Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical Attributes

Q: Matching Hypothesis

__Walster et al. (1966)__ proposed the matching hypothesis. Matching hypothesis says that people are more likely to succeed in relationships and claim to like people who are of roughly equal physical attractiveness.

Test yourself on Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical Attributes

Test your knowledge with free interactive questions on Seneca — used by over 10 million students.

Physical Attractiveness: Symmetry and Initial Attraction

Physical attractiveness seems to be important in the formation of relationships.

Honest signals

One explanation of this comes from evolutionary psychology and ‘honest signals’ (those that cannot be faked).
Physical attractiveness is an honest signal and might convey genetic fitness - a necessary component for making sure that the offspring survive and reproduce.

Shackelford and Larsen (1997)

Shackelford and Larsen (1997) found that people with symmetrical faces are rated as more attractive.
This is because it is an honest signal that might imply genetic fitness.

Shackelford and Larsen (1997) cont.

People are also attracted to faces with neotenous, or ‘babyface’ features.
- For example, having widely separated and large eyes, a delicate chin and/or a small nose.
- These features trigger a protective or caring instinct, which is a valuable resource for females wanting to reproduce.

McNulty et al. (2008)

McNulty et al. (2008) found evidence that the initial attractiveness that brought partners together continued to be an important feature of the relationship after the marriage, for at least several years.

The Halo Effect

The halo effect refers to the phenomenon by which people attribute positive qualities to more attractive individuals.

The halo effect explained

The halo effect demonstrates why physical attractiveness is important.
People can have preconceived ideas about the personality traits attractive people must have. These are almost universally positive. This means attractive people are thought of and treated differently, at least at first.

Dion et al. (1972)

Dion et al. (1972) used the phrase ‘what is beautiful is good’ to sum up the physically attractive stereotype.
Dion found that more physically attractive people are consistently rated as kind, strong, sociable and successful.

Dion et al. (1972) cont.

The belief that good-looking people are more likely to have these characteristics makes them appear to be even more attractive and causes people to behave positively.
This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Palmer and Peterson (2012)

Palmer and Peterson’s (2012) research supports the theory of a halo effect.
They found that physically attractive people were rated as more politically knowledgeable and competent than unattractive people.
This effect was so powerful that it persisted even when participants knew that these people had no particular expertise.

Evaluations

Palmer and Peterson’s (2012) findings are significant because politicians might be judged to be more suitable for their role if they are seen as more attractive.

Evaluations of the halo effect

People have found that the halo effect applies in many other areas of everyday life. This confirms that physical attractiveness is an important factor in the initial formation of relationships - romantic or otherwise.
But individual differences also play a role in the importance of physical attractiveness because some people don’t find it to be particularly important.

Matching Hypothesis

Walster et al. (1966) proposed the matching hypothesis. Matching hypothesis says that people are more likely to succeed in relationships and claim to like people who are of roughly equal physical attractiveness.

Principle of matching hypothesis theory

To successfully match ourselves to a potential partner, we need to make a realistic judgement about our own value to them.
While we desire the most physically attractive person possible, we balance this with our wish to avoid rejection by someone we see as too attractive to be interested in us – someone ‘out of our league’.

Compromise

So, when it comes to physical attractiveness, there is a difference between what we would like in an ideal partner and what we are prepared to settle for. This means that our choice of partner is a compromise.
The original attempt to confirm the matching hypothesis failed. This is most likely because of an unreliable measure of attractiveness. But other studies generally support the idea.

Supporting study

Feingold (1988) carried out a meta-analysis of 17 studies.
He found a significant correlation in ratings of attractiveness between romantic partners.
This is especially supportive of the matching hypothesis because the studies looked at the actual partners, which is a more realistic approach.

Contesting study

But not all research supports the matching hypothesis.
Taylor et al. (2011) studied the activity logs of a popular online dating site.
They found that online daters sought meetings with potential partners who were more physically attractive than them.

Taylor et al. (2011)

This real-life test of the matching hypothesis implies that people do not consider their own attractiveness when making decisions, at least not on dating sites.