Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 43–50 | Cite as

Eye-Tracking of Men’s Preferences for Waist-to-Hip Ratio and Breast Size of Women

  • Barnaby J. DixsonEmail author
  • Gina M. Grimshaw
  • Wayne L. Linklater
  • Alan F. Dixson
Original Paper


Studies of human physical traits and mate preferences often use questionnaires asking participants to rate the attractiveness of images. Female waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), breast size, and facial appearance have all been implicated in assessments by men of female attractiveness. However, very little is known about how men make fine-grained visual assessments of such images. We used eye-tracking techniques to measure the numbers of visual fixations, dwell times, and initial fixations made by men who viewed front-posed photographs of the same woman, computer-morphed so as to differ in her WHR (0.7 or 0.9) and breast size (small, medium, or large). Men also rated these images for attractiveness. Results showed that the initial visual fixation (occurring within 200 ms from the start of each 5 s test) involved either the breasts or the waist. Both these body areas received more first fixations than the face or the lower body (pubic area and legs). Men looked more often and for longer at the breasts, irrespective of the WHR of the images. However, men rated images with an hourglass shape and a slim waist (0.7 WHR) as most attractive, irrespective of breast size. These results provide quantitative data on eye movements that occur during male judgments of the attractiveness of female images, and indicate that assessments of the female hourglass figure probably occur very rapidly.


Sexual attractiveness Evolution Female waist-to-hip ratio Female breast size Eye-tracking 


  1. Anderson, P. (1983). The reproductive role of the human breast. Current Anthropology, 24, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. L. (1988). Breasts, hips and buttocks revisited. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 319–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown, T. P., La, H., Ringrose, C., Hyland, R. E., Cole, A. A., & Brotherston, T. M. (1999). A method for assessing female breast morphometry and its clinical application. British Journal of Plastic Surgery, 52, 353–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavior and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buss, D. M. (2003). The evolution of desire (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Clarys, J. P., Martin, A. D., & Drinkwater, D. T. (1984). Gross tissue weights in the human body by cadaver dissection. Human Biology, 56, 459–473.Google Scholar
  7. Dixson, B. J., Dixson, A. F., Bishop, P., & Parish, A. (2008). Human physique and sexual attractiveness in men and women: A New Zealand–U.S. comparative study. Archives of Sexual Behavior. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9441-y.
  8. Dixson, B. J., Dixson, A. F., Li, B., & Anderson, M. J. (2007). Studies of human physique and sexual attractiveness: Sexual preferences of men and women in China. American Journal of Human Biology, 19, 88–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dixson, B. J., Dixson, A. F., Morgan, B., & Anderson, M. J. (2007). Human physique and sexual attractiveness: Sexual preferences of men and women in Bakossiland, Cameroon. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 369–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fink, B., Matts, P. J., Klingenberg, H., Kuntze, S., Bettina, W., & Grammer, K. (2008). Visual attention to variation in facial skin color distribution. Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology, 7, 155–161.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Furnham, A., Swami, V., & Shah, K. (2006). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio and breast size correlates of ratings of attractiveness and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 443–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Furnham, A., Tan, T., & McManus, C. (1997). Waist-to-hip ratio and preferences for body shape: A replication and extension. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 540–549.Google Scholar
  13. Gallup, G. G. (1982). Permanent breast enlargement in human female: A sociobiological analysis. Journal of Human Evolution, 11, 597–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grammer, K., Fink, B., Møller, A. P., & Thornhill, R. (2003). Darwinian aesthetics: Sexual selection and the biology of beauty. Biological Reviews, 78, 385–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hassebrauck, M. (1998). The visual process method: A new method to study physical attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 111–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henss, R. (2000). Waist-to-hip ratio and female attractiveness: Evidence from photographic stimuli and methodological considerations. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 501–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Horvath, T. (1981). Physical attractiveness: The influence of selected torso parameters. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 10, 21–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jasienska, G., Ziomkiewicz, A., Ellison, P. T., Lipson, S. F., & Thune, I. (2004). Large breasts and narrow waists indicate high reproductive potential in women. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: B, 271, 1213–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson, K. L., & Tassinary, L. G. (2005). Perceiving sex directly and indirectly: Meaning in motion and morphology. Psychological Science, 16, 890–897.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lassek, W. D., & Gaulin, S. J. C. (2007). Menarche is related to fat distribution. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 133, 1147–1151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Law-Smith, M. J. L., Perrett, D. I., Jones, B. C., Cornwall, R. E., Moore, F. R., Feinberg, D. R., et al. (2006). Facial appearance is a cue to oestrogen levels in women. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B, 273, 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. LeBlanc, S. A., & Barnes, E. (1974). Letter to the editor. American Naturalist, 108, 577–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lipson, S. F., & Ellison, P. T. (1996). Comparison of salivary steroid profiles in naturally occurring conception and non-conception cycles. Human Reproduction, 11, 2090–2096.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Low, B. S., Alexander, R. D., & Noonan, K. M. (1987). Human hips, breasts and buttocks: Is fat deceptive? Ethology and Sociobiology, 8, 249–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lykins, A. D., Meana, M., & Kambe, G. (2006). Detection of differential viewing patterns to erotic and non-erotic stimuli using eye-tracking methodology. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 35, 569–575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lykins, A. D., Meana, M., & Strauss, G. P. (2008). Sex differences in visual attention to erotic and non-erotic visual stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 219–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maner, J. K., DeWall, C. N., & Gailliot, M. T. (2008). Selective attention to signs of success: Social dominance and early stage interpersonal perception. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 488–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & DeWall, C. N. (2007). Adaptive attentional attunement: Evidence for mating-related perceptual bias. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 28–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Marlowe, F. (1998). The nubility hypothesis: The human breast as an honest signal of residual reproductive value. Human Nature, 9, 263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marlowe, F., Apicella, C. L., & Reed, D. (2005). Men’s preferences for women’s profile waist- to-hip ratio in two societies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 371–378.Google Scholar
  31. Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  32. Pawlowski, B. (1999). Permanent breasts as a side effect of subcutaneous fat tissue increase in human evolution. Homo, 50, 149–162.Google Scholar
  33. Pond, C. M. (1998). The fats of life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rupp, H. A., & Wallen, K. (2007). Sex differences in viewing sexual stimuli: An eye tracking study of men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 524–533.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Simblet, S. (2001). Anatomy for the artist. New York: DK Publishing.Google Scholar
  36. Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293–307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Singh, D. (2002). Female mate value at a glance: Relationship of waist-to-hip ratio to health, fecundity and attractiveness. Neauroendocrine Letters, 23(Suppl. 4), 81–91.Google Scholar
  38. Singh, D. (2006). The universal allure of the hourglass figure: An evolutionary theory of female sexual attractiveness. Clinics in Plastic Surgery, 33, 359–370.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Singh, D., & Young, R. K. (1995). Body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, breasts, and hips: Role in judgments of attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16, 483–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Smith, N. W. (1986). Psychology and evolution of breasts [Letter to the editor]. Journal of Human Evolution, 1, 285–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suschinsky, K. D., Elias, L. J., & Krupp, D. B. (2007). Looking for Ms Right: Allocating attention to facilitate mate choice decisions. Evolutionary Psychology, 5, 428–441.Google Scholar
  42. Sütterlin, B., Brunner, T. A., & Opwis, K. (2008). Eye-tracking the cancellation and focus model for preference judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 904–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Symons, D. (1995). Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In P. R. Abramson & S. D. Pinkerton (Eds.), Sexual nature, sexual culture (pp. 80–118). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Wiggins, J. S., Wiggins, N., & Conger, J. C. (1968). Correlates of heterosexual somatic preference. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 82–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barnaby J. Dixson
    • 1
    Email author
  • Gina M. Grimshaw
    • 2
  • Wayne L. Linklater
    • 1
  • Alan F. Dixson
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Biological SciencesVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand
  2. 2.School of PsychologyVictoria University of WellingtonWellingtonNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations