Abstract
Disparate cultural practices suggest that small foot size may contribute to female attractiveness. Two hypotheses potentially explain such a pattern. Sexual dimorphism in foot size may lead observers to view small feet as feminine and large feet as masculine. Alternately, because small female feet index both youth and nulliparity, evolution may have favored a male preference for this attribute in order to maximize returns on male reproductive investment. Whereas the observational hypothesis predicts symmetrical polarizing preferences, with small feet being preferred in women and large feet being preferred in men, the evolutionary hypothesis predicts asymmetrical preferences, with the average phenotype being preferred in men. Using line drawings that varied only in regard to relative foot size, we examined judgments of attractiveness in nine cultures. Small foot size was generally preferred for females, while average foot size was preferred for males. These results provide preliminary support for the hypothesis that humans possess an evolved preference for small feet in females.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barber, N. (1995). The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethology (& Sociobiology, 16, 395–424.
Bird, A. R., Menz, H. B., & Hyde, C. C. (1999). The effect of pregnancy on footprint parameters. A prospective investigation. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 89, 405–409.
Block, R. A., Hess, L. A., Timpano, E. V., & Serlo, C. (1985). Physiologic changes in the foot during pregnancy. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 75, 297–299.
Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York: Basic Books.
Chantelau, E., & Gede, A. (2002). Foot dimensions of elderly people with and without diabetes mellitus: A data basis for shoe design. Gerontology, 48, 241–244.
Curtis, V., Aunger, R., & Rabie, T. (2004). Quantitative evidence that disgust evolved to protect from risk of disease. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biology Letters, 272, S131–133.
Dahmus, M. A., & Sibai, B. M. (1993). Blunt abdominal trauma: Are there any predictive factors for abruptio placentae or maternal–fetal distress? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 169, 1054–1059.
Dixson, A. F., Halliwell, G., East, R., Wignarajah, P., & Anderson, M. J. (2003). Masculine somatotype and hirsuteness as determinants of sexual attractiveness to women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 29–39.
Fessler, D. M. T., Haley, K. J., & Lal, R. (in press). Sexual dimorphism in foot length proportionate to stature. Annals of Human Biology.
Fink, B., Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (2001). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness in relation to skin texture and color. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 115, 92–99.
Foti, T., Davids, J. R., & Bagley, A. (2000). A biomechanical analysis of gait during pregnancy. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 82, 625–632.
Frederick, D. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2004). Male muscularity as a good genes indicator: Evidence from women’s preferences for short-term and long-term mates. Paper presented at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology Conference, Austin, TX, January 31st, 2004.
Frey, C., Thompson, F., Smith, J., Sanders, M., & Horstman, H. (1993). American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society women’s shoe survey. Foot & Ankle, 14, 78–81.
Fries, E. C., & Hellebrandt, F. A. (1943). The influence of pregnancy on the location of the center of gravity, postural stability, and body alignment. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 46, 374–380.
Grammer, K., & Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: The role of symmetry and averageness. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 108, 233–242.
Jablonski, N. G., & Chaplin, G. (2000). The evolution of human skin coloration. Journal of Human Evolution, 39, 57–106.
Jackson, B. (2000). Splendid slippers: A thousand years of an erotic tradition. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press.
Jones, D. M. (1995). Sexual selection, physical attractiveness and facial neoteny: Cross-cultural evidence and implications. Current Anthropology, 36, 723–748.
Jones, D. M. (1996). Physical attractiveness and the theory of sexual selection: Results from five populations. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Kaar, P., & Jokela, J. (1998). Natural selection on age-specific fertilities in human females: Comparison of individual-level fitness measures. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences, 265, 2415–2420.
Kirby, K. A. (2000). Biomechanics of the normal and abnormal foot. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 90, 30–34. %
Lundeen, S., Lundquist, K., Cornwall, M. W., & McPoil, T. G. (1994). Plantar pressure during level walking compared with other ambulatory activities. Foot (& Ankle International, 15, 324–328.
Manson, J. H. (1997). Does female rank or age affect mate choice behavior in free-ranging rhesus macaques? Folia Primatologica, 68, 366–369.
Nettle, D. (2002). Height and reproductive success in a cohort of British men. Human Nature, 13, 473–491.
Rhodes, G., Jeffery, L., Watson, T. L., Clifford, C. W. G., & Nakayama, K. (2003). Fitting the mind to the world: Face adaptation and attractiveness aftereffects. Psychological Science, 14, 558.
Rossi, W. A. (1976). The sex life of the foot and shoe. New York: Saturday Review Press.
Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality (& Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320.
Runnebaum, I. B., Holcberg, G., & Katz, M. (1998). Pregnancy outcome after repeated blunt abdominal trauma. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 80, 85–86.
Singh, D. (1993). Body shape and women’s attractiveness: The critical role of waist-to-hip ratio. Human Nature, 4, 297–321.
Symons, D. (1979). The evolution of human sexuality. New York: Oxford University Press.
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.
Symons, D. (2002, January). Warrior lovers: Erotic fiction, evolution, and female sexuality. Paper presented at the UCLA/UCSB Evolution, Mind and Behavior Conference, Santa Barbara, CA.
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty: Averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance. Human Nature, 4, 237–269.
Van den Berge, P., & Frost, P. (1986). Skin color Preference, sexual dimorphism, and sexual selection: A case of gene culture co-evolution? Ethnic and Racial Studies, 9, 87–113.
Wehr, P., MacDonald, K., Lindner, R., & Yeung, G. (2001). Stabilizing and directional selection on facial paedomorphosis: Averageness or juvenilization. Human Nature, 12, 383–402.
Williams, J. K., McClain, L., Rosemurgy, A. S., & Colorado, N. M. (1990). Evaluation of blunt abdominal trauma in the third trimester of pregnancy: Maternal and fetal considerations. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 75, 33–37.
Zerbe, K. J. (1985). “Your feet’s too big”: An inquiry into psychological and symbolic meanings of the foot. Psychoanalytic Review, 72, 301–314.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fessler, D.M.T., Nettle, D., Afshar, Y. et al. A Cross-Cultural Investigation of the Role of Foot Size in Physical Attractiveness. Arch Sex Behav 34, 267–276 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-005-3115-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-005-3115-9