Do they know what they like? Intra-individual variation of female facial preferences

Kościński, Krzysztof

doi:10.1556/jep.8.2010.1.4

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This goes against the common assumption that our preferences are relatively stable and thus, that we only need to account for them once. In support of this, converging evidence is beginning to call the long-held assumption of preference stability into question ( Höfel and Jacobsen, 2003 ; Chen and Risen, 2010 ; Kościński, 2010 ; McManus et al, 2010 ; Pugach et al, 2017 ). The observed instability is commonly attributed to noise within the internal sampling of subjective values.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Theoretical Framework for How We Learn Aesthetic Values

Aleem

Correa-Herran

Grzywacz

2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do we come to like the things that we do? Each one of us starts from a relatively similar state at birth, yet we end up with vastly different sets of aesthetic preferences. These preferences go on to define us both as individuals and as members of our cultures. Therefore, it is important to understand how aesthetic preferences form over our lifetimes. This poses a challenging problem: to understand this process, one must account for the many factors at play in the formation of aesthetic values and how these factors influence each other over time. A general framework based on basic neuroscientific principles that can also account for this process is needed. Here, we present such a framework and illustrate it through a model that accounts for the trajectories of aesthetic values over time. Our framework is inspired by meta-analytic data of neuroimaging studies of aesthetic appraisal. This framework incorporates effects of sensory inputs, rewards, and motivational states. Crucially, each one of these effects is probabilistic. We model their interactions under a reinforcement-learning circuitry. Simulations of this model and mathematical analysis of the framework lead to three main findings. First, different people may develop distinct weighing of aesthetic variables because of individual variability in motivation. Second, individuals from different cultures and environments may develop different aesthetic values because of unique sensory inputs and social rewards. Third, because learning is stochastic, stemming from probabilistic sensory inputs, motivations, and rewards, aesthetic values vary in time. These three theoretical findings account for different lines of empirical research. Through our study, we hope to provide a general and unifying framework for understanding the various aspects involved in the formation of aesthetic values over time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Theoretical Framework for How We Learn Aesthetic Values

Aleem

Correa-Herran

Grzywacz

2020

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This interindividual variability may be due to relative partner preferences (e.g., based on own characteristics and experiences, Figueredo et al, 2006; see a review, Štěrbová and Valentová, 2012). It is also possible, moreover, that an individual’s partner preferences also change over time (Kościński, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This approach revealed differences among various age groups which were due to changes in hormonal levels, personal development, and the like (Kościński, 2011), but it did not track intraindividual variation in preferences in a longitudinal fashion. Kościński (2010) tested individual consistency of facial attractiveness assessment and found that self-correlation of women’s assessment was approximately 0.78, which means that about 40% (1–0.78 2 ) of individual variation in attractiveness rating varies over time. To sum up, existing evidence suggests that preferences can change over time with age and reproductive stage of life, and that they can change in reaction to current circumstances (Rosenthal, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

She Always Steps in the Same River: Similarity Among Long-Term Partners in Their Demographic, Physical, and Personality Characteristics

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In mate choice, individuals consider a wide pool of potential partners. It has been found that people have certain preferences, but intraindividual stability of mate choice over time remains little explored. We tested individual consistency of mate choice with respect to a number of demographic, physical, and personality characteristics. Only mothers were recruited for this study, because we wanted to find out not only whether women choose long-term partners with certain characteristics but also whether the father of their child(ren) differs from their other long-term (ex-)partners. Women (N = 537) of 19–45 years of age indicated the demographic, physical (by using image stimuli), and personality characteristics of all of their long-term partners (partners per respondent: mean = 2.98, SD = 1.32). Then we compared the average difference between an individual’s long-term partners with the expected average difference using a permutation test. We also evaluated differences between partners who had children with the participants (fathers) and other long-term partners (non-fathers) using permutation tests and mixed-effect models. Our results revealed that women choose long-term partners consistently with respect to all types of characteristics. Although effect sizes for the individual characteristics were rather weak, maximal cumulative effect size for all characteristics together was high, which suggests that relatively low effect sizes were caused by high variability with low correlations between characteristics, and not by inconsistent mate choice. Furthermore, we found that despite some differences between partners, fathers of participants’ child(ren) do fit their ‘type’. These results suggest that mate choice may be guided by relatively stable but to some degree flexible preferences, which makes mate choice cognitively less demanding and less time-consuming. Further longitudinal studies are needed to confirm this conclusion.

show abstract

“…Indeed, the features of live interactions crucial to PPA may explain why in some cases, when isolated participants rated static images, alcohol's effects on PPA did not appear to be mediated by effects on mood . The impact of social context on alcohol‐induced mood enhancement , as well as the effects of alcohol on perception of facial expression , the effects of facial expressions on mood and the effects of mood on attractiveness preferences all reinforce the need to assess the alcohol–PPA association, and its underlying mechanisms, using more ecologically relevant approaches. Further, contrasting static images with more interactive methods would help to isolate the factors (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%