Advertisement

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 101–115 | Cite as

Seeing is believing: Facial appearance, credibility, and attitude change

  • Sheila Brownlow
Article

Abstract

One-hundred twenty-eight subjects (64 female, 64 male) viewed either a babyfaced or maturefaced female speaker delivering a persuasive communication, and also received information designed to make the speaker seem either untrustworthy or inexpert. Subjects indicated how much they agreed with the speaker's position and completed other measures concerning her appearance and their perceptions of her speech. Babyfaced speakers induced more agreement with their position than did maturefaced speakers when trustworthiness was in question, presumably because babyfaced speakers still appeared honest due to their babyish facial features. Conversely, maturefaced speakers produced more attitude agreement as compared to babyfaced speakers when expertise was questioned, perhaps because knowledgeability was still communicated via their mature countenance. Attitude change was not related to perceived likability, age, attractiveness, or communication skills of the speakers, or subjects' interest in the topic.

Keywords

Social Psychology Communication Skill Attitude Change Facial Feature Facial Appearance 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abelson, R.P., Kinder, D.R., Peters, M.D., & Fiske, S.T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political person perception.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619–630.Google Scholar
  2. Berry, D.S. (1990). Taking people at face value: Evidence for the kernel of truth hypothesis.Social Condition, 8, 343–361.Google Scholar
  3. Berry, D.S., & Brownlow, S. (1989). Were the physiognomists right? Personality correlates of facial babyishness.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 266–278.Google Scholar
  4. Berry, D.S., & McArthur, L.Z. (1985). Some components and consequences of a babyface.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 312–323.Google Scholar
  5. Berry, D.S., & McArthur, L.Z. (1986). Perceiving character in faces: The impact of age-related craniofacial changes on social perception.Psychological Bulletin, 100, 3–18.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brownlow, S., & Zebrowitz, L.A. (1990). Facial appearance, gender, and credibility in television commercials.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 14, 51–60.Google Scholar
  7. Buss, D.M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures.Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.Google Scholar
  8. Chaiken, S. (1979). Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1387–1397.Google Scholar
  9. Chaiken, S. (1986). Physical appearance and social influence. In C.P. Herman, M.P. Zanna, and E.T. Higgins (Eds.),Physical appearance, stigma, and social behavior. The Ontario Symposium, Vol. 3. (pp. 280–308). NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cunningham, M.R. (1986). Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 27–41.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, D.K., & Baran, S.J. (1981).Mass communication and everyday life: A Perspective on Theory and Effect. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing CompanyGoogle Scholar
  12. Dion, K.K., & Stein, S. (1978). Physical attractiveness and interpersonal influence.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 97–108.Google Scholar
  13. Eagly, A.H., & Chaiken, S. (1984). Cognitive theories of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 17 (pp. 280–308). NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Efran, M., & Patterson, E. (1974). Voters vote beautiful: The effects of physical appearance on a national debate.Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 6, 352–356.Google Scholar
  15. Fridlund, A.J. (1991). Evolution and facial action in reflex, social motive, and paralanguage.Biological Psychology, 32, 3–100.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hovland, C.I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influences of source credibility on communication effectiveness.Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635–650.Google Scholar
  17. McGinnies, E., & Ward, C.D. (1980). Better liked than right: Trustworthiness and expertise as factors in credibility.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 467–472.Google Scholar
  18. McGuire, W.J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.),The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 262–276). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  19. Nisbett, R.E., & Wilson, T.D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.Google Scholar
  20. Pallak, S. (1983). Salience of a communicator's physical attractiveness and persuasion: A heuristic versus systematic processing interpretation.Social Cognition, 2, 158–170.Google Scholar
  21. Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855.Google Scholar
  22. Rosenberg, S.W., & McCafferty, P. (1987). The image and the vote.Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 31–41.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, H.J., Archer, D., & Costanzo, M. (1991). “Just a hunch”: Accuracy and awareness in person perception.Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 15, 3–18.Google Scholar
  24. Sternthal, B., Phillips, L.W., & Dholakia, R. (1978). The persuasive effect of source credibility: A situational analysis.Public Opinion Quarterly, 42, 285–314.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Walster, E., Aronson, E., & Abrahams, D. (1966). On increasing the persuasiveness of a low-prestige communicator.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 325–342.Google Scholar
  26. Wixon, D.R., & Laird, J.D. (1976). Awareness and attitude change in the forced compliance paradigm: The importance of when.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 376–384.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheila Brownlow
    • 1
  1. 1.Catawba CollegeSalisbury

Personalised recommendations