Context-specific effects of facial dominance and trustworthiness on hypothetical leadership decisions

Abstract

Social judgments of faces predict important social outcomes, including leadership decisions. Previous work suggests that facial cues associated with perceptions of dominance and trustworthiness have context-specific effects on leadership decisions. Facial cues linked to perceived dominance have been found to be preferred in leaders for hypothetical wartime contexts and facial cues linked to perceived trustworthiness have been found to be preferred in leaders for hypothetical peacetime contexts. Here we sought to replicate these effects using images of women’s faces, as previous studies have primarily focused on perceptions of leadership abilities from male faces, with only a handful of these including female faces. Consistent with previous work, a linear mixed effects model demonstrated that more trustworthy-looking faces were preferred in leaders during times of peace and more dominant-looking faces were preferred in leaders during times of war. These results provide converging evidence for context-specific effects of facial cues on hypothetical leadership judgments.

Facial Appearance and Electoral Success of Male Italian Politicians

“…They found that participants had a stronger preference for individuals whose facial trustworthiness had been digitally enhanced in a time of peace, whereas individuals whose facial attractiveness had been digitally enhanced were more strongly favored in a time of war. This pattern suggests that prosocial traits (i.e., trustworthiness) are favored in leaders when the political context is characterized by collaboration, but traits related to health and formidability (i.e., attractiveness) are favored when the political climate is characterized by conflict (for similar results, see Ferguson et al, 2019;Laustsen & Petersen, 2015;Spisak et al, 2012).…”

If the face fits: predicting future promotions from police cadets’ facial traits

“…A long line of evidence shows that use of facial cues as a heuristic does occur. This effect is most strongly evident in the case of voting in elections (Antonakis & Dalgas, 2009;Berggren et al, 2010;Berinsky et al, 2019;Bull et al, 1983;Chiao et al, 2008;Ferguson et al, 2019;Lawson et al, 2010;Little et al, 2007;Rosar et al, 2008;Todorov et al, 2005Todorov et al, , 2015Van Vugt & Grabo, 2015). There is also evidence that this effect manifests, albeit to a lesser degree, when selecting individuals for administrative leadership positions (Fruhen et al, 2015;Linke et al, 2016;Mazur et al, 1984;Mazur & Mueller, 1996;Mueller & Mazur, 1996a).…”

“…Though Kahneman identifies many System 1 heuristic types, we focus our study on the phenomenon of leadership selection based on an individual's facial traits. Humans use facial traits to make judgments about competence (Antonakis & Dalgas, 2009;Todorov et al, 2005), trustworthiness (Linke et al, 2016), intelligence, honesty (Bull et al, 1983), and dominance (Berinsky et al, 2019;Bull et al, 1983;Chiao et al, 2008;Ferguson et al, 2019;Fruhen et al, 2015). These judgments correlate with perceived leadership ability and with assessments of candidate leadership potential (Van Vugt & Grabo, 2015) such that human leadership choices can often be predicted based on particular facial image cues (Mazur et al, 1984;Mazur & Mueller, 1996;Mueller & Mazur, 1996).…”

“…Following an analysis of all the plausible factors that might explain promotion beyond field grade ranks, "facial dominance"an ascribed trait measured from cadet portraits taken 20+ years earlier -significantly predicted advancements among the West Point Academy graduates of 1950 (Mazur et al, 1984;Mazur & Mueller, 1996;Mueller & Mazur, 1996a). This seminal set of studies spurred additional inquiries linking facial dominance to a perceived ability to lead, with subsequent studies indicating that facially dominant individuals were more likely to be judged as leaders in various settings (Berinsky et al, 2019;Ferguson et al, 2019;Fruhen et al, 2015;Van Vugt & Grabo, 2015). Later studies suggest that other facial cues, such as perceived competence, are crucial in evaluating prospective leaders (Todorov et al, 2005).…”

In the Face of Opportunities: Facial Structures of Scientists Shape Expectations of STEM Environments

“…For instance, facial judgments of trustworthiness and dominance of political candidates positively predicted intent to vote for those candidates (Little et al, 2012). During times of conflict, more dominant-faced people were preferred for leadership positions (Ferguson et al, 2019). Dominant faces are also motivationally salient, eliciting attention to highly dominant faces (Wang et al, 2016).…”