Your Face
In online dating, the first thing people make their decision on is your face. If you have no picture posted, your chance of anyone even interacting with you reduces itself by 90%.
The problem is that you make go/no go decisions about online dating candidates based on totally erroneous subconscious
biological programming. This means that you will usually get bad relationships that usually fail if you pick a person by facial attraction. You will get one great date with a hot looking person but rarely will you get a lasting relationship if you just choose by "who has the cutest face". Here is how it works:
While it does not sound "right", or "fair" or "proper" to judge people just by their picture, that is the psychology of how it works on the web. Human's are a visually triggered species.
Social programming makes many people only accept those who like like their social appearance group.
While it is nice to think that people will read your profile and select some amazing aspects of your hidden persona that draws them to you, it really does not happen like that. The autonomic, unconscious process, that most people are never aware of, goes something like this, in a silent, back part of your brain: "oh, they seem interesting...ok.. now we are chatting... ok, now they want to date me.. hmmm.. ok, well I would never kiss them or sleep with them so (in the case of men), I am going to pass (Or in the case of women) we can just be friends.."
The most important thing about your face is to smile.
Professional daters, escorts, models and others use: http://www.symmeter.com/symfacer.htm to plan plastic surgery for better dating upside.
Senior staff at Sororities and Fraternities only pick members with the most facial symmetry
Read More From Public Postings...
In online dating, the first thing people make their decision on is your face. If you have no picture posted, your chance of anyone even interacting with you reduces itself by 90%.
The problem is that you make go/no go decisions about online dating candidates based on totally erroneous subconscious
biological programming. This means that you will usually get bad relationships that usually fail if you pick a person by facial attraction. You will get one great date with a hot looking person but rarely will you get a lasting relationship if you just choose by "who has the cutest face". Here is how it works:
While it does not sound "right", or "fair" or "proper" to judge people just by their picture, that is the psychology of how it works on the web. Human's are a visually triggered species.
Social programming makes many people only accept those who like like their social appearance group.
While it is nice to think that people will read your profile and select some amazing aspects of your hidden persona that draws them to you, it really does not happen like that. The autonomic, unconscious process, that most people are never aware of, goes something like this, in a silent, back part of your brain: "oh, they seem interesting...ok.. now we are chatting... ok, now they want to date me.. hmmm.. ok, well I would never kiss them or sleep with them so (in the case of men), I am going to pass (Or in the case of women) we can just be friends.."
The most important thing about your face is to smile.
Professional daters, escorts, models and others use: http://www.symmeter.com/symfacer.htm to plan plastic surgery for better dating upside.
Senior staff at Sororities and Fraternities only pick members with the most facial symmetry
Read More From Public Postings...
| THIS STUDY EXPLAINS HOW IT WORKS WITH FACES AND DATING |
While many studies have shown that symmetric faces (e.g. left image above) are preferred to relatively asymmetric faces (e.g. right image above), the reason why symmetric faces are preferred is controversial. The Evolutionary Advantage view proposes that symmetric faces are preferred because symmetric individuals are particularly healthy. The Perceptual Bias view, however, proposes that symmetric faces are preferred because symmetric stimuli of any kind are more easily processed by the visual system than their
asymmetric counterparts. Even the tiniest millimeter affects if you will get picked in an online dating site or not.
Why are symmetric faces attractive?
Symmetry is one aspect of faces that has been extensively studied by many researchers in relation to attractiveness. The most common method used to investigate the effect symmetry has on the attractiveness of faces involves manipulating the symmetry of face images using sophisticated computer graphic methods and assessing the effect that this manipulation has on perceptions of the attractiveness of the faces. Typically, perfectly symmetric versions of a set of face images are manufactured and presented to subjects along with the original (i.e. relatively asymmetric versions). Participants are then asked to indicate which face is more attractive, choosing between a perfectly symmetric version of a given face and the original version. Because the faces used in
these tests differ in symmetry but not in other facial characteristics, these findings demonstrate that symmetry is a visual cue for attractiveness judgements of faces. Although studies have generally shown that people prefer symmetricversions of faces to the original (i.e. relatively asymmetric) versions, there has been considerable debate about why people prefer symmetric faces.
Explanations of the attractiveness of symmetric faces Two different explanations have been put forward by researchers to explain attraction to symmetric faces: the Evolutionary Advantage view (which proposes that symmetric individuals are attractive because they are particularly healthy) and the Perceptual Bias view (which proposes that symmetric individuals are attractive because the human visual system can process symmetric stimuli of any kind more easily than it can process asymmetric stimuli).
The Evolutionary Advantage view proposes that symmetric faces are attractive because symmetry indicates how healthy an individual is: while our genes are such that we are designed to develop symmetrically, disease and infections during physical development cause small imperfections (i.e. asymmetries). Thus, only individuals who are able to withstand infections (i.e. those with strong immune systems) are successful in developing symmetric physical traits. Indeed, some (but not all) findings from studies of health in humans and many animal species have observed such a relationship between symmetry and indicators
of health, with healthier individuals being more symmetric. For example, swallows and peacocks with symmetric tail feathers are particularly healthy and preferred by potential mates.
Under the Evolutionary Advantage view of symmetry preferences, symmetric individuals are considered attractive because we have
evolved to prefer healthy potential mates. While the Evolutionary Advantage view suggests that attraction to symmetric individu-
als reflects attraction to healthy individuals who would be good mates (i.e. will have healthy offspring), the Perceptual Bias view of symmetry preferences makes a very different claim. Our visual system may be ‘hard wired’ in such a way that it is easier to process symmetric stimuli than it is to process asymmetric stimuli. Because of this greater ease of processing symmetric stimuli, symmetric stimuli of any kind might be preferred to relatively asymmetric stimuli. Under the perceptual bias view, preferences
for symmetric faces are no different to preferences for symmetric objects of any kind.
Indeed, it has been shown that people prefer symmetric pieces of abstract art and sculpture to relatively asymmetric versions.
Testing the Evolutionary Advantage and Perceptual Bias accounts of symmetry preferences Little and Jones (2003) carried out a study that investigated why people prefer symmetric faces to asymmetric faces, testing predictions derived from both the Evolutionary Advantage view and the Perceptual Bias view of symmetry preferences. Previous studies have found that
symmetry had a bigger effect on the attractiveness of opposite-sex faces than own-sex faces and have suggested this is because opposite sex faces are an example of ‘mate choice relevant stimuli’ (i.e. they are the faces of potential mates and own-sex faces are not).
Little and Jones noted that it is well established that inverting face images (i.e. turning them upside down) reduces the ease with
which they can be processed and are perceived as being people . While people find it easy to process faces that are the right way
up, face processing is disrupted by inversion to a far greater extent than processing of other types of visual stimuli is. Furthermore, inverted faces are processed more like other objects when inverted than when they are upright. Inverting faces, however, will obviously not alter how symmetric the faces are. So while opposite-sex upright faces are ‘mate choice relevant stimuli’ (i.e. are easily perceived as potential mates) inverted faces will be perceived more like objects, even though both inverted and upright faces will be equally symmetric. While the evolutionary advantage view suggests that preferences for symmetric faces will
be weaker when the faces are inverted (because they will be perceived as less mate choice relevant), the perceptual bias view suggests that inversion will have no effect on symmetry preferences because symmetry is attractive in any type of stimulus. With this in mind, Little and Jones tested if inverting the faces used to assess preferences for symmetric faces weakens the strength of symmetry preferences (which would support an Evolutionary Advantage account of symmetry preferences) or if symmetry is equally attractive in upright and inverted faces (which would support a Perceptual Bias account of symmetry preferences).
Little and Jones found that symmetric faces were judged more attractive than asymmetric faces when faces were shown the right way up,but not when the faces presented were inverted. Because this suggests that symmetry is more attractive in mate choice relevant stimuli than in other types of stimuli, Little and Jones' findings support an evolutionary advantage account of why symmetric faces are attractive and present difficulties for the Perceptual Bias account (which proposes that symmetry will be preferred in stimuli of any kind).
Further Reading
Little, A. C. & Jones, B. C. (2003) Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 1759-1763.
asymmetric counterparts. Even the tiniest millimeter affects if you will get picked in an online dating site or not.
Why are symmetric faces attractive?
Symmetry is one aspect of faces that has been extensively studied by many researchers in relation to attractiveness. The most common method used to investigate the effect symmetry has on the attractiveness of faces involves manipulating the symmetry of face images using sophisticated computer graphic methods and assessing the effect that this manipulation has on perceptions of the attractiveness of the faces. Typically, perfectly symmetric versions of a set of face images are manufactured and presented to subjects along with the original (i.e. relatively asymmetric versions). Participants are then asked to indicate which face is more attractive, choosing between a perfectly symmetric version of a given face and the original version. Because the faces used in
these tests differ in symmetry but not in other facial characteristics, these findings demonstrate that symmetry is a visual cue for attractiveness judgements of faces. Although studies have generally shown that people prefer symmetricversions of faces to the original (i.e. relatively asymmetric) versions, there has been considerable debate about why people prefer symmetric faces.
Explanations of the attractiveness of symmetric faces Two different explanations have been put forward by researchers to explain attraction to symmetric faces: the Evolutionary Advantage view (which proposes that symmetric individuals are attractive because they are particularly healthy) and the Perceptual Bias view (which proposes that symmetric individuals are attractive because the human visual system can process symmetric stimuli of any kind more easily than it can process asymmetric stimuli).
The Evolutionary Advantage view proposes that symmetric faces are attractive because symmetry indicates how healthy an individual is: while our genes are such that we are designed to develop symmetrically, disease and infections during physical development cause small imperfections (i.e. asymmetries). Thus, only individuals who are able to withstand infections (i.e. those with strong immune systems) are successful in developing symmetric physical traits. Indeed, some (but not all) findings from studies of health in humans and many animal species have observed such a relationship between symmetry and indicators
of health, with healthier individuals being more symmetric. For example, swallows and peacocks with symmetric tail feathers are particularly healthy and preferred by potential mates.
Under the Evolutionary Advantage view of symmetry preferences, symmetric individuals are considered attractive because we have
evolved to prefer healthy potential mates. While the Evolutionary Advantage view suggests that attraction to symmetric individu-
als reflects attraction to healthy individuals who would be good mates (i.e. will have healthy offspring), the Perceptual Bias view of symmetry preferences makes a very different claim. Our visual system may be ‘hard wired’ in such a way that it is easier to process symmetric stimuli than it is to process asymmetric stimuli. Because of this greater ease of processing symmetric stimuli, symmetric stimuli of any kind might be preferred to relatively asymmetric stimuli. Under the perceptual bias view, preferences
for symmetric faces are no different to preferences for symmetric objects of any kind.
Indeed, it has been shown that people prefer symmetric pieces of abstract art and sculpture to relatively asymmetric versions.
Testing the Evolutionary Advantage and Perceptual Bias accounts of symmetry preferences Little and Jones (2003) carried out a study that investigated why people prefer symmetric faces to asymmetric faces, testing predictions derived from both the Evolutionary Advantage view and the Perceptual Bias view of symmetry preferences. Previous studies have found that
symmetry had a bigger effect on the attractiveness of opposite-sex faces than own-sex faces and have suggested this is because opposite sex faces are an example of ‘mate choice relevant stimuli’ (i.e. they are the faces of potential mates and own-sex faces are not).
Little and Jones noted that it is well established that inverting face images (i.e. turning them upside down) reduces the ease with
which they can be processed and are perceived as being people . While people find it easy to process faces that are the right way
up, face processing is disrupted by inversion to a far greater extent than processing of other types of visual stimuli is. Furthermore, inverted faces are processed more like other objects when inverted than when they are upright. Inverting faces, however, will obviously not alter how symmetric the faces are. So while opposite-sex upright faces are ‘mate choice relevant stimuli’ (i.e. are easily perceived as potential mates) inverted faces will be perceived more like objects, even though both inverted and upright faces will be equally symmetric. While the evolutionary advantage view suggests that preferences for symmetric faces will
be weaker when the faces are inverted (because they will be perceived as less mate choice relevant), the perceptual bias view suggests that inversion will have no effect on symmetry preferences because symmetry is attractive in any type of stimulus. With this in mind, Little and Jones tested if inverting the faces used to assess preferences for symmetric faces weakens the strength of symmetry preferences (which would support an Evolutionary Advantage account of symmetry preferences) or if symmetry is equally attractive in upright and inverted faces (which would support a Perceptual Bias account of symmetry preferences).
Little and Jones found that symmetric faces were judged more attractive than asymmetric faces when faces were shown the right way up,but not when the faces presented were inverted. Because this suggests that symmetry is more attractive in mate choice relevant stimuli than in other types of stimuli, Little and Jones' findings support an evolutionary advantage account of why symmetric faces are attractive and present difficulties for the Perceptual Bias account (which proposes that symmetry will be preferred in stimuli of any kind).
Further Reading
Little, A. C. & Jones, B. C. (2003) Evidence against perceptual bias views for symmetry preferences in human faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 270, 1759-1763.
Want to know the secret behind human attraction? Finding a partner who looks just like you.
Or at least that's the theory behind a dating site launched this month by New Yorker Christina Bloom.
Once you upload your picture, the site uses facial recognition technology to zoom in on nine points of your face -- your eyes, ears, nose, chin, as well as the corners and center of your mouth -- to find you a match. When it spots "face mates," it alerts the pair.
"If you look at most couples, you see that these facial features are very similar," Bloom said. "I really believe that getting this theory out there will help people."
The would-be matchmaker said her notion that people are more attracted to those that look like them came from personal experience and years of observation.
About 20 years ago, she said, she started dating her own male doppelgänger and said she felt an unparalleled attraction.
Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton Were 'Face Mates,' Site Founder Says"I had such a strong attraction to him and it was like nothing I had ever experienced before," she said. "Our facial features were very similar and we were told that we looked like brother and sister everywhere we went. Then I started noticing couples everywhere I went."
She noticed the phenomenon among friends and family, as well Hollywood stars, like Iman and David Bowie, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, Heidi Klum and Seal and Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward.
Bloom wrote a small gift book on the theory and later launched a blog, but about a year and a half ago she decided to get serious about putting her theory to work.
"I knew. I knew in my gut that there was something going on here," she said. "I realized that the only way I'd get this out there was to create a dating website."
The site, which is powered by Face.com's facial recognition technology, has attracted about 8,000 people. For testing out the service in its early days, those users get to take part for free. But once the site reaches a critical mass, Bloom said she'll likely charge a fee similar to that of other dating sites.
In General Attraction, People Are Drawn to Those Who Look Like ThemBecause the user base is just growing, Bloom said they haven't yet used the engine to match couples. But when it has amassed enough users, it will use Face.com's biometric face recognition technology to look at key points on the users' faces and calculate the distances between them. When it finds similar proportions, the site will flag it as a match.
"It's not like an exact match. It's more about the shape and the points in the face," she said. "I see it easily, but when there's a little bit of weight involved, it's a little more difficult to see. When a man's hairline is a little higher it's difficult to see. The coloring throws people off."
Bloom said she recognizes that compatibility and similar values are also key components to finding long-lasting love, but said she hopes her site can help people get a jumpstart.
But does science actually support the theory of "face mate" attraction?
Couples Tend to Be of Similar AttractivenessKerri Johnson, an assistant psychology professor at UCLA, said she wasn't aware of recent research that specifically supports Find Your Face Mate's theory, but said, "There is evidence that general liking improves when people look like you."
For example, she said, a 2008 Stanford University study found that on-the-fence voters were unconsciously swayed by candidates who looked more like them. The study morphed photos of the participants and political candidates and, while the test subjects didn't consciously detect the blended images, they consistently favored the ones that most resembled themselves.
In romantic relationships, Johnson said, research has shown that pairs tend to be of similar attractiveness.
"There's a long-standing pattern where a person's own level of attractiveness is matched in their partner," she said.
Being of equal attractiveness doesn't necessarily mean that they have similar facial features, but it could lead to common facial characteristics, such as facial symmetry and youthful qualities, Johnson said.
"Across dimensions, people who are similar tend to be attracted to each other," she said. "'Birds of a feather flock together' characterizes most aspects of interpersonal attraction."
Couple May Start to Resemble Each Other Over TimeStill, Andrew Trees, author of "Decoding Love: Why It Takes Twelve Frogs to Find a Prince, and Other Revelations from the Science of Attraction," said he was dubious about a website that claimed to match look-alikes.
While it may be true that many couples resemble each other, it's not necessarily the case that they were initially attracted to their doppelgangers. Overtime, they may mirror each others' expressions and share habits that contribute to appearance, Trees said.
"One researcher did discover that as couples are together for a long time, their faces do start to look more alike," he said.
Trees also said researchers have found that people are drawn to those that look like them because the faces look familiar. For example, one study found that if you flash the same face to someone several times, that person will find the face to be increasingly attractive.
"If you see a face that's like your own, that's obviously going to be very familiar and there's something appealing about that," he said. "It's not that I question there might be some attraction there, I just don't know if there's an underlying scientific basis to say those people are compatible."
Or at least that's the theory behind a dating site launched this month by New Yorker Christina Bloom.
Once you upload your picture, the site uses facial recognition technology to zoom in on nine points of your face -- your eyes, ears, nose, chin, as well as the corners and center of your mouth -- to find you a match. When it spots "face mates," it alerts the pair.
"If you look at most couples, you see that these facial features are very similar," Bloom said. "I really believe that getting this theory out there will help people."
The would-be matchmaker said her notion that people are more attracted to those that look like them came from personal experience and years of observation.
About 20 years ago, she said, she started dating her own male doppelgänger and said she felt an unparalleled attraction.
Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton Were 'Face Mates,' Site Founder Says"I had such a strong attraction to him and it was like nothing I had ever experienced before," she said. "Our facial features were very similar and we were told that we looked like brother and sister everywhere we went. Then I started noticing couples everywhere I went."
She noticed the phenomenon among friends and family, as well Hollywood stars, like Iman and David Bowie, Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, Heidi Klum and Seal and Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward.
Bloom wrote a small gift book on the theory and later launched a blog, but about a year and a half ago she decided to get serious about putting her theory to work.
"I knew. I knew in my gut that there was something going on here," she said. "I realized that the only way I'd get this out there was to create a dating website."
The site, which is powered by Face.com's facial recognition technology, has attracted about 8,000 people. For testing out the service in its early days, those users get to take part for free. But once the site reaches a critical mass, Bloom said she'll likely charge a fee similar to that of other dating sites.
In General Attraction, People Are Drawn to Those Who Look Like ThemBecause the user base is just growing, Bloom said they haven't yet used the engine to match couples. But when it has amassed enough users, it will use Face.com's biometric face recognition technology to look at key points on the users' faces and calculate the distances between them. When it finds similar proportions, the site will flag it as a match.
"It's not like an exact match. It's more about the shape and the points in the face," she said. "I see it easily, but when there's a little bit of weight involved, it's a little more difficult to see. When a man's hairline is a little higher it's difficult to see. The coloring throws people off."
Bloom said she recognizes that compatibility and similar values are also key components to finding long-lasting love, but said she hopes her site can help people get a jumpstart.
But does science actually support the theory of "face mate" attraction?
Couples Tend to Be of Similar AttractivenessKerri Johnson, an assistant psychology professor at UCLA, said she wasn't aware of recent research that specifically supports Find Your Face Mate's theory, but said, "There is evidence that general liking improves when people look like you."
For example, she said, a 2008 Stanford University study found that on-the-fence voters were unconsciously swayed by candidates who looked more like them. The study morphed photos of the participants and political candidates and, while the test subjects didn't consciously detect the blended images, they consistently favored the ones that most resembled themselves.
In romantic relationships, Johnson said, research has shown that pairs tend to be of similar attractiveness.
"There's a long-standing pattern where a person's own level of attractiveness is matched in their partner," she said.
Being of equal attractiveness doesn't necessarily mean that they have similar facial features, but it could lead to common facial characteristics, such as facial symmetry and youthful qualities, Johnson said.
"Across dimensions, people who are similar tend to be attracted to each other," she said. "'Birds of a feather flock together' characterizes most aspects of interpersonal attraction."
Couple May Start to Resemble Each Other Over TimeStill, Andrew Trees, author of "Decoding Love: Why It Takes Twelve Frogs to Find a Prince, and Other Revelations from the Science of Attraction," said he was dubious about a website that claimed to match look-alikes.
While it may be true that many couples resemble each other, it's not necessarily the case that they were initially attracted to their doppelgangers. Overtime, they may mirror each others' expressions and share habits that contribute to appearance, Trees said.
"One researcher did discover that as couples are together for a long time, their faces do start to look more alike," he said.
Trees also said researchers have found that people are drawn to those that look like them because the faces look familiar. For example, one study found that if you flash the same face to someone several times, that person will find the face to be increasingly attractive.
"If you see a face that's like your own, that's obviously going to be very familiar and there's something appealing about that," he said. "It's not that I question there might be some attraction there, I just don't know if there's an underlying scientific basis to say those people are compatible."
Symmetry Is Sexy: The Science of Sex- B. Cadman
I’ve always been fascinated by symmetry in nature. From the radial symmetry of a snowflake or a starfish, to the bilateral symmetry of a crab shell or a human body, nature’s ability for complementation is astounding. But the fact that symmetry is so widespread is no coincidence. Whether it’s a bird or a human, symmetry means good genes, and that means attraction.
Humans, like most animals, exhibit mirror symmetry, meaning we are roughly the same on both sides. This is something we subconsciously find appealing in our mates. For instance, men are more attracted to women with symmetrical features. In a study at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, females with symmetrical faces were not only more attractive to their male peers than females with asymmetrical faces, they also had a higher number of previous sexual partners and tended to lose their virginity at an earlier age.
The situation is true for a man’s attractiveness to a woman as well. Though women are more apt to look for things like status and dominance, which may be stronger indicators of fitness than symmetry, we still value matching components. Studies have found that women achieve greater sexual satisfaction with partners who are symmetrical, and find symmetrical dancers more attractive than asymmetrical ones. This indicates body, not just facial symmetry, is an important component of attraction.
Symmetry’s role in mate selection is based on the hypothesis that it can give clues to underlying genetic fitness. Asymmetry can show flaws in the genetic code or a predisposition to disease—someone you don’t want your genes commingling with. Because of the ability of symmetry to advertise someone’s health, it is an outward clue to help us select a good mate.
Yet it stands to question whether we find symmetrical faces and bodies more attractive because they’re healthier, or because that’s what we’re used to. Look at the cover of any fashion magazine and it’s easy to conclude that most models’ faces are almost mirror images of each other, with very little skewing. Does our idea of attractiveness have more to do with nature, or the norm?
Evidence shows that symmetry is an attractive trait within and across cultures, indicating it’s important regardless of cultural norms. A study comparing the preferences of people in the United Kingdom with the Hadza, a hunter-gatherer society of Tanzania, found that symmetry was more attractive than asymmetry across both cultures. In fact, symmetry was an even bigger cue of attractiveness in the Hadza than in the Brits, suggesting that ecological pressures may be a selective pressure for this society, forcing it to find outward signs of genetic quality. Symmetry is one of these signs. Furthermore, men with higher standing (the good hunters) placed greater value on symmetry in the female face than men of lower standing; that is, men of high quality were more discriminating, and one way in which they discriminated was by facial symmetry.
Symmetry may be attractive from an evolutionary perspective, but does it really mean healthy? Look no further than Hollywood to see that the people we think of as the “most” attractive, while symmetrical, aren’t necessarily the ones you’d want bearing, raising, or touching your kids (Britney Spears, for example). Does our face give clues to overall health?
Research indicates that in animals and humans, symmetry can be a good indicator of health. Those with outward signs of symmetrical development do tend to be healthy. Only a few studies have looked at the corollary of this; that is, does asymmetry indicate bad health? A study done in 1997 found that people with facial asymmetry are more likely to have psychological, emotional, and physiological distress than those with symmetrical faces. However, it’s tough to parse out whether they have these problems because they’ve been perceived to be unattractive throughout their lives, or whether their psychological distresses are due to genetic causes (most likely a combination of both). Perhaps symmetry tells us something about physical fitness, but gives us fewer cues about a person’s psychological attributes.
Even if symmetry does equal attraction in our minds, it’s one of multiple facial cues we use to judge who’s hot and who’s not. One of things we find most attractive is when someone looks just like us; researchers believe this is because we’ve looked at our parents faces since we were young, and want someone who looks like them. Just as people often look like their dogs, couples also tend to look like each other. (A question I’d like to see answered: do adoptees or people not raised by their biological parents still prefer to date people that look like them?)
And then there are physiologic cues beyond symmetry. One of the best known is a woman’s waist to hip ratio. Numerous studies have found that women with a waist-to-hip ratio of around 0.7 are the most attractive to men. (This ratio means your waist is smaller than your hips.) This so-called “hour-glass figure” may indicate that a woman has deposited fat around her hips and is ready to bear children. Most encouragingly, this ratio holds true for a wide range of weights.
Whether we want their kids or merely want to make out, those people whose bodies look healthy, genetically fit, and able to reproduce are most attractive to us. This means symmetry, hips, and a familiar face can go a long way to landing a lover.
I’ve always been fascinated by symmetry in nature. From the radial symmetry of a snowflake or a starfish, to the bilateral symmetry of a crab shell or a human body, nature’s ability for complementation is astounding. But the fact that symmetry is so widespread is no coincidence. Whether it’s a bird or a human, symmetry means good genes, and that means attraction.
Humans, like most animals, exhibit mirror symmetry, meaning we are roughly the same on both sides. This is something we subconsciously find appealing in our mates. For instance, men are more attracted to women with symmetrical features. In a study at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque, females with symmetrical faces were not only more attractive to their male peers than females with asymmetrical faces, they also had a higher number of previous sexual partners and tended to lose their virginity at an earlier age.
The situation is true for a man’s attractiveness to a woman as well. Though women are more apt to look for things like status and dominance, which may be stronger indicators of fitness than symmetry, we still value matching components. Studies have found that women achieve greater sexual satisfaction with partners who are symmetrical, and find symmetrical dancers more attractive than asymmetrical ones. This indicates body, not just facial symmetry, is an important component of attraction.
Symmetry’s role in mate selection is based on the hypothesis that it can give clues to underlying genetic fitness. Asymmetry can show flaws in the genetic code or a predisposition to disease—someone you don’t want your genes commingling with. Because of the ability of symmetry to advertise someone’s health, it is an outward clue to help us select a good mate.
Yet it stands to question whether we find symmetrical faces and bodies more attractive because they’re healthier, or because that’s what we’re used to. Look at the cover of any fashion magazine and it’s easy to conclude that most models’ faces are almost mirror images of each other, with very little skewing. Does our idea of attractiveness have more to do with nature, or the norm?
Evidence shows that symmetry is an attractive trait within and across cultures, indicating it’s important regardless of cultural norms. A study comparing the preferences of people in the United Kingdom with the Hadza, a hunter-gatherer society of Tanzania, found that symmetry was more attractive than asymmetry across both cultures. In fact, symmetry was an even bigger cue of attractiveness in the Hadza than in the Brits, suggesting that ecological pressures may be a selective pressure for this society, forcing it to find outward signs of genetic quality. Symmetry is one of these signs. Furthermore, men with higher standing (the good hunters) placed greater value on symmetry in the female face than men of lower standing; that is, men of high quality were more discriminating, and one way in which they discriminated was by facial symmetry.
Symmetry may be attractive from an evolutionary perspective, but does it really mean healthy? Look no further than Hollywood to see that the people we think of as the “most” attractive, while symmetrical, aren’t necessarily the ones you’d want bearing, raising, or touching your kids (Britney Spears, for example). Does our face give clues to overall health?
Research indicates that in animals and humans, symmetry can be a good indicator of health. Those with outward signs of symmetrical development do tend to be healthy. Only a few studies have looked at the corollary of this; that is, does asymmetry indicate bad health? A study done in 1997 found that people with facial asymmetry are more likely to have psychological, emotional, and physiological distress than those with symmetrical faces. However, it’s tough to parse out whether they have these problems because they’ve been perceived to be unattractive throughout their lives, or whether their psychological distresses are due to genetic causes (most likely a combination of both). Perhaps symmetry tells us something about physical fitness, but gives us fewer cues about a person’s psychological attributes.
Even if symmetry does equal attraction in our minds, it’s one of multiple facial cues we use to judge who’s hot and who’s not. One of things we find most attractive is when someone looks just like us; researchers believe this is because we’ve looked at our parents faces since we were young, and want someone who looks like them. Just as people often look like their dogs, couples also tend to look like each other. (A question I’d like to see answered: do adoptees or people not raised by their biological parents still prefer to date people that look like them?)
And then there are physiologic cues beyond symmetry. One of the best known is a woman’s waist to hip ratio. Numerous studies have found that women with a waist-to-hip ratio of around 0.7 are the most attractive to men. (This ratio means your waist is smaller than your hips.) This so-called “hour-glass figure” may indicate that a woman has deposited fat around her hips and is ready to bear children. Most encouragingly, this ratio holds true for a wide range of weights.
Whether we want their kids or merely want to make out, those people whose bodies look healthy, genetically fit, and able to reproduce are most attractive to us. This means symmetry, hips, and a familiar face can go a long way to landing a lover.
3D face scans spot gene syndromes
By Rebecca Morelle
Science reporter, BBC News, York
3D face scans are set to speed up the diagnosis of rare genetic conditions in children, UK scientists say. More than 700 genetic syndromes affect facial traits, but some are difficult to spot because few cases exist. Now new software that compares an individual's face with a bank of 3D images of people with known conditions is aiding diagnosis. The technology, presented at the BA Festival of Science in York, had a 90% success rate, the scientists said. Peter Hammond, a computer scientist at the UCL Institute for Child Health in London who carried out the research, explained: "There are many conditions where the face can have unusual features arising from alterations in the genes."
'Average face'
While individuals with Down's syndrome can be easily recognised, there are more than 700 known genetic conditions that can alter how a person looks. For example, people who have Williams syndrome, which occurs in between one in 10,000-20,000 births, have a short, upturned nose, a full mouth and a small jaw. Individuals with Smith-Magenis syndrome, which occurs in one in 25,000 births, have a nose with a very flat bridge and a lifted lip. While those with Fragile X syndrome, which has an incidence of about one in 4,000, have long, narrow faces and large or protruding ears. For some genetic conditions, facial differences can be very subtle and cases can be rare, making initial diagnosis extremely difficult. To help, Professor Hammond has collected 3D images of children with known problem and has created software that combines the images to create an "average face" of a child with different genetic conditions. In the same way, he has also built up the average face of a child with no known genetic disorder for comparison.
Each composite image is made up of between 30 to 150 images.
Faster diagnosis
Professor Hammond said: "When we have a child with an unknown condition, we take a 3D picture of their face and we have developed techniques that allow us to compare their face with these averages. "And the one that is the most similar is the prime target as the condition that might explain their unusual facial features. "Then the geneticists can do the more appropriate genetic testing, if such a test exists, to further confirm this." So far, the technique is currently being applied to more than 30 conditions with an average success rate of 90% and Professor Hammond is collecting more images to encompass even more genetic conditions.
Using the software would speed up diagnosis and reduce the number of genetic tests a child might need, he said.
Professor Hammond is currently using the technology at his hospital in London, but would like it to be rolled out across the UK.
This would involve more 3D cameras in hospitals or technology that could convert 2D images to 3D. In the future, Professor Hammond is looking to compile enough data to build average images of genetic diseases for different sexes and ethnicities.
In work soon to be published, Professor Hammond has also used the software to examine the facial characteristics of people with autism spectrum disorder and has identified unusual facial asymmetry in children with the condition. These children are more likely to have a slight protrusion of the right temple, possibly reflecting a larger area of the brain known as the right frontal pole.
By Rebecca Morelle
Science reporter, BBC News, York
3D face scans are set to speed up the diagnosis of rare genetic conditions in children, UK scientists say. More than 700 genetic syndromes affect facial traits, but some are difficult to spot because few cases exist. Now new software that compares an individual's face with a bank of 3D images of people with known conditions is aiding diagnosis. The technology, presented at the BA Festival of Science in York, had a 90% success rate, the scientists said. Peter Hammond, a computer scientist at the UCL Institute for Child Health in London who carried out the research, explained: "There are many conditions where the face can have unusual features arising from alterations in the genes."
'Average face'
While individuals with Down's syndrome can be easily recognised, there are more than 700 known genetic conditions that can alter how a person looks. For example, people who have Williams syndrome, which occurs in between one in 10,000-20,000 births, have a short, upturned nose, a full mouth and a small jaw. Individuals with Smith-Magenis syndrome, which occurs in one in 25,000 births, have a nose with a very flat bridge and a lifted lip. While those with Fragile X syndrome, which has an incidence of about one in 4,000, have long, narrow faces and large or protruding ears. For some genetic conditions, facial differences can be very subtle and cases can be rare, making initial diagnosis extremely difficult. To help, Professor Hammond has collected 3D images of children with known problem and has created software that combines the images to create an "average face" of a child with different genetic conditions. In the same way, he has also built up the average face of a child with no known genetic disorder for comparison.
Each composite image is made up of between 30 to 150 images.
Faster diagnosis
Professor Hammond said: "When we have a child with an unknown condition, we take a 3D picture of their face and we have developed techniques that allow us to compare their face with these averages. "And the one that is the most similar is the prime target as the condition that might explain their unusual facial features. "Then the geneticists can do the more appropriate genetic testing, if such a test exists, to further confirm this." So far, the technique is currently being applied to more than 30 conditions with an average success rate of 90% and Professor Hammond is collecting more images to encompass even more genetic conditions.
Using the software would speed up diagnosis and reduce the number of genetic tests a child might need, he said.
Professor Hammond is currently using the technology at his hospital in London, but would like it to be rolled out across the UK.
This would involve more 3D cameras in hospitals or technology that could convert 2D images to 3D. In the future, Professor Hammond is looking to compile enough data to build average images of genetic diseases for different sexes and ethnicities.
In work soon to be published, Professor Hammond has also used the software to examine the facial characteristics of people with autism spectrum disorder and has identified unusual facial asymmetry in children with the condition. These children are more likely to have a slight protrusion of the right temple, possibly reflecting a larger area of the brain known as the right frontal pole.
