Women find men less attractive when they smile compared to when they take on swaggering or brooding poses, a Canadian study has found.
In contrast, men find women more attractive when they smile, and least attractive when they look proud and confident, the study of 1,084 heterosexual university students shows.
“Generally, the results appear to reflect some very traditional gender norms and cultural values that have emerged, developed and been reinforced through history, at least in Western cultures,” Jessica Tracy, a sociologist at Vancouver’s University of British Columbia, said in a statement Tuesday.
She co-authored the study with psychology graduate student Alex Beall. Their results were published online Tuesday in the journal Emotion.
While previous studies have shown that women are judged more attractive when they smile, the researchers believe this is the first study to show that men are judged less attractive when they appear happy.
They suggested it was because smiling men were judged to be more feminine and less dominant.
The study “helps to explain the enduring allure of ‘bad boys’ other iconic gender types” and may “inspire online daters to update their profile photo,” said a news release about the study.
Beall noted that the study explored first impressions and did not ask whether they thought the people in the photos would make a partner or spouse.
“We wanted their gut reactions on carnal, sexual attraction,” he said in a statement.
The paper said one important question for future research is to find out whether the effects seen in judgments from photographs can be seen in live social interactions.
The study took place in two stages.
In the first, a research assistant showed about 100 study participants photographs of the same member of the opposite sex in four poses:
Participants were asked to rate the person’s attractiveness on a scale of one to nine, where nine was the most attractive.
In the second stage, study participants were shown photographs online. The volunteers were divided into three categories:
The photos were categorized into the same four categories — happy, proud, ashamed and neutral — by research assistants who did not know why the photos were being categorized. The study participants were asked to rate the attractiveness of the people in the photos.
In all cases, men rated “happy” women highest — above five on the scale. Proud women were rated on average one to two points lower, and were rated lowest among those shown the online photos.
Women consistently rated the proud men highest, with a rating of four to five. They rated happy men about one point lower. Younger women rated happy men lowest, while older women tended to rate happy and ashamed men equally and neutral men lower.
The researchers suggested that shame was considered somewhat attractive in both genders because it expresses respect for social norms.
The experiment is fundamentally flawed. By doing the test via photographs they allow “fantasy realm” to take the place of real world situations.
Much in the same way a good social like IO might be a better bet than TuTH when meeting new people, A warm confident and friendly smile works much better than “blue steel” ( Zoolander fans will know what I mean).
It’s like that craptastic Twilight movie. Yeah sure the little girly girls swoon over Edward (I’m over a hundred years old and I still act like I REALLY want to be James Dean) Cullen…because there’s a safe barrier between the fantasy of the brooding sexy rebel and the stark reality of potential stalkers, date rapists and wife beaters.
I know, because I WAS that guy. Rebel without a clue, always with some stare that I thought looked sexy based off of how women respond to fictional characters in movies, professional models they’ll never meet and of course the occasional pseudo rebellious rock star. Thing with these guys is women find them sexy or attractive because they’re not really face to face with them.
A girl at work once lamented in front of me, “why can’t I find a guy like Edward.” I told her that chances are, she already had and thought he was a weird guy for acting so inexplicably moody.
I’m not saying that the brooding steely gaze NEVER works…just that in the real world when it’s not a picture but a real person standing in front of the woman, a cocky friendly smile works much more often.
Sexual attraction is only one part of attraction. So to say smiling men are less attractive is a misconception. We are humans not animals. We have many of the same instincts as animals but generally without overall attraction we do not act on carnal attraction like animals do. You can say smiling men dont activate the feeling of carnal attraction but you cant say they are less attractive on a whole.
Using pictures is one dimensional. You look at a picture and as Rad suggested you create a story to go with it without consciously even realizing it.
For instance if you look at Johnny Depp’s pictures he is almost always brooding or swaggering. Yep I agree he is hot as hell but thats because I created a story or image to go with his pictures. I could meet him and he could be a total jerk and suddenly that whole perspective changes.
Her study can not carry over into normal social interaction because it leaves out all the other ingredients that form attraction.
Really all her study is indicating is that people dont focus on the carnal side of attraction when they see smiling people. This doesn’t mean they find them less attractive or they can not be sexually attracted to them.
Now ask yourself why brooding reminds you of sex and smiling doesn’t. If your a women and have had sex you will know the answer to this.
Men dont smile during the act of sex. In fact they appear to be brooding. They get this intense concentrated gaze and there pupils dilate. They also get this look when sexually aroused. A women instinctively knows that look. In a picture when you see that look it can activate the sexual response feelings in a women because its natural for us to create the other dimensions of the person in the picture to complete the persona. We create the story. However in person those dimensions are present and we can not create anymore. That look can come across as sexy or creepy depending on the rest of the dimensions of attraction.
This is why so many times you hear people say upon meeting someone they have only talked to but never seen visually or someone they have seen a picture of but never interacted with at all “He/she is so different from what I pictured” Because of the story that go’s with it.
I dont think…no I will go as far as saying I know her study will not work in real life social interaction. Not the way she is categorizing and conducting it. Its extremely flawed.
They are also throwing personal opinion and preference into the test. The classic case of the scientist effecting the outcome of the experiment. Since when does smiling indicate lack of dominance or feminine qualities ? This is a judgement made from the perspective of the person doing the test.
I think they should rename the test “Brooding men make women think about sex more then smiling men” because it has little to do with actual attraction.
I’ve tried thinking of how this study could be done more accurately and it really can’t. There are far too many variables. I suppose they could use some identical twins like they did in the semi famous tv experiment for pheromones. But in an actual interaction so many other external factors come into play that you’d have to do way too many exchanges to get an average result for it to be practical.
I suppose for an individual you could try going out and meeting people several times each using a different shtick. Go out for several nights acting moody and brooding and putting on some fake “sexy look”, and throw a standard game, then go out and try throwing the same game with a warm friendly smile. In the end the results that work best for you are the only ones that matter.
The only way this could be somewhat accurate would be to find a couple sets of twins. Place them in diferent locations in the same venue . Let some brood in corners by themselves and let the others walk around smiling.
I have to agree with Rad and Tisha “In theory, theory is the same as practice. . . in practice, it is not.”
Also what struck me and please don’t jump on me for bringing up the “a” word. . . but the age of the study’s participants. They were university students (and while I know that older people can attend college, that seems unlikely for the uniformity of a study.) I think people really DO find different things attractive at different ages. I think that just like our personalities evolve with age, so does our taste in partners.
e.g.
in my teens and early twenties I was all about that brooding “misunderstood” bad boy
in my late 20s I went for unapologetic “party guys”. . .think “eternal sunshine of the frat-boy mind” most were musicians and though fun, left a little lacking in the “real world” department.
moving into my 30’s I started to go for a different type. . .charisma mixed with a little “grownup” sensibility. The calling card for these guys. . .a confident smile across a crowded room.