↓ Skip to main content

Visual attractiveness is leaky: the asymmetrical relationship between face and hair

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Visual attractiveness is leaky: the asymmetrical relationship between face and hair
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00377
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chihiro Saegusa, Janis Intoy, Shinsuke Shimojo

Abstract

Predicting personality is crucial when communicating with people. It has been revealed that the perceived attractiveness or beauty of the face is a cue. As shown in the well-known "what is beautiful is good" stereotype, perceived attractiveness is often associated with desirable personality. Although such research on attractiveness used mainly the face isolated from other body parts, the face is not always seen in isolation in the real world. Rather, it is surrounded by one's hairstyle, and is perceived as a part of total presence. In human vision, perceptual organization/integration occurs mostly in a bottom up, task-irrelevant fashion. This raises an intriguing possibility that task-irrelevant stimulus that is perceptually integrated with a target may influence our affective evaluation. In such a case, there should be a mutual influence between attractiveness perception of the face and surrounding hair, since they are assumed to share strong and unique perceptual organization. In the current study, we examined the influence of a task-irrelevant stimulus on our attractiveness evaluation, using face and hair as stimuli. The results revealed asymmetrical influences in the evaluation of one while ignoring the other. When hair was task-irrelevant, it still affected attractiveness of the face, but only if the hair itself had never been evaluated by the same evaluator. On the other hand, the face affected the hair regardless of whether the face itself was evaluated before. This has intriguing implications on the asymmetry between face and hair, and perceptual integration between them in general. Together with data from a post hoc questionnaire, it is suggested that both implicit non-selective and explicit selective processes contribute to attractiveness evaluation. The findings provide an understanding of attractiveness perception in real-life situations, as well as a new paradigm to reveal unknown implicit aspects of information integration for emotional judgment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Student > Master 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Other 13 25%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 52%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Computer Science 3 6%
Engineering 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 4 8%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 December 2021.
All research outputs
#4,633,935
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,805
of 34,011 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,068
of 270,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#159
of 471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,011 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.