Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 Apr 30;10(4):20130850.
doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2013.0850. Print 2014.

Cross-cultural variation in men's preference for sexual dimorphism in women's faces

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cross-cultural variation in men's preference for sexual dimorphism in women's faces

Urszula M Marcinkowska et al. Biol Lett. .

Abstract

Both attractiveness judgements and mate preferences vary considerably cross-culturally. We investigated whether men's preference for femininity in women's faces varies between 28 countries with diverse health conditions by analysing responses of 1972 heterosexual participants. Although men in all countries preferred feminized over masculinized female faces, we found substantial differences between countries in the magnitude of men's preferences. Using an average femininity preference for each country, we found men's facial femininity preferences correlated positively with the health of the nation, which explained 50.4% of the variation among countries. The weakest preferences for femininity were found in Nepal and strongest in Japan. As high femininity in women is associated with lower success in competition for resources and lower dominance, it is possible that in harsher environments, men prefer cues to resource holding potential over high fecundity.

Keywords: facial preferences; femininity; national health; other-race effect.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Relationship between femininity preference index and NHI. Average men's preference for femininity plotted against NHI of their country (r = 0.71, n = 28, p < 0.0001).

References

    1. Buss DM. 1989. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav. Brain Sci. 12, 1–49. (10.1017/S0140525X00023992) - DOI
    1. Penton-Voak IS, Jacobson A, Trivers R. 2004. Population differences in attractiveness judgements of male and female faces: comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 25, 355–370. (10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.06.002) - DOI
    1. Puts AP, Jones BC, DeBruine LM. 2012. Sexual selection on human faces and voices. J. Sex Res. 49, 227–243. (10.1080/00224499.2012.658924) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Srael H. 1969. Pubertal influence upon the growth and sexual differentiation of the human mandible. Arch. Oral. Biol. 14, 583–590. (10.1016/0003-9969(69)90181-2) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jones D. 1995. Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny. Curr. Anthropol. 36, 723–748. (10.1086/204427) - DOI

Publication types