Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T09:05:47.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attentional and affective biases for attractive females emerge early in development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 March 2017

Jennifer Lynn Rennels  and
Stephanie Ann Verba
Jennifer Lynn Rennels
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154-5030. Jennifer.rennels@unlv.eduverbas@unlv.nevada.eduhttps://www.unlv.edu/people/jennifer-rennels
Stephanie Ann Verba
Affiliation:
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154-5030. Jennifer.rennels@unlv.eduverbas@unlv.nevada.eduhttps://www.unlv.edu/people/jennifer-rennels
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Predominant experience with females early in development results in infants developing an attractive, female-like facial representation that guides children's attention toward and affective preferences for attractive females. When combined with increased interest in the other sex at puberty, these early emerging biases might help explain the robust prosocial and financial biases men exhibit toward attractive women during adulthood.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e40
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Agthe, M., Spörrle, M., Frey, D., Walper, S. & Maner, J. K. (2013) When romance and rivalry awaken: Attractiveness-based social judgment biases emerge at adolescence. Human Nature 24(2):182–95.Google Scholar
Bigler, R. S. & Liben, L. S. (2006) A developmental intergroup theory of social stereotypes and prejudice. In: Advances in child development and behavior, vol. 34, ed. Kail, R. V., pp. 39–89. Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
de Haan, M., Johnson, M. H., Maurer, D. & Perrett, D. I. (2001) Recognition of individual faces and average face prototypes by 1- and 3-month-old infants. Cognitive Development 16(2):659–78.Google Scholar
Hoss, R. A., Ramsey, J. L., Griffin, A. M. & Langlois, J. H. (2005) The role of facial attractiveness and facial masculinity/femininity in sex classification of faces. Perception 34(12):1459–74.Google Scholar
Ivanova, K., Veenstra, R. & Mills, M. (2012) Who dates? The effects of temperament, puberty, and parenting on early adolescent experience with dating: The TRAILS study. Journal of Early Adolescence 32(3):340–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kayl, A. J. (2012) Do toddlers exhibit same-sex preferences for adult facial stimuli? UNLV Theses/Dissertations/Professional Papers/Capstones, Paper 1676, University of Nevada, Las Vegas.Google Scholar
Knickmeyer, R. C., Gouttard, S., Kang, C., Evans, D., Wilber, K., Smith, J. K., Hamer, R. M., Lin, W., Gerig, G. & Gilmore, J. H. (2008) A structural MRI study of human brain development from birth to 2 years. Journal of Neuroscience 28(47):12176–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Langlois, J. H. & Roggman, L. A. (1990) Attractive faces are only average. Psychological Science 1(2):115–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, J. H., Roggman, L. A., Casey, R. J., Ritter, J. M., Rieser-Danner, L. A. & Jenkins, V. Y. (1987) Infant preferences for attractive faces: Rudiments of a stereotype? Developmental Psychology 23:363–69.Google Scholar
Quinn, P. C., Yahr, J., Kuhn, A., Slater, A. M. & Pascalis, O. (2002) Representation of the gender of human faces by infants: A preference for female. Perception 31:1109–21.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J. L. & Langlois, J. H. (2002) Effects of the “beauty is good” stereotype on children's information processing. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 81(3):320–40.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J. L., Langlois, J. H., Hoss, R. A., Rubenstein, A. J. & Griffin, A. M. (2004) Origins of a stereotype: Categorization of facial attractiveness by 6-month-old infants. Developmental Science 7:201–11.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J. L., Langlois, J. H. & Marti, C. N. (2005) Infant categorization of faces: Ladies first. Developmental Review 25:212–46.Google Scholar
Ramsey-Rennels, J. L. & Langlois, J. H. (2006) Infants' differential processing of female and male faces. Current Directions in Psychological Science 15(2):59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regan, P. C. & Joshi, A. (2003) Ideal partner preferences among adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality 31(1):13–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rennels, J. L. & Davis, R. E. (2008) Facial experience during the first year. Infant Behavior & Development 31(4):665–78.Google Scholar
Rennels, J. L., Kayl, A. J., Langlois, J. H., Davis, R. E. & Orlewicz, M. (2016) Asymmetries in infants' attention toward and categorization of male faces: The potential role of experience. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 142:137–57.Google Scholar
Rennels, J. L. & Langlois, J. H. (2014) Children's attractiveness, gender, and race biases: A comparison of their strength and generality. Child Development 85(4):1401–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rennels, J. L. & Langlois, J. H. (2015) Children's beliefs in reciprocation of biases and flexibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137:39–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Short, L. A., Hatry, A. J. & Mondloch, C. J. (2011) The development of norm-based coding and race-specific face prototypes: An examination of 5- and 8-year-olds' face space. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 108(2):338–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sugden, N. A., Mohamed-Ali, M. I. & Moulson, M. C. (2014) I spy with my little eye: Typical, daily exposure to faces documented from a first-person infant perspective. Developmental Psychobiology 56(2):249–61.Google Scholar
Winkielman, P. & Cacioppo, J. T. (2001) Mind at ease puts a smile on the face: Psychophysiological evidence that processing facilitation elicits positive affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(6):989–1000.Google Scholar