Economists have widely documented the “beauty premium” and “ugliness penalty” on earnings. Explanations based on employer and client discrimination would predict a monotonic association between physical attractiveness and earnings; explanations based on occupational self-selection would explain the beauty premium as a function of workers’ occupations; and explanations based on individual differences would predict that the beauty premium would disappear once appropriate individual differences are controlled. In this paper, we empirically tested the three competing hypotheses about the “beauty premium”.
We analyzed a nationally representative and prospectively longitudinal sample from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health (Add Health).
The results contradicted the discrimination and self-selection explanations and strongly supported the individual differences explanation. Very unattractive respondents always earned significantly more than unattractive respondents, sometimes more than average-looking or attractive respondents. Multiple regression analyses showed that there was very weak evidence for the beauty premium, and it disappeared completely once individual differences, such as health, intelligence, and Big Five personality factors, were statistically controlled.
Past findings of beauty premium and ugliness penalty may possibly be due to the fact that: 1) “very unattractive” and “unattractive” categories are usually collapsed into “below average” category; and 2) health, intelligence (as opposed to education) and Big Five personality factors are not controlled. It appears that more beautiful workers earn more, not because they are beautiful, but because they are healthier, more intelligent, and have better (more Conscientious and Extraverted, and less Neurotic) personality.
This is the first study to show that: 1) very unattractive workers have extremely high earnings and earn more than physically more attractive workers, suggesting evidence for the potential ugliness premium; and 2) the apparent beauty premium and ugliness penalty may be a function of unmeasured traits correlated with physical attractiveness, such as health, intelligence, and personality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219–245.
Al-Eisa, E., Egan, D., & Wassersub, R. (2004). Fluctuating asymmetry and low back pain. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 31–37.
Bailit, H. L., Workman, P. L., Niswander, J. D., & Maclean, J. C. (1970). Dental asymmetry as an indicator of genetic and environmental conditions in human populations. Human Biology, 42, 626–638.
Batty, G. D., Deary, I. J., & Gottfredson, L. S. (2007). Premorbid (early life) IQ and later mortality risk: systematic review. Annals of Epidemiology, 17, 278–288.
Bernstein, I. H., Lin, T.-D., & McClellan, P. (1982). Cross- vs. within-racial judgments of attractiveness. Perception and Psychophysics, 32, 495–503.
Biddle, J. E., & Hamermesh, D. S. (1998). Beauty, productivity, and discrimination: lawyers’ looks and lucre. Journal of Labor Economics, 16, 172–201.
Case, A., & Paxson, C. (2008). Stature and status: height, ability, and labor market outcomes. Journal of Political Economy, 116, 499–532.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2006). Intellectual competence and the intelligent personality: a third way in differential psychology. Review of General Psychology, 10, 251–267.
Cross, J. F., & Cross, J. (1971). Age, sex, race, and the perception of facial beauty. Developmental Psychology, 5, 433–439.
Cunningham, M. R., Roberts, A. R., Barbee, A. P., Druen, P. B., & Wu, C.-H. (1995). “Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours”: consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 261–279.
Deryugina, T., & Shurchkov, O. (2015). Does beauty matter in undergraduate education? Economic Inquiry, 53, 940–961.
Donnellan, M. B., Oswald, F. L., Baird, B. M., & Lucas, R. E. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective measures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment, 18, 192–203.
Fletcher, J. M. (2009). Beauty vs. brains: early labor market outcomes of high school graduates. Economics Letters, 105, 321–325.
Frieze, I. H., Olson, J. E., & Russell, J. (1991). Attractiveness and income for men and women in management. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 1039–1057.
Gangestad, S. W., Thornhill, R., & Yeo, R. A. (1994). Facial attractiveness, developmental stability, and fluctuating asymmetry. Ethology and Sociobiology, 15, 73–85.
Gao, W., & Smyth, R. (2010). Health human capital, height and wages in China. Journal of Development Studies, 46, 466–484.
Gottfredson, L. S., & Deary, I. J. (2004). Intelligence predicts health and longevity, but why? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 1–4.
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.
Hamermesh, D. S. (2011). Beauty pays: why attractive people are more successful. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hamermesh, D. S., & Biddle, J. E. (1994). Beauty and labor market. American Economic Review, 84, 1174–1194.
Harper, B. (2000). Beauty, stature and the labour market: a British cohort study. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 62, 771–800.
Henderson, J. J. A., & Anglin, J. M. (2003). Facial attractiveness predicts longevity. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24, 351–356.
Hönekopp, J., Bartholomé, T., & Jansen, G. (2004). Facial attractiveness, symmetry, and physical fitness in young women. Human Nature, 15, 147–167.
Hosoda, M., Stone-Romero, E. F., & Coats, G. (2003). The effects of physical attractiveness on job-related outcomes: a meta-analysis of experimental studies. Personnel Psychology, 56, 431–462.
James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85–98.
Jensen, A. R., & Sinha, S. N. (1993). Physical correlates of human intelligence. In P. A. Vernon (Ed.), Biological approaches to the study of human intelligence (pp. 139–242). Norwood: Ablex.
Jeronimus, B. F., Ormel, J., Aleman, A., Penninx, B. W. J. H., & Riese, H. (2013). Negative and positive life events are associated with small but lasting change in neuroticism. Psychological Medicine, 43, 2403–2415.
Jeronimus, B. F., Riese, H., Sanderman, R., & Ormel, J. (2014). Mutual reinforcement between neuroticism and life experiences: a five-wave, 16-year study to test reciprocal causation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 751–764.
Jones, D. (1996). Physical attractiveness and the theory of sexual selection. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology.
Jones, D., & Hill, K. (1993). Criteria of physical attractiveness in five populations. Human Nature, 4, 271–296.
Judge, T. A., Hurst, C., & Simon, L. S. (2009). Does it pay to be smart, attractive, or confident (or all three)? Relationships among general mental ability, physical attractiveness, core self-evaluations, and income. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 742–755.
Kanazawa, S. (2010). Evolutionary psychology and intelligence research. American Psychologist, 65, 279–289.
Kanazawa, S. (2011a). Intelligence and physical attractiveness. Intelligence, 39, 7–14.
Kanazawa, S. (2011b). Evolutionary psychology and individual differences. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), The handbook of individual differences (pp. 353–376). Oxford: Blackwell-Wiley.
Kanazawa, S., & Kovar, J. L. (2004). Why beautiful people are more intelligent. Intelligence, 32, 227–243.
Kanazawa, S., & Reyniers, D. J. (2009). The role of height in the sex difference in intelligence. American Journal of Psychology, 122, 527–536.
Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., & Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty?: a meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 390–423.
LeBreton, J. M., & Senter, J. L. (2008). Answers to 20 questions about interrater reliability and interrater agreement. Organizational Research Methods, 11, 815–852.
Lewis, D. M. G. (2015). Evolved individual differences: advancing a condition-dependent model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 84, 63–72.
Lukaszewski, A. W., & Roney, J. R. (2011). The origins of extraversion: joint effects of facultative calibration and genetic polymorphism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 409–421.
Maret, S. M., & Harling, C. A. (1985). Cross-cultural perceptions of physical attractiveness: ratings of photographs of whites by Cruzans and Americans. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 163–166.
Mobius, M. M., & Rosenblat, T. S. (2006). Why beauty matters. American Economic Review, 96, 222–235.
Morse, S. J., & Gruzen, J. (1976). The eye of the beholder: a neglected variable in the study of physical attractiveness? Journal of Personality, 44, 209–225.
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Paltiel, L. (2004). Why is conscientiousness negatively associated with intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1013–1022.
Parsons, P. A. (1990). Fluctuating asymmetry: an epigenetic measure of stress. Biological Review, 65, 131–145.
Parsons, P. A. (1992). Fluctuating asymmetry: a biological monitor of environmental and genomic stress. Heredity, 68, 361–364.
Persico, N., Postlewaite, A., & Silverman, D. (2004). The effect of adolescent experience on labor market outcomes: the case of height. Journal of Political Economy, 112, 1019–1053.
Shackelford, T. K., & Larsen, R. J. (1999). Facial attractiveness and physical health. Evolution and Human Behavior, 20, 71–76.
Thakerar, J. N., & Iwawaki, S. (1979). Cross-cultural comparisons in interpersonal attraction of females toward males. Journal of Social Psychology, 108, 121–122.
Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1993). Human facial beauty: averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance. Human Nature, 4, 237–269.
Thornhill, R., & Møller, A. P. (1997). Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biological Reviews, 72, 497–548.
Wagatsuma, E., & Kleinke, C. L. (1979). Ratings of facial beauty by Asian-American and Caucasian females. Journal of Social Psychology, 109, 299–300.
We thank Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic, Tatyana Deryugina, Jason M. Fletcher, Adrian Furnham, Daniel S. Hamermesh, Andrew J. Oswald, Arthur Sakamoto, David Strang, Felix Thoemmes, two anonymous reviewers, and Associate Editor Eric D. Heggestad for their comments on earlier drafts. See Add Health acknowledgments at http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/faqs/addhealth/index.html#what-acknowledgment-should-be.
About this article
Cite this article
Kanazawa, S., Still, M.C. Is There Really a Beauty Premium or an Ugliness Penalty on Earnings?. J Bus Psychol 33, 249–262 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9489-6
- Physical attractiveness
- Occupational self-selection
- Individual differences