Symmetry in Motion: Perception of Attractiveness Changes with Facial Movement

Original Paper

Abstract

Facial symmetry is an index of developmental stability and shows a positive correlation with attractiveness assessment. However, the appearance of one’s facial symmetry is not always static and may change when there is facial movement while a person is speaking. This study examined whether viewing a dynamic image of a person speaking (where facial symmetry may alter) would elicit a different perception of attractiveness than viewing a static image of that person as a still photo. We examined changes in both measured and perceived facial symmetry in relation to attractiveness perception. We found that when facial movements created an appearance of overall greater facial symmetry while a person was speaking in a video, the person was rated as being more attractive than as a still photo. Likewise, those with facial movements measured and perceived as less symmetrical while speaking were rated as less attractive in a video clip than still photo. By examining the perception of faces in motion as we typically encounter others in real life rather than considering only static photos, we have extended the ecological validity of the study of the perception of bilateral symmetry in humans as it relates to attractiveness.

Keywords

Bilateral symmetry Fluctuating asymmetry Attractiveness Dynamic faces Static faces 

References

  1. Banks, G. C., Batchelor, J. H., & McDaniel, M. A. (2010). Smarter people are (a bit) more symmetrical: A meta-analysis of the relationship between intelligence and fluctuating asymmetry. Intelligence, 38, 393–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cosi, P., & Caldognetto, E. M. (1996). Lips and jaw movements for vowels and consonants: Spatio-temporal characteristics and bimodal recognition applications. In D. G. Stork & M. E. Hennecke (Eds.), Speechreading by humans and machines: Models, systems and applications (pp. 291–314). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Darby, L. J., Millett, D., Kelly, N., McIntyre, G., & Cronin, M. (2015). The effect of smiling on facial symmetry in adults: A 3D evaluation. Australian Orthodontic Journal, 31(2), 132–137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Fink, B., Neave, N., Manning, J. T., & Grammer, K. (2006). Facial symmetry and judgments of attractiveness, health and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(3), 491–499.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.01.017G.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fink, B., & Penton-Voak, I. (2002). Evolutionary psychology of facial attractiveness. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(5), 154–158.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fink, B., Weege, B., Neave, N., Pham, M. N., & Shackelford, T. K. (2015). Integrating body movement into attractiveness research. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(220), 1–6.Google Scholar
  7. Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1997a). Human sexual selection and developmental stability. In J. A. Simpson & D. T. Kenrick (Eds.), Evolutionary personality and social psychology (pp. 169–195). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1997b). The evolutionary psychology of extrapair sex: The role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18(2), 69–88.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(97)00003-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1998). Menstrual cycle variation in women’s preference for the scent of symmetrical men. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London: Biological Sciences, 265(1399), 927–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Yeo, R. A. (1994). Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15(2), 73–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(94)90018-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gay, T., Ushijima, T., Hirose, H., & Cooper, F. S. (1974). Effect of speaking rate on labial consonant-vowel articulation. Journal of Phonetics, 2, 47–63.Google Scholar
  12. Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108(3), 233–242.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7036.108.3.233.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hughes, S. M., Harrison, M. A., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2002). The sound of symmetry: Voice as a marker of developmental instability. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(3), 173–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00099-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hughes, S. M., Pastizzo, M. J., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2008). The sound of symmetry revisited: Subjective and objective analyses of voice. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32(2), 93–108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-007-0042-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hume, D. K., & Montgomerie, R. (2001). Facial attractiveness signals different aspects of ‘quality’ in women and men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22(2), 93–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00065-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hӧnekopp, J., Bartholomé, T., & Jansen, G. (2003). Facial attractiveness, symmetry, and physical fitness in young women. Human Nature, 15(2), 147–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jasienska, G., Lipson, S. F., Ellison, P. T., Thune, I., & Ziomkiewicz, A. (2006). Symmetrical women have higher potential fertility. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 390–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klüver, M., Hecht, H., & Troje, N. F. (2016). Internal consistency predicts attractiveness in biological walkers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 37(1), 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kościński, K. (2013). Perception of facial attractiveness from static and dynamic stimuli. Perception, 42(2), 163–175.  https://doi.org/10.1068/p7378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kowner, R. (2001). Psychological perspective on human developmental stability and fluctuating asymmetry: Sources, applications and implications. British Journal of Psychology, 92(3), 447–469.  https://doi.org/10.1348/000712601162284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lander, K. (2008). Relating visual and vocal attractiveness for moving and static faces. Animal Behaviour, 75(3), 817–822.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2007.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Little, A. C., Jones, A. C., Waitt, C., Tiddeman, B. P., Feinberg, D. R., Perrett, D. I., et al. (2008). Symmetry is related to sexual dimorphism in face: Data across culture and species. PLoS ONE, 3(5), e2106.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Livshits, G., Davidi, L., Kobyliansky, E., Ben-Amitai, D., Levi, Y., Meriob, P., et al. (1998). Decreased developmental stability as assessed by fluctuating asymmetry of morphometric traits in preterm infants. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 29(4), 793–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Livshits, G., & Kobyliansky, E. (1991). Fluctuating asymmetry as a possible measure of developmental homeostasis in humans: A review. Human Biology, 63(4), 441–466.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Manning, J. T. (1995). Fluctuating asymmetry and body weight in men and women: Implications for sexual selection. Evolution and Human Behavior, 16(2), 145–153.Google Scholar
  26. Manning, J. T., Koukourakis, K., & Brodie, D. A. (1997). Fluctuating asymmetry, metabolic rate and sexual selection in human males. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18(1), 15–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(96)00072-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Manning, J. T., Scutt, D., & Lewis-Jones, D. I. (1998). Developmental stability, ejaculate size, and sperm quality in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19(5), 273–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Markow, T. A., & Wandler, K. (1986). Fluctuating dermatoglyphic asymmetry and the genetics of liability to schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research, 19(4), 323–328.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin, S. M., Manning, J. T., & Dowrick, C. F. (1999). Fluctuating asymmetry, relative digit length, and depression in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(3), 203–214.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00006-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mealey, L., Bridgstock, R., & Townsend, G. C. (1999). Symmetry and perceived facial attractiveness: A monozygotic co-twin comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(1), 151–158.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.1.151.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Milne, B. J., Belsky, J., Poulton, R., Thomson, W. M., Caspi, A., & Kieser, J. (2003). Fluctuating asymmetry and physical health among young adults. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(1), 53–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00120-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mitrovic, A., Tinio, P. P. L., & Leder, H. (2016). Consequences of beauty: Effects of rater sex and sexual orientation on the visual exploration and evaluation of attractiveness in real world scenes. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 10, 122.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00122.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Møller, A. P., Soler, M., & Thornhill, R. (1995). Breast asymmetry, sexual selection, and human reproductive success. Evolution and Human Behavior, 16(3), 207–219.Google Scholar
  34. Møller, A. P., & Thornhill, R. (1997). A meta-analysis of the heritability of developmental stability. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 10, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Møller, A. P., & Thornhill, R. (1998). Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: A meta-analysis. American Naturalist, 151(2), 174–192.  https://doi.org/10.1086/286110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Morrison, E. R., Gralewski, L., Campbell, N., & Penton-Voak, I. S. (2007). Facial movement varies by sex and is related to attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(3), 186–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Naik, G. R., Kumar, D. K., & Arjunan, S. P. (2008). Reliability of facial muscle activity to identify vowel utterance. In Presented TENCON 2008-2008 IEEE region 10 conference, India, 2008. New York, NY: IEEE.Google Scholar
  38. Penton-Voak, I. S., & Chang, H. Y. (2008). Attractiveness judgments of individuals vary across emotional expression and movement conditions. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 6(2), 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Penton-Voak, I. S., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Baker, S., Tiddeman, B., Burt, D. M., et al. (2001). Symmetry, sexual dimorphism in facial proportions and male facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 268(1476), 1617–1623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Perrett, D. I., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., Lee, K. J., Rowland, D. A., & Edwards, R. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20(5), 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pipitone, R. N., & Gallup, G. G., Jr. (2008). Women’s voice attractiveness varies across the menstrual cycle. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 268–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Post, R. B., Haberman, J., Iwaki, L., & Whitney, D. (2012). The frozen face effect: Why static photographs may not do you justice. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(22), 1–7.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00022.Google Scholar
  43. Rhodes, G., Lie, H. C., Thevaraja, N., Taylor, L., Iredell, N., Curran, C., et al. (2011). Facial attractiveness ratings from video-clips and static images tell the same story. PLoS ONE, 6(11), e26653.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026653.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., & Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5(4), 659–669.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Roberts, S. C., Saxton, T. K., Murray, A. K., Burriss, R. P., Rowland, H. M., & Little, A. C. (2009). Static and dynamic facial images cue similar attractiveness judgments. Ethology, 115(6), 588–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rubenstein, A. J. (2005). Variation in perceived attractiveness: Differences between dynamic and static faces. Psychological Science, 16(10), 759–762.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01610.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Sadr, J., Troje, N. F., & Nakayama, K. (2006). A pedestrian courtship: Attractiveness and symmetry of humans walking. Journal of Vision, 6, 797–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Samuels, C. A., Butterworth, G., Roberts, T., Graupner, L., & Hole, G. (1994). Facial aesthetics: Babies prefer attractiveness to symmetry. Perception, 42(11), 823–831.  https://doi.org/10.1068/p230823n.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Saxton, T. K., Burriss, R. P., Murray, A. K., Rowland, H. M., & Roberts, C. (2009). Face, body and speech cues independently predict judgments of attractiveness. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 23–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Scheib, J. E., Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1999). Facial attractiveness, symmetry, and cues of good genes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 266(1431), 1913–1917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Scutt, D., & Manning, J. T. (1996). Symmetry and ovulation in women. Human Reproduction, 11(11), 2477–2480.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Swaddle, J. P., & Cuthill, I. C. (1995). Asymmetry and human facial attractiveness: Symmetry may not always be beautiful. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 261(1360), 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty. Human Nature, 4(3), 237–269.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00629.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1994). Human fluctuating asymmetry and sexual behavior. Psychological Science, 5(5), 297–302.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00629.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). The scent of symmetry: A human sex pheromone that signals fitness? Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 175–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Thornhill, R., Gangestad, S. W., & Comer, R. (1995). Human female orgasm and mate fluctuating asymmetry. Animal Behaviour, 50(6), 1601–1615.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(95)80014-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Thornhill, R., & Møller, A. P. (1997). Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biological Reviews, 72(4), 497–528.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Tovée, M. J., Tasker, K., & Benson, P. J. (2000). Is symmetry a visual cue to attractiveness in the human female body? Evolution and Human Behavior, 21(3), 191–200.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00040-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Van Valen, L. (1962). A study of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution, 16, 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Waynforth, D. (1998). Fluctuating asymmetry and human male life-history traits in rural Belize. The Royal Society Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 265(1405), 1497–1501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentAlbright CollegeReadingUSA

Personalised recommendations