Abstract
In humans (Homo sapiens), sexual dimorphism in face shape has been proposed to be linked to quality in both men and women. Although preferences for high-quality mates might be expected, previous work has suggested that high quality may be associated with decreased investment in partnerships. In line with a trade-off between partner quality and investment, human females have been found to prefer higher levels of masculinity when judging under conditions where the benefits of quality would be maximised and the costs of low investment would be minimised. In this study, we examined facultative preferences for masculinity/femininity under hypothetical high and low environmental harshness in terms of resource availability in which participants were asked to imagine themselves in harsh/safe environments. We demonstrate that environmental harshness influences preferences for sexual dimorphism differently according to whether the relationship is likely to be short or long term. Women prefer less-masculine male faces and men prefer less-feminine female faces for long-term than short-term relationships under conditions of environmental harshness. Such findings are consistent with the idea that high-quality partners may be low investors and suggest that under harsh ecological conditions, both men and women favour a low-quality/high-investment partner for long-term relationships. For short-term relationships, where investment is not an important variable, preferences for sexual dimorphism were similar for the low and high environmental harshness conditions. These results provide experimental evidence that human preferences may be contingent on the environment an individual finds itself inhabiting.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson JL, Crawford CB, Nadeau J, Lindberg T (1992) Was the Duchess of Windsor right? A cross-cultural review of ideals of female body shape. Ethol Sociobiol 13:197–227
Belsky J, Steinberg L, Draper P (1991) Childhood experience, interpersonal development, and reproductive strategy—an evolutionary-theory of socialization. Child Dev 62:647–670
Benson PJ, Perrett DI (1993) Extracting prototypical facial images from exemplars. Perception 22:257–262
Burley N (1986) Sexual selection for aesthetic traits in species with biparental care. Am Nat 127:415–445
Buss DM, Barnes M (1986) Preferences in human mate selection. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:559–570
Campbell KL, Wood JW (1994) Human reproductive ecology: interactions of environment, fertility, and behaviour. Ann NY Acad Sci 709:227–230
Chisholm JS (1996) The evolutionary ecology of attachment organization. Hum Nat 7:1–37
Cohen DL (2004) Attachment, ecology, and mating strategies. Ph.D. dissertation, Institute for the Study of Children, Families and Social Issues, University of London, London
Cunningham MR (1986) Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:925–935
Ellison PT (2001) Reproductive ecology and human evolution. Aldine de Gruyter, New York
Gangestad SW, Haselton MG, Buss DM (2006) Evolutionary foundations of cultural variation: evoked culture and mate preferences. Psychol Inq 17:75–95
Geary DC, Vigil J, Byrd-Craven J (2004) Evolution of human mate choice. J Sex Res 41:27–42
Grammer K, Thornhill R (1994) Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. J Comp Psychol 108:233–242
Hill K, Hurtado AM (1996) Ache life history: the ecology and demography of a foraging people. Aldine de Gruyter, New York
Jones D, Hill K (1993) Criteria of facial attractiveness in five populations. Hum Nat 4:271–296
Little AC, Hancock PJ (2002) The role of masculinity and distinctiveness on the perception of attractiveness in human male faces. Br J Psychol 93:451–464
Little AC, Perrett DI (2002) Putting beauty back in the eye of the beholder. Psychologist 15:28–32
Little AC, Burt DM, Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI (2001) Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces. Proc R Soc Lond B 268:39–44
Little AC, Jones BC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2002a) Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proc R Soc Lond B 269:1095–1100
Little AC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2002b) Individual differences in the perception of attractiveness: how cyclic hormonal changes and self-perceived attractiveness influence female preferences for male faces. In: Rhodes G, Zebrowitz L (eds) Advances in social cognition: facial attractiveness, vol 1. Ablex, Westport, CT, pp 59–90
Little AC, Perrett DI, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM (2002c) Evolution and individual differences in the perception of attractiveness. In: Kenichi A, Akazawa T (eds) Human mate choice and prehistoric marital networks. International research center for Japanese studies, Kyoto, Japan, pp 101–115
Mace R (2000) Evolutionary ecology of human life history. Anim Behav 59:1–10
Møller AP, Thornhill R (1998) Male parental care, differential parental investment by females and sexual selection. Anim Behav 55:1507–1515
Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI, Castles DL, Kobayashi T, Burt DM, Murray LK, Minamisawa R (1999) Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature 399:741–742
Penton-Voak IS, Little AC, Jones BC, Burt DM, Tiddeman BP, Perrett DI (2003) Female condition influences preferences for sexual dimorphism in faces of male humans (Homo sapiens). J Comp Psychol 117:264–271
Perrett DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak IS, Rowland DR, Yoshikawa S, Burt DM, Henzi SP, Castles DL, Akamatsu S (1998) Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature 394:884–887
Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (1999) Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn Sci 3:452–460
Tiddeman BP, Burt DM, Perrett DI (2001) Prototyping and transforming facial texture for perception research. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 21:42–50
Wedekind C, Seebeck T, Bettens F, Paepke AJ (1995) MHC-dependent mate preferences in humans. Proc R Soc Lond B 260:245–249
Wilson M, Daly M (1997) Life expectancy, economic inequality, homicide, and reproductive timing in Chicago neighbourhoods. Br Med J 314:1271–1274
Acknowledgements
ACL is supported by a Royal Society University Research Fellowship.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by T. Czeschlik
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Little, A.C., Cohen, D.L., Jones, B.C. et al. Human preferences for facial masculinity change with relationship type and environmental harshness. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 61, 967–973 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0325-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-006-0325-7