Skip to main content
Log in

The physical attractiveness of front-runners and electoral success

An empirical analysis of the 2004 European Parliament elections

Physische Attraktivität von Spitzenkandidaten und Wahlerfolg

Eine empirische Analyse der Europawahl 2004

  • Aufsätze
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft Aims and scope Submit manuscript

It is an advantage for both men and women to be good-looking. You get more notice, and politics is all about being noticed. Visibility is key. (…) I have been given the benefit of being unusually tall for a woman and relatively good-looking. It would be foolish not to make use of that. Pictures are increasingly important in a media democracy. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant. It just is. Those are the rules of the game.

Silvana Koch-Mehrin

Front-Runner of the German Liberal Party at the 2004 European election, Member of the European Parliament. (The quotation is taken from an interview with Silvana Koch-Mehrin published in the German magazine ‘STERN’ (Issue 10/2005). Translation by the authors.)

Abstract

Past research has impressively shown that the physical attractiveness of politicians influences their electoral success. A large part of the existing literature analyses single-member constituencies in parliamentary elections, presidential elections and open lists in proportional representation systems. In contrast, relatively little is known about the effects of the physical attractiveness of front-runners in multiple member constituencies. This paper fills the research gap. Taking the 2004 European Parliament elections as an example, it analyses the influence of front-runners’ physical attractiveness on the electoral success of their respective parties and combined lists. Voter behaviour is captured by real-life election results in the 64 constituencies of the 2004 European Parliament elections. The attractiveness of the front-runners is estimated according to the Truth-of-Consensus Method. Twenty-four students were shown portrait photographs of the candidates and were asked to rate each candidate’s attractiveness. The attractiveness score of a candidate is then computed by averaging the different ratings he or she has received. Multilevel analyses show that front-runners’ attractiveness substantially influences election results.

Zusammenfassung

Frühere Studien haben bereits auf beeindruckende Weise gezeigt, dass die physische Attraktivität von Politikern ihren Wahlerfolg beeinflusst. Ein Großteil der verfügbaren Arbeiten untersucht dabei Einerwahlkreise bei Parlamentswahlen, Wahlen nach präsidentieller Wahllogik und offene Listen bei proportionalen Verhältniswahlen. Relativ wenig ist hingegen über den Einfluss der physischen Attraktivität von Spitzenkandidaten in Mehrpersonenwahlkreisen bekannt. Dieser Beitrag schließt diese Lücke. Am Beispiel der Wahlen zum Europäischen Parlament 2004 analysiert er den Einfluss der physischen Attraktivität der Spitzenkandidaten auf den Erfolg ihrer jeweiligen Parteien bzw. Listenverbindungen. Das Wahlverhalten wird dabei über die Wahlergebnisse in den 64 Wahlkreisen der Europäischen Parlamentswahl 2004 abgebildet. Die Attraktivität der Spitzenkandidaten wird anhand der Truth of Consensus-Methode approximiert. 24 Studierenden wurden dazu Portraitfotographien der Kandidaten mit der Aufforderung vorgelegt, die Attraktivität der abgebildeten Personen anhand einer Skala zu bewerten. Der Attraktivitätsscore der Kandidaten ist der Durchschnittswert der erreichten Attraktivitätsurteile. Mittels Mehrebenenanalysen wird nachgewiesen, dass die Attraktivität der Spitzenkandidaten substantiell das Wahlergebnis beeinflusst.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD).

  2. Christlich Demokratische Union (CDU) and Christlich Soziale Union (CSU).

  3. Freie Demokratische Partei (FDP).

  4. Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (GRÜNE).

  5. Die Linkspartei (DIE LINKE).

  6. Strictly speaking, the data set had three levels, as the 64 constituencies could clearly each be assigned to the 25 countries. Also, the features of the electoral system were, in reality, level-3 variables as the electoral system was controlled uniformly at the country level. Yet, such a complex level-3 model cannot be estimated as 19 of the total 25 level-3 units only consisted of a single level-2 unit. Consideration of the country level has therefore been avoided and the electoral system variables have been treated as level-2 variables instead.

  7. Within a country with several sub-national constituencies, the constituencies were weighted relative to each other according to their population.

  8. The representation of these variables was possible because, in all cases where the countries contained several constituencies at the European election 2004, these constituencies covered the same area as one or more constituencies at the last national parliamentary elections.

  9. In the case of combined lists it was deemed sufficient if at least one of the participating parties was represented in the national government.

  10. The classification was made based on the political statements of the parties or combined lists on their (election campaign) homepages. A program was considered anti-European if a party or combined list generally rejected the EU or European unity or if it argued against the central political projects of the EU.

  11. In the case of combined lists it was deemed sufficient if at least one of the participating parties was already represented in the European Parliament before the election.

  12. The pictures were sorted according to country and the order of the presentation corresponded to the alphabetical order of the countries’ international code on vehicle license plates. In countries with a number of sub-national constituencies the pictures were grouped according to constituency and these sets were presented in a random order. Within the country or constituency, the sets of photographs were also presented in a random order.

  13. A tabulary presentation of simulation results was not utilized in favour of following a stringent structure. Further details can be obtained from the authors upon request.

References

  • Banducci, Susan A., Jeffrey A. Karp, Michael Thrasher, and Colin Rallings. 2008. Ballot photographs as cues in low-information elections. Political Psychology 29:903–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berggren, Niclas, Henrik Jordahl, and Panu Poutvaara. 2010. The looks of a winner: Beauty and electoral success. Journal of Public Economics 94:8–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budesheim, Thomas Lee, and Stephen J. DePaola. 1994. Beauty or the beast? The effects of appearance, personality, and issue information on evaluations of political candidates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 20:339–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, Michael R. 1986. Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi-Experiments on the sociobiology of female beauty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50:925–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, Michael R., Anita P. Barbee, and Carolyn L. Pike. 1986. What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59:61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, Michael R., Alan R. Roberts, Anita P. Barbee, Perri B. Druen, and Cheng-Huan Wu. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dermer, Marshall, and Darrel L. Thiel. 1975. When beauty may fail. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31:1168–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dion, Karen K., and Ellen Berscheid. 1974. Physical attractiveness and peer perception among children. Sociometry 37:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dion, Karen K., Ellen Berscheid, and Elaine Walster. 1972. What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Society Psychology 24:285–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, Alice H., Richard D. Ashmore, Mona G. Makhijani, and Laura C. Longo. 1991. What is beautiful is good, but…: A meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin 100:109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Efran, Michael G., and E.W.J. Patterson. 1974. Voters vote beautiful: The effect of physical appearance on a national election. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 6:353–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feingold, Alan. 1992. Good-looking people are not what we think. Psychological Bulletin 111:304–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grammer, Karl, Bernhard Fink, Anders P. Møller, and Randy Thornhill. 2003. Darwinian Aesthetics: Sexual selection and the biology of beauty. Biological Review 78:385–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henss, Ronald. 1987. Zur Beurteilerübereinstimmung bei der Einschätzung der physischen Attraktivität junger und alter Menschen. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie 18:118–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henss, Ronald. 1992. ‘Spieglein, Spieglein an der Wand…’. Geschlecht, Alter und physische Attraktivität. Weinheim: Psychologie Verlags Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hox, Joop J. 2002. Multilevel analysis. Techniques and applications. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Iliffe, Alan H. 1960. A study of preferences in feminine beauty. British Journal of Psychology 51:267–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, Amy, and Andrew Leigh. 2007. Beautiful politicians. University of South Australia, typescript.

  • Klein, Markus, and Dieter Ohr. 2000. Gerhard oder Helmut. ‘Unpolitische’ Kandidateneigenschaften und ihr Einfluss auf die Wahlentscheidung bei der Bundestagswahl 1998. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 41:199–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Markus, and Ulrich Rosar. 2005. Physische Attraktivität und Wahlerfolg. Eine empirische Analyse am Beispiel der Wahlkreiskandidaten bei der Bundestagswahl 2002. Politische Vierteljahresschrift 46:263–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Markus, and Ulrich Rosar. 2007. Ist Deutschland reif für eine Kanzlerin? Eine experimentelle Untersuchung aus Anlass der Bundestagswahl 2005. In Die Bundestagswahl 2005: Analysen aus Sicht der Wahlforschung, der Kommunikationswissenschaft und der Parteienforschung, eds. Frank Brettschneider, Oskar Niedermayer, Barbara Pfetsch,and Bernhard Wessels, 271–291. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Markus, and Ulrich Rosar. 2008. Physical attractiveness and electoral success. An empirical micro-macro-analysis at the example of the constituency-candidates at the German Federal Election 2005. University of Cologne, typescript.

  • Köhler, Bernd. 1984. Physische Attraktivität und Persönlichkeitsmerkmale. In Brennpunkte der Persönlichkeitsforschung, B and 1, eds. Amelang, Manfred and Hans-Joachim Ahrens, 139–153. Göttingen: Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, Chappell, Gabriel S. Lenz, Andy Baker, and Michael Myers. 2010. Looking like a winner: Candidate appearance and electoral success in new democracies. World Politics 62:561–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leigh, Andrew, and Tirta Susilo. 2009. Is voting skin-deep? Estimating the effect of candidate ballot photographs on election outcomes. Journal of Economic Psychology 30:61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, Georg. 2010. The electoral success of beauties and beasts. Swiss Political Science Review 16: 457–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maner, Jon K., Douglas T. Kenrick, D. Vaughn Becker, Andrew W. Delton, Brian Hofer, Christopher J. Wilbur, and Steven L. Neuberg. 2003. Sexually selective cognition: Beauty captures the mind of the beholder. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 85:1107–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Arthur G. 1970. Role of physical attractiveness in impression formation. Psychonomic Science 19 241–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nohlen, Dieter. 2004. Wie wählte Europa? Das polymorphe Wahlsystem zum Europäischen Parlament. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte B 17:29–37.

  • Olivola, Christopher Y., and Alexander Todorov. 2010. Elected in 100 milliseconds: Appearancebased trait inferences and voting. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 34:83–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patzer, Gordon L. 1985. The physical attractiveness phenomena. New York: Plenum. p. 17.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Poutvaara, Panu, Henrik Jordahl, and Niclas Berggren. 2009. Faces of politicians: Babyfacedness predicts inferred competence but not electoral success. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45:1132–1135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, Jean M., Rita J. Casey, and Judith H. Langlois. 1991. Adults’ responses to infants varying in appearance of age and attractiveness. Child Development 62:68–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosar, Ulrich, and Markus Klein. 2013. Pretty politicians. Die physische Attraktivität von Spitzenkandidaten, ihr Einfluss bei Wahlen und die These der Personalisierung des Wahlverhaltens. In Koalitionen, Kandidaten, Kommunikation. Analysen zur Bundestagswahl 2009, eds. Thorsten Faas Kai Arzheimer, Sigrid Roßteutscher, and Bernhard Weßels, 149–170. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosar, Ulrich, and Dieter Ohr. 2005. Die Spitzenkandidaten: Image und Wirkung. In Die Bundestagswahl 2002. Eine Untersuchung im Zeichen hoher politischer Dynamik, eds. Manfred Güllner, Hermann Dülmer, Markus Klein, Dieter Ohr, Markus Quandt, Ulrich Rosar, and Hans-Dieter Klingemann. 103–121. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosar, Ulrich, Markus Klein, and Tilo Beckers. 2008. The Frog Pond Beauty Contest. Physical attractiveness and electoral success of the constituency candidates at the North Rhine-Westphalia state election 2005. European Journal of Political Research 47:64–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosar, Ulrich, Markus Klein, and Tilo Beckers. 2012. Magic mayors: Predicting electoral success from candidates physical attractiveness under the conditions of a presidential electoral system. German Politics 21:372–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigelman, Carol K., Lee Sigelman, Dan B. Thomas, and Frederick D. Ribich. 1986. Gender, physical attractiveness, and electability: An experimental investigation of voter biases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 16:229–248.

  • Sigelman, Lee, Carol K. Sigelman, and Christopher Fowler. 1987. A bird of a different feather? An experimental investigation of physical attractiveness and the electability of female candidates. Social Psychology Quarterly 50:32–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, Tom, and Roel Bosker. 1999. Multilevel analysis. An Introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modelling. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, Cookie W., and Judith H. Langlois. 1984. Baby beautiful: Adult attributions of infant competence as a function of infant attractiveness. Child Development 55:576–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todorov, Alexander, Anesu N. Mandisodza, Amir Gorem, and Crystal C. Hall. 2005. Inferences of competence from faces predict election outcome. Science 308:1623–1626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zebrowitz, Leslie A., and Joann M. Montepare. 2005. Appearance DOES matter. Science 308:1565–1566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrich Rosar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rosar, U., Klein, M. The physical attractiveness of front-runners and electoral success. Z Vgl Polit Wiss 8 (Suppl 2), 197–209 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-014-0206-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12286-014-0206-9

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Navigation