Do men help only beautiful women in social networks?
Is the Social Network profile photo important when women need help? In two field experiments (N = 681), male and female participants received a help request from a woman of below-average, above-average (Study 1 and 2), or a woman of unknown physical attractiveness (Study 2). Men (but not women) responded more often, answered more detailed, and were more helpful and friendlier to the above-average physical attractive woman (Study 1 and 2), but if they replied, they also answered friendlier to the woman of unknown physical attractiveness (Study 2). In Study 3, participants (N = 298) reported their hypothetical helping intention in an experimental setting. The findings from all three studies indicate that these results are most likely interpretable considering males’ mating strategies and costly signal theory in contrast to the what-is-beautiful-is-good stereotype or attention boost explanation.
KeywordsAttractiveness bias Evolutionary psychology Costly signaling Physical attractiveness Helping behavior Mating strategies
We want to thank Dr. Sally M. Ischebeck for her help in data collection. Further, we would like to thank Daniel Farrelly and one anonymous reviewer for their careful and insightful reviews of the manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie (DGPs) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in Study 3. Due to the nature of the field experiments in Study 1 and 2, informed consent was not obtained prior to the participation of the study. However, all participants were debriefed after participation and encouraged to contact the first author.
Conflict of Interest
Sascha Schwarz declares that he has no conflict of interest. Lisa Baßfeld declares that she has no conflict of interest.
- Barclay, P., & Van Vugt, M. (2015). The evolutionary psychology of human prosociality: Adaptations, byproducts, and mistakes. Oxford library of psychology. The Oxford handbook of prosocial behavior, 37–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399813.013.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bhogal, M. S., Bartlett, J. E., & Farrelly, D. (2018a). The influence of mate choice motivation on non-financial altruism. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0070-x.
- Bhogal, M. S., Galbraith, N., & Manktelow, K. (2018b). A research note on the influence of relationship length and sex on preferences for altruistic and cooperative mates. Psychological Reports., 003329411876464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118764640.
- Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- DelPriore, D. J., Prokosch, M. L., & Hill, S. E. (2017). The causes and consequences of women’s competitive beautification. In M. L. Fisher (Ed.). The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 577–595). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199376377.013.34
- Dovidio, J. F., & Penner, L. A. (2001). Helping and altruism. In G. J. O. Fletcher & M. S. Clark (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Interpersonal processes (pp. 162–195). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Farrelly, D. (2013). Altruism as an indicator of good parenting quality in long-term relationships: Further investigations using the mate preferences towards altruistic traits scale. The Journal of Social Psychology, 153(4), 395–398. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.768595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Back, K. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups; a study of human factors in housing. Oxford, England: Harper.Google Scholar
- Latané, B., & Darley, J. M. (1970). The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn't he help? Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
- Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. London: William Heinemann.Google Scholar
- Penke, L., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2008). Beyond global Sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at Sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1113–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3518.104.22.1683.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Penner, L. A., Dovidio, J. F., Piliavin, J. A., & Schroeder, D. A. (2005). Prosocial behavior: Multilevel perspectives. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 365–392. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rosar, U., Klein, M., & Beckers, T. (2008). The frog pond beauty contest: Physical attractiveness and electoral success of the constituency candidates at the North Rhine-Westphalia state election of 2005. European Journal of Political Research, 47, 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2007.00720.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Smith, E. A., & Bliege Bird, R. (2005). Costly signaling and cooperative behavior. In H. Gintis, S. Bowles, R. Boyd, & E. Fehr (Eds.), Moral sentiments and material interests: The foundations of cooperation in economic life (pp. 115–148). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man: 1871–1971 (pp. 136–179). Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar