Face-ism from an International Perspective: Gendered Self-Presentation in Online Dating Sites Across Seven Countries
- 2.2k Downloads
The present study analyzed whether the face-ism phenomenon, which argues that the media visually depict men with more facial prominence compared to women (whereas women are shown with greater body prominence), exists for self-selected photographs worldwide. Based on a content analysis of a sample of 6286 profile photos drawn from online dating sites in seven countries (Austria, Denmark, Hungary, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, and the United States) in 2013, we did not find any overall gender differences in facial prominence. However, further analysis showed gender differences in facial prominence for certain age groups: whereas there were no gender differences in the 25–41 year-old age group, young women between 18 and 24 had a higher facial prominence than men, and men older than 41 had higher facial prominence than women. These changes by age are driven by a pattern wherein facial prominence generally remains stable for men, but declines for women with age. In short, older users follow more traditional gender depictions in accordance with the face-ism phenomenon, whereas among younger people, women sport an even higher facial prominence than men do. In contrast to this significant interaction between gender and age in facial prominence, we found no significant interaction between culture (as measured by Hofstede’s masculinity dimension) and gender, which indicates that culture plays no discernible role in gender differences in facial prominence, possibly because macro-level sexism (Hofstede’s masculinity dimension) and micro-level sexism (photographs of individuals online) are not the same.
KeywordsFace-ism Facial prominence Online dating sites Gender stereotypes Hofstede’s cultural dimensions Cross-cultural study
This research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2013S1A5A8020741).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Bandura, A. (2009). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 94–124). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Carter, C., & Steiner, L. (2004). Introduction to critical readings: Media and gender. In C. Carter & L. Steiner (Eds.), Critical readings: Media and gender (pp. 1–10). Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Emrich, C. G., Denmark, F. L., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2004). Cross-cultural differences in gender egalitarianism: Implications for societies, organizations, and leaders. In R. J. House, M. Javidan, V. Gupta, P. Dorfman, & P. J. Hanges (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 343–394). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Fiore, A. T., & Donath, J. S. (2005). Homophily in online dating: When do you like someone like yourself? In CHI EA '05 CHI '05 Extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1371–1374). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
- Fiore, A. T., Taylor, L. S., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Hearst, M. (2008). Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles. In Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 797–806). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hausmann, R., Tyson, L. D., Bekhouche, Y., & Zahidi, S. (2014). Global Gender Gap Report. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GGGR14/GGGR_CompleteReport_2014.pdf.
- Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Lammers, H. B., & Lammers, M. L. (1993). Face-ism in photographs: Sex and status differences. In W. F. Van Raaij & G. J. Bamossy (Eds.), European advances in consumer research (pp. 444–448). Provo: Association for Consumer Research.Google Scholar
- Livingstone, R. W. (2004). Demystifying the nonconscious: Unintentional discrimination in society and the media. In J. D. Williams, W.-N. Lee, & C. P. Haugtvedt (Eds.), Diversity in advertising: Broadening the scope of research directions (pp. 59–73). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently ... and why. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2013). Online dating & relationships. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/10/21/online-dating-relationships/.
- Sparks, G. G. (2006). Media effects research: A basic overview (2nd ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
- Szillis, U., & Stahlberg, D. (2007). The face-ism effect in the internet: Differences in facial prominence of women and men. International Journal of Internet Science, 2, 3–11.Google Scholar
- Williams, J. E., & Best, D. L. (1990). Measuring sex stereotypes: A multinational study. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar