The Relative Contribution of Jawbone and Cheekbone Prominence, Eyebrow Thickness, Eye Size, and Face Length to Evaluations of Facial Masculinity and Attractiveness: A Conjoint Data-Driven Approach.

Justin K Mogilski,Lisa L M Welling

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02428

Abstract

Recent work demonstrates the methodological rigor of a type of data-driven analysis (i.e., conjoint analysis; CA), which accounts for the relative contribution of different facial morphological cues to interpersonal perceptions of romantic partner quality. This study extends this literature by using a conjoint face ranking task to predict the relative contribution of five sexually dimorphic facial shape features (jawbone and cheekbone prominence, eyebrow thickness, eye size, face length) to participants’ (N = 922) perceptions of facial attractiveness and sex-typicality (i.e., masculinity/femininity). For overall partner attractiveness, eyebrow thickness and jawbone prominence were relatively more salient than cheekbone prominence and eye size. Interestingly, masculinized (i.e., thicker) eyebrows were marginally more attractive for female than male faces, particularly within a long-term mating context. Masculinized jawbone prominence was more attractive for male than female faces, and feminized jawbone prominence was more attractive for female than male faces. For perceptions of masculinity, eyebrow thickness, jawbone prominence, and facial height were relatively more salient than cheekbone prominence and eye size, although facial height was more important for female than male faces, and jawbone prominence was marginally more important for male than female faces. These findings highlight the prominence of eyebrows, the jawline, and facial height during perception of facial attractiveness and masculinity – though it should be noted that many of these differences were small to moderate in effect size. Findings are interpreted in the context of prior research, and future directions for studying why these facial traits exhibit superior signaling capacity are discussed.

Highlights

Facial morphological cues are indicators of underlying physiology (Stephen et al, 2009; Little et al, 2011b; Jones et al, 2012)
Conjoint analysis (CA) produces importance values, which indicate a feature’s overall contribution to how profiles are ranked, and part-worth utility estimates, which indicate the relative importance of each level within each trait
Importance values reveal which features are weighted most heavily relative to others during ranking decisions, but not the direction of preference within any given feature

Summary

Introduction

Facial morphological cues (e.g., shape, color, and texture) are indicators of underlying physiology (Stephen et al, 2009; Little et al, 2011b; Jones et al, 2012) From these cues, humans can accurately predict certain physical and psychological qualities (e.g., an individual’s health, physical attractiveness, trustworthiness) that are significant to partner selection and social judgment (e.g., Zebrowitz, 2011; Todorov et al, 2015). Face perception researchers have studied how these cues are processed during interpersonal evaluation by digitally manipulating photographic facial cues and presenting these images to third-party raters. These manipulations predictably alter perceptions of attractiveness, dominance, sex-typicality (i.e., masculinity/femininity), health, trustworthiness, and other social attributes (for a review, see Todorov et al, 2008; Little et al, 2011a). This research has tended to focus on individual facial cues in isolation, and debate is turning to the relative contributions of these cues to social perception (Scott et al, 2010; Stephen et al, 2012; Mogilski and Welling, 2017)

Results

Discussion

Conclusion