0.43) 5.74c (0.73) 4.011 (0.36)
Male 2.47a (0.62) 3.68b (0.40) 5.54c (0.74) 3.902 (0.34)
Total 2.53d (0.58) 3.69e (0.37) 5.64f (0.69)

Means in the same line that share the same superscript – a,b,c (means associated with the interaction between facial expression and model’s sex) and – d,e,f (means associated with the main effect of facial expression) – did not differ significantly. Means in the same column that share the same superscript – 1,2 (means associated to the main effect of model’s sex) – did not differ significantly. Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction.