6,481
edits
Physiognomy: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→Evidence
m (→Evidence) |
m (→Evidence) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
In recent years, many studies have concluded that facial features are correlated with perceived and actual personality and character traits. The following is a quick summary of some of these findings: | In recent years, many studies have concluded that facial features are correlated with perceived and actual personality and character traits. The following is a quick summary of some of these findings: | ||
* A meta-analysis of 19 studies found a weak but statistically significant correlation between [[fWHR]] (a measure of the broadness of the face) and aggression, ranging from r = .09 for field and archival studies to r = .21 for studies conducted in research labs.<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388848/</ref> Another study in 2016 found weak but significant correlations between various psychopathic traits and fWHR, (r = .12 for the whole sample and r = .27 for a sample of prison inmates). This is possibly mediated by an association between fWHR and higher levels of pubertal [[testosterone]] exposure. <ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886915005759</ref> A study in 2017 found that fWHR possibly influences social status; with Popes and CEOs typically having higher than average fWHRs. This is possibly due to such leaders being more effective and socially dominant, or due to them being perceived to be so. | * A meta-analysis of 19 studies found a weak but statistically significant correlation between [[fWHR]] (a measure of the broadness of the face) and aggression, ranging from r = .09 for field and archival studies to r = .21 for studies conducted in research labs.<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388848/</ref> Another study in 2016 found weak but significant correlations between various psychopathic traits and fWHR, (r = .12 for the whole sample and r = .27 for a sample of prison inmates). This is possibly mediated by an association between fWHR and higher levels of pubertal [[testosterone]] exposure. <ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886915005759</ref> A study in 2017 found that fWHR possibly influences social status; with Popes and CEOs typically having higher than average fWHRs. This is possibly due to such leaders being more effective and socially dominant, or due to them being perceived to be so. | ||
* A twin study in 2017 found a weak but significant relationship between [[IPD]] | * A twin study in 2017 found a weak but significant relationship between wider [[IPD]] (Interpupillary distance) and actual measured [[IQ]].<ref>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289617300843</ref> An earlier study found that people were able to accurately gauge measured IQ from a photograph, but this only held true in the case of men's IQ, and not women's.<ref>https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081237</ref> | ||
* Studies conducted in 2013 found that people were able to accurately predict the outcomes of fights based on facial features, above chance. The fighters with faces rated as more aggressive were more likely to win their bouts, but they was also confounded by weight, thus it only held true for heavyweight fighters. The facial features associated with aggressiveness were an overall broader face, broader chin, darker eyebrows and [[hunter eyes|horizontally narrowed eyes]].<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797613477117</ref> | * Studies conducted in 2013 found that people were able to accurately predict the outcomes of fights based on facial features, above chance. The fighters with faces rated as more aggressive were more likely to win their bouts, but they was also confounded by weight, thus it only held true for heavyweight fighters. The facial features associated with aggressiveness were an overall broader face, broader chin, darker eyebrows and [[hunter eyes|horizontally narrowed eyes]].<ref>https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797613477117</ref> | ||
* Wang & Kosinski (2017) used a deep neural network that, analyzing 35,326 'selfie' images, correctly determined homosexuality in 81% of cases for men, and in 74% of cases for women.<ref>https://osf.io/zn79k/</ref> This was compared to human judges, who could distinguish a man's homosexuality in 61% of cases and women's in 54% of cases (slightly above chance). This study has been heavily criticized, however, for being confounded by differences in facial expression, grooming, clothing, camera angle and other contextual factors unrelated to facial structure. | * Wang & Kosinski (2017) used a deep neural network that, analyzing 35,326 'selfie' images, correctly determined homosexuality in 81% of cases for men, and in 74% of cases for women.<ref>https://osf.io/zn79k/</ref> This was compared to human judges, who could distinguish a man's homosexuality in 61% of cases and women's in 54% of cases (slightly above chance). This study has been heavily criticized, however, for being confounded by differences in facial expression, grooming, clothing, camera angle and other contextual factors unrelated to facial structure. | ||