Skip to main content

Preference for Facial Self-Resemblance and Attractiveness in Human Mate Choice

Abstract

Empirical studies present considerably consistent data about human mate choice, from which we may infer that it tends to be homogamous for various traits. However, different experiments on facial resemblance led to contradictory results. To obtain additional data about the preference for self-resembling potential mates, male and female composite faces were modified in a manner to resemble subjects. Volunteers were asked to choose a potential partner from three images in different situations: self-resembling faces, non-resembling faces (both with the same degree of other-rated attractiveness), and images which were rated by others as more attractive than the self-resembling faces. Women did not show any preference for similarity; they preferred the most attractive male and female faces. In contrast, men preferred the most attractive images of the opposite sex to self-resembling faces and the self-resembling to non-resembling faces. The self-resemblance of same-sex faces was preferred by neither men nor women. Our results support the hypothesis that both facial similarity (i.e., cues of shared genes) and observer-independent features of attractiveness (i.e., honest signals of genetic quality) play an important role in males’ mate choice. The lack of choice for self-resemblance on the female side in this particular study might reflect their more complex decision-making rules that are probably based on other cues beside visual stimuli.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Bateson, P. P. G. (1983). Optimal outbreeding. In P. P. G. Bateson (Ed.), Mate choice (pp. 257–277). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereczkei, T., & Csanaky, A. (1996). Mate choice, marital success, and reproduction in a modern society. Ethology and Sociobiology, 17, 23–45. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(95)00104-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereczkei, T., Gyuris, P., Köves, P., & Bernáth, L. (2002). Homogamy, genetic similarity, and imprinting: Parental influence on mate choice preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 677–690. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00182-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereczkei, T., Gyuris, P., & Weisfeld, G. E. (2004). Sexual imprinting in human mate choice. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 271, 1129–1134. doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.2672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bereczkei, T., Vörös, A., Gál, A., & Bernáth, L. (1997). Resources, attractiveness, family commitment: Reproductive decisions in mate choice. Ethology, 103, 681–699. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0310.1997.tb00178.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Blouin, S. F., & Blouin, M. (1988). Inbreeding avoidance behaviors. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 3, 230–233. doi:10.1016/0169-5347(88)90164-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, M. R., Barbee, A. P., & Pike, C. L. (1990). What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male facial physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 61–72. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.59.1.61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M. (2002). Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 269, 1307–1312. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M. (2004). Facial resemblance increases the attractiveness of same-sex faces more than other-sex faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 271, 2085–2090. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M. (2005). Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: Context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 272, 919–922. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.3003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBruine, L. M., Jones, B. C., & Perrett, D. I. (2005). Women’s attractiveness judgements of self-resembling faces change across the menstrual cycle. Hormones and Behavior, 47, 379–383. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2004.11.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fink, B., Grammer, K., & Matts, P. J. (2006). Visible skin color distribution plays a role in the perception of age, attractiveness, and health in female faces. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 433–442. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1998). Menstrual cycle variation in women’s preferences for the scent of symmetrical men. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 927–933. doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (2008). Human oestrus. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 275, 991–1000. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.1425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godoy, R., Eisenberg, D. T. A., Reyes-García, V., Huanca, T., Leonard, W. R., McDade, T. W., et al. (2008). Assortative mating and offspring well-being: Theory and empirical findings from a native Amazonian society in Bolivia. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 201–210. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.12.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grammer, K. (1993). 5-Alpha-androst-16en-3alpha-on: A male pheromone? Ethology and Sociobiology, 14, 201–208. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(93)90006-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helgason, A., Pálsson, S., Guðbjartsson, D. F., Kristjánsson, Þ., & Stefánsson, K. (2008). An association between the kinship and fertility of human couples. Science, 319, 813–816. doi:10.1126/science.1150232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Herz, R. S., & Inzlicht, M. (2002). Sex differences in response to physical and social factors involved in human mate selection: The importance of smell for women. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 359–364. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00095-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, W. G. (1995). The ontogeny of littermate preferences in juvenile golden-mantled ground squirrels: Effects of rearing and relatedness. Animal Behaviour, 50, 309–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, W. G., & Sherman, P. W. (1983). Kin recognition in animals. American Scientist, 71, 46–55. doi:10.1006/anbe.1995.0247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hönekopp, J., Bartholomé, T., & Jansen, G. (2004). Facial attractiveness, symmetry, and physical fitness in young women. Human Nature, 15, 147–167. doi:10.1007/s12110-004-1018-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacob, S., McClintock, M. K., Zelano, B., & Ober, C. (2002). Paternally inherited HLA alleles are associated with women’s choice of male odour. Nature Genetics, 30, 175–179. doi:10.1038/ng830.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, K., & Chacon-Puignau, G. (1995). Assortative mating—sex-differences in mate selection for married and unmarried couples. Human Biology, 67, 111–120.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: Evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 251–267. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(01)00066-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalick, S. M., Zebrowitz, L. A., Langlois, J. H., & Johnson, R. M. (1998). Does human facial attractiveness honestly advertise health? Longitudinal data on an evolutionary question. Psychological Science, 9, 8–13. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascie-Taylor, C. G. N. (1988). Assortative mating for psychometric characters. In C. G. N. Mascie-Taylor & A. J. Boyce (Eds.), Human mating patterns (pp. 61–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mascie-Taylor, C. G. N. (1995). Human assortative mating: Evidence and genetic implications. In A. J. Boyce & V. Reynolds (Eds.), Human populations: Diversity and adaptations (pp. 86–105). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nesse, R. M., Silverman, A., & Bortz, A. (1990). Sex differences in ability to recognize family resemblance. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 11–21. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(90)90003-O.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlowski, B. (2003). Variable preferences for sexual dimorphism in height as a strategy for increasing the pool of potential partners in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 709–712. doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak, I. S., & Chen, J. Y. (2004). High salivary testosterone is linked to masculine male facial appearance in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 229–241. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.04.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak, I. S., & Perett, D. I. (2000). Female preference for male faces changes cyclically: Further evidence. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21, 39–48. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00033-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., et al. (1999a). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399, 741–742. doi:10.1038/21557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., & Peirce, J. W. (1999b). Computer graphic studies of the role of facial similarity in judgements of attractiveness. Current Psychology, 18, 104–117. doi:10.1007/s12144-999-1020-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrett, D. I., Lee, K., Penton-Voak, I., Burt, D. M., Rowland, D., Yoshikawa, S., et al. (1998). Effects of sexual dimorphism and facial attractiveness. Nature, 394, 884–886. doi:10.1038/29772.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Platek, S. M., Burch, R. L., Panyavin, I. S., Wasserman, B. H., & Gallup, G. G. (2002). Reactions to children’s faces: Resemblance matters more for males than females. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 159–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platek, S. M., Critton, S. R., Burch, R. L., Frederick, D. A., Myers, T. E., & Gallup, G. G. (2003). How much paternal resemblance is enough? Sex differences in the reaction to resemblance but not in ability to detect resemblance. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 81–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platek, S. M., Raines, D. M., Gallup, G. G., Mohamed, F. B., Thomson, J. W., Myers, T., et al. (2004). Reactions to children’s faces: Males are more affected by resemblance than females are, and so are their brains. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 394–405. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, W. K., Manning, C. J., & Wakeland, E. K. (1991). Mating patterns in seminatural populations of mice influenced by MHC genotype. Nature, 352, 619–621. doi:10.1038/352619a0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Read, A. F., & Harvey, P. H. (1988). Genetic relatedness and the evolution of animal mating patterns. In C. G. N. Mascie-Taylor & A. J. Boyce (Eds.), Human mating patterns (pp. 115–131). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, S. C., Little, A. C., Gosling, L. M., Jones, B. C., Perrett, D. I., Carter, V., et al. (2005). MHC-assortative facial preferences in humans. Biology Letters, 1, 400–403. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2005.0343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, J. P. (1988). Genetic similarity, mate choice, and fecundity in humans. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 329–333. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(88)90025-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, J. P. (1989). Genetic similarity, human altruism, and group selection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 503–518. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00057320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saxton, T. K., Little, A. C., Rowland, H. M., Gao, T., & Roberts, S. (2009). Trade-offs between markers of absolute and relative quality in human facial preferences. Behavioral Ecology, 20, 1133–1137. doi:10.1093/beheco/arp107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarbrough, P. S., & Johnston, V. S. (2005). Individual differences in women’s facial preferences as a function of digit ratio and mental rotation ability. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 509–526. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 266, 1913–1917. doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shackelford, T. K., & Larsen, R. J. (1999). Facial attractiveness and psychical health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 71–76. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00036-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spoon, T. R., Millam, J. R., & Owings, D. H. (2006). The importance of mate behavioural compatibility in parenting and reproductive success by cockatiels, Nymphicus hollandicus. Animal Behaviour, 71, 315–326. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.03.034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spuhler, J. N. (1968). Assortative mating with respect to physical characteristics. Biodemography and Social Biology, 15, 128–140. doi:10.1080/19485565.1968.9987763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiessen, D. (1999). Social influences on human assortative mating. In M. C. Corballis & S. G. Lea (Eds.), The descent of mind: Psychological perspectives on hominid evolution (pp. 311–323). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiessen, D., & Gregg, B. (1980). Human assortative mating and genetic equilibrium: An evolutionary perspective. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1, 111–140. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(80)90003-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, N. W. (1990). The evolutionary significance of incest rules. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 113–119. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(90)90032-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999a). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3, 452–460. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01403-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999b). The scent of symmetry: A human sex pheromone that signals fitness? Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 175–201. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00005-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornhill, R., Gangestad, S. W., Miller, R., Scheyd, G., McCullough, J. K., & Franklin, M. (2003). Major histocompatibility genes, symmetry and body scent attractiveness in men and women. Behavioral Ecology, 14, 668–678. doi:10.1093/beheco/arg043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, L. Q., Kaplan, J. T., Molnar-Szakacs, I., Zaidel, E., & Iacoboni, M. (2005). Self-face recognition activates a frontoparietal “mirror” network in the right hemisphere: An event-related fMRI study. NeuroImage, 25, 926–935. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wedekind, C., & Füri, S. (1997). Body odour preferences in men and women: Do they aim for specific MHC combinations or simply heterozygosity? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 264, 1471–1479. doi:10.1098/rspb.1997.0204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedekind, C., Seebeck, T., Bettens, F., & Paepke, A. J. (1995). MHC-dependent mate preference in humans. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 260, 245–249. doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0087.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ferenc Kocsor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kocsor, F., Rezneki, R., Juhász, S. et al. Preference for Facial Self-Resemblance and Attractiveness in Human Mate Choice. Arch Sex Behav 40, 1263–1270 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9723-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-010-9723-z

Keywords