Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 5.
Published in final edited form as: Curr Biol. 2017 May 11;27(10):1506–1513.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.018

Table 1. Distribution of beauty ratings in Experiments 1A,B (N = 20 each) and Experiment 2 (N =22).

For each stimulus category with or without an added task. Beauty ratings: “definitely not” (B = 0); “perhaps no” (1); perhaps yes (2); “definitely yes” (3). The teddy bear was used only in Experiment 1B. See also Figure S4.

Stimulus Kind Count without Task % Count with Task %
Beauty Rating 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Experiment 1Aa
Self-selected beautiful 0 0 2 18 90 1 2 9 8 40
High-valence IAPS 0 1 3 16 80 0 5 12 3 15
Mid-valence IAPS 0 8 10 2 10 5 6 5 4 20
Neutral IKEA 8 9 3 0 0 10 8 2 0 0
Candy 4 3 7 6 30 4 2 8 6 30
Experiment 1Ba
Self-selected beautiful 0 0 3 17 85 0 0 9 11 55
High-valence IAPS 0 2 8 10 50 0 4 11 5 25
Mid-valence IAPS 6 1 8 5 25 3 5 9 3 15
Neutral IKEA 9 4 5 2 10 8 6 6 0 0
Candy 5 2 6 7 35 6 6 7 1 5
Teddy bear 2 5 7 6 30 5 5 5 5 25
Experiment 2b
Self-selected beautiful 0 0 0 22 100 1 0 4 17 77
High-valence IAPS 1 3 9 9 41 2 4 8 8 36
Mid-valence IAPS 4 6 7 5 23 4 5 9 4 18
Neutral IKEA 9 4 9 0 0 12 7 3 0 0
Candy 2 2 8 10 45 1 5 11 5 23

For each stimulus, category is with or without an added task. Beauty ratings: “definitely not” (B = 0); “perhaps no” (1); perhaps yes (2); “definitely yes” (3). The teddy bear was used only in experiment 1B.

See also Figure S4.

a

N = 20 each.

b

N = 22.