Skip to main content

Full text of "Physical appearance and personality"

See other formats


Presented  by 

Mary-Somers  Knight 
Class  of  1975 

SWEET 

BRIAR 

COLLEGE 

LIBRARY 


- 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2010  with  funding  from 

Lyrasis  Members  and  Sloan  Foundation 


http://www.archive.org/details/physicalappearanOOknig 


Physical  Appearance  and 

Personality 

by 

M.  -  Somers  Knight 


Date: 


Approved : 


h™  /I.  /97<r 


/ Outside  Readerf 


A  Thesis 

Submitted  in  Partial  Fulfillment  of  the 

Requirements  for  the  Degree  with  Honors 

in  Psychology 


Sweet  Briar  College 

Sweet  Briar,  Virginia 

May,  1975 


3F 

.3(3 
/<S5 


Table  of  Contents 

Chapter  Page 

Introduction I 

I  A  HISTORY  OF  PHYSICAL  CHARACTEROLOGY 1 

Personality  and  Appearance  in  Literature 2 

Aristotle' s  ' Physiognomica' 5 

Phrenology  and  Physiognomy:  Gall  and  Lavater 6 

Constitutional  Psychology:  Sheldon  and  Kretschmer 11 

II  PHYSICAL  ATTRACTIVENESS  aND  INTERPERSONAL  ATTRACTION 22 

Inter oersonal  Attraction 27 

Person  Percpetion 28 

Experimental  Research 51 

Impression  Formation 40 

III  P1YSICAL  DEFORVITY  AND  PIRSONALITY hj 

Deformity  and  the  Social  Context 50 

The  Self  Image 52 

Personality  Problems  Associated  with  Deformity 55 

The  Family  and  the  Deformed  Child 55 

The  Benefits  of  Plastic  Surgery 57 

Body  Image  and  Self  Image 60 

IV  SELF  IMAGE  AND  BODY  IMAGE  IN  THE  SOCIAL  C0NT2XT 65 

Body  Image 64 

Cultural  Norms 66 

The  Self  Image 70 

Self  Image  and  Body  Image 72 

Cone  lusion • Ik 

V  SUMMARY  AND  CONCLUSION 77 

VI  BIBLIOGRAPHY 


VII  STUDY  OF  AGREEMENT  IN  CHILDREN'S  JUDGEMENTS  OF  ATTRACTIVENESS 
OF  PHOTOGRAPHED  FACES 

VIII  APPENDIX:  photographs  used  in  study 


The  object  of  osychology  is  to  give  us  a  totally- 
different  idea  of  the  things  we  know  best. 

Paul  Valery,  Tel  Quel,  194j 


Introduction 


America  is  unique  in  being  the  culture  which  is  the  most 
thoroughly  pervaded  by  visual  media.   We  are  exposed  to  a 
steady  stream  of  faces  and  bodies  which  meet  us  each  time 
we  open  a  magazine,  watch  television  or  go  to  the  movies. 
Women  are  incessently  reminded  that  "the  wrinkles  that  spell 
character  in  a  man's  face,  spell  disaster  in  a  woman's". 
The  clothes  make  the  man;  so  do  his  teeth,  his  tan  and  the 
width  of  his  shoulders.   It  is  no  wonder  that  American  social 
psychologists  have  pounced  upon  physical  attractiveness  as  a 
variable  to  play  around  with  in  their  studies  of  human  interaction; 
no  wonder  that  plastic  surgeons  do  a  booming  business. 

But  this  fascination  with  the  way  we  look,  although  it  may 
sometimes  seem  like  another  product  of  Madison  Avenue,  is  not 
an  American  invention.   If  advertising  that  advises  us  "be 
beautiful  and  you  will  be  loved"  is  successful  it  is  because 
it  strikes  upon  a  very  human  tendency  to  be  concerned  about 
physical  appearance.   The  concern  has  often  manifested  itself 
not  only  in  the  desire  to  present  oneself  well  to  others  but 
in  attempts  to  find  out  what  other  people's  appearance  tell 
about  their  characters. 

Human  beings  have  always  sought  links  between  physical 
appearance  and  character.   The  purpose  of  this  paper  is  to 


II. 


put  all  of  the  studies,  ancient  and  recent,  plausible  and 
ridiculous,  which  have  tried  to  show  the  relationship  be- 
tweensome  aspect  of  physical  appearance  and  personality, 
into  some  sort  of  a  framework.   What  I  am  building  up  to 
is  support  for  a  'social  response'  explanation  of  the  re- 
lationship.  The  relevance  of  physical  appearance  comes  of 
course  within  the  social  sphere.   And  it  is  the  social 
response  to  physical  appearance  (and  to  the  total  person) 
that  is  a  significant  factor  in  personality  development. 
Whatever  connection  there  is,  it  originates  in  this  social 
process . 

The  word  that  for  brevity's  sake  I  will  use  to  describe 
"any  personality  theory  that  attempts  to  show  a  connection 
between  physical  appearance  and  character"  is  "physical 
characterology".   And  the  different  systems  of  physical 
characterology  that  have  been  brought  together  here  are 
classified  as  one  of  the  three  types  of  approach:   intuitive- 
observational;  scientific-biological;  and  social-develop- 
mental.  An  example  of  the  first  type  is  physiognomy  and  of 
the  second,  Sheldon's  constitutional  psychology.   The  third 
is  not  easily  narrowed  down  to  one  example  but  discussion 
of  the  studies  that  come  under  it  fills  most  of  this  paper. 
The  social -developmental  approach  governs  the  research  behind 
the  social  origin  theory.   The  first  two  types  of  explanation 
are  both  essentially  nativistic;  I  have  introduced  the 


III. 


separation  as  an  acknowledgement  of  differences  in  method, 
The  social -developmental  is  an  environmentalist^  view. 

My  material  has  come  from  related  but  varied  fields. 
The  assumptions  of  an  experimental  social  psychologist 
and  of  a  counseling  psychiatrist  are  not  always  the  same, 
although  in  this  context  they  shouldn't  seem  wholly 
exclusive.   However  I  hope  I  will  be  forgiven  for  a 
modicum  of  eclecticism. 


I.   A  History  of  Physical  Characterology 


Chapter  I 


-  but  that  the  size  and  jollity  of  every  individual  nose, 
and  by  which  one  nose  ranks  above  another,  and  bears  a 
higher  price,  is  owing  to  the  cartilaginous  and  muscular 
parts  of  it,  into  whose  ducts  and  sinuses  the  blood  and 
animal  spirits  being  impelled,  and  driven  by  the  warmth 
and  force  of  the  imagination,  which  is  but  a  step  from 

it -  it  so  happens,  and  ever  must,  says  Prignitz, 

that  the  excellency  of  the  nose  is  in  a  direct  arithmetical 
proportion  to  the  excellency  of  the  wearer's  fancy. 


(Laurence  Sterne, Tristram   Shandy 
1767,  Chapter  XXXVIII) 


Form  is  power,  because  being  a  promise  of  good,  it  re- 
commendeth  men  to  the  favor  of  women  and  strangers. 


(Thomas  Hobbes,  Leviathan 
1651,  Chapter  10) 


There  has  always  been  the  tendency  for  people  to  make  judgements  of 
character  which  are  at  least  in  part  based  upon  the  appearance  of  the 
person  being  judged.   There  are  numerous  adages  in  our  society  that  warn 
about  "judging  a  book  by  its  cover"  or  being  "deceived  by  appearances". 
They  are  designed  to  curb  the  habit  of  forming  preconceived  notions  about 
the  inner  qualities  of  someone  based  upon  their  external  qualities. 
Ethologists  would  explain  the  phenomenon  of  judging  by  appearance 
as  the  product  of  innate  propensities;  Social  Psychologists  would  look 
for  reasons  somewhere  in  the  socialization  process.   Whatever  the 
explanation,  there  is  a  part  of  human  tradition  which  allows  for  the 
possible  connections  between  physical  appearance  and  personality.   People 
with  small  eyes  are  shrewd;  fat  people  are  jolly;  thin  lips  denote  severity; 
blondes  have  more  fun.   Good  people  are  beautiful  people;  bad  people  are 
ugly  people. 

Personality  and  Appearance  in  Literature 
Conventional  wisdoms  about  appearance  are  dotted  throughout  literature 
and  folklore.   An  example  comes  from  Shakespeare's  Julius  Caesar: 

"Let  me  have  men  about  me  that  are  fat; 
Sleek -headed  men  and  such  as  sleep  o'  nights; 
Yon  Cassius  has  a  lean  and  hungry  look; 
He  thinks  too  much:   such  men  are  dangerous." 

(Julius  Caesar,  Act  1,  Sc.2) 

Heros  and  heroines,  outstandingly  in  Victorian  and  pre-Victorian  literature, 
are  usually  striking  in  appearance  because  of  the  association  of  what  is 


good  with  what  is  beautiful.   Their  beauty  is  in  contrast  to  the  un- 
attractiveness  of  literary  villains  who  are  portrayed  as  ugly  through 
and  through.   In  fairy  tales  it  is  the  swans  who  are  the  honoured  ones; 
frogs  must  be  satisfied  with  anti-hero  status  at  best.   The  description 
of  Juanito,  the  protagonist  in  Fortunata  and  Jacinta,  is  typical  of  19th 
century  conceptions  of  heros: 

"Don  Baldomiero's  son  was  very  good  looking  and  moreover  very  pleasant. 
He  was  one  of  those  men  who  attract  by  their  appearance  before  captivating 
with  their  manner,  one  of  those  who  gain  more  friends  in  an  hour  of  conversa- 
tion than  others  who  confer  positive  favours." 

(Perez  Galdos,  Fortunata  and  Jacinta, 
1887,  trans.  Lester  Clark,  pt.l,  chap.l) 

Charles  Dickens  is  known,  among  other  things,  for  his  caricature-like  des- 
criptions of  characters.   For  this  reason  he  is  a  good  author  to  pick  on 
to  show  the  contrast  between  the  way  a  'good'  character  is  described  as 
opposed  to  the  way  a  'bad'  one  is  .   The  passages  below  are  portrayals  of 
two  characters  from  Bleak  House.   The  first  is  Ada  Claire  who  is  the  em- 
bodiment of  goodness  and  purity;  the  second,  Krook,  is  certainly  among 
Dickens'  more  villanous  creations. 

"  I  saw  in  the  young  lady  with  the  fire  shining  upon  her,  such  a 

beautiful  girl.'   With  such  rich  golden  hair,  such  soft  blue  eyes, 

and  such  a  bright,  innocent,  trusting  face.'" 

(Charles  Dickens,  Bleak  House,  1853, 
p.  28) 

"[He  was]  an  old  man  in  spectacles  and  a  hairy  cap... He  was  short, 

cadaverous  and  withered,  with  his  head  sunk  sideways  between  his 


shoulders  and  the  breath  issuring  in  visible  smoke  from  his  mouth, 
as  if  he  were  on  fire  within.   His  throat,  chin  and  eyebrows  were 
so  frosted  with  white  hairs  and  so  gnarled  with  veins  and  puckered 
skin,  that  he  looked  from  his  breast  upward  like  some  old  root 
in  a  fall  of  snow." 

(Ibid,  p. 48) 

These  three  passages  are  only  a  suggestion  of  the  stereotypes  of  appearance 
which  writing  has  both  reflected  and  perpetuated.   In  terms  of  the  three 
main  approaches  to  physical  characterology,  the  assumptions  about  physical 
appearance  and  personality  contained  in  literature  are  the  result  of  in- 
tuituion  and  observation;  on  the  part  of  the  author  and  on  the  part  of  the 
culture . 

The  other  means  by  which  writers  have  set  down  observations  on  the 
connections  between  character  and  personality  has  been  in  developing 
actual  theories  of  the  relationship  and  devoting  formal  writings  to 
the  topic.   Some  of  the  earliest  forms  of  personality  theory  included 
attempts  to  show  the  relationship  between  personality  and  the  shape  of 
the  nose,  the  size  of  the  eyes,  the  width  of  the  forehead  or  the  basic 
body  type.   Sometimes  the  writers  described  people  who  looked  like 
various  animals  and  concluded  that  they  must  therefore  have  temperaments 
similar  to  those  of  the  animals.   They  also  drew  out  the  association  between 
a  particular  physical  feature  and  a  specific  group  (for  example,  Jews, 
philosophers,  thieves)  with  the  implication  that  possessing  the  features 


5. 


that  members  of  the  group  possess  is  a  sure  sign  of  the  possessor's  having 
the  type  of  personality  generally  ascribed  to  the  group.   The  different 
explanations  were  legion  and  not  usually  too  highly  correlelated  especially 
since  they  were  based  strictly  on  intuitive-observational  evidence. 

Aristotle's  'Physiognomica' 
Probably  the  first  formal  piece  of  writing  on  the  relationship  between 
physical  appearance  and  character  has  been  attributed  to  Aristotle  under 
the  title  "Physiognomica".   Aristotle  believed  that: 

"  instances  of  the  fundamental  connexion  of  body  and  soul  and  their 
very  extensive  interaction  may  be  found  in  the  normal  products  of  nature. 
There  never  was  an  animal  with  the  form  of  one  kind  and  the  mental  character 
of  another;  the  soul  and  body  appropriate  to  the  same  kind  always  go 
together,  and  this  shows  that  a  specific  body  involves  a  specific  mental 
character."   (W.D.  Ross  Ed,  1913,  805a) 

Many  of  Aristotle's  conclusions  about  the  meaning  of  physiognomy 
were  drawn  from  observations  of  animals.   For  example: 

"Soft  hair  indicates  cowardice  and  coarse  hair  courage.   This  in- 
ference is  based  on  observations  of  the  whole  animal  kingdom.   The 
most  timid  of  animals  are  deer,  hares,  and  sheep,  and  they  have  the 
softest  coats;  whilst  the  lion,  and  wild  boar  are  bravest  and  have 
coarsest  of  coats."   (Ibid.,  806b) 

He  also  makes  generalizations  based  upon  racial  characteristics  and  stereo- 
types, as  in  this  sentence:   The  Small-Minded  have  small  limbs  and  small 
delicate  lean  bodies,  small  eyes  and  small  faces,  just  like  a  Corinthian 
or  Leucadian."   (ibid.,  808a)   The  reasoning  behind  some  of  the  observations 
in  "Physiognomica"  is  slightly  more  obscure.   "Gluttony  is  indicated  when 


6. 
the  distance  from  navel  to  chest  is  greater  than  that  from  chest  to  neck." 
(Ibid.,  808b) 

The  writer  concludes  the  work  by  stating  that: 
It  will  be  found,  moreover,  in  every  selection  of  signs 
that  some  signs  are  better  adapted  than  others  to  indicate 
the  mental  character  behind  them.   The  clearest  indications 
are  given  by  signs  in  certain  particularly  suitable  parts 
of  the  body.   The  most  suitable  part  of  all  is  the  region 
of  the  eyes  and  forehead,  head  and  face..." 

It  would  be  interesting  to  know  how  this  particular  writing  was 
received  by  Aristotle's  contemporaries.   Certainly  theories  of  physical 
characterology  have  always  had  great  popular  appeal.   There  is  something 
enticing  about  being  able  to  read  character  from  a  face  or  body  type. 
But  the  history  of  the  'sciences'  of  physical  characterology  is  fraught 
with  hostilities,  to  some  extent  due  to  the  fact  that  they  are  so  appealing 
to  the  layman.   The  field  has  swarmed  with  quacks  and  charlatans.   In  fact, 
the  pervading  charlatanism  was  enough  to  drive  George  II  to  threaten,  by 
act  of  Parliament/ all  self-acclaimed  physiognomists  with  public  whipping 
and  terms  in  houses  of  correction. 


Phrenology  and  Physiognomy  -  Gall  and  Lavate 


There  is  a  gap  between  Aristotle's  writings  and  the  inception  of  further 
major  written  theories  of  physical  characterology.   Folk  wisdoms  prevailed, 
Ballads  and  fairy  tales  continued  to  favor  blond,  blue-eyed  and  above  all 
beautiful  heroines  but  very  little  was  published  that  included  any  direct 


7. 


examination  of  physique  and  character.   Then  in  1598  an  Italian,  Baptista 

Porta  published  "De  Humana  Physiognomica"  which  made  him  the  first  of  the 

modern  physiognomists.   However  it  was  in  the  18th  and  19th  centuries  that 

the  strongest  revival  of  formal  physical  characterology  began.   Franz  Josef 

Gall,  who  did  most  of  his  writing  in  French,  began  to  lecture  on  his  science 

of  phrenology  during  the  late  18th  century.   And  in  Germany  in  1789,  J.C. 

Lavater  published  Essays  on  Physiognomy.   These  two  were  followed  by  a  host 

of  lesser  nasologists,  phsiognomists  and  phrenologists  (for  example,  the 

Fowler  brothers  who  plugged  phrenology  in  the  United  States)  and  this  celebration 

of  physical  characterology  lasted  a  little  over  a  century. 

Phrenology  (sometimes  referred  to  by  its  antagonists  as  'bumpology') 
was  not  concerned  with  interpreting  overall  physical  appearance  or  the  face. 
It  dealt  specifically  with  the  configuration  of  the  skull  and  how  scrutiny 
of  it  could  reveal  the  talents  and  dispositions.   I  think  phrenology  should 
be  included  in  any  discussion  of  systems  which  tried  to  take  specific  aspects 
of  physical  appearance  as  signs  for  reading  character.   It  differs  from  other 
systems  of  physical  characterology  mainly  in  its  specificity  of  method. 

Gall  believed  the  brain  to  be  compartmentalized  into  separate  and  distinct 
faculties.   According  to  him,  the  crebral  cortex  could  be  schematically  divided 
up  into  sections,  each  of  which  was  in  charge  of  one  personality  function. 
Examples  of  the  traits  in  Gall's  system  are:   Philoprogenitiveness,  Cautiousness, 
Tune,  Veneration  and  Causality.   One  of  Gall's  major  premises  was  that  form  reveals 
function.   Therefore  he  examined  skull  shape  to  discover  the  size  of  the  different 
faculties  which  would  then  tell  which  areas  a  person  was  most  and  least  well 
endowed  in.   He  said  that  by  carefully  measuring  the  skull  it  was  possible  to 
determine  anyone's  personality,  talents  and  disabilities,  strengths  and  weaknesses. 


Phrenology  differs  from  other  forms  of  physical  characterology  in  that  it 
does  not  build  upon  skills  that  a  layman  would  be  expected  to  possess.   Its  pre- 
tensions to  being  a  science  were  stronger  if  still  based  on  quite  erroneous  con- 
ceptions.  Gall  at  least  tried  to  incorporate  measurement  in  his  system.   It  is 
also  true  that  he  made  an  effort  to  obtain  the  bodies  of  men  that  he  had  studied 
while  still  alive  in  order  to  examine  the  brain  and  see  how  well  its  shape  conformed 
to  expectations.   If  considered  in  a  somewhat  more  abstract  sense.   Phrenology 
foreshadows  the  social  psychological  view  of  impression  formation  which  postulates 
that  physical  appearance  may  suggest  a  series  of  related  traits  to  the  perceiver. 
But  Gall's  system,  while  verging  on  a  nativistic  approach  employing  scientific 
methods,  was  really  more  of  the  intuitional -observational  variety. 

Lavater 's  physiognomy  took  overall  physical  appearance  as  the  basis  for 
analysis  with  attention  focused  on  the  face.   "...there  are  foreheads,  noses, 
lips,  eyes,  which  singly  betoken  strength,  weakness,  ardour,  phlegm,  acuteness, 
dullness,  wrath,  revenge,  as  far  as  they  express  certain  other  determinate  parts." 
(J.C.  Lavater,  1789,  p. 56) 

The  'science'  of  physiognomy,  and  related  'sciences'  like  nasology  flourished  in 
the  19th  century.   Sporting  ornate  titles  like  "Nasology;  hints  towards  a  class- 
ification of  noses"  or  "New  physiognomy:   Signs  of  Character  as  manifested  through 
Temperament  and  External  Forms  and  especially  in  The  Human  Face  Divine",  scores  of 
books  were  published  on  the  topic  and  scores  of  lectures  given.   Tangled  in  his 
century's  benevolent  religious  views,  Lavater  writes,  "Oh  physiognomy!   What  a 
pledge  art  thou  of  the  everlasting  clemency  of  God  toward  man."   (Ibid,  p. 12) 
And  similar  is  this  passage  from  Warwick  (1848  p. 4)   "We  may  feel  assured  that  He 
who  gave  the  os  sublime  to  man,  did  not  place,  as  its  foremost  and  most  prominent 
feature,  a  ridiculous  appendage."   (Warwick,  1848,  p.  4) 


With  metaphysical  overtones  like  these,  and  fraught  with  contradictions  and  false 
assumptions,  physiognomy  became  a  murky  field  indeed. 

In  the  view  of  physiognomists,  faces  revealed  things  deeper  than  the  mere 
play  of  emotions.   Given  the  right  guidance,  anyone  could  read  a  face  like  a 
book.   Lavater  writes,  "...what  Goethe  has  somewhere  said  [is]  true,  and  in 
my  opinion  nothing  can  be  more  true,  ...the  best  text  for  a  commentary  on  man 
is  his  presence,  his  countenance,  his  form..."  (J.C.  Lavater,  1789,  p. 74)   Books 
on  physiognomy  often  contained  a  feature  by  feature  run  down  of  the  meaning  of 
different  facial  features.   Examples  from  Lavater  are:   "Blue  eyes  are  generally 
more  significant  of  weakness,  effeminacy  and  yielding,  than  brown  and  black." 
(Ibid,  p.  171) 

"Eyebrows  regularly  arched  are  characteristic  of  feminine  youth."   (Ibid,  p. 181) 

"The  hair  of  man  is  strong  and  short  -  of  woman  more  long  and  pliant.  (Ibid,  p. 210) 

Physiognomists  used  both  of  the  Aristotelian  methods  of  associating  facial  con- 
figuration with  animal  characters  and  racial  types. 

Some  of  the  physiognomists  were  specialists.  Eden  Warwick  (1848)  was 
one  who  believed  that  the  nose  was  the  most  important  index  to  character.   Many 
of  the  characters  which  he  assigns   to  one  of  his  five  nasal  types  are  obviously 
built  upon  racial  or  cultural  sterotypes.   This  passage  from  Warwick's  Nasology 
describing  the  personality  that  goes  along  with  the  'Jewish  Nose'  is  an  example 
of  this  kind  of  reasoning:   "Considerable  Shrewdness  in  wordly  matters;  a  deep 
insight  into  character,  and  facility  of  turning  that  insight  to  profitable  account." 
(Warwick,  1848,  p. 8) 


10. 

The  assumption  underlying  most  of  these  physiognomal  systems  of 
character  analysis  was  that  appearance  of  the  face  completely  and 
accurately  reflects  character,  and,  implicitly,  that  both  physiognomy 
and  character  are  provided  by  gentic  heritage  and  are  interdependent 
for  that  reason.   However  some  writers  were  so  sure  that  there  was  a 
direct  and  necessary  association  between  face  and  personality  that  they 
went  so  far  as  to  state  that  character  can  shape  appearance.   A  change 
in  character  would  have  to  produce  the  accompanying  physical  change  so 
that  face  and  personality  would  continue  to  correspond  in  expected 
fashion.   This  belief  is  shown  in  a  classification  of  Milton's  nose  in 
Warwick's  book: 

"Milton  in  youth  possessed  a  "Greek  Nose... his  portrait,  taken  at 
23,  shows  that  his  nose  was  not  then  developed  in  to  the  cogitative 
form  which  it  assumed  in  later  years,  when  troublous  times  and  anxious 
care  caused  him  to  reflect  profoundly  on  events  around  him.   Then  it 
expanded  at  the  base  and  became,  like  the  Noses  of  all  the  great  men 
of  these  stirring  times,  largely  and  compounded  with  the  cogitative..." 
Ibid,  p. 83) 

Later  in  the  book,  the  author  gives  instructions  on  "How  to  Get  a  Cogitative 
Nose ." 

The  conclusion  of  the  physiognomists  were  based  upon  knowledge  of 
acquaintances  and  of  any  other  people  within  their  field  of  experience, 
and  often  upon  observation  of  men  well-known  for  an  ability  of  abilities. 
The  following  description  by  Lavater  of  Haller  should  clarify  the  latter 
method  of  physiognomists: 

"For  example,  Haller,  certainly,  in  many  respects,  was  an  extraordinary 
man.   Among  other  remarkable  features  which  he  had  in  common  with  other 


11. 

men  of  understanding,  I  observed  a  trait,  a  line,  a  muscle,  below  the 
eye,  which  I  never  saw,  after  this  form,  in  any  other  man.   I  do  not 
yet  know  what  it  denotes,  but  I  pay  attention  to  all  countenances,  and 
the  first  which  I  shall  meet  with  this  trait,  I  shall  carefully  examine, 
shall  turn  discourse  on  those  subjects  in  which  Haller  excelled,  or 
on  such  as  will  easily  make  it  visible  whether  a  person  with  such  a 
trait  possesses  any  portion  of  the  spirit  of  Haller."   (J.C.  Lavater, 
1789,  p. 27) 

Although  phrenology  had  some  beneficial  influence  on  the  development  of 
psychophysiology  (probably  not  directly  but  through  Gall's  interest  in  the 
accompanying  physiology)  neither  phrenology  nor  physiognomy  proved  to  be 
of  any  long  range  help  in  understanding  human  character.   The  flaws  in  the 
systems  are  obvious  and  these  so-called  sciences  were  never  fully  accepted 
even  in  their  century-long  hey-day.   The  men  who  compiled  Casaubonistic 
piles  of  data  and  wrote  vague  pompous  tomes  were  accused  of  quackery  or 
just  plain  uselessness .   But  the  flowering  of  physical  characterology 
does  provide  an  interesting  historical  perspective  to  the  discussion  of 
physical  appearance  as  a  variable  in  20th  century  psychological  theory, 
and  some  insight  into  human  tendency. 

Constitutional  Psychology:   Sheldon  and  Kretschmer 

The  early  (pre-20th  century)  men  who  developed  systems  of  physical 
characterology  relied  upon  a  sort  of  inductive  reasoning  built  upon  the 
association  of  physical  types  with  character  types.   The  gentic  component 
(if  any)  was  assumed  to  be  implicit.   In  the  early  20th  century, 
notably  with  Kretschmer's  and  Sheldon's  constitutional  psychologies, 
someone  again  was  trying  to  pinpoint  a  relationship  between  physical 
appearance  and  personality.   But  these  two,  who  were  both  doctors,  were  building 


12, 


their  theories  on  the  results  of  more  precise  scientific  methods.   They  were,  (and 
Kretschmer  emphasized  this  more  than  Sheldon)  indicating  that  if  over  a  period 
of  human  history  certain  body  types  have  been  consistently  paired  with  specific 
temperaments,  there  must  be  a  common  biological  or  physiological  cause.   Their 
method  of  attacking  the  problem  was  through  thorough  study  of  multiple  cases 
to  determine  first,  how  to  classify  physical  appearances  into  several  basic 
types  and  second,  to  determine  the  sort  of  personality  which  accompanied  each 
case.   By  contrast  with  earlier  writers,  they  were  interested  in  somatotypes 
and  not  as  much  concerned  with  the  arrangement  of  facial  features  or  the 
shape  of  the  nose. 

E.  Kretschmer,  a  German  psychiatrist,  devised  a  theory  of  constitution 
and  temperament  from  the  medical-psychiatric  point  of  view.   Although  he 
does  not  exclude  his  system '  s  being  applicable  to  so  called  'normal'  types 
(and  to  geniuses)  his  main  work  lay  in  elucidating  the  relation  between  physique 
and  character  in  two  main  psychiatric  groups:   schizoid  and  cycloid  (manic 
depressive) . 

The  three  types  of  physical  constitution  around  which  Kretschmer  built 
his  theory  are  the  asthenic,  the  athletic  and  the  pyknic.   The  way  Kretschmer 
arrived  at  these  three  types  was  by  tracing  morphological  similarities  through 
large  numbers  of  individuals  (patients)  and  taking  their  average  value.   The 
characteristics  of  each  type  are  as  follows: 

Asthenic:   "the  male  asthenic  type  [has]  ...a  deficiency  in  thickness 
combined  with  an  average  unlessened  length.   This  deficiency  in  the  thickness 
development  is  present  in  all  parts  of  the  body  -  face,  neck,  trunk,  extre- 
mities and  in  all  the  tissues  -  skin,  fat,  muscle,  bone  and  vascular  system 


13. 
throughout.  On  this  account  we  find  the  average  weight,  as  well  as  the  total 
circumference  and  breadth  measurements,  below  the  general  value  for  males. 

We  have  therefore,  in  the  clearest  cases  the  following  general  impression...; 
a  lean,  narrowly-built  man  who  looks  taller  than  he  is,  with  a  skin  poor  in 
secretion  and  blood,  with  narrow  shoulders  from  which  hang  lean  arms  with  thin 
muscles,  and  delicately  boned  hands;  a  long  narrow,  flat  chest,  on  which  we 
can  count  the  ribs,  with  a  sharp  rib-angle.   A  thin  stomach  devoid  of  fat,  and 
lower  limbs  which  are  just  like  the  upper  ones  in  character."   (E.  Kretschmer, 
1926,  trans.  W.J.H.  Sprott,  p. 21) 

Athletic:   "A  middle  sized  to  tall  man  with  particularly  wide  projecting 
shoulders,  a  superb  chest,  a  firm  stomach  and  a  trunk  which  tapers  in  its 
lower  region  so  that  the  pelvis,  and  the  magnificent  legs,  sometimes  seem 
almost  graceful  compared  with  the  size  of  the  upper  limbs  and  particularly 
the  hypertrophied  shoulders . 

"The  solid  long  head  is  carried  upright  on  a  free  neck  so  that  the  sloping 

linear  contour  of  the  firm  trapezius  looked  at  from  in  front,  gives  that  part 

of  the  shoulder  which  is  nearest  the  neck,  its  peculiar  shape.   The  outlines 

and  shadings  of  the  body  are  determined  by  the  swelling  of  the  muscles  of  the 

good  or  hypertrophied  musculature  which  stands  out  plastically  as  muscle-relief. 

The  bone  relief  is  specially  (sic)  prominent  in  the  shape  of  the  face.   The 

coarse  boning  throughout  is  to  be  seen  particularly  in  the  collar  bones,  the 

hand  and  foot-joints  and  the  hands... The  length  of  the  extremities  is  rather 

long  and  short... the  fat  is  relatively  only  moderately  developed,  and,  speaking 
absolutely,  is  more  or  less  normal."   (Ibid.,  p. 24) 

Pyknic:   "The  pyknic  type,  in  the  height  of  its  perfection  in  middle-age, 

is  characterized  by  the  pronounced  peripheral  development  of  the  body  cavities 


14. 
(head,  breast  and  stomach),  and  a  tendency  to  a  distribution  of  fat  about  the 
trunk,  with  a  more  graceful  construction  of  the  motor  apparatus  (shoulders 
and  extremities) 

"The  rough  impression  in  well-developed  cases  is  very  distinctive:   middle 
height,  rounded  figure,  a  soft  broad  face,  a  short  massive  neck,  sitting  between 
the  shoulders;  the  magnificent  fat  paunch  protrudes  from  the  deep  vaulted  chest 
which  broadens  out  towards  the  lower  part  of  the  body.   (Ibid,  p. 29) 

Kretschmer  concentrates  on  male  types,  but  amends  these  descriptions  to 
include  female  types,  as  in,  the  following  passage  on  the  female  asthenic: 

"The  asthenic  women,  as  far  as  the  type  shows  itself  clearly  among  them, 
are,  in  their  general  appearance,  like  asthenic  men,  up  to  an  important  point: 
they  are  not  only  thin,  but  also  of  very  small  growth.   This  group  of  women 
is  thus  not  merely  asthenic,  but  asthenic-hypoplastic;  and  in  this  work  by 
asthenic,  we  mean  merely  underdevelopment  of  the  body  and  the  parts  of  the 
body,  especially  with  reference  to  the  height."   (Ibid,  p. 23) 

And  although  Kretschmer' s  interest  was  in  physiques  he  did  not  exclude 
general  physiognomy  from  his  system.   In  fact,  he  placed  some  importance  on  the 
face  since  it  is  one  physical  aspect  with  the  least  susceptibility  to  change 
(as  a  result  of  lack  of  exercise,  weight  gain  etc.). 

Through  the  thorough  examination  of  the  psychiatric  cases  that  confronted 
him,  Kretschmer  drew  the  following  conclusions: 

"1)  There  is  a  clear  biological  affinity  between  the  psychic 
disposition  of  the  manic-depressives  and  the  pyknic  body 
type. 


15. 


2)  There  is  clear  biological  affinity  between  the  psychic  disposition 
of  the  schizophrenes  and  the  bodily  disposition  characteristic 

of  the  asthenics,  athletics  and  certain  dysplastics. 

3)  And  vice  versa,  there  is  only  a  weak  affinity  between  schizophrene 
and  pyknic  on  the  one  hand,  and  between  circulars  and  asthenics, 
athletics  and  hysplastics  on  the  other."   (Ibid,  p. 36) 

Kretschmer  is  very  clear  about  where  he  thinks  the  relationship  between 
constitution  and  temperament  originates. 

"It  is  an  empicical  fact  that  the  endocrine  system  has  a  fundmental  influence 
on  the  mentality  and  especially  on  the  temperamental  qualities  ... [In]  the  great 
schizothymic  and  cyclothymic  temperamental  groups  [we  see]  the  correlation 
between  physique  and  temperament,  that  is  to  say,  that  very  biological  relation 
which  also  forces  itself  so  much  on  one's  attention  in  gross  glandular  disturbances, 
when  we  observe  the  parallelism  between  psychic  malformation  and  hypoplastic 
physique  among  cretins  and  between  abnormal  length  of  the  extremity  bones,  and 
displacement  of  the  psychic  temperament  among  people  who  have  been  castrated  young 
and  eunuchoids, phenomina  indeed,  which  can  be  seen  ocurring  under  fixed  biological 
laws  even  among  higher  animals .... 

"It  is  not  a  great  step  to  the  suggestion  that  the  chief  normmal  types  of 
tempermant,  cyclothymes ,  and  schizothymes,  are  determined,  with  regard  to  their 
physical  correlates,  by  similar  parallel  activity  on  the  part  of  the  secretions..." 
(Ibid,  p. 254) 


16. 


Kretschmer,  seeing  that  there  were  body  types  and  character  types  that 
kept  recurring  with  each  other  realized  that  he  would  have  to  come  up  with 
some  sort  of  explanation  for  this  recurrence.   The  cause  he  names  in  his 
writing  is  the  endocrine  gland  system  which,  through  the  chemistry  of 
the  blood,  affects  body  growth  and  temperaments  simultaneously.   As  a 
result  of  this  parallel  effect,  it  is  possible  to  read  with  more  or 
less  accuracy  (Kretschmer  never  claims  his  system  is  infallible)  one  of 
the  three  body  types  as  predictive  of  one  of  the  psychiatric  or  normal 
temperaments . 

Casting  aside  the  intuitive  sort  of  system  propagated  by  the  phreno- 
logists and  physiognomists,  Kretschmer  did  an  about  face  to  put  a  system 
of  parallel  body  type  and  temperament  on  a  more  scientific  basis,  to  explain 
the  common  cause  in  physiological  terms  and  to  finally,  as  he  put  it,  "... 
instead  of  the  one-sided  parallel:   Brain  and  mind,  put  one  and  for  all  the 
other:   soma  and  mind."   (Ibid,  p. 255) 

W.  H.  Sheldon  is  an  American  physician  who  also  devised  a  system 
incorporating  three  body  types  and  related  temperaments.   (The  magic  number 
for  physical  types  seems  to  be  three).   He  presented  his  theory  in  two  books, 
The  Varieties  of  Human  Physique  (1940)  and  The  Varieties  of  Temperament  (1942). 
His  research  team  photographed  some  4,000  male  college  students  and  found  that 
there  were  "obvious  dimensions  of  variation"  in  their  physiques.   They  narrowed 
the  variation  to  three  primary  morphological  axes  around  which  all  physiques 
varied.   The  three  types  that  appeared  were  endomorphic,  mesomorphic  and 
ectomorphic.   The  physical  characteristics  of  these  types  are: 


17. 


"  When  endomorphy  predominates,  the  digestive  viscera  are  massive  and 
highly  developed,  while  the  somatic  structures  are  relatively  weak,  and 
undeveloped. .. [Endomorphs]  are  usually  fat  but  they  are  sometimes  seen 
emaciated. 

"When  mesomorphy  predominates  the  somatic  structures  (bone,  muscle, 
and  connective  tissue)  are  in  the  ascendency ... [The  body  is]  hard,  firm, 
upright  and  relatively  strong  and  tough.   Blood  vessels  are  large,  especially 
the  arteries.   The  skin  is  relatively  thick  with  large  pores  and  it  is  heavily 
reinforced  with  underlying  connective  tissue.   The  hallmark  of  mesomorphy 
is  uprightness  and  sturdiness  of  structure,  as  the  hallmark  of  endomorphy 
is  softness  and  sphericity. 

"Ectomorphy  means  fragility,  linearity,  flatness  of  the  chest,  and 
delicacy  throughout  the  body.   There  is  relatively  slight  development 
of  both  visceral  and  somatic  structures.   The  ectomorph  has  long,  slender, 
poorly  muscled  extremities  with  delicate,  pipestem  bones,  and  he  has 
relative  to  his  mass,  the  greatest  surface  area  and  hence  the  greatest 
sensory  exposure  to  the  outside  world.   He  is  in  this  one  sense  overly 
exposed  and  naked  to  the  world."   (W.H.  Sheldon,  1942,  pp. 389-390) 

Using  these  three  types  as  a  base  Sheldon  could  classify  any  physique  on 
a  seven  point  scale  for  each  type.   The  scale  was  arranged  in  the  order 
endomorph,  mesomorph, ectomorph  so  that,  for  example,  an  extreme  endomorph 
would  have  the  rating  7-1-1,  an  extreme  ectomorph  would  be  rated  1-1-7 
and  a  more  'average'  type  might  be  3-4-4. 


18. 


Then,  by  working  out  the  correlations  between  personality  traits  in  a  list  of 
50  traits  Sheldon  and  his  workers  found  three  groups  of  traits  highly 
correlated  among  themselves  but  with  low  intercorrelations.   The  result 
was  three  20-trait  clusters.   Below  are  the  short  and  picturesque  summations 
that  Sheldon  gives  of  the  basic  temperaments: 

"Viscerotonia,  the  first  component,  in  its  extreme  manifestation 
is  characterized  by  general  relaxation,  love  of  comfort,  sociability, 
conviviality,  gluttony  for  food,  for  people,  for  affection.   The  viscero- 
tonic  extremes  are  people  who  'suck  hard  at  the  breast  of  mother  earth'  and 
love  physical  proximity  with  others.   The  motivated  organization  is  dominated 
by  the  gut  and  by  the  function  of  anabolism.   The  personality  seems  to  center 
around  the  viscera.   The  digestive  tract  is  kind,  and  its  welfare  appears  to 
define  the  primary  purpose  of  life. 

"Somatotonia,  the  second  component,  is  roughly  a  predomince  of  muscular 
activity  and  of  vigorous  bodily  assertativeness .   The  motivational  organization 
seems  dominated  by  the  soma.   The  people  have  vigor  and  push.   The  executive 
department  of  their  internal  economy  is  strongly  vested  in  their  somatic 
muscular  systems.   Action  and  power  define  lifes  primary  purpose. 

"Cerebrotonia,  the  third  component,  is  roughly  a  predominance  of  the 
element  of  restraint,  inhibition  and  of  the  desire  of  concealment.   These 
people  shrink  away  from  sociability  as  from  too  strong  a  light.   They 
'repress'  somatic  and  visceral  expression,  are  hyperattentional,  and 
sedulously  avoid  attracting  attention  to  themselves.   Their  behavior  seems 
dominated  by  the  inhibitory  and  attentional  functions  of  the  cerebrum  and 


19. 


their  motivational  hierarchy  appears  to  define  an  antithesis  to  both  of 
the  other  extremes."     (Ibid,  pp. 10-11) 


After  these  gargantuan  classification  and  sorting  tasks,  to  establish 
the  connection  between  physique  and  temperament  Sheldon  conducted  extensive 
evaluation  of  200  cases  in  terms  of  morphology  and  temperament.   The  correlations 
that  he  found  are  summarized  in  the  following  table: 


Viscero- 
tonia 


Meso- 
morphy 


Somato- 
tonia 


Ecto- 
morphy 


Cerebro- 
tonia 


Endomorphy 

+.79 

-.29 

-.29 

-.41 

-.32 

Viscerotonia 

-.23 

-.34 

-.40 

-.37 

Mesomorphy 

+  .82 

-.63 

-.58 

Somatotonia 

-.53 

-.62 

Ectomorphy 

+  .83 

(Sheldon,  1942,  p.  400) 


Morphology,  or  somatotype,  Sheldon  called  the  static  element,  and 
temperament,  the  dynamic  one.   He  thought  they  were  both  part  of  the  same 
unit  and  said,  "we  are  not  surprised  if  we  are  led  to  expect  that  the 
dynamics  of  an  individual  should  be  related  to  the  static  picture  he 
presents.   It  is  the  old  notion  that  structure  must  somehow  determine 
function."   (Ibid,  p. 4) 


20. 


It  is  never  stated  in  his  book  how  the  relation  comes  about  but  the 
unspoken  assumption  is  that  both  components  are  inherited.   The  clearest 
allusion  to  this  belief  is  where  Sheldon  writes: 

"From  the  immediate,  materialistic  or  purely  somatotomic  point  of  view, 
it  may  be  true  that  the  constitutional  outlook  is  fatalistic  and  pessimistic, 
the  way  of  escape  would  seem  to  be  the  extension  of  a  general  understanding 
of  the  elements,  both  static  and  dynamic,  whose  patterning  constitutes  the 
individual. .. If  constitutional  studies  can  lead  to  the  establishment  of  a 
rational  foundation  for  a  science  of  heredity  and  eugenics,  we  may  then 
hope,  for  example,  to  eliminate  the  principal  constitutional  and  degenera- 
tive physical  scourges  of  the  race... But  of  greater  importance  than  that, 
it  might  then  also  be  possible  by  discriminate  breeding  to  strengthen  the 
mental  and  spiritual  fiber  of  the  race.   This  is  optimistic  enough." 

Sheldon's  system  was  not  saved  by  its  optimism  and  his  constitutional 
psychology  saw  its  end  not  long  after  its  inception.   The  system,  like  many 
other  attempts  to  fit  human  beings  into  a  neat  taxonomy,  because  of  the 
predominance  of  exceptions,  the  questionable  nature  of  the  trait  constructs 
and  the  subjectivity  of  the  judgements  just  faded  out  of  importance. 

Gordon  Allport  includes  a  chapter  on  characterology  in  his  1937  book 
Personality:   a  psychological  interpretation.   Basically,  he  holds  up  earlier 
theories  as  effigies  to  batter  against  preparatory  to  stating  his  views  on  the 
relation  between  physique  and  personality.   For  he  does  allow  that  a 
relationship  does  exist  and  can  exert  an  influence  on  the  developing 


21. 


personality.   I  include  the  following  paragraph  because  it  is  the  first 
of  any  of  the  theories  listed  to  hint  at  social-developmental  influences 
on  the  personality. 

"Within  the  normal  range,  physical  build  is  associated  only  indirectly 
with  personality.   Strong  bodies,  well-formed,  and  socially  approved, 
predispose  people  (especially  in  youth)  to  develop  extroverted,  real- 
istic, sociable  traits;  conversely,  frail,  malformed  or  markedly 
atypical   physiques  tend  (in  response  to  social  and  environmental  stan- 
dards) to  produce  introverted,  intellectual,  or  autistic  personalities. 
This  finding  takes  care  of  much  of  Kretschmer's  evidence,  but  offers 
a  totally  different  theory  (one  that  is  environmentalistic  rather 
than  nativistic)  to  account  for  the  association  of  physique  and  per- 
sonality within  the  normal  range."   (G.  Allport,  1937,  p.78) 

Allport  did  not  develop  this  idea  further.   Obviously  he  was  more 
concerned  with  developing  a  complete  personality  theory.   Sheldon  and 
Kretschmer,  as  carefully  thought  out  as  their  systems  were,  foundered 
in  technicalities.   Earlier  types  of  physical  characterology  went  the 
route  of  snake  oils  and  guaranteed  aphrodesiacs .   Their  reliability  was 
easily  disputed,  their  falsity  easily  discovered.   Their  value  is  purely 
historical.   I  have  included  this  chapter  to  show  how  history  reveals 
examples  of  man's  preoccupation  with  finding  a  concrete  correlation 
between  the  external  appearance  and  the  internal  character  and  how 
two  types  of  explanation  -  the  intuitive  and  the  nativistic  (scientific- 
biological)  -  have  for  various  reasons  failed.   The  body  of  the  paper 
will  now  be  devoted  to  elaborating  on  the  environmentalistic   or  social- 
developmental  approach  which  is  the  approach  I  believe  has  been  best 
able  to  suggest  valid  explanations  for  any  correspondence  between  physical 
appearance  and  personality. 


21.  b 


References 


Allport,  G.W. ,  Personality  -  a  psychological  inter- 
pretation.  N.Y.:   Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  Inc.,  1937. 

Combe,  G.,  Lectures  on  Phrenology   ,  1847. 

Dickens,  C. ,  Bleak  House,  N.Y. :   Books,  Inc. 
(orig.  pub.,  1853) 

Galdos,  P.,  Fortunata  &  Jacinta,  Middlesex, 

England:   Penguin  Books  Ltd.,  1973,  trans.  Lester 
Clark,  (orig.  pub.,  1887) 

Kretschmer,  E. ,  Physique  and  Character,  London:   Harcourt 
Brace  &  Co.,  Inc.,  1926,  trans.  W.J.H.  Sprott. 

Lavater,  J.C.,  Essays  on  Physiognomy   for  the  promotion 
of  the  Knowledge  and  the  love  of  mankind  Vol.  II, 
London,  G.N.J.  &  J.  Robinson,  1789. 

Loveday,  T.,  &  Forster  E.S.  trans,  "Physiognomonica" 
in  W.D.  Rossied,  The  Works  of  Aristotle,  London: 
Oxford  University  Press,  1913. 

Sheldon,  H. ,  The  Varieties  of  Temperament   ,  New  York: 
Harper  &  Brothers  Pub.,  1942. 

Warwick,  E.,  Nasology  -  or  hints  towards  a  classification 
of  noses,  London:   Richard  Bentley,  1848. 

Watson,  R.I.,  The  Great  Psychologists   ,  N.Y. :   J.  B. 
Lippincott  Co.,  1963. 


II.   Physical  Attractiveness  and  Inter- 
personal Attraction 


CHAPTER  2 


Beauty  is  nothing  other  than  the  promise 
of  happiness . 

Stendhal,  "On  Love"  (1822) 

beauty  gets  the  best  of  it/in  this  world 

Don  Marquis,  "unjust"  (1927) 


23. 


The  remainder  of  this  paper  will  be  devoted  to  the  social- 
developmental  approach  to  physical  appearance  and  character. 
In  this  chapter  I  will  go  into  the  social  psychological  research 
on  physical  attractiveness  and  interpersonal  attraction  with  a 
discussion  of  the  role  of  impression  formation. 

The  following  two  chapters  will  cover  findings  on  the 
influence  of  physical  deformity  on  the  personality  and  theories 
of  the  interdependence  of  body  image  and  self  image. 

A  person  is  socially  defined  as  a  physical  as  well  as  a 
behaving  entity.   After  all,  those  behaviors  have  to  emanate 
from  somewhere.   Thus  a  person  is  a  combination  of  both  static 
and  dynamic  elements  Jand  showing  the  relevance  of  the  static 
element  -  appearance  -  to  the  more  dynamic  component  -  personality 
is  the  main  thrust  of  this  paper. 


24.&25. 


People  meeting  other  people  are  initially  confronted  with  each 
other's  physical  appearances.   Consciously  or  unconsciously,  we  base 
our  first  judgment  of  another  person  on  the  way  he  or  she  looks  to 
us.   Our  concern  over  making  a  good  appearance  shows  in  the  vast 
amount  of  effort  we  put  into  preparing  ourselves  for  presentation. 
We  constantly  attempt  to  improve  our  physical  appearance  -  adding 
what  is  desired,  deleting  what  is  undesired.   We  want  to  be  attrac- 
tive, to  be  presentable  at  least.   Everything  from  turtlebased  night 
creams  to  tinted  contact  lenses  to  radical  plastic  surgery  is  aimed 
toward  this  end.   Businesses  capitalize  on  this  desire  to  be  beautiful 
and  some  wealthy  Americans  attend  health  spas  to  lose  five  pounds  at  , 
$400  a  pound.   In  some  parts  of  California  even  the  dead  must  be  made 
beautiful.   Ugliness  is  an  undefined  stigma;  a  subtle  curse.   People 
feel  sorry  for  the  ugly  members  of  society  in  the  same  cringing  way 
they  pity  the  blind  or  the  crippled. 

Yet,  in  the  face  of  abundant  intuitive  evidence  that  where 
human  relationships  are  concerned  physical  attractiveness  is  by  no 
means  irrelevant,  social  psychologists  have  until  recently  been 
rather  coy  about  examining  this  intuition.   Aronson  neatly  describes 
the  dilemma  involved: 


It  is  difficult  to  be  certain  why  the  effects  of 
physical  beauty  have  not  been  studied  more  system- 
atically.  It  may  be  that,  at  some  levels,  we  would 
hate  to  find  evidence  indicating  that  beautiful  women 
are  better  liked  than  homely  women — somehow  this  seems 
undemocratic.   In  a  democracy  we  like  to  feel  that  with 
hard  work  and  a  good  deal  of  motivation,  a  person  can 
accomplish  almost  anything.   But,  alas  (most  of  us  be- 
lieve), hard  work  cannot  make  an  ugly  woman  beautiful. 
Because  of  this  suspicion  perhaps  most  social  psycholo- 


26. 


gists  implicitly  prefer  to  believe  that  beauty  is  in- 
deed only  skin  deep — and  avoid  the  investigation  of  its 
social  impact  for  fear  they  might  learn  otherwise, 
(cited  in  Dion  et  al,  1972,  p. 285) 


Whatever  unadmitted  fears  and  hedging  may  have  been  involved, 
there  is  now  a  growing  body  of  experimental  literature  examining 
the  role  of  physical  attractiveness  in  interpersonal  attraction. 
Moreover,  the  findings  confirm  the  belief  that  physical  attractive- 
ness influences  the  course  of  social  interaction  and  interpersonal 
attraction.   Attractive  people  are  better  liked  (Walster  et  al, 
1966;  Byrne  et  al,  1968;  Stroebe  et  al,  1971),  more  desirable  to 
work  with  (Byrne  et  al,  1968;  Stroebe  et  al,  1971)  and  have  more 
control  over  their  own  actions  (A.G.  Miller,  1970b).   More 
people  would  like  to  date  someone  who  is  attractive  than  someone 
who  is  not  (Walster  et  al,  1966;  Byrne  et  al,  1968;  Byrne,  1970; 
Walster,  1970;  Stroebe  et  al,  1971).   Attractiveness  seems  to  cast 
a  halo  over  the  individuals  involved.   They  are  not  only  attractive 
but  are  believed  to  possess  a  host  of  other  virtues  as  well  (A.G. 
Miller,  1970  a). 

According  to  a  study  by  Dion  et  al  (1972)  ,  attractive  people  are  ex- 
pected to  lead  better  lives,  to  have  more  opportunities  in  business 
and  the  choice  of  a  career,  to  be  more  likely  to  get  married. 

In  short,  there  is  quite  a  lot  which  seems  to  indicate  that 
attractive  people  will  have  an  easier  time  socially  than  unattractive 
people.   Certainly,  being  attractive  is  not  the  only  means  of  achieving 
social  success,  but  perhaps  it  is  more  important  than  we  have  previously 
been  willing  to  admit. 


27. 


INTERPERSONAL  ATTRACTION 

People  vary  in  their  potential  rewardingness  to  others.   Rewarding- 
ness  will  from  now  on  be  referred  to  as  "social  desirability"  which,  as 
defined  by  Berscheid  and  Walster,  "...includes  such  attributes  as  physical 
attractiveness,  personableness ,  intelligence,  fame,  material  resources,  etc." 
(Berscheid  and  Walster,  1969,  p. 108) 

The  aspect  of  social  desirability  which  this  chapter  is  most  concerned  with 
is,  of  course,  physical  attractiveness.   I  believe  that  the  influence  of 
physical  attractiveness  or  interpersonal  attraction  comes  in  terms  of 
potential  reward  value.   Physical  beauty  (and  probably  some  personality 
correlates,  to  be  discussed  later)  increases  the  social  desirability 
of  attractive  individuals.   Whether  this  comes  from  the  mere  status 
involved  in  being  seen  with  an  attractive  person  (which  would  not  seem 
unrelated  to  Elder's  (1969)  finding  that  attractive  women  are  more  socially 
mobile)  or  a  belief  that  attractive  people  are  better  conversationalists  or 
better  workers  will  depend  on  the  people  and  the  situation  involved.   If 
attractive  people  have  greater  social  desirability,  their  social  life  will 
not  be  the  same  as  that  of  unattractive  people  with  less  social  value.   During 
interaction  the  person  with  more  rewards  on  his  side  has  more  control  over 
the  situation.   He  is  more  likely  to  be  able  to  determine  the  outcome,  to 
"call  the  shots".   As  in  any  bargaining  situation,  the  person  with  the  greater 
amount  of  assets  has  the  advantage.   And,  most  important,  when  it  comes  to 
interpersonal  attraction,  this  person  will  be  more  likely  to  be  sought  out  on 
the  basis  of  these  social  assets.   To  apply  this  to  the  question  of  physical 


28. 


beauty,  take  the  example  of  two  girls  of  dating  age — one  highly  attractive 
and  the  other  not  much  to  look  at  at  all .   Boys  are  more  likely  to  want  to 
date  the  attractive  girl  as,  they  believe,  she  has  much  more  to  offer.   She 
will  be  more  popular,  better  liked.   Taking  out  the  other  girl  means  running 
the  risk  of  being  exposed  to  comments  like  "Is  that  all  he  could  get?"   Dating 
her  would  be  less  rewarding;  hence  she  would  be  less  popular.   Of  course  to 
some  extent  a  boy's  approach  will  be  limited  by  what  he  thinks  he  has  to  offer. 
There  is  a  greater  risk  that  the  pretty  girl  will  turn  him  down — she  has  more 
options  available  and  can  afford  to  be  choosy  or  playful.   But,  as  far  as 
sheer  potential  reward  value  goes,  the  attractive  girl  should  be  better  liked. 

The  assumption  throughout  the  remainder  of  the  paper  will  be  that 
attractive  people  are  inherently  more  rewarding  people  and  therefore  they 
are  liked  more.   And  there  is  no  dearth  of  evidence  to  show  that  physical 
attractiveness  can  cause  liking,  as  will  be  evident  in  the  section  reviewing 
experimental  literature. 

PERSON  PERCEPTION 

Before  proceeding  to  discuss  the  experimental  work,  it  is  necessary 
to  say  something  about  the  process  of  person  perception.   When  two  people 
meet,  carry  on  a  conversation,  or  just  pass  each  other  walking  down  the  hall, 
each  is  perceiving  the  other  in  some  way.   That  sounds  simple  enough.   However, 
it  is  extremely  important  to  realize  that  a  study  of  person  perception  must 
consider  not  only  the  qualities  of  the  person  being  perceived  but  also  the 
attributes  of  the  one  doing  the  perceiving.   How  another  person  is  perceived 
depends  on  the  perceiver's  past  experiences,  his   categorizations  of  people, 
his  goals, his  view  of  his  own  role  in  relation  to  the  other  person  and  the 


29. 


situation  they  are  in.   Jones  and  Thibaut  write  that: 

Inter-personal  perception  can  most  fruitfully  be  treated 
as  both  instrumental  to  social  interaction  and  conditioned 
by  it.   Thus  the  strategic  focus  in  social  perception  will 
vary  as  a  function  of  the  type  of  social  interaction  it 
supports .   If  we  can  successfully  identify  the  goals  for 
which  an  actor  is  striving  in  the  interaction  situation 
we  can  begin  to  say  something  about  the  cues  to  which 
he  will  attend  and  the  meaning  he  is  most  likely  to 
assign  them.   (Jones  and  Thibaut,  1958,  p. 152) 

People  provide  cues  to  others  as  to  how  to  act  and  the  first 

cues  come  of  course  from  their  physical  appearance.   What  a  perceiver 

infers  from  another  person's  appearance  will  help  to  guide  him  in  any 

subsequent  interaction.   But  while  we  hope  to  find  general  laws  governing 

patterns  of  inference,  allowance  must  be  made  for  individual  differences. 

Originally  researchers  in  the  field  of  person  perception 
concerned  themselves  with  seeing  how  effective  people  were  at  judging 
personality  or  with  finding  out  who  could  judge  emotions  accurately. 
But  it  soon  became  evident  that  there  were  rather  serious  difficulties 
with  the  results  they  were  obtaining.   There  was  little  consistency 
among  different  subjects  trying  to  assess  the  emotion  being  expressed 
in  a  photograph — where  one  saw  surprise  another  saw  fear,  and  meanwhile 
the  experimentor  had  instructed  the  subject  in  the  photograph  to  look 
joyful.   In  order  for  there  to  be  a  criterion  against  which  subject  responses 
could  be  measured  for  accuracy  in  judging  personality ,  psychologists 
had  to  agree  on  foolproof  unbiased  methods  for  assessing  actual  per- 
sonality traits.   They  found  that  such  foolproof  methods  were  rather 
hard  to  come  by.   And  some  researchers  began  to  realize  that  what 
they  were  actually  measuring  was  how  well  subjects  were  able  to  see 


30. 


what  they  thought  they  should  see.   Hastorf  et  al  said  about  this 
problem,  "In  other  words,  the  experimenter  has  set  the   categories 
the  subject  must  employ  with  little  concern  for  the  relevance  of 
these  to  the  subject's  cognitive  map  of  other  people."   (Hastorf  et 
al,  1958,  p. 56) 

The  trend  in  person  perception  now  is  to  pay  closer  attention  to  the 
perceiver.   In  their  book  on  person  perception,  Hastorf  states  the 
main  argument  as  follows:   "The  research  in  person  perception  has 
shifted  in  interest  from  the  stimuli  and  the  accuracy  with  which 
they  are  recorded  to  the  ways  that  perceivers  actively  process  those 
stimuli  to  create  interpersonal  meaning."   (Hastorf  et  al,  1970,  p. 91) 

There  are  two  reasons  for  mentioning  the  above.   One  is  that 
it  presents  some  cautions  to  be  kept  in  mind  in  the  examination  of  the 
role  of  physical  attractiveness  in  interpersonal  attraction.    The  con- 
cern of  this  chapter  is  not  to  point  out  why  people  idiosyncratically 
consider  certain  individuals  to  be  attractive  but  to  show  whether  they 
more  or  less  uniformly  respond  differently  to  attractive  individuals  as 
opposed  to  unattractive  ones;  whether  they  are  more  attracted  to  them 
and  like  them  better.   Earlier  it  was  mentioned  that  a  boy  of  low  social 
desirability  might  be  reluctant  to  approach  a  highly  attractive  girl. 
In  the  studies  by  Walster,  Berscheid  and  others  (1966;  1970;  1971)  one 
of  the  main  hypotheses  was  that  individuals  would  like  others  near  their 
own  level  of  social  desirability  best.   Although  I  hope  to  show  that 
attractiveness  does  produce  more  liking  and  generally  positive  reactions 
from  others,  the  nature  of  the  reaction  must  depend  to  some  extent  on 


31. 


who  these  "others"  are  and  what  attractiveness  in  another  person  implies 
to  them.   Differences  may  be  individual  or  even  tied  to  various  socio- 
economic levels  but  they  will  exist  and  must  be  taken  into  account. 

The  other  reason  for  this  discussion  on  person  perception  is 
to  say  a  bit  more  about  inference  processes.   Each  individual  has  an 
"implicit  personality  theory"  against  which  he  judges  others — what 
people  have  what  sorts  of  personalities,  and  what  traits  go  with  what. 
Since  first-.encounter  situations  are  so  common  and  the  first  aspect  of 
another  person  which  is  encountered  is  his  physical  appearance,  what 
someone  perceives  in  another  person  is  actually  what  he  first  infers 
from  the  cues  at  hand.   This  will  depend  on  which  cues  he  chooses  to 
pay  attention  to  and  what  his  experiences — some  unique,  some  part  of 
living  in  a  particular  society — tell  him  that  these  cues  mean.   Some 
inferences  may  be  very  straightforward  and  simple  (all  redheaded  people 
like  carrots)  to  more  complex  distinctions  (intelligent  people  are  more 
socially  aware  than  non-intelligent) .   The  proposal  I  want  to  make  here 
is  that  part  of  the  social  desirability  of  attractive  people  is  linked 
to  an  implicit  personality  theory,  in  general  use,  that  attractive 
people  possess  many  desirable  qualities  in  addition  to  mere  attractive- 
ness— a  sort  of  attractiveness  halo  effect.   Some  preliminary  evidence 
supporting  this  will  be  mentioned  in  later  sections. 

EXPERIMENTAL  RESEARCH 

To  begin  by  answering  the  inevitable  challenge  to  defend  the 
investigation  of  something  as  amorphous  as  "physical  attractiveness", 


32, 


there  is  evidence  that  certain  standards  of  beauty  do  exist  across 

populations.   Staf fieri  (1967)  showed  that  elementary  school  age 

boys  (6-10  years)  preferred  mesomorph  body  types  over  endomorphs  and 

ectomorphs.   Jourard  and  Secord  (1940)  found  that  groups  both  of  men 

and  women  had  highly  correlated  conceptions  of  the  ideal  body  type 

for  their  sex.   In  an  experiment  by  Cavior  and  Lombardi  (1973)  children 

as  young  as  six  years  old  agreed  highly  on  the  attractiveness  of  11- 

and  17-year  olds  in  photographs;  there  was  almost  no  difference  between 

the  ratings  of  eight-year  olds  and  older  groups.   If  a  definition  of 

attractiveness  is  needed  it  is  based  on  agreement  among  observers.  This 
agreement  will  be  reviewed  in  more  detail  in  Chapter  IV. 

In  1966  Elaine  Walster  and  three  colleagues  staged  a  computer 
dance  during  Freshman  "Welcome  Week"  at  the  University  of  Minnesota. 
Students  were  enticed  with  the  idea  of  being  scientifically  matched 
to  "someone  who  has  the  same  expressed  interests  as  yourself".   The 
dance  was  designed  to  test  the  proposal  that  an  individual  would  expect 
to  date  and  would  therefore  like  better  someone  at  his  own  level  of 
social  desirability.   The  proposal  was  an  application  of  Level  of 
Aspiration  theory  (Lewin  et  al,  1944)  to  the  dating  situation.   Level 
of  Aspiration  theory  states  that  an  individual  establishes  two  goals: 
an  ideal  goal  which  depends  on  the  desirability  of  the  goal  itself  and 
a  realistic  goal  which  is  limited  by  the  chances  of  achieving  that  goal. 
An  ideal  goal  for  a  meagre  man  about  5 ' 1"  would  be  to  be  the  strong  man 
in  a  circus.   A  slightly  more  realistic  goal  would  be  to  aspire  to  be  a 
seal -trainer ,  assuming  he  had  some  affinity  with  seals.   Students  who 
attended  the  dance  were  scaled  according  to  their  level  of  physical 
attractiveness  by  four  "beaureaucrats"  (also  students)  when  they  bought 
their  tickets.   Personality  and  intelligence  measures  were  also  taken 


33. 

and  the  subjects  were  asked  to  give  their  expectations  as  to  the  sort  of 
date  they  would  like  to  be  paired  with.   Couples  were  assigned  to  each 
other  on  a  random  basis.   During  an  intermission  at  the  dance,  subjects 
were  rounded  up  (including  any  who  had  wandered  away  to  fire  escapes 
or  nearby  buildings)  and  asked  to  fill  out  a  brief  questionnaire  assessing 
their  dates.   Although  attractive  students  had  had  higher  expectations 
for  their  dates  (whom  they  assumed  would  be  more  attractive,  personable 
and  considerate) ,  there  was  no  other  support  of  Level  of  Aspiration 
theory  in  this  study.   The  attractive  people  were  better  liked  regardless 
of  the  attractiveness  of  the  partner.   Subjects  were  also  more  inclined 
to  want  to  date  attractive  people  again.   In  a  follow-up  study,  it  was 
the  attractive  girls  who  had  been  most  often  asked  out  after  the  dance. 
Liking  was  not  always  equally  reciprocated — in  many  cases  partners'  feelings 
for  each  other  were  quite  anthithetical.   Intelligence  and  personality  didn't 
seem  to  be  highly  related  to  liking.   Quite  simply,  the  students  liked  a 
good-looking  date  better  than  one  who  was  not.   These  results  are  interesting 
not  only  because  they  did  not  support  the  hypothesis  but  also  because  the 
authors  found  something  that  they  had  not  been  looking  for. 

In  a  later  study,  ElaincWalster  (19  70)  again  attempted  to  test 
Level  of  Aspiration  theory  in  a  romantic  situation.   It  was  a  bit 
puzzling  that  something  which  appealed  so  much  to  common  sense  had 
not  been  demonstrated  at  the  computer  dance.   So  subjects  were  presented 
with  a  booklet  containing  five  photographs  of  people  of  the  opposite 
sex  at  five  levels  of  attractiveness.   Each  subject  was  asked  to  say 
how  he  felt  romantically  toward  the  people  in  the  photograph.   Then 
during  a  coffee  break  the  experimentor  handed  subjects  the  ostensible 
results  of  earlier  personality  tests.   These  results  were  designed  to 


34, 


either  assure  the  subject  that  he  had  a  fine  personality  and  so 
raise  his  self  esteem  or  convince  him  that  his  personality  was  in 
pretty  sorry  shape  and  so  lower  his  self  esteem.   A  third  group 
served  as  a  control.   After  the  coffee  and  esteem  manipulation 
subjects  were  given  a  second  booklet  similar  to  the  first  and  again 
asked  how  each  person  impressed  them  romantically.   Berscheid  had 
predicted  that  subjects  whose  self  esteem  had  been  lowered  would 
lower  any  romantic  aspirations  as  well.   But  again  there  was  "striking" 
non-support  of  the  hypothesis  and  the  author  bemusedly  concludes  that 
"the  matching  hypothesis,  which  seemed  so  plausible,  is  not  an  important 
determinant  of  romantic  perference."   (E.  Walster,  1970,  p. 253) 

Physical  attractiveness,  on  the  other  hand,  apparently  was  an  important 
determinant. 

Undaunted,  Berscheid  and  some  collaborators  went  ahead  and 
produced  still  another  test  of  the  matching  hypothesis  in  1971.   They 
introduced  a  new  element  by  varying  the  possibility  of  rejection  by 
a  chosen  date.   The  study  was  divided  into  two  parts.   In  Part  I  the 
computer  dance  idea  was  repeated  but  the  couples  were  to  meet  before 
the  dance.   Some  subjects  were  assured  that  they  stood  a  good  chance 
of  being  rejected  by  their  date;  others  were  told  that  the  risk  of 
rejection  was  slight.   The  estimate  of  individual  social  desirability 
was  based  on  Rosenf eld's  fear  of  rejection  scale  and  on  how  socially 
desirable  a  subject  saw  himself  as  being.   Then  subjects  were  asked  to 
specify  the  sort  of  date  they  would  prefer.   For  the  first  time  the 
matching  principle  seemed  to  be  guiding  the  subjects  and  it  was  in 


35, 


full  play  under  both  conditions.   In  the  second  experiment,  subjects 
first  answered  questions  about  their  dating  experiences,  self  per- 
ceptions, body  cathexis  and  self  cathexis .   They  themselves  were 
classed  as  being  physically  attractive   or  unattractive.   Each  one 
had  the  opportunity  to  choose  one  of  six  potential  dates  represented 
by  photographs.   In  the  "realistic"  condition  there  was  a  catch — 
subjects  would  receive  the  date  of  their  choice  only  if  the  choice 
were  reciprocated.   In  the  "idealistic"  condition,  the  subject  would 
receive  whichever  date  he  chose.   And  for  both  conditions,  there 
was  still  more  support  for  the  matching  hypothesis.   Maybe  people 
do  aim  no  higher  than  their  own  level  of  desirability.   Some  of 
the  other  findings  were  interesting.   Attractive  girls  reported 
themselves  as  being  more  popular  in  the  dating  field.   Men  tended 
to  set  higher  expectations  as  to  the  good  qualities  they  wanted 
in  their  dates. 

Once  the  experimenters  had  obtained  the  results  they  of 
course  had  to  ask  themselves  why  no  one  had  been  acting  according 
to  the  matching  principle  in  the  earlier  experiments.   They  con- 
cluded that,  "Perhaps  timing  is  extremely  important  in  detecting 
operation  of  the  matching  principle. . .dating  choice  in  these  (past) 
studies  was  one  of  maintaining  a  social  contact  rather  than  attempting 
to  achieve  contact.   It  may  be  that  the  matching  principle  is  a  more 
potent  determinant  of  how  desirable  a  person  one  will  be  willing 
to  approach..."   (E.  Berscheid  et  at,  1971,  p. 188) 

Another  major  difference  between  studies,  is  that  in  this  one  the 
individual's  level  of  social  desirability  was  self-determined.   It 


36. 


isn't  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  someone  acts  according  to  his 
own  self-concept  rather  than  someone  else's  estimation  of  it. 

These  three  studies  show  not  only  that  physical  attractiveness 
can  generate  liking  for  someone  but  also  that  being  attracted  to  a 
person  in  an  ideal  sense  does  not  mean  that  you  will  be  willing  to 
approach  them.   Some  of  the  major  effects  of  physical  appearance  will 
be  the  ones  which  precede  actual  interaction.   Once  two  people  have 
gotten  into  conversation,  other  factors  will  be  present  -  attitude 
similarity,  need  complementarity,  whatever.   But  if  a  man  enters  a 
room  where  a  woman  is  already  seated  and  he  is  attracted  to  her,  the 
way  he  evaluates  himself  and  his  appearance  in  his  mind  will  affect 
the  way  he  approaches  the  woman,  what  he  anticipates  from  the  interaction, 
or  whether  he  may  decide  to  go  back  out  the  door  again. 

Don  Byrne,  satisfied  that,  "The  effect  of  attitude  similarity/ 
dissimilarity  is  sufficiently  well  established  to  constitute  an  empirical 
law"  (D.  Byrne,  1965,  p. 254)  went  on  to  examine  the  effect  of  attitude 
similarity  and  physical  attractiveness  in  interaction  (as  positive  rein- 
forcements) .   His  subjects  were  given  photographs  coupled  with 
attitude  statements  of  varying  levels  of  attractiveness  and  similarity. 
The  subjects  rated  these  stimulus  people  on  an  Interpersonal  Judgment 
Scale  (liking,  desirability  as  a  date  or  spouse,  desirability  as  a 
work  partner).   Similarity  and  attractiveness  in  combination  constitute 
high  reward  value  and  as  predicted,  high  similarity  and  attractiveness 
pushed  up  ratings  on  the  IPJ  scale;  unattractiveness  had  a  slight  negative 
effect.   Stroebe  et  al  in  a  similar  study  supported  these  findings  and  added 


37. 


some  new  material.   They  found,  for  one,  that  if  a  female  were  attractive, 
men  did  not  concern  themselves  so  much  with  whether  or  not  they  had  similar 
attitudes.   However,  similarity  became  much  more  important  in  the  case  of 
evaluating  homely  girls.   Physical  attractiveness  was  also  judged  more 
important  for  dating  than  for  liking  or  marrying.   The  authors  believe 
that  probably  "the  decision  to  date  someone  is  not  only  affected  by 
liking  but  also  by  considerations  of  possible  status  gains  or  losses 
through  being  seen  with  them".   (Stroebe  et  al,  1970,  p. 90) 

What  is  important  in  marriage  is  also  determined  by  the  goals  of  the 
individuals  involved;  compatability  is  probably  emphasized  more  but 
there  is  status  to  be  gained  through  marriage  to  someone  attractive 
as  well.   For  instance,  there  is  evidence  that  attractive  women  are 
more  upwardly  mobile  (1969,  Elder).   (And  what  better  social  accoutre- 
ment could  a  rising  young  business  executive  have,  in  addition  to  the 
right  sort  of  house  and  the  right  sort  of  car,  than  the  right  of  sort  of 
attractive  personable  wife?) 

Since  there  were  murmurs  of  discontent  with  previous  dating 
studies  (how  far  can  we  generalize  from  the  relationships  between 
subjects  and  photographs  or  mimeographed  lists  of  attitudes  to 
real  life?),  Byrne  in  1970  set  up  an  experiment  designed  to  demonstrate 
continuity  between  a  lab  study  of  attraction  variables  and  how  these 
variables  work  in  the  field.   Twenty-four  of  the  couples  studied  were 
put  together  on  the  basis  of  high  attitude  similarity  and  twenty  because 
they  were  relatively  dissimilar.   Some  of  the  couples  in  each  condition 
were  told  to  imagine  they  were  similar  or  dissimilar,  and  some  were  told 
they  actually  were  similar  or  dissimilar.   Then  they  were  sent  to  get 


38. 

to  know  each  other  on  a  30-minute  "coke"  date.   Subsequent  measures 
(for  example,  how  far  apart  the  couple  stood  when  they  returned  to 
talk  to  the  experimentor)  showed  that,  as  in  paper  and  pencil  studies, 
liking  was  based  on  similarity  and  attractiveness.   Byrne's  claim  that 
the  coke  date  was  a  "real  life"  situation  is  open  to  some  question. 
But  it  is  a  study  worth  mentioning.   Although  Miller  (1972)  suggests 
that  attitude  similarity  may  act  as  an  "open  gate"  for  people  to  be 
more  receptive  to  other  cues  about  a  person,  it  is  another  person's 
physical  appearance  which  we  become  acquainted  with  initially  and  it 
is  just  as  likely  that  attractiveness  is  an  open  gate. 

Many  conclusions  about  the  significant  role  of  physical  beauty 
in  interpersonal  relations  are  based  on  studies  conducted  in  a  dating 
situation.   This  makes  it  possible  for  someone  to  claim  that  nothing 
has  been  shown  except  a  little  about  the  dating  habits  of  American 
college  students.   Probably  physical  attractiveness  is  more  important 
for  people  when  they  are  dating.   It  is  during  adolescence  that 
children  first  become  really  aware  of  their  own,  and  others'  physical 
appearance.   Attracting  the  opposite  sex  becomes  a  pervading  raison  d'etre 
for  many.   But  there  is  evidence  which  suggests  that  attractive  people 
have  got  the  edge  over  unattractive  people  in  other  situations  and 
attributes . 

In  1970  Miller  found  attractive  people  to  be  perceived  as  more 
internally  controlled  than  unattractive  people.   Miller  defines  internal 
control  as  "the  extent  to  which  an  individual  feels  that  he  has  control 
over  the  reinforcements  that  occur  relative  to  his  behavior"   (A.G.  Miller, 
1970,  p. 103) 


39. 


Considered  in  terms  of  reward  value,  attractiveness,  as  has  been  pointed 
out,  gives  the  attractive  person  more  social  power.   An  attractive  woman 
accepts  a  date  with  an  ugly  man  for  whatever  peculiar  reasons  of  her 
own.   An  unattractive  girl  accepts  the  date  because  she  doesn't  have  any 
choice . 

Subjects  in  an  experiment  by  M.J.  Lerner  (1965)  watched  two  people 
doing  anagrams.   One  of  the  people,  a  robust  young  man  with  a  deep  voice, 
was  much  more  attractive  than  the  other,  who  was  thin  and  wore  glasses. 
Although  the  subjects  knew  the  winner  of  the  task  was  decided  entirely 
by  chance,  when  the  attractive  young  man  was  the  one  who  went  unrewarded, 
they  tended  to  knock  the  performance  of  both  of  them.   Physical  attractiveness 
was  also  found  to  influence  opinion  change  (Mills  and  Aronson,  1965). 
An  attractive  man  or  woman  who  admitted  to  a  desire  to  change  a  group's 
attitude  was  much  better  received  than  an  unattractive  person  who  tried 
to  do  the  same  thing.   (Certainly  on  any  given  day  of  commercial  television, 
products  are  more  likely  to  be  endorsed  by  good-looking  people) . 

Sigall  and  Aronson  (1969)  had  subjects  given  positive  or  negative 
ratings  of  their  personality  by  a  young  woman  who  was  either  attractively 
or  unattractively  dressed.   Subjects  liked  the  woman  who  told  them  were 
"well  adjusted,  mature  and  insightful"  much  better  when  she  was  attractive 
than  unattractive.   But  to  be  labeled  "immature,  shallow,  lacking  in  insight" 
by  a  dingy  woman  sporting  a  frizzy  blond  wig  was  not  as  bad  as  being  told 
the  same  by  a  highly  attractive  young  woman  apparently,  as  the  latter  was 
liked  least  in  this  situation.   This  is  another  example  of  attractiveness 


40. 


working  in  terms  of  potential  reward  value.   "...with  a  physically  attractive 
person,  a  greater  drive  is  aroused  to  be  well  received..."   (Sigall  and 
Aronson,  1969,  p. 9 3) 

The  subjects  had  much  more  to  gain  from  a  positive  evaluation  by  an  attractive 
woman;  and  therefore,  more  to  lose  when  she  didn't  think  as  much  of  them. 

The  title  of  an  article  by  Dion  et  al  (1972)  that  "What  is  Beautiful 
is  Good"  seems  to  sum  up  the  sense  of  the  accumulating  experimental  findings. 
According  to  the  subjects  in  this  experiment,  attractive  people  have  better 
personalities  and  lead  better  lives.   Good-looking  men  and  women  will  have 
more  prestigious  occupations,  more  prospects  and  likelihood  of  marrying, 
better  marriages,  better  prospects  for  happy  social  and  professional  lives 
and  more  total  happiness  in  their  lives. 

IMPRESSION  FORMATION 


Not  only  do  attractive  people  stand  to  be  better  liked  by  others, 
but  they  seem  to  have  increased  chances  to  attain  life,  liberty  and  the 
pursuit  of  happiness.   In  this  section  I  will  outline  one  explanation 
for  the  high  degree  of  social  desirability  of  attractive  people,  and 
hence  their  social  success . 

Walster  (1966)  wondered  if  the  results  of  the  computer  dating 
study  were  due  to  some  of  the  correlates  of  attractiveness  since  "we  know 
from  developmental  studies  of  intelligent  individuals  (Terman,  1925,  1947, 
1959)  that  intelligence,  physical  attractiveness,  'creativity,  and  certain 
personality  traits  are  often  positively  correlated'"   (E.  Walster,  1966, 


41. 


p. 514). 

In  1970  Miller  showed  that  subjects  rating  photographs  at  three 
levels  of  attractiveness  on  an  adjective  checklist,  associated 
the  attractive  people  with  more  positive  traits.   In  other  words 
(Miller's,  to  be  exact)  "...in  a  first  impression  situation,  a 
person  s  level  of  attractiveness  may  evoke  in  a  perceiver  a 
consistent  set  of  expectancies  by  a  process  of  trait  inference." 
(A.G.  Miller,  1970,  p. 241) 

According  to  earlier  work  done  by  W.E.  Asch  (1946),  impression 
formation  is  an  organized  process.   In  his  experiments,  subjects  were 
presented  with  lists  of  personality  traits  and  asked  to  form  an  impression 
of  a  person  possessing  those  traits.   Changing  one  word  in  the  list  (from 
'warm'  to  'cold'  for  example),  depending  on  whether  it  was  a  'central'  or 
'peripheral'  trait,  changed  the  nature  of  the  entire  impression.   For 
example,  consider  ugly  and  beautiful  as  traits.   Following  Asch's  idea 
the  same  traits  in  an  ugly  and  a  beautiful  person  would  not  produce  the 
same  impression.   Wishner  (1960)  extended  Asch's  research  by  pointing  out 
that  the  centrality  of  a  trait  depended  on  how  strongly  it  was  related 
to  each  of  the  other  traits  in  the  list.   And  you  might  expect  that 
attractiveness  would  in  most  people's  minds  be  more  strongly  related 
to  attributes  like  'friendliness'  or  'sociability'  and  less  obviously 
connected  to  'piety'  or  'perserverance' .   In  some  work  I  did  earlier 
with  impression  formation,  subjects  in  four  different  groups  were 
presented  with  printed  lists  of  physical  traits  describing  a  man  who 
was  made  out  to  be  progressively  less  attractive  in  the  four  conditions. 


42. 


Subjects  were  asked  to  form  an  impression  of  his  personality  and  to  rate 
him  on  30  adjective  traits  which  were  on  a  six-point  scale.   Not  all 
differences  between  the  groups  on  mean  adjective  ratings  were  significant 
but  those  that  were  tended  to  be  with  adjectives  relating  to  ease  in 
social  interest  (eig,  humorous,  warm,  popular). 

It  has  been  suggested  that  people  carry  with  them  an  "implicit 
personality  theory"  for  attractiveness.   Based  on  what  has  been  discussed 
in  the  paragraph  above,  I  am  proposing  that  physical  beauty  generates 
positive  impressions  and  trait  inferences.   People  on  the  verge  of 
interaction  search  for  cues  as  to  how  to  behave,  what  they  can  expect 
the  other  person  to  be  like.   The  first  impression  we  form  of  someone 
will  be  based  on  the  other  person's  physical  appearance  since  that  is 
the  first  thing  we  see.   We  would  expect  quite  a  different  encounter 
with  someone  in  a  major-general's  uniform  than  with  someone  in  a  tutu. 
If  an  attractive  individual,  as  well  as  being  desirable  as  a  potential 
date  because  of  the  status  conferred  by  being  seen  with  someone  attractive, 
promises  to  be  witty,  light-spirited  and  able  to  converse  intelligently 
on  current  topics,  they  could  be  very  rewarding.   On  the  other  hand,  a 
person  who  is  homely,  and  will  most  certainly  be  dull,  generally  un- 
interesting and  perhaps  not  inclined  to  talk,  does  not  promise 
as  rewarding  an  interaction.   What  should  be  emphasized  is  the  traits 
a  perceiver  believes  someone  to  possess.   He  will  act  according  to 
the  impression  he  has. 

Much  of  this  is  speculative  but  there  is  evidence  for  the 

existence  of  an  attractiveness  cum  personality  syndrome  supported 
by  its  own  implicit  personality  theory.   This  will  affect  first 
impressions  and  again  it  should  be  said  that  the  immediate  social 
value  of  physical  attractiveness  lies  in  anticipated  rewards. 


43. 


Physical  attractiveness  is  one  of  the  important  determinants 
of  liking  and  probably  of  personality  development.   It  is  not  the  only 
reason  people  like  each  other.   Attractiveness  should  be  stressed  as 
a  pre-interaction  variable.   There  are  the  other  previously  mentioned 
factors  which  go  into  making  up  someone's  social  worth.   An  individual 
of  low  attractiveness  but  radiant  personality  may  be  as  likeable  as 
a  highly  attractive  person  who  is  somewhat  less  charming:   it  will 
depend  on  who  is  doing  the  juding.   An  attractive  man  interested  in 
his  public  image  as  opposed  to  a  plain  man  in  search  of  sympathy  and 
good  cooking  are  looking  for  different  things  in  the  women  they  meet. 

If  research  into  the  social  implications  of  physical  attractive- 
ness is  to  continue,  we  must  pay  more  attention  to  age  factors,  same- 
sex  attraction,  individual  idiosyncracies .   Meanwhile  the  evidence  is 
strong  in  support  of  the  claim  that  in  the  course  of  social  events  it 
helps  significantly  to  be  physically  attractive. 


kk. 


REFERENCES 


Argyle,  M. ,  The  Psychology  of  Interpersonal  Behavior,  Middlesex, 
England : Penguin  Books  Ltd.,  1967. 

Argyle,  M. ,  Social  Interaction,  London:   Methuen  &  Co.,  1969. 

Asch,  S.  E. ,  "Forming  impressions  of  personality",  J.  Abnormal  and 
Soc.  Psych.  ,  19^6,  Ul,  258-290. 

Berscheid,  E.  and  Walster,  E.,  Interpersonal  Attraction,  Reading, 
Mass.:  Addison  Wesley  Pub.  Co.,  1969. 

Berscheid,  E. ,  Dion,  K. ,  Walster,  E.  and  Walster  G.  W., 

"Physical  attractiveness  and  dating  choice:  A  test  of  the 
matching  hypothesis",  J.  Exper.  Soc.  Psych.,  1971,  17, 
173-189. 

Bruner,  J.  S.  and  Tagiuri,  R.,  "The  perception  of  people"  in 
G.  Lindzey  ed. ,  Handbook  of  Social  Psychology,  Vol.  II, 
Reading,  Mass.:   Addison  Wesley  Pub.  Co.,  1951*,  277-288. 

Bruner,  J.  S. ,  Shapiro,  D.  and  Tagiuri,  R. ,  "The  meaning  of  traits 
in  isolation  and  in  combination"  in  R.  Tagiuri  &  L.  Petrullo 
eds.,  Person  Perception  and  Interpersonal  Behaviour,  Calif.: 
Stanford  University  Press,  1958,  277-288. 

Byrne,  D. ,  "interpersonal  attraction  and  attitude  similarity", 
J.  Abnormal  and  Soc.  Psych.,  196l,  62,  713-715. 

Byrne,  D.,  London,  0.  and  Reeves,  K. ,  "The  effects  of  physical 
attractiveness,  sex  and  attitude  similarity  on  interpersonal 
attraction",  J.  Personality,  1968,  36,  259-269. 

Byrne,  D.,  "Continuity  between  the  experimental  study  of 
attraction  and  real  life  computer  dating",  J.  Pers. 
and  Soc.  Psych. ,  1970,  16,  157-165. 

Byrne,  D.  and  Nelson,  D.,  "attraction  as  a  linear  function  of 
proportion  of  positive  reinforcements",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc. 
Psych.,  1965,  1,  659-663. 

Cavior,  N.  and  Lombardi,  D.  A.,  "Developmental  aspects  of 

physical  attractiveness  in  children",  Developmental  Psych. , 
1973,  8,  167-171. 


U5. 


Dion,  K.  ,  Berscheid,  E.  and  Walster,  E.,  "What  is  beautiful  is 
",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych. ,  1972,  2k,    285-290. 


Elder,  G.  H. ,  Jr.,  "Appearance  and  education  in  marriage 
mobility",  Am.  Soc.  Rev. ,  1969,  3h ,    519-533. 

Goldstein,  J.  W.  and  Rosenfeld,  H.  M. ,  "Insecurity  and  prefer- 
ence for  persons  similar  to  oneself" ,  J.  Personality, 
1969,  37,  253-268. 

Guthrie,  E.  R.,  The  Psychology  of  Human  Conflict,  New  York: 
Harper,  1938,  cited  in  Argyle,  op.  cit.  ,  1969»  36U. 

Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  Richardson,  S.  A.  and  Dornbusch,  S.  M. , 
"The  problem  of  relevance  in  the  study  of  person 
perception",  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds . , 
Person  Perception  and  Interpersonal  Behaviour,  Calif.: 
Stanford  University  Press,  1958,  5^-62 . 

Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  Schneider,  D.  J.  and  Polefka,  J.,  Person 
Perception,  Reading,  Mass.:   Addison  Wesley  Pub.  Co., 
1969. 

Hays,  W.  L. ,  "An  approach  to  the  study  of  trait  implication 
and  trait  similarity"  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo 
eds.,  op.  cit.,  1958,  287-299. 

Heider,  F. ,  "Perceiving  the  other  person",  in  R.  Tagiuri  and 
L.  Petrullo  eds.,  op.  cit.,  1958,  22-26. 

Jones,  E.  E.  and  Thibaut ,  J.  W. ,  "Interaction  goals  as  bases 
of  inference  in  interpersonal  perception"  in  R.  Tagiuri 
and  L.  Petrullo  eds.,  ibid. ,  151-178. 

Jones,  E.  E.  and  Gerard,  H.  B. ,  Foundations  of  Social 
Psychology,  New  York:   J.  Wiley  &  Sons,  Inc.,  1967 . 

Lerner,  M.  J.  ,  "Evaluation  of  performance  as  a  function 
of  performer's  reward  and  attractiveness",  J.  Pers. 
and  Soc.  Psych. ,  1965,  1,  355-360. 

Lewin,  K. ,  Dembo,  T.,  Festinger,  L.  and  Sears,  P.,  "Level 
of  aspiration"  in  J.  McV.  Hunt  ed.  Personality  and  the 
Behaviour  Disorders,  Vol.  I,  New  York:   Ronald  Press 
Co.,  19^  • 

Miller,  A.  G. ,  "Role  of  physical  attractiveness  in  impression 
formation",  Psychon.  Science,  1970a,  19,  2l*l-2U3. 


k6. 


Miller,  A.  G.  ,  "Social  perception  of  internal-external 
control",  Percep.  and  Motor  Skills,  1970b,  30, 
103-109. 

Miller,  A.  G. ,  "Effect  of  attitude  similarity-dissimilarity 
on  the  utilization  of  additional  stimulus  inputs  in 
judgments  of  interpersonal  attraction",  Psychon.  Science, 
1972,  26,  199-203. 

Mills,  J.  and  Aronson,  E. ,  "Opinion  changes  as  a  function 
of  the  communicator's  attractiveness  and  desire  to 
influence",  J.  Pers .  and  Soc .  Psych.,  1965,  1,  173-177. 

Secord,  P.  F. ,  "Facial  features  and  inference  processes  in 
interpersonal  perception"  in  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo 
eds.,  op.  cit.,  1958,  300-315. 

Sigall,  H.  and  Aronson,  E. ,  "Liking  for  an  evaluator  as  a 
function  of  her  physical  attractiveness  and  the  nature 
of  the  evaluation" ,  J.  Exp.  Soc.  Psych. ,  1971 ,  5 , 
77-91. 

Staffieri,  J.  R.,  "A  study  of  social  stereotype  of  body 
image  in  children",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1967, 
7,  101-10^. 

Stroebe,  W. ,  Insko,  C.  A.,  Thompson,  V.  D.  and  Layton,  B.  D., 
"Effects  of  physical  attractiveness,  attitude  similar- 
ity and  sex  on  various  aspects  of  interpersonal  attraction", 
J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1971,  18,  79-91. 

Tagiuri,  R.  and  Petrullo,  L.  eds.,  Person  Perception  and 
Interpersonal  Behaviour. ,  Calif. :   Stanford  University 
Press,  1958. 

Walster,  E.,  Aronson,  V.,  Abrahams,  D.  and  Rottman,  L. , 
"The  importance  of  physical  attractiveness  in 
dating  behavior",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1966, 
h,    508-516. 

Walster,  E. ,  "The  effect  of  self-esteem  on  liking  for  dates 
of  various  social  desirabilities",  J.  Exper.  Soc.  Psych., 
1970,  6,  2U8-263. 

Wishner,  J.,  "Reanalysis  of  'Impressions  of  Personality'", 
Psych.  Reports,  i960,  67,  96-112. 


III.   Physical  Deformity  and  Personality 


Chapter  3 


Philip  saw  a  boy  running  past  and  tried  to  catch  him, 
but  his  limp  gave  him  no  chance;  and  the  runners,  taking 
their  opportunity,  made  straight  for  the  ground  he  covered. 
Then  one  of  them  had  the  brilliant  idea  of  imitating  Philip's 
clumsy  run.   Other  boys  saw  it  and  began  to  laugh;  then  they 
all  copied  the  first;  and  they  ran  round  Philip,  limping 
grotesquely,  screaming  in  their  treble  voices  with  shrill 
laughter. 

W.  Somerset  Maugham  Of  Human 
Bondage,  1915,  Chapter,  XI 


What  sort  of  a  creature  are  you?"  they  inquired,  as  the 
duckling  turned  from  side  to  side  and  greeted  them  as  well 
as  he  could.   "You  are  frightfully  ugly,"  said  the  wild  ducks, 
"but  that  does  not  matter  to  us  so  long  as  you  do  not  marry  into 
our  family. 

Hans  Christian  Anderson,  The 
Ugly  Duckling 


48. 


"When  and  if  by  virtue  of  accident  or  disease,  something  occurs 
that  destroys  any  of  our  body,  we  need  to  completely  reorganize  our 
body  image  and  self -concept ."   (Schecter,  in  Knorr  et  al,  1968,  p.  248) 

It  has  already  been  established  in  the  previous  chapter  that  the 
person  in  society  is  identified  as  a  physical  entity  as  well  as  a 
behaving  entity.   The  dichotomy  of  appearances  which  has  been  the 
focus  of  study  with  social  psychologists  over  the  last  ten  years  is 
that  of  at tractive /unattractive.   And  the  general  finding  has  been 
that  people  perceive  beauty  as  being  somewhat  more  than  just  skin 
deep.   I  have  said  that  there  is  a  state  of  positive  trait  association 
with  attractive  people  and  negative  trait  association  with  unattractive 
people.   People  tend  to  react  more  positively  to  someone  who  is  attractive 
and  negatively  to  someone  who  is  unattractive.   Further  evidence  of  this 
proposition  can  be  drawn  from  the  medical  profession,  surprisingly  enough. 
Physical  appearance  has  become  an  important  part  of  medical  practice  in 
recent  years  not  because  of  the  rebirth  of  any  constitutional  or  humoral 
psychologies,  but  because  of  advances  in  plastic  surgery  and  increasing 
demands  for  these  surgical  procedures. 

The  demand  itself  is  indicative  of  how  important  people  feel  it  is 
to  have  a  satisfactory  physical  appearance.   And  the  work  that  plastic 
surgeons  and  psychiatrists,  have  done  with  plastic  surgery  patients  has 
provided  some  striking  insights  into  the  relations  between  body  image 
and  self  image.   What  many  of  their  studies  have  shown  is  that  there 
most  assuredly  are  negative  prejudices  brought  out  by  any  physical 


49, 


deformity  and  that  having  to  contend  with  these  prejudices  affects 
the  experience  and  personality  of  deformed  and  disfigured  people  with 
some  very  serious  consequences.   Social  psychologists  have  been  looking 
more  at  interpersonal  attraction  and  particularly  at  the  advantages  of 
being  attractive.   Plastic  Surgeons  and  counseling  psychiatrists  are 
concerned  with  social  facility  and  particularly  with  the  disadvantages 
of  being  unattractive.   The  psychiatrist  who  works  with  the  patients, 
has  had  the  opportunity  to  see  first  hand  the  effect  of  deformity  on 
the  personality.   I  want  to  concentrate  on  the  dynamics  of  this  effect 
within  the  social  context. 

There  are  varied  reasons  why  people  seek  out  a  Plastic  Surgeon. 
They  may  have  experienced  long  term  dissatisfaction  with  a  too  large 
nose  or  a  receding  chin.   There  may  have  been  a  drastic  alteration 
in  physical  appearance  due  to  accident  or  disease.   Someone  may  be 
in  the  throes  of  an  emotional  crisis  and  decide  that  a  breast  augmenta- 
tion or  a  nose  bob  would  improve  the  situation.   Women  worried  about 
growing  old  may  try  to  stave  the  years  off  by  having  a  face  lift.   Many 
people  want  their  noses  changed  in  accordance  with  the  preferences  of 
the  dominant  culture;  and  to  prevent  their  being  identified  with  a 
stereotyped  sub-group  and  exposed  to  the  accompanying  prejudices  (MacGregor, 
1967).   Whatever  the  reason,  these  people  have  the  idea  that  a  change  in 
appearance  will  somehow  improve  their  lives  and  themselves.   They  are 
often  not  far  wrong. 

Most  plastic  surgery  is  done  upon  the  face  for  as  MacGregor  has  said, 
"Perhaps  nothing  is  so  eloquent  and  significant  as  the  human  face." 


50. 


(MacGregor,  1951,  p. 630).   And  to  add  another  opinion,  "Family  and  society 
react  to  any  body  part  of  the  child  but  the  reaction  tends  to  be  greater 
to  the  facial  and  genital  appearance."   (W.M.  Easson,  1967,  p. 453-459). 
The  face  is  usually  the  first  part  of  physical  appearance  that  is  noticed. 
And  since  the  face  is  of  prime  importance,  facial  deformity  would  be  the 
most  significant.   A  severe  burn  scar  on  the  shoulder  is  not  as  distressing 
as  one  on  the  face  —  if  nothing  else,  the  shoulder  can  at  least  be  covered 
up,  the  face  cannot.   Throughout  the  rest  of  the  chapter,  unless  otherwise 
specified,  any  mention  of  disfigurement  should  be  taken  to  mean  facial 
disfigurement . 

Deformity  And  The  Social  Context 

For  a  long  time  medical  practitioners  looked  askance  at  requests  for 
cosmetic  surgery.   Since  there  was  usually  no  real  physical  trauma  involved 
in  a  disfiguring  facial  injury  or  a  congenital  deformity,  such  requests 
seemed  superfluous  and  self-serving.   This  attitude  is  changing.   Knorr 
and  Edgerton  write  that  "the  patient  who  inquires  about  cosmetic  surgery 
may  have  been  more  hesitant  than  most.   He's  apt  to  feel  guilty  about 
his  "vanity"  and  thus  needs  to  be  reassured  that  the  desire  to  be  found 
attractive  is  characteristic  of  any  healthy,  normal  person."   (Knorr  and 

Edgerton,  1971,  p. 141).   And  beyond  this,  Brown  points  out  that  " 

there  is  an  increasingly  widespread  realization  among  general  practitioners 
that  defects  can  do  their  patients  tremendous  psychological  damage." 
(W.E.  Brown,  1970,  pp.  12-13).   The  problem  for  the  disfigured  child  or 
adult  is  not  impairment  of  his  body  but  impairment  of  his  social  life. 
The  deformity  becomes  associated  with  negative  affect  in  the  face  of 


51. 

adverse  social  reactions.   What  is  the  nature  of  these  reactions?  Mac- 
Gregor  describes  some  of  the  prejudices  that  dog  people  with  deformities. 

"Myths  and  misconceptions  regarding  the  man  whose  face  is  scarred 
or  misshapen  by  disease  whose  expression  is  distorted  or  who  was 
born  with  a  harelip  or  without  an  ear  are  legion.   He  has  been 
stereotyped  in  folklore,  literature  and  the  movies.   He  is  the 
"evil  one"  or  the  gangster;  he  is  diseased  or  has  led  an  "immoral" 
life;  he  is  a  "freak"  paying  for  the  sins  of  his  father  or  for  the 
things  his  mother  saw  while  she  was  pregnant.   He  is  to  be  shunned, 
regarded  with  curiosity,  or  ridiculed  and  made  a  social  outcast". 

(F.C.  MacGregor,  1951,  p. 631) 

This  is  quite  an  imposing  list.   Again  and  again  writers  discussing 
the  problems  of  the  disfigured  indicate  that  it  is  other  people  who 
cause  the  real  damage.   Often  the  hope  that  a  patient  places  in  plastic 
surgery  is  not  to  acquire  striking  good  looks  but  to  be  less  noticeable. 
He  wants  to  attract  less  attention  in  the  streets  and  subways,  to  be 
able  to  sit  on  a  bus  without  feeling  the  necessity  of  burying  his  head 
in  a  newspaper  that  he  doesn't  even  feel  particularly  like  reading. 
In  an  article  on  the  social  psychological  problems  associated  with 
disability,  Meyerson  says, 

1)  "The  problem  of  adjustment  to  physical  disability  is  in  large 
fact,  a  problem  is  creating  favorable  social  situations. 

2)  The  problem  of  adjustment  to  physical  disability  is  as  much  or 
more  a  problem  of  the  non-handicapped  majority  as  it  is  of  the  disabled 
minority.:   (L.  Meyerson,  1948,  p. 6) 


52, 


In  an  extensive  psychosocial  study  of  facial  disfigurement  and  plastic 
surgery,  MacGregor  and  her  associates  emphasized  this  role  of  others  in 
creating  an  uncomfortable  social  atmosphere  for  deformed  people.   One 

of  their  concluding  statements  is  that  " it  is  the  non -handicapped 

who,  by  their  negative  attitudes  and  prejudices,  help  to  create  and  per- 
petuate many  of  the  difficulties  of  the  facially  deformed."  (MacGregor 
et  al,  1951,  p. 216). 


The  Self  Image 

If  at  all  possible,  an  effort  is  made  to  correct  physical  defects 
while  a  child  is  still  young.   This  prevents  his  incorporating  the  defect 
and  all  of  its  negative  consequences  into  his  developing  body  and  self 
images.   In  a  statement  referring  directly  to  ear  anomaly  but  applicable 
to  most  deformities,  Knorr  writes: 

"The  full  effect  of  the  deformity  may  not  be  felt  until  the  child 
comes  under  the  influence  of  peers  who  may  reject  ridicule  and 
alienate  the  child  as  someone  diff erent . . . . the  impaired  self 
image  proves  substantially  more  disabling  than  the  physical 
defect."   (N.  J.  Knorr  et  al ,  1968,  p. 250). 

Apparently  between  the  ages  of  7  and  10,  children  are  less  aware  of 
deformity;  subsequently  adolescence  is  an  especially  traumatic  time  for 
a  child  with  any  appearance  deficiency.   The  self-image  is  still  developing 
and  the  need  to  be  accepted  by  the  peer  group  is  stronger  than  ever.   According 
to  Brown,  " more  operations  [are]  performed  while  the  patient  is  still  in 


53. 


his  early  teens,  before  there  is  a  chance  of  the  deformity's  causing  serious 
psychological  damage."   (W.E.  Brown,  1970,  p. 69)   Knorr  says  that  "The 
adolescent  body  image  is  in  a  constant  state  of  change.   These  changes  must 
gain  internal  acceptance  and  also  must  be  sanctioned  by  the  external  environ- 
ment."  (N.J.  Knorr  et  al,  1968,  p. 251)   What  is  involved  in  these  situations 
is  essentially  a  realization  of    Mead's   mirrored-self  hypothesis.   People 
see  themselves  through  the  reactions  of  others  and  these  reactions,  in  the 
case  of  someone  who  is  noticeably  unattractive,  are  not  usually  good  ones. 
As  MacGregor  aptly  puts  it,  "Not  only  [are]  they  daily  dismayed  by  the 
reflection  of  their  own  mirrors  but,  more  damaging  to  their  ego  esteem, 
they  [see]  their  handicaps  reflected  in  the  reaction  of  others  towards 
them."   (F.C.  MacGregor,  1951,  p. 633).   Under  these  circumstances,  the 
self  image  takes  quite  a  battering. 


Personality  Problems  Associated  With  Deformity 

Although  I  have  been  emphasizing  the  fact  that  society's  reaction 
to  physical  deformity  is  psychologically  damaging  I  have  not  yet  been 
explicit  as  to  what  that  damage  is .   Many  of  the  character  traits  of 
the  deformed  person  represent  adaptation  to  undifficult  situations.   Some 
handicapped  people  are  able  to  handle  their  strained  interactions  by 
returning  stares  directed  at  their  deformity  or  through  flippant  remarks, 
like  the  young  man  with  a  severe  facial  disfigurement  who  when  questioned 
about  it,  would  reply,  "Oh  I  stepped  on  my  face  going  up  the  stairs"  or 
"I  got  it  for  sticking  my  nose  in  other  people's  business."  (MacGregor  et 
al,  1953,  p. 84). 


54. 
But  generally  the  strain  results  in  a  loss  of  social  adeptness.   The 
researchers  who  have  done  the  most  with  examining  and  evaluating  the  psychological 
damage  that  accompanies  damaged  appearance  are  MacGregor  on  the  one  hand  and 
Knorr  and  Edgerton  on  the  other.   All  have  been  involved  in  extensive  hospital 
studies  of  plastic  surgery  patients  and  their  work  has  revealed  basic  personality 
syndromes  which  occurs  as  a  result  of  physical  deformity  and  the  adverse  reactions 
to  it.   In  one  of  her  earlier  papers,  MacGregor  describes  the  personality  of 
patients  who  over  a  period  of  time  came  into  the  hospital  for  plastic  surgery: 
"The  majority  of  patients  suffered  from  behaviour  difficulties  which 
ranged  from  feelings  of  inferiority,  self -consciousness,  frustration, 
preoccupation  with  the  deformity,  hypersensitivity,  anxiety,  hostili- 
ty, paranoid  complaints  and  withdrawal  from  social  activities  that 
varied  from  partial  to  complete,  to  anti-social  behavior  and  psychotic 
states."   (F.C.  MacGregor,  1951,  pp. 628-629.) 

Later,  in  publication  of  the  extensive  psychosocial  study  which  she 
carried  out  with  a  large  team  of  collaboraters,  MacGregor  lists  more  outline  form 
these  common  ways  facially  disfigured  people  have  of  adjusting:  Withdrawal,  agressive- 
ness;  putting  blame  for  their  faults  on  external  factors  such  as  parents,  en- 
vironment and  society;  using  the  deformity  as  inner  defense  against  emotional 
disturbance;  and  denying  the  reality  of  appearance.   Knorr  and  his 
associates  made  a  study  of  adolescents  who  for  varying  reasons  were 
about  to  undergo  plastic  surgery.   Among  the  group  about  to  undergo 
rhinoplasty,  they  found  that  "most  prominent  are  depressive  themes 
related  to  interpersonal  relationships."   (N.J.  Knorr  et  al,  1968,  p. 248) 


55. 

The  patients  with  cogenital  deformities  either  tended  to  overcompensate 
for  the  deformity  through  intellectual  achievement,  or  else,  lacking 
the  ability  or  situation  for  that  sort  of  outlet,  to  show  extreme  social 
and  intellectual  retardation.   Those  who  had  acquired  facial  deformities 
(facial  scars)  showed  acute  depression  with  "intense  feelings  that  the 
body  has  been  violated."   (N.  J.  Knorr,  et  al,  1968,  p.  250) 

The  Family  and  the  Deformed  Child 

The  strongest  influences  that  anyone  exercises  over  the  child  while 
he  is  still  young  come  initially  from  the  family  and  after  that  from 
his  peers.   I  have  already  cited  how  the  peer  group's  intolerance  of  abnormality 
is  a  reason  for  having  the  child  undergo  surgery  as  early  as  possible. 
I  have  not  elaborated  on  the  role  the  family  can  play  in  generating 
symptoms  like  those  listed  above.   The  mother  of  a  deformed  child  may 
treat  the  child  in  one  of  several  ways.   She  may  totally  reject  him. 
There  is  one  case  record  (and  probably  many  more  which  were  not  recorded) 
where  the  grandmother  of  a  severely  deformed  little  boy  requested  that 
the  doctor  just  do  away  with  him  shortly  after  birth.   When  the  request 
was  denied  the  mother  took  the  child  home  where  he  was  systematically 
starved  to  death.  This  of  course  is  an  extreme  example  and  most  mothers 
do  not  react  in  this  fashion.   However  evidence  is  that  there  are  tensions 
within  the  family  which  contribute  to  the  maladjustment  of  facially  deformed 
or  disfigured  children. 

The  1953  MacGregor  Psychosocial  study  included  observation  of  the 
patients  at  home  and  in  school.   The  home  studies  were  fruitful  in  laying 
bare  some  of  the  intra-familial  conflicts.   MacGregor  states  that  "The 


56. 


records  of  the  investigation  suggest  that  not  one  mother  of  a  congenitally 
deformed  child  is  without  feelings  of  guilt  or  resentment,  or  both."   It's 
true  that  the  mother  as  well  as  her  child  is  open  to  social  criticism  for 
having  a  child  "like  that".   She  may  wonder  if  she  is  being  punished  or 
what  she  did  to  cause  her  child  to  be  disfigured.   She  often  feels 
ashamed  of  the  child  or  else  sees  it  as  an  affront  to  her.   The  same 
sorts  of  feelings  will  affect  other  members  of  the  family.   The  child 
is  often  either  rejected  and  abused  or  protected  to  the  point  of  being 
smothered.   W.  M.  Easson  writing  about  the  psychopathological  reactions 
to  congenital  defects  points  out  that  "Parents  need  to  have  their  child 
near  the  culturally  established  physical  norm;  variation,  disease  and 
deformity  tend  to  be  viewed  with  repugnance  and  rejection."   (W.M. 
Easson,  1967,  p. 453)   Knorr  says  that  "Parental  guilt  and  anxiety 
over  their  child's  deformity  and  their  need  to  overprotect  their 
child  will  often  lead  to  pathologic  interactions  between  the  child 
and  parent."   (N.J.  Knorr , reprint ,  p. 185)". .. the  emotional  investment  in  the 
physical  self,  the  body  image,  is  to  a  large  part  due  to  the  pleasure 
or  displeasure  emotionally  significant  people  find  in  the  child's 
appearance"   (W.M.  Easson,  1967,  p. 453)   Children  younger  than  four 
years  old  have  been  observed  to  cover  a  deformed  ear  with  their  hands 
or  to  pull  and  tear  at  it.   It  is  probable  that  this  action  is  in 
imitation  of  the  parents  who  have  been  able  by  words  and  gestures  to 
communicate  to  the  child  that  he  has  something  to  hide.   (N.  J.  Knorr 
et  al,  reprint,  p. 184;  G.  Aufricht,  1957,  p. 398)   If  the  parents  find 
displeasure  in  their  child's  appearance  inevitably  the  child  will  too. 
Couple  this  with  an  attitude  of  rejection  and  it  is  a  foregone  conclusion 


57. 


that  the  deformed  child  will  have  a  difficult  time  at  home.   As  Watser 

and  Johnson  express  it,  " the  child  perceives  and  imitates  parental 

attitudes  towards  his  body  and  its  parts and  perceives  and  imitates 

the  defenses  against  anxiety  utilized  by  the  parents." (p. 96)  Both  Knorr  (1968) 
and  MacGregor  (1953)  have  found  patterns  of  conflict  in  the  families  of 
their  patients.   Mothers  were  often  openly  hostile  to  their  deformed 
child  and  made  a  point  of  comparing  him  or  her  to  another  non-deformed 
sibling . 

Of  course  these  statements  are  generalizations.   Obviously  some 
families  could  better  handle  the  problem  of  bringingup  a  disfigured  or 
deformed  child.   But  it  is  safe  to  say  that  in  any  case  there  will  be 
at  least  some  strain,  whether  minimal  or  extreme,  within  the  family. 
And  even  with  the  best  family  situation  the  deformed  child  still  has 
his  peers  and  the  rest  of  the  world  to  contend  with.   It  is  no  surprise 
that  behavioral  maladjustments  do  appear. 

The  Benefits  of  Plastic  Surgery 

Plastic  surgeons  are  aware  of  the  problems  of  those  who  come  under 
their  care.   The  question  is  whether  or  not  the  surgery  helps  to  alleviate 
these  problems.   The  answer  seems  to  be  that  to  a  very  great  extent  it 
does.   For  several  reasons,  improved  physical  appearance  does  improve 
the  lives  of  those  who  have  undergone  plastic  surgery.   In  questioning 
female  rhinoplasty  patients,  following  surgery,  Knorr  found  the  following 
statements  true  of  the  majority: 


58. 


"1)  they  would  seek  surgery  again;  2)  they  felt  less  psychologically 
inhibited  ('freer')  after  surgery;  3)  they  gained  social  confidence; 
4)  they  became  less  dependent  on  the  family."  (Knorr,  1968,  p. 248) 

Patients  in  the  same  study,  but  being  treated  for  congenital  deformities, 
generally  had  modest  expectations  for  surgery.  All  were  pleased  with  the 
results  and  experienced  increased  "self  confidence". 

In  a  John's  Hopkins  study  (cited  by  Brown,  1970),  55%  of  the  post- 
surgery  patients  experienced  one  or  more  of  the  following  shortly  after 
surgery:   a  new  job,  marriage,  a  promotion  or  raise  in  salary,  a  merit 
award,  a  new  close  relationship,  termination  of  an  old  detrimental 
relationship.   In  addition,  85%  developed  more  personal  comfort,  less 
personal  criticism,  better  satisfaction  with  their  lives,  less  self- 
consciousness,  more  social  ease,  more  self-esteem  and  greater  happiness. 
An  interesting  statistic  mentioned  by  Brown  concerns  convicts.   Apparently 
"disfigured  offenders  who  do  not  undergo  surgery  return  to  prison  at  a 
10%  higher  rate  than  those  who  have  had  cosmetic  surgery."   (Brown,  1970, 
p. 161).   The  MacGregor  psychosocial  study  of  facial  disfigurement  revealed 
the  following  about  the  post-surgery  patients: 

"In  some  cases  there  was  immediate  and  marked  overt  improvement 
from  previous  social  and  emotional  maladjustment.   In  many 
instances  individual  behavior  became  more  spontaneous  and  this 
resulted  in  more  satisfactory  social  interaction. . .patients 
claimed  that  the  reactions  of  other  people  changed. . .As  for 


59. 


the  patients  themselves,  feelings  of  shame,  self -consciousness, 
inferiority,  and  social  inadequacy  were  mitigated,  and  there 
was  a  marked  rise  in  self-esteem  and  self-confidence."   (F.C. 
MacGregor  et  al,  1953,  p. 89) (Patients  also  saw  in  retrospect  that 
their  inhibited  and  constrained  behavior  had  brought  on  some  of  the  social 
discomfort.)   One  case  study,   a  woman  about  50  years  old  who  had  been 
disfigured  when  the  distal  portion  of  her  nose  was  amputated,  felt  that 
after  reconstructive  surgery  "her  status  as  a  'human  being'  [was]  restored' 

Not  all  patients  in  any  study  were  satisfied  with  the  results  of 
surgery  or  felt  that  their  lives  had  improved  sufficiently  to  warrant 
having  had  it.   However  these  people  usually  tended  to  have  some  sort 
of  personality  disorder,  to  entertain  unrealistic  expectations  or  to  be 
able  to  relate  to  society  only  through  a  disability.   One  type  of  patient 
that  has  appeared  in  enough  plastic  surgeons'  offices  to  have  stimulated 
the  writing  of  several  papers  is  the  ambulatory  male  schizophrenic  who 
has  had  a  faulty  body  image  which  he  keeps  trying  to  change.   It  is 
interesting,  in  fact,  that  the  majority  of  male  patients  seeking  plastic 
surgery  (and  they  are  far  outnumbered  by  female  patients)  are  party  to 
this  syndrome.   This  is  mainly  in  the  case  of  those  asking  for  cosmetic 
surgery  and  not  reconstructive  surgery.   Edgerton  explains  the  phenomenon 
this  way:   "Beauty  and  handsomeness  are  recognized  as  interpersonal 
attributes.   These  attributes  are  less  important  for  men  than  women. 
This  contributes  to  the  smaller  number  of  male  patients.   The  male 
patient  who  seeks  cosmetic  surgery  moves  against  strong  social  pred- 
judice."   (M.T.  Edgerton  et  al,  1960,  pp. 366-367). 


60. 


Body  Image  and  Self  Image 

In  this  chapter  the  definition  of  body-image  that  I  am  employing 
is  Cath's:   "By  body-image  we  mean  that  composite  picture  which  the 
individual  has  of  his  own  body."  The  proposition  is  that  body  image 
is  an  extremely  significant  part  of  the  total  self-image  and  that 
deficiencies  in  it  lead  to  low  self-esteem,  feelings  of  social  in- 
adequacy and  similar  deficiencies  in  the  self -concept .   Fischer  states 
that  "the  close  correlation  of  specific  body  image  attributes  to 
specific  classes  of  social  experience  is  the  child's  earliest  method  of 
adjusting  to  his  environment."   (M.T.  Edgerton  et  al,  1960,  p.  369)   If 
the  social  experience  is  negative,  as  is  the  case  with  a  person  who  has 
some  sort  of  physical  deformity,  this  will  lead  to  maladjustment  in  an 
effort  to  adapt  to  the  negative  social  environment.   It  is  with  his 
body  that  a  child  begins  to  realize  the  reality  of  his  environment,  both 
physical  and  social.   The  social  milieu  remains  important  throughout  life 
with  peaks  of  importance  at  the  time  of  a  child's  first  extensive  peer 
contact  and  during  adolescence.   The  affective  nature  of  the  body  image 
comes  through  social  interaction.   The  reactions  of  other  people  to 
physical  appearance  influences  body  image  and  concordantly  the  self 
image . 

I  think  that  the  psychosocial  studies  of  plastic  surgery  patients, 
people  with  pronounced  facial  deformity  whether  congenital  or  traumatic, 
are  a  convincing  demonstration  of  the  very  powerful  effect  that  physical 
appearance  in  the  active  social  context  can  have  upon  personality  and 
self-concept . 


61. 


REFERENCES 


Aufricht,  G. ,  "Philosophy  of  cosmetic  surgery",  Plastic  and 
Reconstructive  Surgery,  1957,  20(5),  397-399- 

Brown,  W.  E.,  Cosmetic  Surgery,  N.  Y.:   Stein  and  Day  Pub- 
lishers, 1970. 

Cath,  S.  H.,  "The  role  of  the  body-image  in  psychotherapy 
with  the  physically  handicapped",  Psychoanalytic  Rev., 
1957,  lMl),  3U-U0. 

Easson,  W.  M.,  "Psychopathological  environmental  reaction  to 
congenital  defect",  J.  Nervous  and  Mental  Disorder,  1967, 
1^2(5),  U53-1+59. 

Jacobson,  W.  E.,  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  Meyer,  E.,  Center,  A.  and 
Slaughter,  R.,  "Psychiatric  evaluation  of  male  patients 
seeking  cosmetic  surgery",  Plast.  and  Reconstr.  Surgery, 
i960,  26(U) ,  361-370. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Hoopes,  J.  E.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T. ,  "Psychiatric- 
surgical  approach  to  adolescent  disturbance  in  self-image", 
Plast.  and  Reconstr.  Surgery,  1968,  1+1(3),  21+8-253. 

Knorr,  N.  J.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  "Cosmetic  surgery:   Not  for 
everybody",  Consultant,  1971,  11(6),  1+1+-1+6. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Hoopes,  J.  E.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  "Psychologic 
factors  in  reconstruction  of  the  ear,  reprint  (source 
unknown ) . 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  "Some  psycho-social  problems  associated  with 
facial  deformities",  American  Sociological  Review,  1951, 
16,  629-638. 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  Abel,  T.  M.,  Brut,  A.,  Lauer,  E.  and 

Weissman,  S. ,  Facial  Deformities  and  Plastic  Surgery  - 
A  Psycho-social  Study,  Illinois:   Charles  Thomas 
Publisher,  1953. 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  "Social  and  cultural  components  in  the 
motivations  of  persons  seeking  plastic  surgery  of  the 
nose",  J.  Health  and  Social  Behavior,  1967,  8(2), 
125-135. 

Meyerson,  L. ,  "Physical  disability  as  a  social  psychological 
problem",  J.  Social  Issues,  19I+8,  (M,  2-10. 

Richardson,  S.  A.,  "Some  social-psychological  consequences 
of  handicapping",  Pediatrics,  1963,  32,  391-397. 


62. 


Watser,  E.  and  Johnson,  A.  M. ,  "The  emotional  significance  of 
acquired  physical  disfigurement  in  children" ,  American  J. 
Orthopsychiatry,  1958,  28,  85-97- 


IV.   Self  Image  and  Body  Image  in 
the  Social  Context 


CHAPTER  4 

What  is  more  important  in  life  than  our  bodies  or  in  the 
world  than  what  we  look  like? 


George  Santayana,  "My  Sister 
Susana",  1944 


Six  quiet  years.... I  had  passed  at  Greenleaf,  seeing  in  those 
around  me,  as  it  might  be  in  a  looking  glass,  every  stage  of  my  own 
growth  and  change  there. 


Charles  Dickens,  Bleak  House, 
Chapter  HI 


64. 


Body  Image 

In  the  last  chapter  I  briefly  sketched  the  relationship  between 
body  image  and  self  image.   In  this  chapter,  the  concepts  will  be 
expanded  upon  in  more  detail.   Cath's  definition  of  body  image  has 
already  been  cited.   To  this  I  want  to  add  another  definition  from 
Kaufman  and  Heims  (1958),   "It  is  the  ego  which  perceives  the  body 
and  determines  the  conscious  awareness  of  its  form  and  function  along 
with  the  associated  affects.   The  totality  of  this  perception  and  the 
affective  association  is  what  we  mean  by  body  image."   It  should  be 
indicated  here,  before  continuing,  that  much  of  the  material  on  body 
image  is  based  on  psychoanalytic  theory.   (This  was  evident  in  chapter 
III  with  so  much  of  the  data  coming  from  psychiatrists  notebooks) . 
Because  of  the  Freudian  emphasis  on  body  and  states  of  bodily  pleasure 
and  frustration,  it  follows  that  the  body  image  concept  would  come 
out  of  and  largely  draw  from  that  tradition.   However  I  want  to  employ 
the  concept  with  as  few  Freudian  overtones  as  possble.   For  example, 
in  the  above  definition  the  word  "ego"  is  superfluous. 

Without  a  doubt,  some  of  the  best  descriptions  of  personality  can 
be  found  in  novels.   The  following  passage  about  the  child's  developing 
awareness  of  himself  comes  from  Somerset  Maugham's  Of  Human  Bondage: 

"The  new-born  child  does  not  realize  that  his  body  is  more  a  part 
of  himself  than  surrounding  objects,  and  will  play  with  his  toes  without 
any  feeling  that  they  belong  to  him  more  than  the  rattle  by  his  side; 
and  it  is  only  by  degrees,  through  pain,  that  he  understands  the  fact 
of  the  body.   And  experiences  of  the  same  kind  are  necessary  for  the 


65. 


individual  to  become  conscious  of  himself..." 


(Chapter  XIII) 


Gordon  Allport  writes  that  "Probably  the  first  aspect  of  selfhood 
to  evolve  is  the  sense  of  a  bodily  me."   (G.  W.  Allport,  1961,  p. 113). 
The  body  is  obviously  a  very  important  part  of  self.   The  body  image  can 
be  divided  roughly  into  two  parts:   awareness  of  physical  self  in  relation 
to  the  environment  and  affective  awareness  of  physical  self  (appearance) 
in  relation  to  the  social  environment.   Chronologically,  awareness  of 
the  body  in  relation  to  the  environment  comes  first  -  the  child  comes 
to  realize  that  his  body  is  distinct  and  separate  from  the  environment 
and  that  it  is  an  active  force  in  the  environment.   (Allport  gives  the 
example  of  a  child  biting  a  block  and  then  its  finger) .   But  it  is  the 
second  kind  of  awareness  that  I  want  to  deal  with.   The  way  that  society 
(peers,  parents)  reacts  to  physical  appearance  will  consciously  or 
unconsciously  be  incorporated  into  body  image  and  hence  into  self-image 
as  well.   Much  social  approval  or  disapproval  of  the  body  will  not  be 
overt  -  the  positive  reaction  generated  by  an  attractive  child  may  simply 
produce  more  positive  behavior  toward  the  child.   But  the  reaction  may  also 
take  the  form  of  a  comment  like  "My  what  a  pretty  little  girl"  or,  in  the 
case  of  a  less  than  attractive  child,  "I  really  don't  see  how  Mrs.  McAubrey 
could  have  had  such  a  homely  child."   Through  remarks  like  this,  there  will 
be  an  association  of  one's  appearance  with  positive  or  negative  affect.   The 
most  striking  examples  of  this  association  come  with  children  who  have 


66. 


deformities.   As  children  grow  older,  they  will  also,  through  expanded 
social  experience,  become  aware  of  cultural  norms  for  appearance  and 
develop  an  idea  of  what  an  ideal  body  type  is.   Not  measuring  up  to  this 
ideal  can  be  another  cause  for  dissatisfaction  with  the  body.   Where  the 
attitude  toward  someone's  physical  appearance  is  implied  in  behavior  the 
effect  on  the  self  image  will  be  direct  and  on  the  body  image,  indirect; 
where  it  directly  reflects  an  evaluation  of  the  appearance  the  initial 
effect  is  on  the  body  image  and  correspondingly  on  the  self  image.   Body 
image  and  self  image  are  combined  in  the  global  awareness  of  self.   The 
combined  force  of  these  two  ways  that  physical  appearance  can  influence 
the  behavior  of  people  who  perceive  it  is  the  prime  factor  shaping  the 
body  image . 

Cultural  Norms 

In  order  for  cultural  norms  the  social  reaction  to  bodily  appearance 
to  have  any  salience  for  a  growing  child  it  must  be  part  of  a  general 
cultural  pattern,  shared  by  parents  and  peers  alike.   The  following  pages 
will  cover  some  of  the  studies  that  give  evidence  of  such  a  cultural  pattern. 
Then  the  discussion  will  turn  to  the  development  of  self  and  the  connections 
between  body  image  and  self  image.   If  the  evidence  leans  more  towards 
examples  of  the  implications  of  physical  deviance  (deformity,  obesity)  that 
is  because  the  majority  of  research  with  children's  judgments  of  physical 
appearance  has  leaned  in  that  direction.   In  fact  it  seems  that  unattractive- 
ness  is  much  more  tangible  for  subjects  in  studies  than  is  attractiveness. 
In  my  own  research  with  children's  perceptions  of  attractiveness  in  photo- 


67. 


graphed  faces  the  greatest  amount  of  interrater  agreement  within  the  two 
groups  (4-6  year  olds  and  10-11  year  olds)  came  with  the  pictures  of 
children  who  were  rated  unattractive.   There  was  some  disagreement  as 
to  which  of  six  pictures  of  boys  and  six  of  girls  were  the  most  attractive 
but  the  subjects  were  almost  unanimous  in  their  agreement  as  to  which 
child  in  each  set  was  the  most  unattractive. 

Children  acquire  social  standards  of  attractiveness  at  a  fairly 
early  age.   Sheldon's  tripartite  classification  of  body  types  (endomorphic, 
mesomorphic  and  ectomorphic)  has  been  pulled  out  as  a  variable  in  several 
studies  that  have  demonstrated  this  fact.   Lerner  and  Gallut  (1969)  showed 
photographs  of  chubby,  average  and  thin  peers  to  a  group  of  kindergarten 
children  (5-6  years  old) .   Two  of  the  questions  they  were  asked  were  which 
one  they  would  most  like  to  look  like  and  which  one  they  would  least  like 
to  look  like.   Although  there  was  no  general  preference  for  one  particular 
body  type  there  was  a  general  aversion  to  looking  like  the  chubby  child  ; 
86%  of  the  children  said  that  that  child  was  the  one  that  they  would 
least  like  to  look  like.   In  another  study  employing  the  three  body  types, 
Staffieri  (1967)  had  boys  from  6-10  years  of  age  assign  39  personality 
traits  in  an  adjective  list  to  silhouettes  representing  the  three  body 
types.   He  found  that  the  children  applied  favorable  adjectives  to  the 
mesomorph  type  and  unfavorable  adjectives  to  the  endomorph.   Also, 
unlike  the  subjects  in  the  Lerner  and  Gallut  study,  most  of  these 
children  said  they  would  prefer  to  look  like  the  mesomorph  type.   In  a 
major  study  of  the  perception  of  facial  beauty  in  photographs   Cross  and 
Cross,  0.971)  showed  that  with  subjects  in  four  age  groups  from  age  7  through 


68. 


adult  there  were  no  major  differences  in  judgment  due  to  age. 

So  it  is  around  the  age  of  five  that  children  are  assuming  the  standards 
of  their  culture.   The  developmental  aspects  of  judgment  of  physical 
attractiveness  in  children  were  studied  by  Cavior  and  Lombardi  (1973) . 
They  took  children  at  four  age  levels  (5 -8-year s-old)  and  had  them  rank 
full-length  photographs  of  11 -and  17-year-olds  on  their  physical  attractive- 
ness.  Interrater  reliability  was  statistically  significant  among  the  6-year 
olds  and  by  the  age  of  8  the  reliability  was  at  the  same  level  as  that  shown 
by  older  comparison  groups.   Agreement  came  initially  with  the  photographs 
of  children  to  their  own  age  and  increased  until  they  were  using  the  same 
internal  standards  for  older  children  as  well.   The  authors  conclude  that 
"What  should  be  emphasised  is  that  the  culteral  criteria  used  by  older 
persons  begin  to  be  acquired  at  age  6."   (Cavior  and  Lombardi,  1973,  p. 69) 

There  are  a  number  of  examples  in  the  experimental  literature  of 
agreement  among  children  when  rating  or  otherwise  reacting  to  physically 
disabled  children.   Centers  and  Centers  (1963)  demonstrated  that  children 
expressed  more  rejecting  attitudes  toward  an  amputee  than  a  non-amputee 
child.   Part  of  the  reaction  was  that  an  amputee  child  in  a  classroom  was 
often  considered  to  be  the  "saddest"  child.   Richardson  et  al  (1961)  asked 
children  to  rank  pictures  of  children  with  various  disabilities.   The  order 
the  authors  hypothesized  that  they  would  produce  was:   1.  no  handicap; 
2.  crutches  and  brace;  3.  wheelchair;  and  blanket;  4.  left  hand  missing; 
5.  facial  disfigurement;  6.  obesity.   The  hypothesis  was  supported  and  there 
were  no  different  rankings  due  to  the  characteristics  of  the  raters  (i.e.,  race, 
sex,  etc.)   In  a  later  (and  related)  study,  Goodman  et  al.,  cited  explicitly 


69. 


two  factors  that  they  believed  important  in  the  acquisition  of  a  pervading 
cultural  value.   These  are  the  child's  exposure  to  the  value  and  the  ability 
of  the  child  to  learn  the  value.   Using  the  same  procedure  they  showed  that 
children  from  subcultures  (Jewish  and  Italian)  who  had  not  been  exposed  to 
the  values  of  the  dominant  culture  and  retarded  and  emotionally  disturbed 
children  who  were  not  able  to  assimilate  the  values  produced  different 
rank  orderings . 

The  implications  that  such  values  hold  for  influencing  behavior 
and  social  interaction  have  not  been  as  thoroughly  examined  experimentally. 
However  there  are  two  studies  that  can  be  mentioned.   In  1974,  Kleck  et  al 
conducted  a  camp  study  to  find  out  the  relationship  between  attractiveness 
and  sociometric  status  (how  well  a  child  was  known,  liked  etc.)   among  the 
children.   The  subjects  were  9-14  year-old  boys  whose  attractiveness  had 
been  earlier  determined  by  having  an  independent  group  of  peers  rate 
photographs.   After  two  weeks  at  the  camp  two  groups  of  high  and  low 
socially  accepted  boys  were  selected  by  questioning  all  of  the  boys  as 
to  their  friendship  choices.   The  results  showed  that  the  photographs  of 
the  five  children  with  the  highest  social  acceptance  also  occupied  the 
first  five  ranks  in  the  hierarchy  of  social  preference.   This  is  an 
especially  important  finding  in  light  of  the  consideration  that  attractive- 
ness seems  to  be  an  important  factor  in  liking  even  after  two  weeks  of  inter- 
action.  The  authors  suggest  that  the  next  step  is  to  look  for  positive 
behaviors  that  might  be  associated  with  physical  attractiveness. 


70. 


To  step  away  from  peer  judgments  for  a  moment  and  turn  to  adult-child 
judgments,  an  experiment  by  Karen  Dion  (1972)  shows  how  adults  may  expect 
different  behavior  from  children  who  are  more  or  less  attractive,  in  other 
words,  there  are  cultural  stereotypes  which  can  influence  adults  so  that 
they  will  perceive  attractive  and  unattractive  children  differently.   The 
adult  subjects  in  the  study  were  given  identical  case  studies  of  delinquent 
children  each  of  which  had  a  photograph  of  a  child^ previously  rated  either 
attractive  or  unattractive  in  the  upper  corner.   In  their  judgements  of  the 
children  for  the  same  piece  of  misbehavior  the  adults  tended  to  be  much  more 
harsh  in  estimating  the  seriousness  of  the  act  when  the  case  referred  to  an 
unattractive  child  than  when  it  concerned  a  more  attractive  child.   They  were 
also  more  likely  to  see  the  misdeed  as  predictive  of  a  life  of  crime  in  the 
case  of  the  unattractive  child. 

The  Self  Image 


For  present  purposes  the  definition  of  self  image  that  I  am  adopting 
is  that  of  a  collection  of  affectively  coloured  cognitions  about  non-physical 
(including  behavioral)  aspects  of  oneself,  incorporating  elements  like  self 
esteem.   There  has  always  been  controversy  over  the  development  of  self 
or  even  what  self  is.   In  an  attempt  to  sidestep  this  labyrinth  of  theory 
I  am  employing  the  above  more  limited  definition. 

The  theories  of  the  development  of  self  image  that  are  pertinent  here 
are  the  social  origin  theories  as  presented  by  Cooley  and  Head.   They 
believed  that  the  children  develop  self  awareness  through  the  reactions 


71. 


of  others;  society  acts  as  a  form  of  mirror.   In  1902  Cooley  wrote: 

"In  a  very  large  and  interesting  class  of  cases  the  social  reference 

takes  the  form  of  a  somewhat  definite  imagination  of  how  one's  self  - 

that  is  any  idea  he  appropriates  -  appears  in  a  particular 

mind  and,  the  kind  of  self -feeling  one  has  is  determined  by 

the  attitude  toward  this  attributed  to  that  other  mind.   A 

social  self  of  this  sort  might  be  called  the  reflected  or 

looking  glass  self." 

(C.H.  Cooley,  Human  Nature  and  the 
Social  Order,  N.Y.:   Schocken  Books 
Inc.,  1964) 

Applying  this  to  the  concept  of  self  image,  it  follows  that  attitudes  anyone 

holds  toward  himself  are  derivative  of  the  attitudes  of  others  toward  him. 

A  child  develops  his  self  image  in  the  presence  of  his  parents  first,  and 

after  that,  largely  from  his  peers.   Allport  (1937)  suggests  that  the  strength 

of  the  influence  is  partially  due  to  the  fact  that  the  child  is  bound  to 

the  language  of  those  who  are  surrounding  him.   Initially,  most  prominently 

in  the  early  stages  of  language  development,  the  child  has  no  concepts  to 

apply  to  himself  other  than  those  provided  by  the  parents.   This  overwhelming 

influence  of  the  parents  is  part  of  why  the  original  stages  of  the  developing 

self  image  remain  so  important  throughout  life  that  adults  may  often  be  trying 

to  compensate  for  deficiencies  in  themselves  that  no  longer  exist.   There  is 

some  experimental  evidence  that  supports  the  fact  that  parental  evaluations 

of  their  children  are  correlated  with  their  children's  self -evaluations .   An 

example  is  a  study  by  Helper  (1958)  in  which  he  found  small  but  still  positive 

correlations  between  parents'  rating  of  Favorability  and  Acceptance  and 


72. 


their  children's  rating  of  Self-Favorability  and  Self -Acceptance. 

Self  Image  and  Body  Image 

It  has  been  stated  that  body  image  and  self  image,  as  they  have  been 
defined,  both  develop  out  of  social  experience.   The  next  step  is  to  support 
the  earlier  claim  that  body  image  influences  self  image.   It  is  possible  to 
speak  of  body  image  and  self  image  as  overlapping,  of  being  incorporated  one 
within  the  other  or  being  simply  connected  in  neighborly  fashion.   However 
the  connection  is  explained,  the  two  are  inter-dependent  and  intereffective. 
What  affects  one  must  necessarily  affect  the  other.   Fisher  and  Cleveland 
(cited  in  Wylie,  1968)  talk  about  a  body  image  which  overlaps  the  self-concept. 
(Their  definition  of  body  image  is  "the  body  as  a  psychological  experience, 
focusing    on  the  individual's  attitude's  toward  his  own  body.")   They  believe 
these  attitudes  are  largely  unconscious. 

Another  view  is  offered  by  Watser  et  al  (1958)  writing  about  the  emotional 
impact  of  acquired  disfigurement  on  children: 

u 

In  the  course  of  growth,  development  and  interpersonal  experience,  each 

child  forms  a  concept  of  self.   The  concept  of  self,  the  emotionally  invested 
body  image,  is  unique  to  its  possessor  since  it  derives  from  his  own  individual 
sensorimotor  and  affective  experiences.   Impending  or  actual  traumatic  or 
surgical  disruption  of  the  body  surface  represents  such  a  loss  and  strangeness 
as  to  constitute  a  serious  threat  to  basic  body  ego.   The  threat  temporarily 
disrupts  personality  integration  and  evokes  hostility  with  associated  anxiety. f 


73. 


(Watser  et  al,  1958,  p. 96) 

In  this  definition,  the  body  image  seems  to  be  part  and  parcel  of  self  image 

and  no  dividing  line  is  possible.   And  indeed  it  is  hard  to  conceive  of  the 

two  as  being  separate.   Rejection  of  someone  because  of  their  physical  appearance 

is  easily  interpreted  as  rejection  of  the  global  self. 

Perhaps  the  best  demonstration  of  a  relationship  between  body  and  self 
images  comes  from  work  by  Jourard  and  Secord.   The  terms  they  employ  for 
satisfaction  with  the  body  and  with  the  self  are  body  cathexis  and  self 
cathexis  .   They  found  a  more  or  less  one-to-one  relationship  between  the 
two.   The  method  they  used  was  to  give  male  and  female  subjects  a  body 
cathexis  and  a  self  cathexis  scale,  a  homonym  test  of  anxiety-related  body- 
cathexis ,  and  the  Maslow  Test  of  Psychological  Security-Insecurity.   The 
authors  write  that  "one  of  the  most  significant  results  is  the  demonstration 
that  the  body  and  the  self  tend  to  be  cathected  to  the  same  degree.   This 
supports  the  hypothesis  that  valuation  of  the  body  and  the  self  tend  to 
be  commensurate."   (Secord  and  Jourard,  1953,  p. 346)   In  a  later  publication 
the  same  two  researchers  (Jourard  and  Secord,  1955)  found  the  same  correlation 
of  self  cathexis  with  body  cathexis.   They  also  found  that  the  cathexis  measures 
correlated  with  perceived  parental  attitudes  to  the  self  and  the  body.   This 
is  an  interesting  finding  (it  would  be  more  convincing  if  a  correlation  were 
to  be  attempted  using  actual  parental  attitudes.)  There  was  also  evidence  that 
each  sex  had  a  clear  image  of  ideal  body  type.   Men  wished  to  be  bigger  than 
the  average  (taller,  more  muscular) ,  women  wanted  to  be  smaller  than  the 
average  in  all  body  parts  except  the  bust  size.   This  is  more  evidence  for 
the  existence  of  cultural  stereotypes  for  what  is  to  be  considered  attractive. 


74. 


(And  these  are  stereotypes  that  clothing  designers  play  along  with,  producing 
everything  from  padded  bras  to  padded  shoulders.) 

Conclusion 


The  evidence  in  this  chapter  supports  the  hypothesis  that  body  image 
as  composed  from  the  experience  gained  in  social  interaction  has  a  clear 
and  direct  relationship  to  self  image.   The  implication  of  this  hypothesis  goes 
beyond  the  scope  of  this  chapter  but  to  allude  to  it  I  will  go  back  to 
the  Kleck  (1974)  study  in  which  he  suggested  that  what  was  needed  is  some 
studies  of  the  behavior  associated  with  attractiveness.   This  is  probably 
the  of  the  more  important  directions  an  argument  such  as  the  one  being 
developed  in  this  paper  can  take.   Whatever  a  character  is  that  is 
associated  with  attractiveness  or  unattractiveness ,  it  will  probably  be 
a  product  of  self  image  and  of  motivations  and  tendencies  developed  in 
it  as  a  result  of  social  approval  or  disapproval  of  the  physical  appearance. 


75. 


REFERENCES 


Allport,  G.  W.  ,  Personality:   A  Psychological  Interpretation, 
N.  Y.:   Henry  Holt  &  Co.,  Inc.,  1937. 

,  Pattern  and  Growth  in  Personality,  N.  Y.:   Holt, 

Rinehart  &  Winston  Inc.,  1961. 

Cavior,  N.  and  Lombardi ,  D.  A.,  "Developmental  aspects  of 
judgment  of  physical  attractiveness  in  children", 
Developmental  Psych.,  1973,  5(l),  67-71. 

Centers,  L.  and  Centers,  R.,  "Peer  group  attitudes  toward  the 
amputee  child",  J.  Social  Psych. ,  1963,  6l,  127-132. 

Cooley,  C.  H. ,  Human  Nature  and  the  Social  Order,  N.  Y.: 
Schocken  Books,  Inc.,  I96U.   (orig.  pub.  1902). 

Cross,  J.  F.  and  Cross,  J.,  "Age,  sex,  race  and  the  perception 
facial  beauty",  Devel.  Psych.,  1971,  5(3),  ^33-^39- 

Dion,  K. ,  "Physical  attractiveness  and  evaluation  of  children's 
transgressions",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc .  Psych.,  1972,  2U(2), 
207-213. 

Goodman,  N. ,  Richardson,  S.  A.,  Dornbusch,  S.  M.  and  Hastorf,  A.  H., 
"Variant  reactions  to  physical  disability",  Am.  Soc.  Rev. , 
1963,  28(3),  U29-^35. 

Helper,  M.  M. ,  "Parental  evaluations  of  children  and  children's 
self-evaluations",  J.  Abnormal  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1958, 
56,  190-19^. 

Jourard,  S.  M.  and  Secord,  P.  F. ,  "Body  cathexis  and  personality", 
British  J.  Psych. ,  1955,  U6t   130-138. 

Kaufman,  I.  and  Heims ,  L. ,  "The  body  image  of  the  juvenile 
delinquent",  Am.  J.  Orthopsychiatry,  1958,  28,  1U6-159. 

Kleck,  R.  E.,  Richardson,  S.  A.  and  Ronald,  L. ,  "Physical 
appearance  cues  and  interpersonal  attraction  in 
children",  Child  Devel.,  191^,   *+5,  305-310. 

Lerner,  R.  M.  and  Gallut,  E.,  "Body  build  identification 
preferences  and  aversion  in  children" ,  Devel.  Psych.  , 
1969,  1(5),  U56-U62. 

Richardson,  S.  A.,  Goodman,  N. ,  Hastorf,  A.  H.  and  Dornbusch,  S.  M. , 
"Cultural  uniformity  in  reaction  to  physical  disabilities", 
Am.  Soc.  Rev. ,  1961,  26,  2UI-2U7. 

Staf fieri,  J.  R. ,  "A  study  of  social  stereotype  of  body  image 

in  children",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1967 ,  7(1),  101-lOU. 


76. 


Secord,  P.  F.  and  Jourard,  S.  M. ,  "The  appraisal  of  body  cathexis: 
Body-cathexis  and  the  self",  J.  Consult.  Psych.,  1953, 
17(5),  3U6-350. 

Watser,  E.  and  Johnson,  A.  M. ,  "The  emotional  significance  of 
acquired  physical  disfigurement  in  children" ,  Am.  J.  Ortho- 
psychiatry, 1958,  28,  85-97. 

Wylie,  R.  C,  "The  present  status  of  self  theory",  in  Borgatta 
and  Lamhert ,  eds .  Handbook  of  Personality  Theory  and 
Research,  Chicago:   Rand  McNally  &  Co.,  1968. 


V.   Summary  and  Conclusion 


77. 


I  built  this  paper  on  the  premise  that  there  has  always  been  a 
human  fascination  with  showing  the  ways  that  character  is  reflected 
in  physical  appearance,  and  that  there  must  be  some  truth  underlying 
such  a  universal  and  popular  belief.   The  attitude  has  often  been  that 
personality  sculpts  the  face  in  accordance  with  its  own  attributes,  good 
or  bad.   A  certain  narrowness  and  closeness  of  the  eyes  is  the  metaphorical 
result  of  a  certain  narrowness  and  closeness  of  character.   To  some  extent 
we  are  the  victims  of  our  own  tendencies  because  although  we  tell  ourselves 
that  appearances  may  be  deceiving,  we  are  still  easily  deceived.   One  of 
the  stock  themes  in  the  history  of  male/female  relations  concerns  the  man 
who  is  taken  in  by  a  woman's  beauty  only  to  find  himself  with  a  shrew  on 
his  hands . 

What  I  have  been  trying  to  show,  however,  is  that  appearances  are  not 
always  deceiving.   I  put  the  mass  of  writing  on  the  subject  of  physical 
appearance  and  personality  into  three  categories.   The  first  two  -  the 
intuitive-observational  view  common  with  novelists  and  physiognomists, 
and  the  scientific-biological  (nativistic)  view  put  forward  by  Sheldon 
and  Kretschmer  in  their  constitutional  psychologies  -  is  presented  as  a 
history.   Literature  has  reflected  and  encouraged  belief.   Lavater, 
Gall,  Sheldon  and  the  rest  tried  to  analyze  the  belief  and  failed.   I 
reserve  the  third  approach,  the  social -developmental  (environmental)  for 
the  remainder  of  the  paper.   Since  it  is  the  one  I  consider  the  most 
reasonable  view.   It  states  that  any  relationship  between  appearance 
and  character  is  the  product  of  the  development  of  self  and  body  images 
in  the  social  context. 


78. 


Social  Psychological  research  on  physical  attractiveness  is  the  core 
of  chapter  II  and  serves  as  example  of  the  positive  effect  that  physical 
attractiveness  has  in  interpersonal  relations.   It  is  suggested  that  this 
effect  is  due  to  positive  impressions  generated  in  a  perceiver. 

On  the  other  side  of  the  coin  is  physical  unattractiveness,  physical 
deformity,  which  is  the  subject  of  chapter  III.   Material  from  plastic 
surgeons  shows  how  physical  deformity  can  produce  negative  reactions  in 
other  people  and  how  in  turn  the  negative  reactions  affect  self-esteem 
and  personality  development. 

The  final  chapter  is  an  elaboration  of  social  origin  theories  of  the 
development  of  body  and  self  images.   The  two  are  closely  related  and  in 
fact  inseparable,  and  so  it  is  that  the  way  significant  people  (and  people 
in  general)  are  influenced  by  physical  appearance  (whether  they  like 
someone's  looks,  whether  they  are  repelled)  can  shape  personality,  the 
realization  of  the  combined  body/self  image.   In  the  face  of  staunch 
cultural  support  of  what  is  attractive  and  what  is  not,  children  may 
walk  into  a  sort  of  self-fulfilling  prophecy  which  revolves  around 
their  appearance.   I  have  purposely  emphasized  the  extremes  of  appearance 
since  these  are  the  most  easily  (and  frequently)  studied  and  the  most 
salient  in  social  interaction. 

If,  as  I  suggest  at  the  end  of  the  last  chapter,  attractive  and 
unattractive  people  can  be  shown  to  exhibit  different  behavior,  and  I 
believe  that  this  is  the  case,  then  we  have  come  around  full  circle 
to  an  explanation  of  the  connection  between  physical  appearance  and 
character,  since  character  is  merely  the  name  we  give  to  a  set  of 


79. 
behaviors  and  potential  behaviors.   Briefly,  character  is  related  to 
physical  appearance  through  the  differential  effect  that  social  response 
has  on  a  person  who  is  physically  attractive  or  unattractive  and  the 
behavior  he  or  she  displays  as  a  result  of  this  response. 

This  statement  cannot  of  course  go  unqualified.    There  is  a 
thundering  herd  of  variables  in  the  social  situation  and  any  attempt 
at  producing  a  simple  explanation  of  a  social  process  is  bound  to  leave 
something  out.   For  example,  I  have  been  emphasizing  the  negative  effect 
that  physical  appearance  has  on  personality.   However,  since  social 
desirability  is  composed  of  a  number  of  factors,  many  unattractive 
people  make  up  for  what  they  lack  physically  in  other  areas.   Another 
factor  that  is  left  out  in  any  assumption  of  "all  other  things  being 
equal"  is  the  difference  in  families.   There  is  no  reason  in  the 
world  why  an  attractive  child  can't  develop  a  faulty  personality  and 
an  unattractive  child  a  healthy  one,  solely  because  of  the  nature  of 
interaction  within  the  family. 

There  is  also  a  significant  difference  in  the  relevance  of  attrac- 
tiveness for  the  different  sexes.   Traditionally,  men  have  been  considered 
the  shapers  of  a  society  while  women  have  merely  adorned  it.   Attractiveness 
for  men  is  more  tied  up  with  physique  and  promise  of  physical  ability  while 
for  women  it  is  a  matter  of  being  decorative;  and  hence  the  frantic  attention 
to,  for  example,  the  facial  appearance.   (Please  note  the  booming  cosmetics 
industry) .   This  difference  has  cropped  up  in  a  number  of  studies  -  dating 
studies  where  males  are  more  concerned  with  the  appearance  of  their  dates 
than  are  females;  medical  documents  which  show  that  most  plastic  surgery 
patients  are  female  and  the  ones  that  are  male  are  psychotic  and  trying 
to  cut  off  their  noses  to  spite  their  faces;  in  ratings  of  physical 
attractiveness  where,  as  in  the  Cross  and  Cross  (1971)  study  the  most 


80. 


positive  responses  were  to  female  faces. 

But  I  want  to  shove  this  heap  of  complications  and  qualifications 
aside.   For  what  it  may  offer  in  understanding  some  part  of  human 
interactions  and  personality  development,  we  do  respond  to  physical 
appearance,  in  greater  or  lesser  degrees,  and  it  is  this  composite 
social  response  that  leads  to  any  correlations  between  physical  appearance 
and  personality. 


Agreement  Between  Children's  Judgements  of 

Attractiveness  in  Photographed  Faces 

M.  -Somers  Knight 

Sweet  Briar  College 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Allport,  G.  W. ,  Personality  -  a  psychological  interpretation,  U.S.A.:   Henry  Holt 
and  Company,  Inc.,  1937. 


,  Pattern  and  Growth  in  Personality,  N.Y. :   Holt,  Rinehart  and  Winston, 

Inc. ,  1961. 

Argyle,  M. ,  The  Psychology  of  Interpersonal  Behaviour,  Middlesex,  England:   Penguin 
Books  Ltd. ,  1967. 

,  Social  Interaction,  London:   Methuen  and  Company,  1969. 


Asch,  S.  E. ,  "Forming  impressions  of  personality",  J.  Abnormal  and  Soc.  Psych., 
19h6,   Ul,  258-290. 

Aufricht,  G. ,  "Philosophy  of  Cosmetic  Surgery",  Plast .  and  Reconstr.  Surgery, 
1957,  20  (5),  397-399- 

Barker,  R.  G. ,  "The  social  psychology  of  physical  disability" ,  J.  Social  Issues, 
19^5,  k,   28-38. 

Berscheid,  E.  and  Walster,  E. ,  Interpersonal  Attraction,  Reading,  Massachusetts: 
Addison  Wesley  Publishing  Company,  1969. 

Berscheid,  E. ,  Dion,  K. ,  Walster,  E.  and  Walster,  G.  W. ,  "Physical  attractiveness 
dating  choice:   A  test  of  the  matching  hypothesis",  J.  Exp.  Social  Psych., 
1971,  17,  173-189. 

Brown,  W.  E. ,  Cosmetic  Surgery,  N.Y.:   Stein  and  Day  Pub.,  1970. 

Bruner,  J.  S.  and  Tagiuri ,  R. ,  "The  perception  of  people",  in  G.  Lindzey  ed. , 
Handbook  of  Social  Psychology,  Vol.  II,  Reading, Massachusetts :   Addison 
Wesley  Publishing  Company,  195^,  63h-6^h. 

Bruner,  J.  S.,  Shapiro,  D.  and  Tagiuri,  R. ,  "The  meaning  of  traits  in  isolation 
and  combination"  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds.,  Person  Perception  and 
Interpersonal  Behavior,  California:   Stanford  University  Press,  1958,  277-288. 

Byrne,  D.  ,  "Continuity  between  the  experimental  study  of  attraction  and  real  life 
computer  dating",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1970,  l6,  157-165. 

Byrne,  D.  and  Clare,  G.  L. ,  Jr.,  "Predicting  interpersonal  attraction  towards 
strangers  in  three  different  modes",  Psychon.  Science,  1966,  ht   239-2^0. 

Byrne,  D.  and  Nelson,  D. ,  "Attraction  as  a  linear  function  of  proportion  of 
positive  reinforcements",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1965.  1>  659-663. 

Byrne,  D. ,  London,  0.  and  Reeves,  K. ,  "The  effects  of  physical  sttractiveness , 
sex  and  attitude  similarity  on  interpersonal  attraction",  J.  Personality, 
1968,  36,  259-269. 

Cath,  S.  H.,  Glud,  E.  and  Blane,  H.T.  ,  "The  Role  of  the  Body-Image  in  Psychotherapy 
with  the  Physically  Handicapped",  Psychoanalytic  Rev.,  1957,  1*+  (l),  3^-1+0. 


Cavior,  N.  and  Lombardi ,  D.  A.,  "Developmental  aspects  of  judgement  of  physical 
attractiveness  in  children",  Devel.  Psych. ,  1973,  5  (l),  67-71. 

Centers  L.  and  Centers  R. ,  "Peer  group  attitudes  toward  the  amputee  child", 
J.  Soc.  Psych.,  1963,  61,  127-132. 

Combe,  G. ,  Lectures  on  Phrenology,  18U7, 

Cooley,  C.  H. ,  Human  Nature  and  the  Social  Order,  N.Y.:   Schocken  Books  Inc., 
196U.   (orig.  pub.  1902) 

Cross,  J.  F.  and  Cross,  J.,  "Age,  Sex,  Race  and  the  Perception  of  Facial  Beauty", 
Devel.  Psych.,  1973,5  (3),  U33->+39. 

Davis,  F. ,  "Deviance  Disavowal:   the  management  of  strained  interaction  by  the 
visibly  handicapped",  Social  Problems,  9  (2),  120-132. 

Dickens,  C,  Bleak  House,  N.  Y.  :   Books,  Inc.   (orig.  pub.  1853) 

Dion,  K. ,  "Physical  attractiveness  and  evaluation  of  children's  transgressions", 
J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych. ,  1972,  2k    (2),  207-2^3. 

Dion,  K.,  Berscheid,  E.  and  Walster,  E. ,  "What  is  beautiful  is  good",  J.  Pers. 
and  Soc.  Psych.,  1972,  2k,   285-290. 

Duval,  S.  and  Wickland,  R.  A.,  A  Theory  of  Objective  Self  Awareness,  N.  Y.: 
Academic  Press,  1972. 

Easson,  W.  M. ,  "Psychopathological  environmental  reaction  to  congenital  defect", 
J.  Nervous  and  Mental  Disorders,  1967 ,  1^2  (5),  1+53-1+59- 

Elder,  G.  H. ,  Jr.,  "Appearance  and  education  in  marriage  mobility",  Am.  Soc.  Rev. , 
1969,  3k,    519-533. 

Farina,  A.,  Sherman,  M.  and  Allen,  J.  G.,  "Role  of  physical  abnormalities  in  inter- 
personal perception  and  behavior",  J.  Abn.  Psych. ,  1968,  73,  590-593. 

Galdos,  P.,  Fortunata  and  Jacinta,  Middlesex,  England:   Penguin  Books  Ltd.,  1973. 
trans.  Lester  Clark.   (orig.  pub.  1887) 

Gergen,  K.  J.,  The  Concept  of  Self,  N.  Y. :   Holt,  Rinehart  and  Winston,  Inc.,  1971. 

Goffman,  E. ,  Stigma:   notes  on  the  management  of  spoiled  identity,  Englewood  Cliffs, 
N.  J.:   Prentice-Hall,  Inc.,  1963. 

Goldstein,  J.  W.  and  Rosenfield,  H.  M. ,  "Insecurity  and  preference  for  persons 
similar  to  oneself",  J.  Pers.,  1969,  37,  253-268. 

Goodman,  N. ,  Richardson,  S.A.,  Dornbusch,  S.  M.  and  Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  "Variant 
reactions  to  physical  disabilities",  Am.  Soc.  Rev. ,  1963,  28  (3),  ^29-^35- 

Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  Richardson,  S.  A.  and  Dornbusch,  S.  M. ,  "The  problem  of  relevance 
in  the  study  of  person  perception"  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds . , 
Op.  Cit. ,  5^-62. 


Hastorf,  A.  H.  ,  Schneider,  D.  J.  and  Polefka,  J.,  Person  Perception,  Reading, 
Massachusetts:  Addison  Wesley  Pub.  Co.,  1969. 

Heider,  F. ,  "Perceiving  the  other  person"  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds . , 
Op.  Cit.,  22-26. 

Helper,  Malcolm  M. ,  "Parental  evaluations  of  children  and  children's  self- 
evaluations",  J.  Abn.  and  Soc .  Psych.,  1958,  56,  190-191* . 

Jacobson,  W.  E. ,  Edgerton,  M.  T.  ,  Meyer,  E. ,  Canter,  A.  and  Slaughter,  R., 

"Psychiatric  Evaluation  of  Male  Patients  Seeking  Cosmetic  Surgery",  Plast . 
and  Reconstr.  Surgery,  i960,  26  (1+) ,  361-370. 

Jane,  R.  and  Hanks,  L.  M. ,  Jr.,  "The  Physically  Handicapped  in  Non-Occidental 
Societies",  J.  Soc.  Issues,  19I+8,  k,   11-20. 

Jones,  E.  E.  and  Gerard,  H.  B. ,  Foundations  of  Social  Psychology,  N.  Y.:   J.  Wiley 
and  Sons,  Inc.,  1967. 

Jones,  E.  E.  and  Thibaut,  J.  W. ,  Interaction  goals  as  bases  of  inference  in 
interpersonal  perception",  in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds.,  Op .  Cit., 
151-178. 

Jourard,  S.  M.  and  Secord,  P.  F.,  "Body  Cathexis  and  Personality",  Brit.  J.  Psych. , 
1955,  U6,  130-138. 

Kagan,  J.,  Henker,  B.  A.,  Hen-Tov,  A.,  Levine,  J.,  and  Lewis,  M. ,  "Infants' 

differential  reactions  to  familiar  and  distorted  faces",  Child  Devel.  ,  1966, 
37  (3),  518-532. 

Kaufman,  I.  and  Heims,  L. ,  "The  body  image  of  the  juvenile  delinquent",  Am.  J. 
Orthopsychiatry,  1958,  28,  1^6-159- 

Kleck,  R.  E. ,  Ono ,  H.  and  Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  "The  effect  of  physical  deviance  upon 
face  to  face  interaction",  Hum.  Rel.  ,  1966,  19  (M,  1+25-1+36. 

Kleck,  R.  E. ,  Richardson,  S.  A.  and  Ronald,  L. ,  "Physical  appearance  cues  and 
interpersonal  attraction  in  children",  Child.  Devel.,  197^,  *+5,  305-310. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  "Feminine  loss  of  identity  in  rhinoplasty",  Archives  of  Otolaryngology, 
1972,  96,  11-15. 

Knorr,  N.  J.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  "Cosmetic  surgery:   Not  for  everybody", 
Consultant ,  1971,  11  (6),  kk-k6. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Edgerton,  M.  T.  and  Hoopes,  J.  E.,  "The  'insatiable'  cosmetic  surgery 
patient",  Plast.  and  Reconstr.  Surg.,  1967,  ^0  (3),  28U-288. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Hoopes,  J.  E.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  "Psychiatric  surgical  approach 
to  adolescent  disturbance  in  self  image",  Plast.  and  Reconstr.  Surgery, 
1968,  1+1  (3),  2^8-253. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Edgerton,  M.  T.  and  Barberie,  M.  ,  "Psychologic  factors  in  recon- 
struction of  the  ear",  reprint. 


Kretschmer ,  E. ,  Physique  and  Character.  London:   Harcourt,  Brace  and  Company,  Inc., 
1926,  trans.  W.  J.  H.  Sprott . 

Lavater,  J.  C,  Essays  on  Physiognomy,  for  the  promotion  of  the  knowledge  and  the 
love  of  mankind,  Vol.  II,  London:   G.  N.  J.  and  J.  Robinson,  IT89. 

Lerner,  M.  J.,  "Evaluation  of  performance  as  a  function  of  performer's  reward  and 
attractiveness",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc .  Psych.,  1965,  1,  355-360. 

Lerner,  R.  M.  and  Gallert,  E.  ,  "Body  "build  identification  preference  and  aversion 
in  children",  Devel.  Psych.,  1969,  1  (5),  1+56-1+62. 

Lewin,  K. ,  Dembo ,  T. ,  Festinger,  L.  and  Sears,  P.,  "Level  of  Aspiration"  in  J.  McV. 
Hunt  ed. ,  Personality  and  the  Behavior  Disorders,  Vol.  I,  N.  Y. :   Ronald 
Press  Co.,  I9UU . 

Lomax,  L. ,  Physiognomy:   How  to  read  character  in  the  face  and  to  determine  the 
capacity  for  love,  business,  or  crime,  Philadelphia:   the  Penn  Pub.  Co.,  1906. 

Loveday,  T.  and  Forster,  E.  S.  trans.,  "Physiognomonica" ,  in  W.  D.  Ross  ed.,  The 
Works  of  Aristotle,  translated  into  English,  London:   Oxford  U.  Press,  1913. 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  "Some  psycho-social  problems  associated  with  facial  deformities", 
Am.  Soc.  Rev. ,  1951,  10,  629-638. 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  "Social  and  cultural  components  in  the  motivations  of  persons 
seeking  plastic  surgery  of  the  nose",  J.  Health  and  Soc.  Behav.,  1967,  8  (2), 
125-135. 

MacGregor,  F.  C,  Abel,  T.  M.  ,  Brut,  A.,  Lauer ,  E.  and  Weissman,  S.,  Facial 
Deformities  and  Plastic  Surgery  -  A  Psychosocial  Study,  Springfield,  111.: 
Charles  C.  Thomas,  Pub.,  1953. 

Maugham,  W.  S.,  Of  Human  Bondage,  N.  Y. :  Vintage  Books,  1956  (orig.  pub.  1915, 
Doubleday  and  Co. ,  Inc . ) . 

McKeachie,  W.  J.,  "Lipstick  as  a  determiner  of  first  impressions  of  personality", 
J.  Soc.  Psych. ,  1952,  36,  2UI-2UU. 

Mead,  G.  H.  ,  Mind,  Self  and  Society,  Chicago:   University  of  Chicago  Press,  193*+. 

Meyerson,  L. ,  "Physical  Disability  as  a  Social  Psychological  Problem",  J.  Soc. 
Issues,  19*+8,  (1+),  2-10. 

Miller,  A.  G. ,  "Role  of  physical  attractiveness  in  impression  formation",  Psychcn. 
Sci.,  1970a,  21+1-21+3. 


— ,  "Social  perception  of  internal-external  control",  Perceptual  and  Motor 
Skills,  1970b,  30,  103-109. 


— ,  "Effect  of  attitude  similarity-dissimilarity  on  the  utilization  of 
additional  stimulus  inputs  in  judgements  of  interpersonal  attraction", 
Psychon.  Sci.,  1972,  26,  199-203. 


Mills,  Jr.,  and  Aronson,  E.,  "Opinion  change  as  a  function  of  the  communicator's 
attractiveness  and  desire  to  influence",  J.  Pers .  and  Soc .  Psych.,  1965,  1, 
173-177. 

Richardson,  S.  A.,  "Some  social-psychological  consequences  of  handicapping", 
Pediatrics,  1963,  32,  391-397. 

Richardson,  S.  A.,  Goodman,  N. ,  Hastorf,  A.  H. ,  and  Dornbusch,  S,  M. ,  "Cultural 

uniformity  in  reaction  to  physical  disabilities",  Am.  Soc.  Rev.  ,  1961,  26,  2Ul-2l+7. 

Secord,  P.  F.,  "Facial  features  and  inference  processes  in  interpersonal  perception", 
in  R.  Tagiuri  and  L.  Petrullo  eds .  ,  Op.  Cit.,  300-315. 

Secord,  P.  F. ,  and  Jourard,  S.  M. ,  "The  Appraisal  of  Body-Cathexis :   Body-cathexis 
and  the  self",  J.  Consult.  Psych.,  1953,  17  (5),  3^6-3^9. 

Sheldon,  W.  H. ,  The  Varieties  of  Temperament,  N,  Y.:   Harper  and  Brothers 
Publishers,  19U2. 

Sigall,  H.  and  Aronson,  E. ,  "Liking  for  an  evaluator  as  a  function  of  her  physical 
attractiveness  and  the  nature  of  the  evaluation",  J.  Exp.  Soc.  Psych.  ,  1971, 
5,  77-91. 

Staf fieri,  J.  R.,  "A  study  of  social  stereotype  of  body  image  in  children", 
J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1967,  7,  101-lOU. 

Stroebe,  W.  ,  Insko,  C.  A.,  Thompson,  V.  D.  and  Layton,  B.  D.,  "Effects  of  physical 
attractiveness,  attitude  similarity  and  sex  on  various  aspects  of  inter- 
personal attractiveness",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1971,  18,  79-91- 

Tagiuri,  R.  and  Petrullo,  L.  eds.,  Person  Perception  and  Interpersonal  Behavior, 
California:   Stanford  University  Press,  1958. 

Walster,  E. ,  "The  effect  of  self-esteem  on  liking  for  dates  of  various  social 
desirabilities",  J.  Exp.  Soc.  Psych.  ,  1970,  6,  21+8-263. 

Walster,  E. ,  Aronson,  V.,  Abrahams,  D.  and  Rottman,  L. ,  "The  importance  of 

physical  attractiveness  in  dating  behavior",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1966, 
h,   508-516. 

Warwick,  E.,  Nasology  -  or  hints  towards  a  classification  of  noses,  London:   Richard 
Bentley,  18U8. 

Watser,  E.  and  Johnson,  A.  M. ,  "The  emotional  significance  of  acquired  physical 
disfigurement  in  children",  Am.  J.  Ortho-Psychiatry,  1958,  28,  85-97. 

Watson,  R.  I.,  The  Great  Psychologists,  N.  Y.:   J.  B.  Lippincott  Company,  1963. 

Wells,  S.  R.,  How  to  Read  Character:   A  new  illustrated  handbook  of  phrenology  and 
physiognomy,  N.  Y.:   S.  R.  Wells  pub.,  1870. 


— ,  New  Physiognomy  or  signs  of  character  as  manifested  through  temperament 
and  external  forms,  and  esp.  in  'The  Human  Face  Divine',  N.  Y.:   S.  R.  Wells 
pub. ,  1866. 


Wilcox,  J.  W. ,  "A  Comparison  of  Body  Image  in  Selected  Facial  Plastic  Surgery- 
Patients",  unpublished  master's  thesis,  University  of  Virginia,  1973. 

Wishner,  J.,  "Preanalysis  of  'Impressions  of  Personality'",  Psych.  Reports,  I960, 
67,  96-112. 

Wylie,  R.  C,  "The  Present  Status  of  Self  Theory",  in  E.  F.  Borgatta  and  W.  W. 
Lambert  eds . ,  Handbook  of  Personality  Theory  and  Research,  Chicago :  Rand 
McNally  and  Company,  1968. 


Agreement  Between  Children's  Judgements  of 
Attractiveness  in  Photographed  Faces 

M.  -Somers  Knight 
Sweet  Briar  College 

Abstract 


Subjects  in  two  age  groups  -  4-6-years  old  and  10-11-years  old  -  were 
individually  shown  six  photographs  of  11-year  old  boys  and  six  photographs 
of  11-year-old  girls  by  the  method  of  paired  comparisons.   In  a  prior 
rating  by  college  age  subjects,  three  attractive  photographs  of  each 
sex  had  been  chosen,  and  three  unattractive  photographs  had  been  chosen 
as  well.   The  young  subjects  were  asked  to  make  judgements  of  the  physical 
attractiveness  of  the  stimulus  children  by  stating  which  child  in  each 
paired  presentation  was  better  looking.   Concordance  of  opinion  within 
age  groups  was  highly  significant  for  judgements  of  both  sets  of  photographs. 
Overall  rank  orders  constructed  for  the  two  sets  of  judgements  within  each 
age  group  revealed  differences  in  the  ranking  of  the  same  photographs 
between  the  younger  and  the  older  subjects,  although  the  rank  orders  of 
boys'  photographs  were  most  highly  correlated.   Results  were  interpreted 
as  evidence  for  the  existence  of  cultural  standards  for  assessing  attractive- 
ness and  tied  into  a  "social  response"  theory  of  the  connection  between 
physical  appearance  and  personality. 

Review  of  the  Literature 

In  the  history  of  personality  theory  there  is  one  large  segment  encom- 
passing those  theories  which  claimed  to  have  found  the  true  connection  be- 
tween personality  and  body  type.   The  men  who  made  this  claim  were  the  phy- 


siognomists ,  the  phrenologists ,  the  constitutional  psychologists  who  said 
that  by  measuring  the  nose,  the  skull  or  the  length  of  the  torso,  it  was  pos- 
sible to  come  up  with  an  accurate  character  analysis.   T-iese  theorists, 
guilty  of  faulty  reasoning,  over-generalization  or  just  out-and-out  quackery, 
fell  by  the  wayside,  remembered  only  as  conspicuous  and  sometimes  monumental 
f ai lures. 

However  that  does  not  mean  that  psychologists  have  totally  discarded  the 
possibility  that  a  body- type/personality  relation  deos  exist.   Currently  the 
most  favored  explanation  is  that  they  are  related  through  the  medium  of  social 
response  to  physical  appearance  which  in  turn  influences  personality  develop- 
ment.  Social  psychologists  like  Walster  (lc>66),  Berscheid  (1971)>  and  Byrne 

1   >)    and  a  host  of  others  have  shown  that  physically  attractive  people 
are  generally  liked  better  than  unattractive  people.   Psychiatrists  working 
with  plastic  surgery  patients  have  found  that  many  of  them  have  problems  in 
social  adjustment  due  to  adverse  social  reaction  to  their  deformities. 

In  order  to  make  use  of  the  concept  of  the  "social  self"  to  explain  how 
social  response  to  physical  anpearance  can  affect  the  personality,  researchers 
must  first  have  some  basis  for  apsuming  that  there  is  some  sort  of  consistent 
social  response  to  physical  appearance.   If  there  are  overriding  cultural 
standards  for  iud  :ing  attractiveness,  they  should  be  increasingly  apparent 
in  children  as  their  socialization  into  the  culture  becomes  more  complete. 
And  this  is  what  the  present  study  set  out  to  demonstrate. 

There  have  been  previous  studies  within  the  last  15  years  which  have  dis- 
covered some  uniformity  in  children's  judgements  of  other  children  in  terms  of 
physical  appearance.   The  first  of  these  looked  at  reaction  to  physical  de- 
formity.   It  was  found  that  young  children  ranked  photographs  of  peers  with 
various  physical  disabilities  in  a  predictable  and  consistent  (between  raters) 


manner.   (Richardson  et  al ,  196l).   And  subjects  who  had  less  exposure  to  the 
cultural  value  because  they  belonged  to  a  subgroup  or  were  unable  to  learn  the 

value  because  of  mental  disturbance  or  retardation,  produced  different  rankings 
of  the  same  pictures.   (Goodman  et  al,  1^65) •   In  a  study  by  Centers  and  Centers 
(1965)  children  held  more  rejecting  attitudes  toward  amputee  children  than 
to  non-amputees.   And  two  researchers  (Staffieri,  1967;  and  Lerner,  1969), 
using  three  body  types  (endomorph,  mesomorph  and  ectomorph)  found  that  chil- 
dren 6-10-years  old  preferred  the  mesomorphic  type  and  showed  general  anti- 
pathy to  the  endomorpiic . 

The  fascination  of  social  psychologists  with  physical  attractiveness  as 

a  variable  has  not  left  out  children's  perceptions  either,  although  the  body 
of  research  is  not  large.   An  example  is  the  197^-  paper  by  Xleck  in  which  he 
demonstrates  that  boys  in  a  summer  camp  who  had  been  rated  attractive  in  a 
preliminary  rating  of  their  photographs  were  generally  better  liked  by  their 
campmates .   Boys  who  had  been  iudged  unattractive  were  less  well  lilced. 

Two  studies  which  have  revealed  the  most  about  standard  cultural  values 
nave  used  different  age  groups  in  their  samples.  Cross  and  Cross  (1971)  in 
an  extensive  study  of  'udgement  of  attractiveness  of  faces  in  photographs, 

found  no  major  differences  in  judgement  attributable  to  age.   Their  subjects, 
placed  in  fiur  groups,  ranged  in  age  from  7  through  adult.   The  study  closest 
to  the  Dresent  one  in  format  is  one  by  Cavior  and  Lombard!  ( 1975 ^  which  fomises 
on  the  develoomental  aspects  of  judgement  of  physical  attractiveness.   They 
had  judges  at  f-ur  age  levels  (5~3)  who  ranked  full-length  photographs  of  11- 

and  17-year  olds.   Agreement  was  significant  among  the  6-year  olds  and  increased 

until  the  8-year  olds  showed  as  ~uch  consistency  as  older  comparison  groups 
and  also  produced  the  same  rank  order.   The  changes  were  interpreted  according 

to  Piaget's  theory  of  the  stage  of  concrete  operations. 

T  lis  paper  is  a  somewhat  altered  version  of  the  Cavior  and  Lombardi  study. 


5 
task,  the  experimenter  took  the  pictures  with  the  highest  degrees  of 
agreement  (from  83  -  100%)  and  for  each  sex  chose  3  attractive  and  3 
unattractive  children  of  the  same  age,  which  was  11. 

The  result  of  the  sorting  was  2  sets  (one  of  each  sex)  of  6  pictures 
each,  labeled  at  A,B,C,D,E,  and  F.   In  each  set,  pictures  of  A,B,  and  C 
had  been  consistently  chosen  as  being  attractive  and  pictures  D,E,  and  F 
had  most  often  been  placed  into  the  category  of  'unattractive'.   Pictures 
C  and  F  were  black  children.   And  the  A  and  D  pictures  of  both  sexes 
were  blond-haired  children  while  the  B  and  E  pictures  were  dark  haired 
children,  with  the  exception  of  the  subject  of  picture  B  in  the  girls' 
set,  who  was  a  redhead. 

Procedure 
Each  subject  went  with  the  experimenter  to  an  area  separate  from  the 
classroom  and  set  apart  for  the  experiment.   In  the  nursery  school  this  was 
a  small  room  next  to  the  play  area  and  in  the  elementary  school  it  was  a  large 
open  space  with  a  counter  on  the  side  which  formed  the  'hub'  for  several 
classrooms  which  opened  out  into  it.   The  experimenter  brought  the  younger 
subjects  to  the  area;  the  older  subjects  reported  to  the  area  themselves. 
The  method  of  paired  comparison  was  selected  as  the  one  requiring  the  least 
taxing  decision  on  the  part  of  the  subject.   With  6  pictures,  this  meant 
15  pairs  of  pictures  of  each  sex  to  be  presented.   A  different  random  order 
of  the  pairs  was  constructed  for  each  subject;  for  half  of  the  subjects 
the  pictures  of  boys  were  presented  first  and  for  the  other  half,  the  pic- 
tures of  girls  were  first.   The  experimenter  and  the  subject  sat  next  to 
each  other  at  a  table  or  counter  and  before  instructing  the  subject  how 
to  go  about  doing  the  experiment,  the  experimenter  asked  the  subject  his 
or  her  name  and  age.   The  instructions  given  to  the  younger  subjects  were: 


Okay  (name) ,  now  I'm  going  to  show  you  some  pictures  of  children  just 
a  little  bit  older  than  you.   I'm  going  to  show  them  to  you  two  at  a 
time  here  on  the  table  and  I  want  you  to  tell  me  which  one  you  think 
is  prettier  (or  handsomer).   Do  you  think  you  can  do  that?  We'll 
begin  with  pictures  of  girls  (boys) . 

and  when  about  to  begin  on  the  second  series  of  pairs,  the  experimenter 
said:  Now  we  will  do  pictures  of  boys  (girls)  and  this  time  I  want  you 
to  tell  me  which  one  you  think  is  handsomer  (prettier). 


The  instructions  given  to  the  older  subjects  were: 

Okay  (name) ,  what  I'm  going  to  be  doing  is  showing  you  pictures 
of  some  people  about  your  age  and  I  want  to  find  out  what  you 
think  about  the  way  they  look.   I'll  show  you  the  pictures  two 
at  a  time  right  here  on  the  counter  and  you  just  point  to  the 
one  you  think  is  the  best  looking.  Okay?   Do  you  have  any  questions 
before  we  start?   We'll  be  doing  pictures  of  boys  (girls)  first 
and  then  some  girls  (boys). 

The  experimenter  laid  out  each  pair  of  pictures  facing  the  subject  and 

waited  for  the  subject  to  point  to  the  one  he  or  she  chose.   After 

every  5  pictures,  the  experimenter  repeated,  while  presenting  the 

6th  pair,  "Now  which  one  of  these  two  do  you  think  is  better  looking." 

This  was  done  to  make  sure  that  the  subject  kept  the  purpose  of  the 

task  in  mind.   The  entire  procedure  took,  on  average,  12  minutes  per 

child. 

Results 

Two  subjects  had  to  be  eliminated  in  the  final  data  analysis. 

One  1 — year  old  girl  claimed  to  know  one  of  the  girls  in  the  photographs 

(well  enough  to  name  her)  and  when  one  5-year  old  boy  was  judging  the 

girls'  photographs,  in  all  but  three  presentations  he  chose  the  picture 

on  the  right  side.   This  left  N=20  for  4-6-year  olds  judging  boys' 

photographs  (group  la);  N=19  for  4-6-year  olds  judging  girls  (group 

lb);  N=24  for  10-11-year  olds  judging  boys  (group  Ila) ;  and  N=23  for 

10-11-year  olds  judging  girls  (group  lib) . 


coeff iciencts  is  somewhat  more  difficult  to  interpret.   The  younger 
subjects  show  the  most  agreement  in  their  judgements  of  girls'  photo- 
graphs and  the  older  subjects  are  more  consistent  when  it  comes  to 
evaluating  the  attractiveness  of  boys.   A  possible  explanation  is  that 
since  the  physical  appearances  of  women  are  emphasized  more  than  those 
of  men  in  our  culture,  children  would  begin  to  learn  the  standards  of 
judging  women  first.   The  depressed  coefficient  in  group  lib  may  be 
the  result  of  other  factors,  for  example,  the  predominance  of  females 
in  group  II  and  the  fact  that  11-year  old  girls  are  more  responsive 
to  boys  than  the  reverse. 

The  hypothesis  that  receives  very  little  support  in  the  findings  is  the 
second  part  of  H^.   Particularly  in  judgements  of  the  girls'  photographs 
the  two  age  groups  scarcely  agree  at  all.   The  correlation  between  rank 
orders  of  the  boys'  photographs  approaches  significance  even  if  it  doesn't 
quite  attain  it.   The  other  correlation  is  quite  small.   This  seems  to  go 
contrary  to  what  has  been  suggested  above,  for  if  standards  for  judging 
female  beauty  are  the  first  learned  then  it  should  be  the  case  that  the 
highest  agreement  would  be  in  these  judgements.   But  there  is  another 
possible  explanation.   It  may  be  that  there  are  more  complex  standards 
for  judging  women  than  men.   It  may  be  that  the  difference  is  attributable 
to  the  fact  that  younger  children  have  assimilated  some  but  not  all  of  their 
culture's  standards.   Thus  they  would  show  high  agreement  among  themselves 
because  these  standards  are  important  and  highly  emphasized  but  their 
judgements  would  not  be  the  same  as  those  of  older  children  because  of 
less  complete  assimilation  of  cultural  standards.   The  greatest  amount 
of  disagreement  over  the  girls'  pictures  is  in  the  rank  assigned  to 
picture  D,  a  blond,  blue-eyed  girl  designated  unattractive  by  91%  of 


the  subjects  in  the  preliminary  sorting.   In  the  rank  order  for  the  4-6 
year  olds,  this  picture  was  ranked  first;  the  fifth  graders  gave  the 
picture  fifth  place.   The  difference  may  make  more  sense  if  it  is  noted 
that  the  first  ranks  for  both  boys'  and  girls'  pictures  in  the  judgements 
of  fifth  graders  belong  to  blonde  blue-eyed  children.   Western  culture 
has  always  valued  the  nordic  type  of  beauty.   It  is  probable  that  young 
children  react  to  conspicuous  features  like  hair  color  and  eye  color  and 
only  as  they  grow  older  begin  to  notice  more  detailed  aspects  of  physical 
appearance,  such  as  shape  of  face,  size  of  mouth  etc. 

One  of  the  most  striking  findings  here  is  the  total  agreement  across 
all  four  sets  of  judgements  as  to  which  of  the  photographed  children  (the 
'F' pictures)  were  the  most  unattractive.   The  girl  was  obese  and  it  is  in 
keeping  with  the  findings  of  earlier  studies  that  she  was  not  favored. 
The  boy's  picture  prompted  laughter  in  a  number  of  subjects,  and  his 
appearance  led  to  comments  like  "He  looks  like  a  monkey"  or  "He  sure  in 
funny  looking."   In  fact,  subjects  were  much  more  likely  to  show  their 
negative  feelings  toward  the  unattractive  children  (making  faces  or 
stating  their  dislike)  than  they  were  to  acclaim  positive  ones  for  an 
unattractive  child.   Their  outspoken  judgements  are  interesting  in  con- 
trast to  the  comments  of  the  college  age  subjects  involved  in  the  pre- 
liminary sorting  who  often  stated  that  they  felt  sorry  or  guilty  about 
designating  a  picture  as  unattractive.   There  is  apparently  one  cultural 
value  that  younger  children  have  not  picked  up  yet  and  that  is  that  it  is 
wrong  (unfair,  undemocratic)  to  judge  people  by  appearances. 

It  would  be  desirable  in  the  future  to  have  several  older  comparison 
groups  in  a  study  of  this  sort.   And  although  it  is  unlikely  that  demographic 
variables  like  socio-economic  status  caused  differences  in  judgements,  it 


10 


might  be  safer  to  use  either  all  public  school  or  all  private  school  students 
as  subjects.   It  is  also  possible  that  although  there  was  no  difference  between 
the  rank  ordering  by  black  and  by  white  fifth-graders,  the  older  white  children 
may  actually  have  been  more  favorable  toward  photographs  of  black  children 
simply  because  the  younger  subjects  have  had  less  contact  with  black  children. 
Finally,  further  studies  of  the  perception  of  physical  attractiveness  should 
consider  the  merits  of  cross  cultural  comparison. 

Conclusion 

The  results  give  clear  support  to  the  hypothesis  that  there  are  cultural 
standards  for  judging  attractiveness  and  that  these  standards  are  increasingly 
internalized  by  children  as  they  grow  older  and  are  more  immersed  in  their 
culture.   These  findings  give  strength  to  the  theory  that  physical  appearance 
and  character  are  related  through  the  social  response  to  physical  appearance 
which  can  influence  personality  development. 


Table  1 
Coefficients  of  Concordance 


Age 
Group 

Sex   of   . 
Photos 

w    • 

Coeff. 

%2 

P,(«if=5) 

(K=20) 

4-6   yrs. 

(K=19) 

M 

.18 

18 

<  .01 

F 

•  37 

35-2 

<   .001 

(K=2^) 

10-11   yrs. 
(K-23) 

M 

.54 

64.8 

<  .001 

p 

.44 

50.6 

<    .001 

Table  2 
Rank  Orders  of  Photographs 


Age  Group 
4-6   yrs  .                          10-11   yrs  . 

Sex   of 
Photos 

M 

? 

1 
2 

3 
rank 

5 
6 

B 
A 
D 
C 
E 
F 

D 
A 
B 
C 
E 
F 

A 

B 
G 
E 
D 
F 

A 
C 

B 
D 
F 

REFERENCES 


Berscheid,  E. ,  Dion,  K.  ,  Walster,  E.  and  Walster,  G.  W,  , 
"Physical  attractiveness  and  dating  choice:   A  test  of 
the  matching  hypothesis",  J.  Exp.  Soc.  Psych. ,  1971, 
IT,  173-189. 

Byrne,  D. ,  London,  0.  and  Reeves,  K.  ,  "The  effects  of  physical 
attractiveness,  sex  and  attitude  similarity  on  interpersonal 
attraction",  J.  Pers.  ,  1968,  36,  259-269- 

Cavior,  N.  and  Lomhardi ,  D.  A.,  "Development  aspects  of  judgement 
of  physical  attractiveness  in  children",  Devel.  Psych. , 
1973,  5(1),  67-71. 

Centers,  L.  and  Centers,  R.  ,  "Peer  group  attitudes  toward  the 
amputee  child",  J.  Soc.  Psych.,  1963,  6l,  127-132. 

Cross,  J.  F.  and  Cross,  J.,  "Age,  sex,  race  and  the  perception 
of  facial  beauty",  Devel.  Psych.,  1971,  5(3),  1+33-U39- 

Goodman,  N.,  Richardson,  S.  A.,  Dornbusch,  S.  M.  and  Hastorf,  A.  H.  , 
"Variant  reactions  to  physical  disabilities",  Am.  Soc .  Rev. , 
1963,  28(3),  U29-U35. 

Kleck,  R.  E.,  Richardson,  S.  A.  and  Ronald,  L. ,  "Physical 

appearance  cues  and  interpersonal  attraction  in  children  , 
Child  Devel.,  197^,  ^5,  305-310. 

Knorr,  N.  J.,  Hoopes ,  J.  E.  and  Edgerton,  M.  T.,  "Psychiatric- 
surgical  approach  to  adolescent  disturbance  in  self-  image", 
Plast.  and  Reconstr.  Surg.,  1968,  Hl(3),  2U8-253. 

Lerner,  R.  M.  and  Gallert ,  E.,  "Body  build  identification 
preference  and  aversion  in  children" ,  Devel.  Psych.  , 
1969,  1(5),  U56-1+62. 

Richardson,  S.  A.,  Goodman,  N. ,  Hastorf,  A.  H.  and  Dornbusch,  S.  M. , 
"Cultural  uniformity  in  reaction  to  physical  disabilities", 
Am.  Soc.  Rev.,  196l,  26,  2U1-2U7. 

Siegel,  S.,  Nonparametric  Statistics,  for  the  behavioral  sciences, 
N.  Y.:   McGraw  Hill  Book  Co.,  1956. 

Staffieri,  J.  R.,  "A  study  of  social  stereotype  of  body  image 

in  children",  J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1967 ,  7(1 ),  IOI-IOU. 

Walster,  E. ,  Aronson,  V.,  Abrahams,  D.  and  Rottman,  L. , 

"Importance  of  physical  attractiveness  in  dating  behavior", 
J.  Pers.  and  Soc.  Psych.,  1966,  5,  508-516. 


9B912YF 

.j   28-94         45190 


4L55 


DATE  DUE 


PRINTED  IN  U.S.A.