Physical attractiveness is the degree to which a person's physical traits are considered aesthetically pleasing or beautiful. The term often implies sexual attractiveness or desirability, but can also be distinct from the two; for example, adults may regard children as attractive for various reasons. There are many factors which influence one person's attraction to another, with physical aspects being one of them. Physical attraction itself includes universal perceptions common to all human cultures, as well as aspects that are culturally and socially dependent, along with individual subjective preferences.
In many cases, humans attribute positive characteristics, such as intelligence and honesty, to physically attractive people without consciously realizing it. From research done in the United States and United Kingdom, it was found that the association between intelligence and physical attractiveness is stronger among men than among women. In recent times, evolutionary psychologists have tried to answer why individuals who are more physically attractive should also on average be more intelligent, and have put forward the notion that both general intelligence and physical attractiveness may be indicators of underlying genetic fitness.
Physical attractiveness is a characteristic that suggests fertility and health. These factors contribute to the probability of survival and reproduction for continuing life on Earth. Men, on average, tend to be attracted to women who are shorter than they are, have a youthful appearance, and exhibit features such as a symmetrical face, full breasts, full lips, and a low waist-hip ratio. Women, on average, tend to be attracted to men who are taller than they are, display a high-degree of facial symmetry, masculine facial dimorphism, and who have broad shoulders, a relatively narrow waist, and V-shaped torso.
General contributing factors 
Generally, physical attraction can be studied from a number of perspectives, including universal perceptions common to all human cultures, cultural and social aspects, and individual subjective preferences. Additionally, the perception of attractiveness can have a significant effect on how people are judged in terms of employment or social opportunities, friendship, sexual behavior, and marriage.
Some physical features are attractive in both men and women, particularly bodily and facial symmetry, although one contrary report suggests that "absolute flawlessness" with perfect symmetry can be "disturbing". Symmetry may be evolutionarily beneficial as a sign of health because asymmetry "signals past illness or injury". One study suggested people were able to "gauge beauty at a subliminal level" by seeing only a glimpse of a picture for one-hundredth of a second. Other important factors include youthfulness, skin clarity and smoothness of skin; and "vivid color" in the eyes and hair. However, there are numerous differences based on gender.
A 1921 study of the reports of college students regarding those traits in individuals which make for attractiveness and repulsiveness argued that static traits, such as beauty or ugliness of features, hold a position subordinate to groups of physical elements like expressive behavior, affectionate disposition, grace of manner, aristocratic bearing, social accomplishments, personal habits.
Male physical attractiveness 
Women, on average, tend to be more attracted to men who have a relatively narrow waist, a V-shaped torso, and broad shoulders. Women also tend to be more attracted to men who are taller than they are, and display a high degree of facial symmetry, as well as relatively masculine facial dimorphism. With regard to male-male-attractiveness, one source reports that the most important factor that attracts gay men to other males is the man's physical attractiveness.
Facial attractiveness 
Sexual dimorphism 
Studies have shown that ovulating heterosexual women prefer faces with masculine traits associated with increased exposure to testosterone during key developmental stages, such as a broad forehead, relatively longer lower face, prominent chin and brow, chiseled jaw and defined cheekbones. The degree of differences between male and female anatomical traits is called sexual dimorphism. Female respondents in the follicular phase of their menstrual cycle (n = 55) were significantly more likely to choose a masculine face than those in menses and luteal phases (n = 84), (or in those taking hormonal contraception). It is suggested that the masculinity of facial features is a reliable indication of good health, or, alternatively, that masculine-looking males are more likely to achieve high status. However, the correlation between attractive facial features and health has been questioned. Sociocultural factors, such as self-perceived attractiveness, status in a relationship and degree of gender-conformity, have been reported to play a role in female preferences for male faces. Studies have found that women who perceive themselves as physically attractive are more likely to choose men with masculine facial dimorphism, than are women who perceive themselves as physically unattractive. In men, facial masculinity significantly correlates with facial symmetry—it has been suggested that both are signals of developmental stability and genetic health. One study called into question the importance of facial masculinity in physical attractiveness in men arguing that when perceived health, which is factored into facial masculinity, is discounted it makes little difference in physical attractiveness. In a cross-country study involving 4,794 women in their early twenties, a difference was found in women's average "masculinity preference" between countries.
Symmetrical faces and bodies may be signs of good inheritance to women of child-bearing age seeking to create healthy offspring. Studies suggest women are less attracted to men with asymmetrical faces, and symmetrical faces correlate with long term mental performance and are an indication that a man has experienced "fewer genetic and environmental disturbances such as diseases, toxins, malnutrition or genetic mutations" while growing. Since achieving symmetry is a difficult task during human growth, requiring literally billions of cell reproductions while maintaining a parallel structure, achieving symmetry is a visible signal of genetic health.
Studies have also suggested that women at peak fertility were more likely to fantasize about men with greater facial symmetry, and other studies have found that male symmetry was the only factor that could significantly predict the likelihood of a woman experiencing orgasm during sex. Women with partners possessing greater symmetry reported significantly more copulatory female orgasms than were reported by women with partners possessing low symmetry, even with many potential confounding variables controlled. This finding has been found to hold across different cultures. It has been argued that masculine facial dimorphism (in men) and symmetry in faces are signals advertising genetic quality in potential mates. Low facial and body fluctuating asymmetry may indicate good health and intelligence, which are desirable features. Studies have found that women who perceive themselves as being more physically attractive are more likely to favor men with a higher degree of facial symmetry, than are women who perceive themselves as being less physically attractive. It has been found that symmetrical men (and women) have a tendency to begin to have sexual intercourse at an earlier age, to have more sexual partners, and to have more one-night stands. They are also more likely to be prone to infidelity. A study of quarterbacks in the American National Football League found a positive correlation between facial symmetry and salaries.
Body scent 
A number of double-blind studies have found that women prefer the scent of men who are rated as facially attractive. For example, a study by Anja Rikowski and Karl Grammer had individuals rate the scent of t-shirts slept in by test subjects. The photographs of those subjects were independently rated, and Rikowski and Grammar found that both males and females were more attracted to the natural scent of individuals who had been rated by consensus as facially attractive. Additionally, it has also been shown that women have a preference for the scent of men with more symmetrical faces, and that women's preference for the scent of more symmetrical men is strongest during the most fertile period of their menstrual cycle. Within the set of normally cycling women, individual women's preference for the scent of men with high facial symmetry correlated with their probability of conception.
Studies have explored the genetic basis behind such issues as facial symmetry and body scent and how they influence physical attraction. In one study in which women wore men's T-shirts, researchers found that women were more attracted to the bodily scents in shirts of men who had a different type of gene section within the DNA called Major histocompatibility complex (MHC). MHC is a large gene area within the DNA of vertebrates which encodes proteins dealing with the immune system and which influences individual bodily odors. One hypothesis is that humans are naturally attracted by the sense of smell and taste to others with dissimilar MHC sections, perhaps to avoid subsequent inbreeding while increasing the genetic diversity of offspring. Further, there are studies showing that women's natural attraction for men with dissimilar immune profiles can be distorted with use of birth control pills. Other research findings involving the genetic foundations of attraction suggest that MHC heterozygosity positively correlates with male facial attractiveness. Women judge the faces of men who are heterozygous at all three MHC loci to be more attractive than the faces of men who are homozygous at one or more of these loci. Additionally, a second experiment with genotyped women raters, found these preferences were independent of the degree of MHC similarity between the men and the female rater. With MHC heterozygosity independently seen as a genetic advantage, the results suggest that facial attractiveness in men may be a measure of genetic quality.
For the Romans especially, "beardlessness" and "smooth young bodies" were considered beautiful to both men and women. For Greek and Roman men, the most desirable traits of boys were their "youth" and "hairlessness". Pubescent boys were considered a socially appropriate object of male desire, while post-pubescent boys were considered to be "ἔξωροι" or "past the prime". This was largely in the context of pederastry (adult male interest in adolescent boys). Today, men and women's attitudes towards male beauty has changed. For example, body hair on men may even be preferred (see below).
A 2010 OkCupid study of 200,000 of its male and female customers found that women users are, except during their early to mid-twenties, open to searches from both somewhat older and somewhat younger men; they have a larger potential dating pool than men until age 26. At age 20 women, in a "dramatic change", begin sending private messages to significantly older men. Another such change occurs at age 29, accompanied by an end to messages to significantly younger men. Male desirability to women peaks in the late 20s and does not fall below the average for all men until 36.
Waist-to-chest ratio 
The mesomorphic physique of a slim waist, broad shoulders and muscular chest are often found to be attractive to females.  Further research has shown that, when choosing a mate, the traits females look for indicate higher social status, such as dominance, resources, and protection. An indicator of health in males (a contributing factor to physical attractiveness) is the android fat distribution pattern which is categorized as more fat distributed on the upper body and abdomen, commonly referred to as the "V shape." When asked to rate other men, both heterosexual and homosexual men found low waist-to-chest ratios (WCR) to be more attractive on other men, with the gay men showing a preference for lower WCR (more V-shaped) than the straight men.
In one study, researchers found that the ideal model for male measurements was actor Christian Bale; His waist to chest ratio is 0.6. Overall, the findings were that the ideal measurements for a man included being over 6 feet tall (Bale's height is 6 feet), with his legs being around the same length as his upper body. Men's BMIs are on average higher than females, and this contributes to making them appear more muscular in stature.
Evidence supports waist-to-chest importance in physical attractiveness: "waist-to-chest ratio plays the most important role in the perception of male attractiveness. A leaner waist line coupled with a larger, more muscular chest and shoulders creates the popular "V" shape to the body". Other researchers found that waist to chest ratio was the largest determinant of male attractiveness, while body mass index and waist to hip ratio were not as much of a factor.
Women focus primarily on the ratio waist to chest or more specifically waist to shoulder. This is analogous to the waist to hip ratio that men prefer. Key body image for a man in the eyes of a woman would include big shoulders, chest, upper back, and a slim waist area. Research has additionally shown that college males had a better satisfaction with their body than college females. The research also found that when a college females waist to hip ratio went up, their body image satisfaction decreased. The results indicate that males had significantly greater body image satisfaction than did females.
Some research has shown that body weight may have a stronger affect than WHR when it comes to perceiving attractiveness of the opposite sex. It was found that waist to hip ratio played a smaller role in body preference than body weight in regards to both sexes.
Psychologists Viren Swami and Martin J. Tovee compared female preference for male attractiveness cross culturally, between Britain and Malaysia. They found that females placed more importance on WCR (and therefore body shape) in urban areas of Britain and Malaysia, while females in rural areas placed more importance on BMI (therefore weight and body size). Both WCR and BMI are indicative of male status and ability to provide for offspring, as noted by evolutionary theory.
Females have been found to desire males that are normal weight and have the average WHR for a male. Females view these males as attractive and healthy. Males who had the average WHR but were overweight or underweight are not perceived as attractive to females. This suggests that WHR is not a major factor in male attractiveness, but a combination of body weight and a typical male WHR seem to be the most attractive. Research has shown that men who have a higher waist to hip ratio and a higher salary are perceived as more attractive to women.
Men often perceive a more muscular male body as being ideal compared to what women perceive to be the ideal male body. This is due to the within-gender prestige granted by increased muscularity and within-gender competition for increased muscularity. Men perceive the attractiveness of their own musculature by the closeness their body resembles the "muscle man". This "muscle man" ideal is characterized by large muscular arms, especially biceps, a large muscular chest that tapers to their waist and broad shoulders.
Height and erect posture 
Females' sexual attraction towards males may be determined by the height of the man. Height in men is associated with status or wealth in many cultures (in particular those where malnutrition is common), which is beneficial to women romantically involved with them. One study conducted of women's personal ads support the existence of this preference; the study found that in ads requesting height in a mate, 80% requested a height of 6.00 feet (1.83 m) or taller. The online dating Website eHarmony only matches women with taller men, because of complaints from women matched with shorter men.
Recent studies have shown that heterosexual women often prefer men taller than they are, rather than a man with above average height. While women usually desire men to be at least the same height as themselves or taller, several other factors also determine male attractiveness, and the male-taller norm is not universal. Professor Adam Eyre-Walker, from the University of Sussex, has stated that there is, as yet, no evidence that these preferences are evolutionary preferences, as opposed to merely cultural preferences. In a double-blind study by Graziano et al., it was found that, in person, using a sample of women of normal size, they were on average most attracted to men who were of medium height (5'9"- 5'11") and less attracted to both men of shorter height (5'5"- 5'7") and men of tallest height (6'2"- 6'4").
Additionally, women seem more receptive to an erect posture than men, though both prefer it as an element of beauty. According to one study (Yee N., 2002), gay men who identify as "Only Tops" tend to prefer shorter men, while gay men who identify as "Only Bottoms" tend to prefer taller men.
Studies based in the United States, New Zealand, and China have shown that women rate men with no body hair as most attractive, and that attractiveness ratings decline as hirsutism increases. Another study, however, found that moderate amounts of trunk hair on men was most attractive, to the sample of British and Sri Lankan women. Further, a degree of hirsuteness (hairiness) and a waist-to-shoulder ratio of 0.6 is often preferred, when combined with a mesomorphic physique.
In a study using Finnish women, women with hairy fathers were more likely to prefer hairy men, suggesting that preference for hairy men is either the result of genetics or imprinting. Among gay men, another study (Yee N., 2002) reported gay males who identify as "Only Tops" prefer less hairy men, while gay males who identify as "Only Bottoms" prefer hairier men.
Skin color 
Testosterone has been shown to darken skin color in laboratory experiments. In his foreword to Peter Frost's 2005 Fair Women, Dark Men, University of Washington sociologist Pierre L. van den Berghe writes: "Although virtually all cultures express a marked preference for fair female skin, even those with little or no exposure to European imperialism, and even those whose members are heavily pigmented, many are indifferent to male pigmentation or even prefer men to be darker." Despite this, the aesthetics of skin tone varies from culture to culture. Manual laborers who spent extended periods of time outside developed a darker skin tone due to exposure to the sun. As a consequence, an association between dark skin and the lower classes developed. Light skin became an aesthetic ideal because it symbolized wealth. "Over time society attached various meanings to these colored differences. Including assumptions about a person's race, socioeconomic class, intelligence, and physical attractiveness."
According to one study (Yee N., 2002), gay men who identify as "Only Tops" tend to prefer lighter-skinned men while gay men who identify as "Only Bottoms" tend to prefer darker-skinned men.
More recent research has suggested that redder and yellower skin tones, reflecting higher levels of oxygenated blood, melanin pigment and net dietary intakes of fruit and vegetables, appears healthier, and therefore more attractive.
Female physical attractiveness 
Attractiveness research indicates that heterosexual men tend to be attracted to young and beautiful women with bodily symmetry. Rather than decreasing it, modernity has only increased the emphasis men place on women's looks. Evolutionary psychologists attribute such attraction to an evaluation of the fertility potential in a prospective mate.
Facial features 
Attractiveness research has attempted to determine which facial aspects communicate attractiveness. Facial symmetry has been shown to be considered attractive in women, and men have been found to prefer full lips, a high forehead, broad face, small chin, small nose, a short and narrow jaw, high cheekbones clear, smooth skin, and wide-set eyes. The shape of the face in terms of "how everything hangs together" is an important determinant of beauty. A University of Toronto study found correlations between facial measurements and attractiveness; researchers varied the distance between eyes, and between eyes and mouth, in different drawings of the same female face, and had the drawings evaluated; they found there were ideal proportions perceived as attractive (see photo). These proportions (46% and 36%) were close to the average of all female profiles. Women with thick, dark limbal rings in their eyes have also been found to be more attractive. The explanation given is that because the ring tends to fade with age and medical problems, a prominent limbal ring gives an honest indicator of youth.
In another cross-cultural study, more neotenized (i.e., youthful looking) female faces were found to be most attractive to men while less neotenized female faces were found to be less attractive to men, regardless of the females' actual age. One of these desired traits was a small jaw. In a study of Italian women who have won beauty competitions, it was found that their faces had more "babyish" (pedomorphic) traits than those of the "normal" women used as a reference.
Michael R. Cunningham of the Department of Psychology at the University of Louisville found, using a panel of "Asian", "Hispanic" and "White" judges, that the "Asian", "Hispanic" and "White" female faces found most attractive were those that had "neonate large eyes, greater distance between eyes, and small noses" and his study led him to conclude that "large eyes" were the most "effective" of the "neonate cues". This idea of Western beauty is shown through some Asian cultures as women strive to physically change the eyelid structure to reflect the typical Western eyelid. East Asian blepharoplasty, also known as the double eyelid surgery, shows the lengths Asian women will go to reach this western ideal of physical attractiveness. Cunningham also said that "shiny" hair may be indicative of "neonate vitality". Using a panel of "Blacks" and "Whites" as judges, Cunningham found more neotenous faces were perceived as having both higher "femininity" and "sociability". In contrast, Cunningham found that faces that were "low in neoteny" were judged as "intimidating". Cunningham noted a "difference" in the preferences of "Asian" and "White" judges with "Asian" judges preferring women with "less mature faces" and smaller mouths than the "White" judges. Cunningham hypothesized that this difference in preference may stem from "ethnocentrism" since "Asian faces possess those qualities", so Cunningham re-analyzed the data with "11 Asian targets excluded" and concluded that "ethnocentrism was not a primary determinant of Asian preferences." Rather than finding evidence for purely "neonate" faces being most appealing, Cunningham found faces with "sexually-mature" features at the "periphery" of the face combined with "neonate" features in the "center of the face" most appealing in men and women. Upon analyzing the results of his study Cunningham concluded that preference for "neonate features may display the least cross-cultural variability" in terms of "attractiveness ratings" and, in another study, Cunningham concluded that there exists a large agreement on the characteristics of an attractive face.
In computer face averaging tests, women with averaged faces have been shown to be considered more attractive. This is possibly due to average features being more familiar and, therefore, more comfortable.
Commenting on the prevalence of whiteness in supposed beauty ideals in his book White Lies: Race and the Myth of Whiteness, Maurice Berger notes that the schematic rendering in the idealized face of a notable study conducted with American subjects had "straight hair," "light skin," "almond-shaped eyes," "thin, arched eyebrows," "a long, thin nose, closely set and tiny nostrils" and "a large mouth and thin lips", though the author of the study noted the consistency between his results and those conducted on other races. As Dr. Liu Jieyu says in the article White Collar Beauties, "The criterion of beauty is both arbitrary and gendered. The implicit consensus is that women who have fair skin and a slim figure with symmetrical facial features are pretty." All of these requirements are socially constructed and force people to change themselves to fit these criterion.
One psychologist speculated there were two opposing principles of female beauty: prettiness and rarity. So on average, symmetrical features are one ideal, while unusual, stand-out features are another. A study performed by the University of Toronto found that the most attractive facial dimensions were those found in the average female face. However, that particular University of Toronto study looked only at white women.
Cross-cultural data shows that the reproductive success of women is tied to their youth and physical attractiveness such as the pre-industrial Sami where the most reproductively successful women were 15 years younger than their man. One study covering 37 cultures showed that, on average, a woman was 2.5 years younger than her male partner, with the age difference in Nigeria and Zambia being at the far extreme of 6.5 to 7.5 years. As men age, they tend to seek a mate who is ever younger. 25% of eHarmony's male customers over the age of 50 request to only be matched with women younger than 40. A 2010 OkCupid study of 200,000 of its male and female users found that female desirability to men peaks at age 21, and falls below the average for all women at 31. After age 26 men have a larger potential dating pool than women; by 48 their pool is almost twice as large. The median 31 years-old male user searches for women aged 22 to 35, while the median 42 years-old male searches for women 27 to 45. The age skew is even greater with messages to other users; the median 30 years-old male messages teenage girls as often as women his own age, while mostly ignoring women a few years older than him. Excluding the most and least beautiful 10% of women, however, women's attractiveness does not change between 18 and 40.
The common explanation for this preference is that men have evolved to be attracted to women with high child-bearing potential and therefore prefer young women. A stronger preference of youthfulness (detected by female hormone markers) reflects female fertility and the reproductive value mean. As females age, the estrogen-to-androgen production ratio changes and results in female faces to appear more and more masculine (thus appearing less "attractive"). In a small (n=148) study performed in the United States using male college students at one university, the mean age expressed as ideal for a wife was found to be 16.87 years old, while 17.76 was the mean ideal age for a brief sexual encounter; however, the study sets up a framework where "taboos against sex with young girls" are purposely diminished, and biased their sample by removing any participant over the age of 30, with a mean participant age of 19.83. In a study of penile tumescence, men were found most aroused by pictures of young adult females.
Research has shown that most men enjoy the sight of female breasts. Some studies indicate that men prefer large, firm breasts, while a contradictory study of British undergraduates found men preferring small breasts on women. Smaller breasts are widely associated with youthfulness. Cross-culturally, another study found "high variability" regarding the ideal breast size. Some researchers in the United Kingdom have speculated that a preference for larger breasts may have developed in Western societies because women with larger breasts tend to have higher levels of the hormones estradiol and progesterone, which both promote fertility.
A study showed that men prefer symmetrical breasts. Breast symmetry may be particularly sensitive to developmental disturbances and the symmetry differences for breasts are large compared to other body parts. Women who have more symmetrical breasts tend to have more children.
Biological anthropologist, Helen B. Fisher of the Center for Human Evolution Studies in the Department of Anthropology of Rutgers University, said that, "perhaps, the fleshy, rounded buttocks... attracted males during rear-entry intercourse." Bobbi S. Low et al. of the School of Natural Resources and Environment at the University of Michigan, said the female "buttocks evolved in the context of females competing for the attention and parental commitment of powerful resource-controlling males" as an "honest display of fat reserves" that could not be confused with another type of tissue, although T. M. Caro, professor in the Center for Population Biology and the Department of Wildlife, Fish, and Conservation Biology, at University of California, Davis, rejected that as being a necessary conclusion, stating that female fatty deposits on the hips improve "individual fitness of the female", regardless of sexual selection.
Fat distribution is also practical, leading to "beauty". In order to retain agility, reserves of fat should be placed as close to the centre of gravity as possible, which is near to the navel. In men, fat can be placed inside and around the abdomen. Women cannot do this because their abdomens are already occupied by a uterus and possibly a fetus. So the next available place is on the buttocks, upper thigh and thorax. If the fat is kept to reasonable proportions then it doesn't affect athletic performance (see the "wobbly" bottoms of many Olympic athletes). So the inherent design of fat distribution is a good indication of femininity and good health.
Body mass 
Body Mass Index (BMI) is an important determinant to the perception of beauty. Even though the Western ideal is for a thin woman, some cultures prefer plumper women, which has been argued to support that attraction for a particular BMI merely is a cultural artifact. The attraction for a proportionate body also influences an appeal for erect posture. One cross-cultural survey comparing body-mass preferences among 300 of the most thoroughly studied cultures in the world showed that 81% of cultures preferred a female body size that in English would be described as "plump".
Availability of food influences which female body size is attractive which may have evolutionary reasons. Societies with food scarcities prefer larger female body size than societies having plenty of food. In Western society males who are hungry prefer a larger female body size than they do when not hungry.
In the United States, women overestimate men's preferences for thinness in a mate. In one study, American women were asked to choose what their ideal build was and what they thought the build most attractive to men was. Women chose slimmer than average figures for both choices. When American men were independently asked to choose the female build most attractive to them, the men chose figures of average build. This indicates that women may be misled as to how thin men prefer women to be. Some speculate that thinness as a beauty standard is one way in which women judge each other and that thinness is viewed as prestigious for within-gender evaluations of other women. A reporter surmised that thinness is prized among women as a "sign of independence, strength and achievement." Some implicated the fashion industry for the promulgation of the notion of thinness as attractive.
Waist–hip ratio 
Ethnic groups vary with regard to their ideal waist-to-hip ratio for women, ranging from 0.6 in China, to 0.8 or 0.9 in parts of South America and Africa, and divergent preferences based on ethnicity, rather than nationality, have also been noted. A cross-cultural analysis that found isolated peoples preferring high WHR (0.9) over a low WHR (0.7) suggested that many such "cross-cultural" tests "may have only reflected the pervasiveness of Western media"; however many evolutionary psychologists believe preference for low WHR is a signal for fertility and biologically based.
Most men tend to be taller than their female partner. It has been found that, in Western societies, most men prefer shorter women and tend to view taller women as less attractive and people view heterosexual couples where the woman is taller to be less ideal. Women who are 0.7 to 1.7 standard deviations below the mean female height have been reported to be the most reproductively successful, since fewer tall women get married compared to shorter women. However, in other ethnic groups, such as the Hadza, study has found that height is irrelevant in choosing a mate.
Leg-to-body ratio 
A study using Polish participants by Sorokowski found 5% longer legs than an individual used as a reference was considered most attractive. The study concluded this preference might stem from the influence of leggy runway models. The Sorokowski study was criticized for using a picture of the same person with digitally altered leg lengths which Dr. Marco Bertamini felt were unrealistic. Another study using British and American participants, found "mid-ranging" leg-to-body ratios to be most ideal.
A study by Swami et al. of British male and female undergraduates showed a preference for men with legs as long as the rest of their body and women with 40% longer legs than the rest of their body. The researcher concluded that this preference might be influenced by American culture where long legged women are portrayed as more attractive. The Swami et al. study was criticized for using a picture of the same person with digitally altered leg lengths which Marco Bertamini felt were unrealistic. Bertamini also criticized the Swami study for only changing the leg length while keeping the arm length constant. Bertamini's own study which used stick figures mirrored Swami's study, however, by finding a preference for leggier women.
Men have been found to prefer long-haired women. An evolutionary psychology explanation for this is that malnutrition and deficiencies in minerals and vitamins causes loss of hair or hair changes. Hair therefore indicates health and nutrition during the last 2–3 years. Lustrous hair is also often a cross-cultural preference.
One study reported non-Asian men to prefer blondes and Asian men to prefer black-haired women.
Movement patterns 
The way an individual moves can indicate health and even age and influence attractiveness. In a study that reflected the views of 700 individuals, through a series of 5 studies, 3 of which involved animated representations of people walking. The physical attractiveness perceived increased by about 50 percent when women walked with a hip sway.
Skin tone and skin radiance 
A preference for lighter-skinned women has remained prevalent over time, even in cultures without European contact, though exceptions have been found. Anthropologist Peter Frost stated that since higher-ranking men were allowed to marry the perceived more attractive women, who tended to have fair skin, the upper classes of a society generally tended to develop a lighter complexion than the lower classes by sexual selection (see also Fisherian runaway). In contrast, one study on men of the Bikosso tribe in Cameroon found no preference for attractiveness of females based on lighter skin color, bringing into question the universality of earlier studies that had exclusively focused on skin color preferences among non-African populations.
Today, skin bleaching is not uncommon in parts of the world such as Africa, and a preference for lighter-skinned women generally holds true for African Americans, Latin Americans, and Asians. One exception to this has been in contemporary Western culture, where tanned skin used to be associated with the sun-exposed manual labor of the lower-class, but has generally been considered more attractive and healthier since the mid-20th century.
More recent work has extended skin color research beyond preferences for lightness, arguing that redder (higher a* in the CIELab colour space) and yellower (higher b*) skin has healthier appearance. These preferences have been attributed to higher levels of red oxygenated blood in the skin, which is associated with aerobic fitness and lack of cardiac and respiratory illnesses, and to higher levels of yellow-red antioxidant carotenoids in the skin, indicative of more fruit and vegetables in the diet and, possibly more efficient immune and reproductive systems.
Eye color 
A study where photographs of several women were manipulated (so that their faces would be shown with either the natural eye color of the model or with the other color) showed that, in average, brown-eyed men have no preference regarding eye color, but blue-eyed men prefer women of the same eye color.
Other determinants 
There has been research suggesting that women at the "fertile stage" of the menstrual cycle appear more attractive to single unattached men, but it is not clear exactly how this process works. Another study comparing British and American subjects concluded that there is a correlation between intelligence and physical attraction. The study concluded that intelligence is a big factor in physical attractiveness, particularly in males.
Possible gender differences for preferences 
For both men and women, there appear to be universal criteria of attractiveness both within and across cultures and ethnic groups. When considering long term relationships, some studies have concluded that men place a higher emphasis on physical attractiveness in a partner than women do. On the other hand, some studies have found little difference between men and women in terms of the weight they place on physical characteristics when they are choosing partners for short-term relationships, in particular with regard to their implicit, as opposed to explicitly articulated, preferences. Other recent studies continue to find sex differences for long-term relationships.
Some evolutionary psychologists, including David Buss, have argued that this long-term relationship difference may be consequence of ancestral humans who selected partners based on secondary sexual characteristics, as well as general indicators of fitness which allowed for greater reproductive success as a result of higher fertility in those partners, although a male's ability to provide resources for offspring was likely signaled less by physical features. It is argued that the most prominent indicator of fertility in women is youth, while the traits in a man which enhance reproductive success are proxies for his ability to accrue resources and protect.
Studies have shown that women pay greater attention to physical traits than they do directly to earning capability or potential to commit, including muscularity, fitness and masculinity of features; the latter preference was observed to vary during a woman's period, with women preferring more masculine features during the late-follicular (fertile) phase of the menstrual cycle. Additionally, women process physical attractiveness differently, paying attention to both individual features and the aesthetic effect of the whole face. A 2003 study in the area concluded that heterosexual women are about equally aroused when viewing men or women. Heterosexual men were only aroused by women. This study verified arousal in the test subjects by connecting them to brain imaging devices. Notably, the same study reported arousal for women upon viewing animals mating.
It has been shown that women prefer men with a more masculine facial dimorphism during the fertile period of the menstrual cycle and men with a more feminine facial dimorphism during other parts of the cycle. This distinction supports the sexy son hypothesis, which posits that it is evolutionarily advantageous for women to select potential fathers who are more genetically attractive, rather than the best caregivers.
Bonnie Adrian's book, Framing the Bride, discusses the emphasis Taiwanese brides place on physical attractiveness for their wedding photographs. Globalization and western ideals of beauty have spread and have become more prevalent in Asian societies where brides go through hours of hair and makeup to "transform everyday women with their individual characteristics into generic look-alike beauties in three hours' time." These brides go through hours of makeup to transform themselves into socially-constructed beauty.
According to strategic pluralism theory, men may have correspondingly evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their own physical attractiveness. More physically attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of physically less attractive men, who therefore will not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated either to investing heavily in accruing resources, or investing in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.
Facial similarity and racial bias 
Several studies have suggested that people are generally attracted to people who look like them and they generally evaluate faces that exhibit features of their own ethnic or racial group as being more attractive. Although both men and women use children's "facial resemblance" to themselves in "attractiveness judgments," a greater percentage of women in one study (37% n=30) found hypothetical children whose faces were "self-morphs" of themselves as most attractive when compared to men (30% n=23). However, one report in The Guardian suggested there was a "Caucasian beauty standard" spreading worldwide because of the proliferation of the Western entertainment industry.
The more similar a judged person is toward the judging person, the more the former is liked. However, this effect can be reversed. This might depend on how attractiveness is conceptualized: similar members (compared to dissimilar ones) of the opposite sex are judged as more likable in a prosocial sense. Again, findings are more ambiguous when looking for the desiring, pleasure related component of attractiveness. This might be influenced by the measure one uses (subjective ratings can differ from the way one actually reacts) and by situational factors: while men usually prefer women whose face resembles their own, this effect can reverse under stress, when dissimilar females are preferred.
Social effects 
Perceptions of physical attractiveness contribute to generalized assumptions based on those attractions. Individuals assume that when someone is beautiful, they have many other positive attributes that make the attractive person more likeable. This is also called the 'beautiful-is-good' effect. Across cultures, what is beautiful is assumed to be good; attractive people are assumed to be more extroverted, popular, and happy. This could lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, as from a young age, attractive people receive more attention that helps them develop these characteristics. In one study, beautiful people were found to be generally happier than less beautiful or plain people, perhaps because these outgoing personality traits are linked to happiness, or perhaps because beauty led to increased economic benefits which partially explained the increased happiness. In another study testing first impressions in 56 female and 17 male participants at University of British Columbia, personality traits of physically attractive people were identified more positively and more accurately than those who were less physically attractive. It was explained that people pay closer attention to those they find physically beautiful or attractive, and thus perceiving attractive individuals with greater distinctive accuracy. The study believes this accuracy to be subjective to the eye of the beholder.
However, attractiveness varies by society; in ancient China, a small foot was considered attractive, so foot binding was practiced by confining young girls' feet in tightly bound shoes to prevent the feet from growing to normal size. In England, women used to wear corsets that severely constricted their breathing and damaged vital internal organs, in order to achieve a visual effect of an exaggeratedly low Waist-to-Hip ratio.
People make judgments of physical attractiveness based on what they see, but also on what they know about the person. Specifically, perceptions of beauty are malleable such that information about the person's personality traits can influence one's assessment of another person's physical beauty. A 2007 study had participants first rate pictures for attractiveness. After doing distracting math problems, participants saw the pictures again, but with information about the person's personality. When participants learned that a person had positive personality characteristics (e.g., smart, funny, kind), that person was seen as more physically attractive. Conversely, a person with negative personality characteristics (e.g., materialistic, rude, untrustworthy) was seen as less physically attractive. This was true for both females and males.
Physical attractiveness can have various effects. A survey conducted by London Guildhall University of 11,000 people showed that those who subjectively describe themselves as physically attractive earn more income than others who would describe themselves as less attractive. People who described themselves as less attractive earned, on average, 13% less than those who described themselves as more attractive, while the penalty for being overweight was around 5%. According to further research done on the correlation between looks and earnings in men, the punishment for unattractiveness is greater than the benefits of being attractive. However, in women the punishment is found to be equal to the benefits. Another study suggests that more physically attractive people are significantly more likely on average to earn considerably higher wages. Differences in income due to attractiveness was much more pronounced for men rather than women, and held true for all ranges of income.
It is important to note that other factors such as self-confidence may explain or influence these findings as they are based on self-reported attractiveness as opposed to any sort of objective criteria; however, as one's self-confidence and self-esteem are largely learned from how one is regarded by his/her peers while maturing, even these considerations would suggest a significant role for physical appearance. One writer speculated that "the distress created in women by the spread of unattainable ideals of female beauty" might possibly be linked to increasing incidence of depression.
Many have asserted that certain advantages tend to come to those who are perceived as being more attractive, including the ability to get better jobs and promotions; receiving better treatment from authorities and the legal system; having more choices in romantic partners and, therefore, more power in relationships; and marrying into families with more money. Those who are attractive are treated and judged more positively than those who are considered unattractive, even by those who know them. Also, attractive individuals behave more positively than those who are unattractive. One study found that teachers tend to expect that children who are attractive are more intelligent, and are more likely to progress further in school. They also consider these students to be more popular. Voters choose political candidates who are more attractive over those who are less attractive. Men and women use physical attractiveness as a measure of how "good" another person is. In 1946, Soloman Asch coined the Implicit Personality Theory, meaning that the presence of one trait tends to imply the existence of other traits. This is also known as the halo effect. Research suggests that those who are physically attractive are thought to have more socially desirable personalities and lead better lives in general. This is also known as the "what-is-beautiful-is-good effect." Discrimination against or prejudice towards others based on their appearance is sometimes referred to as lookism.
Some researchers conclude that little difference exists between men and women in terms of sexual behavior. Symmetrical men and women have a tendency to begin to have sexual intercourse at an earlier age, to have more sexual partners, to engage in a wider variety of sexual activities, and to have more one-night stands. They are also prone to infidelity and are more likely to have open relationships. Additionally, they have the most reproductive success. Therefore, their physical characteristics are most likely to be inherited by future generations.
Concern for improving physical attractiveness has led many persons to consider alternatives such as cosmetic surgery. It has led scientists working with related disciplines such as computer imaging and mathematics to conduct research to suggest ways to surgically alter a face in terms of distances between facial features, to make it closer to an ideal face with "agreed-upon standards of attractiveness", by using algorithms to suggest an alternative which still resembles the current face. One research study found that cosmetic surgery as a way to "boost earnings" was "not profitable in a monetary sense." Perhaps people try to look more beautiful because they think it would make them happier. However, research shows that physical attractiveness seems to only have a marginal effect on happiness. If beautiful people are slightly happier though, it is not clear whether this is caused by physical attractiveness, or if happy people simply take better care of their appearance.
See also 
- Body proportions
- Body shape
- Erotic capital
- Female body shape
- Halo effect
- Human physical appearance
- Matching hypothesis
- Sexual attraction
- Sexual fetishes
- Sexual objectification
- "People: Just Deserts". Time Magazine. May 28, 1945. Retrieved 2011-08-05. "... "the most perfect all-over beauty of all time." Runner-up: the Venus de Milo."
- "SAYS VENUS DE MILO WAS NOT A FLAPPER; Osteopath Says She Was Neurasthenic, as Her Stomach WasNot is Proper Place.". The New York Times. April 29, 1922. Retrieved 2011-08-05. "Venus de Milo ... That lady of renowned beauty..."
- CBS News Staff (2011-08-05). "Venus". CBS News. Retrieved 2011-08-05. "The classical vision of beauty exemplified in Greek art, such as the 2nd century B.C. Venus de Milo (a.k.a. Aphrodite of Milos), was an ideal carried through millennia, laying the basis for much of Western art's depictions of the human form."
- Kousser R (2005). "Creating the Past: The Vénus de Milo and the Hellenistic Reception of Classical Greece". American Journal of Archaeology 109 (2): 227–250. doi:10.3764/aja.109.2.227.
- Wilkinson, Philip (1998). Illustrated Dictionary of Mythology.
- Day, John (2004). "Does the Old Testiment Refer to Sacred Prostitution and Did It Actual Exist in Ancient Israel?". In McCarthy, Carmel; Healey, John F. Biblical and Near Eastern Essays: Studies in Honour of Kevin J. Cathcart. Cromwell Press. pp. 2–21. ISBN 0-8264-6690-7. pp. 15-17.
- Singh, Nagendra Kr (1997). Divine Prostitution. New Dehli: APH Publishing. pp. 4–6. ISBN 81-7024-821-3.
- Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E (December 1972). "What is beautiful is good". J Pers Soc Psychol 24 (3): 285–90. doi:10.1037/h0033731. PMID 4655540.
- Kanazawa Satoshi (2011). "Intelligence and physical attractiveness". Intelligence 39 (1): 7–14.
- Kanazawa, S. (2011). Intelligence and Physical Attractiveness. "Intelligence, 39"(1), 7-14.
- Barelds-Dijkstra, Pieternel & Barelds, Dick P.H. (2008)
- Joanna Briscoe (17 January 2004). "Haven't I seen you somewhere before?". The Guardian. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Evolutionary psychologists claim there is an underlying standard script for beauty — a foundation for what we find appealing that transcends culture and ethnicity. There are various absolutes. For instance, to judge someone beautiful, the eye requires symmetry."
- Daniel Nettle: Women’s height, reproductive success and the evolution of sexual dimorphism in modern humans, The Royal Society. Retrieved 15 October 2009.
- Glassenberg AN, Feinberg DR, Jones BC, Little AC, Debruine LM (December 2010). "Sex-dimorphic face shape preference in heterosexual and homosexual men and women". Arch Sex Behav 39 (6): 1289–96. doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9559-6. PMID 19830539.
- Perrett, D.I.; Lee, K.J.; Penton-Voak, I.S.; Rowland, D.R.; Yoshikawa, S.; Burt, D.M.; Henzi, S.P.; Castles, D.L. et al. (1998). "Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness". Nature 394 (6696): 884–7. doi:10.1038/29772. PMID 9732869.
- Lorenz, Kate. (2005). "Do Pretty People Earn More?" www.CNN.com.
- Guy Dammann (20 August 2008). "Rules of attraction". The Guardian. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "scientists from Brunel University have revealed that physical attraction is all down to bodily symmetry."
- SARAH KERSHAW (October 8, 2008). "The Sum of Your Facial Parts". The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-07-15.
- DAVID J. BERRI (September 16, 2008). "Do Pretty-Boy Quarterbacks Make More Money?". The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Research, though, has indicated that what we think of as facial attractiveness is really just facial symmetry."
- Edward Willett (October 29, 2008). "A person's face can say a lot: Helen's face is said to have launched a thousand ships, while Medusa's could turn men to stone. And even today we talk about individuals with "a face that can stop a clock."". The Leader-Post (Regina). Retrieved 2011-07-15. ""people preferentially mate with, date, associate with, employ, and even vote for physically attractive individuals." ... Symmetry is one trait we find attractive (but only if the face is right-side up: your symmetric face will, alas, do nothing to help you attract a mate if you constantly stand on your head."
- Clare Murphy (4 December 2003). "In the eye of the beholder?". BBC News. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Art historians, anthropologists and human psychologists in general agree that it is the symmetry of a face, its perfect proportion, or indeed its averageness — where no feature stands out — that has consistently down the ages been deemed attractive. ..."
- Oliver Burkeman (24 April 2010). "This column will change your life: The beauty in imperfection". The Guardian. Retrieved December 27, 2012. "Absolute flawlessness, it's long been observed, is disturbing. It offers no point of connection, and may help explain the "uncanny valley" effect, where almost-lifelike robots trigger revulsion in humans. ..."
- S McKeen (February 10, 2006). "A beauty fix plumps up psyche and overall health". The Edmonton Journal. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Evolution taught us to lust after symmetry — a nicely balanced body and face — because asymmetry signals past illness or injury. We therefore define beauty quite elegantly, right down to the most ideal ratio of hips to breasts and upper lip to lower lip. Singh says one study showed that people were able to gauge beauty at a subliminal level, when shown pictures for a mere one-hundredth of a second. Another study showed babies prefer pretty faces."
- Perrin (June 1921). "Physical Attractiveness and Repulsiveness.". Experimental Psychology. American Psychological Association: 203–217.
- Voon, C.P. The Crossroads of Race and Sexuality Date Selection Among Men in Internet "Personal" Ads. CUNY Graduate School.
- Cangialosi, Thomas (2005). "Surgical Orthodontics Diagnosis and Treatment Planning". Columbia University. Unknown parameter
- Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI (January 2000). "Female preference for male faces changes cyclically: Further evidence". Evol Hum Behav 21 (1): 39–48. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00033-1.
- Rhodes G (2006). "The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty". Annu Rev Psychol 57: 199–226. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208. PMID 16318594.
- Fink B, Neave N, Seydel H (2007). "Male facial appearance signals physical strength to women". Am J Hum Biol. 19 (1): 82–7. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20583. PMID 17160983.
- Rhodes G., Chan J., Zebrowitz L.A., Simmons L.W. (2003). "Does sexual dimorphism in human faces signal health?". Proc Biol Sci. 270 (Suppl 1): S93–5. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2003.0023. PMC 1698019. PMID 12952647.
- Cellerino A (2003). "Psychobiology of facial attractiveness". J Endocrinol Invest 26 (3 Suppl): 45–8. PMID 12834020.
- Little AC, Burt DM, Penton-Voak IS, Perrett DI (2001). "Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces". Proc Biol Sci. 268 (1462): 39–44. doi:10.1098/rspb.2000.1327. PMC 1087598. PMID 12123296.
- Gangestad SW, Thornhill R (July 2003). "Facial masculinity and fluctuating asymmetry". Evol Hum Behav 24 (4): 231–241. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(03)00017-5.
- DeBruine L. M., Jones B. C., Crawford J. R., Welling L. L. M., Little A. C. (2010). "The health of a nation predicts their mate preferences: cross-cultural variation in women's preferences for masculinized male faces". Proceedings of the Royal Society. B 277: 2405–2410. doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.2184.
- Feng, Charles (2002-12-06). "Looking Good: The Psychology and Biology of Beauty". Stanford University. Retrieved 2012-01-20.
- "Face shape clue to mental decline: Men with symmetrical faces are less likely to lose their memory and intelligence in later life, according to researchers.". BBC News. 9 August 2009. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Psychologists at the University of Edinburgh found a link between facial symmetry and mental performance between the ages of 79 and 83. ..."
- Tim Radford (17 August 2005). "How women dream of symmetrical men". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 2010-01-19. "The research once again confirms a hypothesis that beauty is not merely in the eye of the beholder: it is an indicator of genetic fitness. From a choice of computer-generated faces, volunteers routinely choose the most symmetrical as the most attractive. Physical symmetry is interpreted as a sign of good inheritance. And therefore, the theory goes, women in a position to conceive would be more attracted to someone more likely to engender the healthiest offspring."
- Thornhill R, Gangestad SW, Comer R (1995). "Human female orgasm and mate fluctuating asymmetry". Animal Behaviour 50 (6): 1601–15. doi:10.1016/0003-3472(95)80014-X.
- Little AC, Jones BC, Waitt C, et al. (2008). "Symmetry Is Related to Sexual Dimorphism in Faces: Data Across Culture and Species". In Reimchen, Thomas. PLoS ONE 3 (5): e2106. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002106. PMC 2329856. PMID 18461131.
- Zebrowitz, Leslie; Gillian Rhodes (2004). "SENSITIVITY TO ‘‘BAD GENES’’ AND THE ANOMALOUS FACE OVERGENERALIZATION EFFECT: CUE VALIDITY, CUE UTILIZATION, AND ACCURACY IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE AND HEALTH". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 28 (3). Retrieved 4/3/2012.
- Nancy Etcoff (2000). Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty. pp. 50–3, 185–7.
- Haselton MG, Gangestad SW (April 2006). "Conditional expression of women's desires and men's mate guarding across the ovulatory cycle". Horm Behav 49 (4): 509–18. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.10.006. PMID 16403409.
- Rikowski A, Grammer K (May 1999). "Human body odour, symmetry and attractiveness". Proc. Biol. Sci. 266 (1422): 869–74. doi:10.1098/rspb.1999.0717. PMC 1689917. PMID 10380676.
- Gangestad SW, Thornhill R (May 1998). "Menstrual cycle variation in women's preferences for the scent of symmetrical men". Proc. Biol. Sci. 265 (1399): 927–33. doi:10.1098/rspb.1998.0380. PMC 1689051. PMID 9633114.
- "The laws of sexual attraction". CNN. April 13, 2009. Retrieved 2011-07-25. "... when women are ovulating, they produce copulins, a scent that attracts men...."
- "Google Science Fair semi-finalist: I can taste your DNA". The Guardian. 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2011-07-25. "the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) is a large gene family found in most vertebrates...."
- Razib Khan in Genetics (August 16, 2008). "Taking the pill might make your brother hawt?". Discover Magazine. Retrieved 2011-07-25. "Previous studies in animals and humans show that genes in the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) influence individual odours and that females often prefer odour of MHC-dissimilar males, perhaps to increase offspring heterozygosity or reduce inbreeding. Women using oral hormonal contraceptives have been reported to have the opposite preference, raising the possibility that oral contraceptives alter female preference towards MHC similarity, with possible fertility costs."
- Roberts SC, Little AC, Gosling LM, Perrett DI, Carter V, Jones BC, Penton-Voak I, Petrie M (May 2005). "MHC-heterozygosity and human facial attractiveness". Evol Hum Behav 26 (3): 213–226. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.09.002.
- Penn DJ, Damjanovich K, Potts WK (August 2002). "MHC heterozygosity confers a selective advantage against multiple-strain infections". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99 (17): 11260–4. doi:10.1073/pnas.162006499. PMC 123244. PMID 12177415.
- Williams, C. A. (1999). Roman homosexuality: ideologies of masculinity in classical antiquity. Oxford University Press, USA.
- Rudder, Christian (2010-02-16). "The Case For An Older Woman". OkTrends. Retrieved April 28, 2012.
- Horvath T (February 1981). "Physical attractiveness: the influence of selected torso parameters". Arch Sex Behav 10 (1): 21–4. doi:10.1007/BF01542671. PMID 7212994.
- Braun, M. F., & Bryan, A. (n.d.). Female waist-to-hip and male waist-to-shoulder ratios as determinants of romantic partner desirability. (2006). Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23(5), 805-819. doi: 10.1177/0265407506068264
- Swami V, Tovée MJ (2008). "The Muscular Male: A Comparison of the Physical Attractiveness Preferences of Gay and Heterosexual Men". International Journal of Men's Health 7 (1): 59–71. doi:10.3149/jmh.0701.59.
- World’s most beautiful couple: and the figures to prove it. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.adinnerguest.com/tricks-of-the-mind/the-worlds-most-beautiful-people/
- Smith, C. (2011, July 1). The ideal waist to chest ratio. Retrieved from http://www.livestrong.com/article/482944-the-ideal-waist-to-chest-ratio/
- Fan, J., Dai, W., Liu, F., & Wu, J. (n.d.). Visual perception of male body attractiveness. (2005). Proceedings of The Royal Society Biological Sciences, 219-226. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2922
- Appleton, I. (n.d.). Getting more female attention. Retrieved from http://www.sosuave.com/quick2/tip408.htm
- Catikkas, F. (n.d.). Physical correlates of college students' body image satisfaction levels. (2011). Social Behavior and Personality, 39(4), 497-502. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2011.39.4.497
- Furnham, A., Tan, T., & McManus, C. (n.d.). Waist-to-hip ratio and preferences for body shape: A replication and extension. (1997). Personality Individual Differences, 22(4), 539-549. Retrieved from http://commonsenseatheism.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Furnham-Waist-to-hip-ratio-and-preferences-for-body-shape-A-replication-and-extension.pdf
- Swami, V., & Tovee, M. J. (n.d.). Male physical attractiveness in britain and malaysia: A cross-cultural study. (2005). Science Direct, 383-393. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2005.08.001
- Singh, D. (n.d.). Female judgment of male attractiveness and desirability for relationships: Role of waist-to-hip ratio and financial status. (1995). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1089-1101. Retrieved from http://0-ehis.ebscohost.com.linus.lmu.edu/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=9446f708-ea6d-41ab-abb6-3eb7e171a608@sessionmgr10&vid=3&hid=8
- David A. Frederick, Daniel M.T. Fessler, Martie G. Haselton, Do representations of male muscularity differ in men's and women's magazines?, Body Image, Volume 2, Issue 1, March 2005, Pages 81-86, ISSN 1740-1445, 10.1016/j.bodyim.2004.12.002. link
- Johnston, J.R. (2001). The American body in context: An anthology. Scholarly Resources, Inc. USA.
- Paley, Maggie (2000) . The Book of the Penis (first ed.). New York: Grove Press. pp. 232, 16–19. ISBN 0-8021-1648-5.
- Pierce, C.A. 1996; Cunningham, M.R. 1990; Pawlowski B, Dunbar RI, Lipowicz A 2000.
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 38–40. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Reitman, Valerie (2004-04-26). "'We clicked'". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2004-04-26. Retrieved April 3, 2012.
- Sear R, Marlowe FW (October 2009). "How universal are human mate choices? Size does not matter when Hadza foragers are choosing a mate". Biol. Lett. 5 (5): 606–9. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0342. PMC 2781963. PMID 19570778.
- Tall men 'top husband stakes'. BBC News. Retrieved 15 October 2009.
- Graziano W., Brothen T., Berscheid E. (1978). "Height and attraction: Do men and women see eye-to-eye?". Journal of Personality 46: 128–145.
- Yee, N. (2002). Beyond Tops and Bottoms Correlations between Sex-Role Preference and Physical Preferences for Partners among Gay Men
- Dixson BJ, Dixson AF, Bishop PJ, Parish A (2010). "Human Physique and Sexual Attractiveness in Men and Women: A New Zealand-U.S. Comparative Study". Arch Sex Behav 39 (3): 798–806. doi:10.1007/s10508-008-9441-y. PMID 19139985.
- Dixson BJ, Dixson AF, Li B, Anderson MJ (2007). "Studies of human physique and sexual attractiveness: sexual preferences of men and women in China". Am. J. Hum. Biol. 19 (1): 88–95. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20584. PMID 17160976.
- Dixson AF, Halliwell G, East R, Wignarajah P, Anderson MJ (February 2003). "Masculine somatotype and hirsuteness as determinants of sexual attractiveness to women". Arch Sex Behav 32 (1): 29–39. doi:10.1023/A:1021889228469. PMID 12597270.
- Rantala MJ, Pölkki M, Rantala LM (2010). "Preference for human male body hair changes across the menstrual cycle and menopause". Behavioral Ecology 21 (2): 419–423. doi:10.1093/beheco/arp206.
- Robins, A.H. (1991). Biological perspectives on human pigmentation. Cambridge University Press
- see Steve Sailer, Blondes Have Deeper Roots (2005)
- Jones, Trina. Shades of Brown: The Law of Skin Color. Duke Law School. 2000.
- Stephen, Ian; Law Smith, M.J., Stirrat, M.R., Perrett, D.I. (2009). "Facial skin coloration affects perceived health of human faces". International Journal of Primatology 30 (6): 845–857. doi:10.1007/s10764-009-9380-z.
- Stephen, Ian; Coetzee, V., Law Smith, M.J., Perrett, D.I. (2009). "Skin blood perfusion and oxygenation affect perceived human health". PLoS ONE 4: e5083. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005083.
- Stephen, Ian; Coetzee, V., Perrett, D.I. (2011). "Carotenoid and melanin pigment coloration affect perceived human health". Evolution and Human Behavior 32: 216–227. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.09.003.
- Jones, Ben; Little, A.C., Burt, D.M., Perrett, D.I. (2004). "When facial attractiveness is only skin deep". Perception 33: 569–576. doi:10.1068/p3463.
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 51–4. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Browne KR (2006). "Sex, Power, and Dominance: The Evolutionary Psychology of Sexual Harassment". Managerial and Decision Economics 27 (2–3): 145–158. doi:10.1002/mde.1289.
- IAN TATTERSALL (book reviewer) Geoffrey Miller (author) (June 11, 2000). "Whatever Turns You On: A psychologist looks at sexual attraction and what it means for humankind.". The New York Times: Book Review. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "it turns out that symmetry of bodily structure is a fitness indicator, and symmetry is more easily detectable among large breasts than small ones."
- Jackson, L. B. (1992). Physical appearance and gender: sociobiological and sociocultural perspectives. State University of New York Press.
- Fiona Macrae (27 December 2009). "Skin deep: Beautiful faces have Miss Average proportions". Daily Mail. Retrieved 2011-07-31. "All were head shots of the same person with different distances from eyes to mouth or between the eyes. She was at her most attractive when the space between her pupils was just under half, or 46 per cent, of the width of her face from ear to ear. The other perfect dimension was when the distance between her eyes and mouth was just over a third, or 36 per cent, of the overall length of her face from hairline to chin. ..."
- Berscheid and Reis, 1998
- Fink B, Penton-Voak IS (2002). "Evolutionary Psychology of Facial Attractiveness". Current Directions in Psychological Science 11 (5): 154–8. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00190.
- Brizendine, Louann (2006). The female brain. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 63. ISBN 978-0-7679-2010-0.
- Meistrell, Jr., Malcolm (2005). "The Beautiful Face". Columbia University. Unknown parameter
- Van Meter, Jonathan (2008-08-11). "http://nymag.com/news/features/48948/index1.html". NY Mag. Retrieved 2012-07-30.
- Sharon Jayson (March 31, 2011). "Study: Beautiful people cash in on their looks". USA Today. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Numerous studies, including his earlier research, have concluded that beauty helps the budget by providing greater wealth in several ways: Better-looking people generally earn more money and marry those who are better-looking and higher-earning, he says."
- How Big Is Your Limbal Ring? | Psychology Today
- Jones, D. Sexual Selection, Physical Attractiveness and Facial Neoteny: Cross-Cultural Evidence and Implications. p.723
- Kohl JV (2006). "The Mind's Eyes: Human Pheromones, Neuroscience, and Male Sexual Preferences". Psychology & Human Sexuality 18 (4): 313–369.
- Sforza C, Laino A, D'Alessio R, Grandi G, Binelli M, Ferrario VF (January 2009). "Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive Italian women as compared to normal women". Angle Orthod 79 (1): 17–23. doi:10.2319/122707-605.1. PMID 19123721.
- Cunningham MR, Roberts, AR, Barbee, AP, Druen, PB, Wu, CH (February 1995). "Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours": Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 68 (2): 261–279. doi:10.1037/0022-3522.214.171.1241.
- Chee, Elaine, and Chai Teck Choo. "Asian blepharoplasty-an overview." Orbit 30.1 (2011): 58-61.
- Cunningham MR (May 1986). "Measuring the Physical in Physical Attractiveness: Quasi-Experiments on the Sociobiology of Female Facial Beauty". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50 (5): 925–935. doi:10.1037/0022-35126.96.36.1995.
- From Cunningham (1986) Research with Western subjects disclosed significant consistency in evaluating attractiveness (Hatfield & Sprecher, 1986; Iliife, 1960). The females judged to be most attractive may have such similar facial features that they were hard to distinguish one from another (Light, Hollander, & Kayra-Stuart, 1981). Cross-cultural investigations on the judgment of facial attractiveness tended to highlight societal differences, but rough agreements in facial aesthetic preferences were shown by Asian-American and Caucasian females (Wagatsuma & Kleinke, 1979), Chinese, Indian, and English females judging Greek males (Thakerar & Iwawaki, 1979), South African and American males and females (Morse, Gruzen, & Reis, 1976), and blacks and whites judging males and females from both races (Cross & Cross, 1971).
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 54, 55. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Berger, M. (1999). White lies: race and the myths of whiteness. Farrar, Strous and Giroux, Canada.
- Sexualized Labour? ‘White-Collar Beauties’ in Provincial China. Liu Jieyu. 2008
- John Tierney (January 18, 2007). "The Waif From Ipanema". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-11-06. "women's aesthetic judgments are so influenced by other women. Men prefer the wider hips, and most likely could [sic] care less about high heels and handbags. Yet for many women all these things are essential to marking their beauty status with other women"
- "Perfect face dimensions measured". BBC News. 2009-12-18. Retrieved 2010-05-22.
- Hechter, M. (2011). Social Norms. Russell Sage Foundation. pp. 300
- Biello D (5 December 2007). "What is the Best Age Difference for Husband and Wife?". Scientific American.
- Thornhill, R., & Gangestad, S. W. (1999). Facial attractiveness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(12), 452-460.
- Young JA, Critelli JW, Keith KW (2005). "Male age preferences for short-term and long-term mating". Sexualities, Evolution & Gender 7 (2): 83–93. doi:10.1080/14616660500035090.
- Quinsey, V.L. The Etiology of Anomalous Sexual Preferences in Men. Queen's University Department of Psychology.
- Scientific proof that men look at women's breasts first and their face is almost last The Daily Telegraph
- Physical Attractiveness in Adaptationist Perspective in Evolutionary Psychology Handbook, Lawrence S. Sugiyama (2005).
- Buss, David M.The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, John Wiley and Sons, 2005, pg. 325 ISBN 0-471-26403-2, ISBN 978-0-471-26403-3
- Furnham A, Swami V (2007). "Perception of female buttocks and breast size in profile". Soc Behav Pers 35 (1): 1–8. doi:10.2224/sbp.2007.35.1.1.
- Hourglass figure fertility link - BBC News
- Joann Ellison Rodgers (2003). Sex: A Natural History. Macmillan. p. 102. ISBN 978-0-8050-7281-5.
- Wade, T. J. (2010). "The Relationships between Symmetry and Attractiveness and Mating Relevant Decisions and Behavior: A Review". Symmetry 2 (2): 1081. doi:10.3390/sym2021081.
- Fisher, H.B. (1982). The Sex Contract - The Evolution of Human Behavior. New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc.
- Caro, T.M. & D. W. Sellen, D.W. (1990). The Reproductive Advantages of Fat in Women. Ethology and Sociobiology. (11)5 1-66 0162-3095
- Tovée MJ, Reinhardt S, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL (August 1998). "Optimum body-mass index and maximum sexual attractiveness". Lancet 352 (9127): 548. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79257-6. PMID 9716069.
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 55, 56. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Brown, Peter J. and Jennifer Sweeney. 2009. THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF OVERWEIGHT, OBESITY AND THE BODY. AnthroNotes Volume 30 No. 1.
- Nettle, D. (2009). "Ecological influences on human behavioural diversity: A review of recent findings". Trends in Ecology & Evolution 24 (11): 618–611. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.05.013.
- Nanci Hellmich (2006-09-26). "Do thin models warp girls' body image?". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2009-11-06. "The widespread concern that model thinness has progressed from willowy to wasted has reached a threshold as evidenced by the recent actions of fashion show organizers."
- Fisher, M.L.; Voracek M. (June 2006). "The shape of beauty: determinants of female physical attractiveness". J Cosmet Dermatol 5 (2): 190–4. doi:10.1111/j.1473-2165.2006.00249.x. PMID 17173598.
- Dixson, B.J.; Dixson A.F., Li B., Anderson M.J. (January 2007). "Studies of human physique and sexual attractiveness: sexual preferences of men and women in China". Am J Hum Biol 19 (1): 88–95. doi:10.1002/ajhb.20584. PMID 17160976.
- Marlowe, F.; Wetsman, A. (2001). "Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology" (PDF). Personality and Individual Differences 30 (3): 481–489. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00039-8. Retrieved 2007-08-04.
- Marlowe F, Apicella C, Reed D (November 2005). "Men's preferences for women's profile waist-to-hip ratio in two societies". Evol Hum Behav 26 (6): 458–468. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.07.005. as PDF
- Dixson, B.J.; Dixson A.F., Morgan B., Anderson M.J. (June 2007). "Human physique and sexual attractiveness: sexual preferences of men and women in Bakossiland, Cameroon". Arch Sex Behav 36 (3): 369–75. doi:10.1007/s10508-006-9093-8. PMID 17136587.
- Freedman, R.E.; Carter M.M., Sbrocco T., Gray JJ. (August 2007). "Do men hold African-American and Caucasian women to different standards of beauty?". Eat Behav 8 (3): 319–33. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2006.11.008. PMC 3033406. PMID 17606230.
- Freedman, R.E.; Carter M.M., Sbrocco T., Gray J.J. (July 2004). "Ethnic differences in preferences for female weight and waist-to-hip ratio: a comparison of African-American and White American college and community samples". Eat Behav. 5 (3): 191–8. doi:10.1016/j.eatbeh.2004.01.002. PMID 15135331.
- Yu DW, Shepard GH (November 1998). "Is beauty in the eye of the beholder?". Nature 396 (6709): 321–2. doi:10.1038/24512. PMID 9845067.
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. p. 56. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Scar, R. Height and Reproductive Success: How a Gambian Population Compares to the West. Human Nature Winter 2006.
- BBC News: "Tall men 'top husband stakes'"
- Sorokowskia P, Pawlowskib B (March 2008). "Adaptive preferences for leg length in a potential partner". Evol Hum Behav 29 (2): 86–91. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.09.002.
- Sorokowski P (2010). "Attractiveness of Legs Length in Poland and Great Britain" (PDF). J Hum Ecol 31 (3): 148.
- Bertamini M, Bennet KM (2009). "The effect of leg length on perceived attractiveness of simplified stimuli" (PDF). Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology 3 (3): 233–250.
- Barber N (September 1995). "The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology". Ethology & Sociobiology 16 (5): 395–424. doi:10.1016/0162-3095(95)00068-2.
- Voracek M, Fisher ML, Rupp B, Lucas D, Fessler DM (June 2007). "Sex differences in relative foot length and perceived attractiveness of female feet: relationships among anthropometry, physique, and preference ratings". Percept Mot Skills 104 (3 Pt 2): 1123–38. PMID 17879647.
- Berman, J.E. (1993). Female Genital Mutilation, Yes, but Don't Condone It. Accessed date November 6, 2009, from http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/30/opinion/l-understand-female-genital-mutilation-yes-but-don-t-condone-it-015393.html
- Buss, David M. (2005). The handbook of evolutionary psychology. John Wiley and Sons. p. 309. ISBN 978-0-471-26403-3.
- Bereczkei, T. Hair length, facial attractiveness, personality attribution; A multiple fitness model of hairdressing
- The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, edited by David M. Buss, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2005. Chapter 10 "Physical Attractiveness in Adaptationist Perspective" by Lawrence S. Sugiyama.
- Texas A&M University, "Clues To Mysteries Of Physical Attractiveness Revealed.", Science Daily, 2007, May 24
- Peter Frost "Fair Women, Dark Men: The Forgotten Roots of Color Prejudice," (2005).
- Dixson, Barnaby. Human Physique and Sexual Attractiveness: Sexual Preferences of Men and Women in Bakossiland, Cameroon http://www.springerlink.com/content/b74147t360040220/fulltext.pdf
- "The Heavy Cost of Light Skin". BBC News. 2000-04-18. Retrieved 09-08-2010.
- "What Are "Good Looks"?". Kenyon College. Retrieved 09-08-2010.
- Jones, Vanessa E. (2004-08-19). "Pride or Prejudice?". Boston.com. Retrieved 09-08-2010.
- Skin whitening big business in Asia | PRI.ORG
- Singer, Merrill; Hans Beyer (28 July 2008). Killer Commodities: Public Health and the Corporate Production of Harm. AltaMira Press. p. 151. ISBN 0-7591-0979-6. "Harris investigated the history of the parasol... everywhere ordinary people were forbidden to protect themselves with such devices "pallid skin became a marker of upper-class status". At the beginning of the 20th Century, in the United States, lighter-skinned people avoided the sun... Tanned skin was considered lower class."
- Geller, AC; Colditz, G; Oliveria, S; Emmons, K; Jorgensen, C; Aweh, GN; Frazier, AL (2002-06-06). "Use of Sunscreen, Sunburning Rates, and Tanning Bed Use Among More Than 10 000 US Children and Adolescents". Pediatrics 109 (6): 1009–14. doi:10.1542/peds.109.6.1009. PMID 12042536. More than one of
- Broadstock M, Borland R, Gason R (January 1992). "Effects of Suntan on Judgements of Healthiness and Attractiveness by Adolescents". J Appl Soc Psychol 22 (2): 157–172. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1992.tb01527.x.
- Leary MR, Jones JL (September 1993). "The Social Psychology of Tanning and Sunscreen Use: Self-Presentational Motives as a Predictor of Health Risk". J Appl Soc Psychol 23 (17): 1390–1406. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01039.x.
- Tan is 'In': Study Finds Light Brown More Attractive than Pale or Dark Skin
- Fink B., Grammer K., Thornhill R. (2001). "Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness in relation to skin texture and color". Journal of Comparative Psychology 115 (1): 92–99.
- Fink B., Matts P.J. (2008). "The effects of skin colour distribution and topography cues on the perception of female facial age and health". Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venerology 22 (4): 493–498.
- Bruno Laeng, Ronny Mathisen, Jan-Are Johnsen (2007). "Why do blue-eyed men prefer women with the same eye color?". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61 (3): 371–384.
- JOHN TIERNEY (February 21, 2011). "The Threatening Scent of Fertile Women". The New York Times. Retrieved 2011-07-15. "Previous research had shown that a woman at the fertile stage of her menstrual cycle seems more attractive, and that same effect was observed here — but only when this woman was rated by a man who wasn’t already involved with someone else."
- Kanazawa, S. (2011) Intelligence and Physical Attractiveness. pgs 7-14, url=http://journals2.scholarsportal.info.myaccess.library.utoronto.ca/tmp/5181975288283953712.pdf
- Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M (May 2000). "Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review". Psychol Bull 126 (3): 390–423. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390. PMID 10825783. as PDF
- Walster, E.; Aronson, V.; Abrahams, D.; Rottman, L. (1966). "Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior". Journal of personality and social psychology 4 (5): 508–516. doi:10.1037/h0021188. PMID 6008393.
- Cowley, Geoffrey. "The Biology of beauty". Newsweek. June 3, 1996
- Buss, David (2003) . The Evolution of Desire (second ed.). New York: Basic Books. pp. 57, 58, 60–63. ISBN 0-465-07750-1.
- Bar-Tal, D.; Saxe, L. (1976). "Physical attractiveness and its relationship to sex-role stereotyping". Sex Roles 2 (2). doi:10.1007/BF00287245.
- Nevid, J. S. (1984). "Sex differences in factors of romantic attraction". Sex Roles 11 (5–6): 401–411. doi:10.1007/BF00287468.
- Li N. P., Kenrick D. T. (2006). "Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: What, whether,and why.". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90: 468–489.
- Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: Do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner?, By Eastwick, Paul W.; Finkel, Eli J. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 94(2), Feb 2008, 245-264, Norman P. Lia, , , Katherine A. Valentinea and Lily Patel
- Mate preferences in the US and Singapore: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model, Personality and Individual Differences Volume 50, Issue 2, January 2011, Pages 291-294
- Feingold A (1990). "Gender differences in effects of physical attractiveness on romantic attraction: A comparison across five research paradigms.". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 59: 981–993. doi:10.1037/0022-35188.8.131.521.
- Implicit and explicit preferences for physical attractiveness in a romantic partner: A double dissociation in predictive validity, Eastwick, Paul W.; Eagly, Alice H.; Finkel, Eli J.; Johnson, Sarah E. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Jul 18, 2011
- Little, A. C.; Cohen, D. L.; Jones, B. C.; Belsky, J. (2006). "Human preferences for facial masculinity change with relationship type and environmental harshness". Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61 (6): 967. doi:10.1007/s00265-006-0325-7.
- Belsky, J.; Cohen, D. L. (2008). "Individual differences in female mate preferences as a function of attachment and hypothetical ecological conditions". Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 6: 25. doi:10.1556/JEP.2008.1001.
- Dunn, M. J.; Searle, R. (2010). "Effect of manipulated prestige-car ownership on both sex attractiveness ratings". British Journal of Psychology 101 (Pt 1): 69–80. doi:10.1348/000712609X417319. PMID 19302732.
- Li, N. P.; Valentine, K. A.; Patel, L. (2011). "Mate preferences in the US and Singapore: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model". Personality and Individual Differences 50 (2): 291. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.005.
- Symons D. 1995. Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: the evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. In Sexual Nature, Sexual Culture: Chicago Series on Sexuality, History, and Society, ed. P.R. Abramson, S.D. Pinkerton, pp. 80–119. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
- Sex Differences: Developmental and Evolutionary Strategies by Linda Mealey and Mother Nature by Sarah Hardy.
- Abigail Trafford, Andrew Cherlin (March 6, 2001). "Second Opinion: Men's Health & Marriage". Washington Post. Retrieved 2009-11-06. "The major reason for the imbalance between men and women in the later decades of life is because men tend to marry younger women as they get older."
- Women drawn to men with muscles
- Feinberg, D. R.; Jones, B. C.; Law Smith, M. J.; Moore, F. R.; Debruine, L. M.; Cornwell, R. E.; Hillier, S. G.; Perrett, D. I. (2006). "Menstrual cycle, trait estrogen level, and masculinity preferences in the human voice". Hormones and Behavior 49 (2): 215–222. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2005.07.004. PMID 16055126.
- Women's choice of men goes in cycles
- How Ladies Size Up Facial Attractiveness
- Study on differences in Male, Female sexuality. June 2003
- Federally funded study measures arousal
- New York Times. "What do women want?" Study on human sexuality
- ScienceDaily. "Study Suggests Difference Between Female And Male Sexuality"
- "Women's choice of men goes in cycles". BBC News. 1999-06-24. Retrieved 30 November 2006.
- The Selfish Gene
- University of Michigan.
- Adrian, Bonnie. Framing the Bride: Globalizing Beauty and Romance in Taiwan's Bridal Industry. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003. Print.
- Frederick, D. A.; Haselton, M. G. (2007). "Why is Muscularity Sexy? Tests of the Fitness Indicator Hypothesis". Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 33 (8): 1167–1183. doi:10.1177/0146167207303022. PMID 17578932.
- (Locke & Horowitz, 1990).
- DeBruine LM (May 2004). "Resemblance to self increases the appeal of child faces to both men and women". Evol Hum Behav 25 (3): 142–154. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.03.003.
- DeBruine, L.M.; Deuter, C. E.; Kuehl, L. K.; Schulz, A.; Blumenthal, T. D.; Schachinger, H. (2005). "Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: context-specific effects of facial resemblance". Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences 272 (1566): 919–922. doi:10.1098/rspb.2004.3003. PMC 1564091. PMID 16024346.
- Lass-Hennemann, J.; Deuter, C.E.; Kuehl, L.K.; Schulz, A.; Blumenthal, T.D..; Schachinger, H. (2010). "Effects of stress on human mating preferences: stressed individuals prefer dissimilar mates". Proceedings of the Royal Society. B, Biological sciences 277 (1691): 2175–2183. doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0258. PMC 2880157. PMID 20219732.
- Cash TF, Gillen B, Burns DS (June 1977). "Sexism and beautyism in personnel consultant decision making". Journal of Applied Psychology 62 (3): 301–310. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.62.3.301.
- Clark, M.S.; & Mills, J. (1979)
- Lorenzo G. L., Biesanz J. C., Human L. J. (2010). "What Is Beautiful Is Good and More Accurately Understood: Physical Attractiveness and Accuracy in First Impressions of Personality". Psychological Science 21 (12): 1777. doi:10.1177/0956797610388048.
- Jonathan E. Berman (letter to the editor) (November 30, 1993). "Understand Female Genital Mutilation, Yes, but Don't Condone It". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-11-06. "The desired mark of beauty, put in plain language, was a set of withered or amputated toes at the end of crippled feet, which were jammed into the smallest possible slipper."
- Lewandowski, Gary; Aron, Art; Gee, Julie (2007). "Personality goes a long way: The malleability of opposite-sex physical attractiveness". Personal Relationships 14 (4): 571–585. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00172.x.
- http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/Careers/07/08/looks/ Do Pretty People Earn More from cnn.com
- Pfeifer, Christan (2012). "Physical Attractiveness, Employment, and Earnings". Applied Economics Letters 19 (6): 505–510. Retrieved 19 March 2013.
- Daniel Goleman (December 8, 1992). "A Rising Cost Of Modernity: Depression". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-11-06. "Competing explanations range from a loss of beliefs in God or an afterlife that can buffer people against life's setbacks, to the stresses of industrialization, to the distress created in women by the spread of unattainable ideals of female beauty, to exposure to toxic substances."
- De Santis, A; and Kayson, W.A. 1999
- Langlois, Judith; Lisa Kalakanis, Adam J. Rubenstein, Andrea Larson, Monica HaUam, and Monica'Smoot (2000). "Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review". Psychological Bulletin 126 (3): 390–423. doi:10.1037//0033-2909.126.3.390. Retrieved 4/3/2012.
- Clifford, Margaret; Elaine Walster (1973). "The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on Teacher Expectations". Sociology of Education 46 (2): 248–258. Retrieved 4/8/2012.
- Efrain, Michael; Patterson, E. W. J (1974). "Voters vote beautiful: The effect of physical appearance on a national election.". Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 6 (4): 352–356. doi:10.1037/h0081881.
- Science rewrites the rules of attraction
- Dion, Karen; Berscheid, Ellen; Walster, Elaine (December 1972). "What is beautiful is good". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 24 (3): 285–290. Retrieved 4/8/2012.
- Cowley, Geoffrey. "The Biology of beauty." Newsweek. June 3, 1996
- Sexual atrractiveness predicted by voice attractiveness
- Rhodes, Gillian; Zebrowitz, Leslie, A. (2002). Facial Attractiveness – Evolutionary, Cognitive, and Social Perspectives. Ablex. ISBN 1-56750-636-4.
- Edler RJ (June 2001). "Background considerations to facial aesthetics". J Orthod 28 (2): 159–68. doi:10.1093/ortho/28.2.159. PMID 11395532.
- Zaidel DW, Aarde SM, Baig K (April 2005). "Appearance of symmetry, beauty, and health in human faces". Brain Cogn 57 (3): 261–3. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004.08.056. PMID 15780460.
- Evolution producing more 'beautiful' women
- Diener, Ed; Wolsic, Brian; Fujita, Frank (July 1995). "Physical attractiveness and subjective well-being". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69 (1): 120–129. doi:10.1037/0022-35184.108.40.206. Retrieved 4/10/2012.
- Kanazawa, S. (2011). Intelligence and Physical Attractiveness. "Intelligence, 39"(1), 7-14.