1. Can Pretty People Have Their Cake and Eat it Too? Positive and Negative Effects of Physical Attractiveness. Megan M. Schad, David E. Szwedo, Joanna M. Chango, Erin M. Miga, & Joseph P. Allen University of Virginia. We would like to thank the National Institute of Child Health & Human Development for funding awarded to Joseph P. Allen, Principal Investigator, (9 R01 HD058305-A11) for funding to conduct this study as well as for the write-up of this study. Introduction It has been well documented that physical attractiveness affects behavior. Specifically, research indicates that people who interact with attractive people treat them differently. Many studies have shown how teachers give attractive children higher evaluations and also have higher expectations for them (Fox, K., 1997). Similarly, attractive job applicants have a better chance of getting jobs and receiving higher salaries. Attractive people are found guilty less often than less attractive people. Although the literature indicates how other people tend to act towards attractive people, there is a lack of research about how physical attractiveness predicts how individuals act towards others or behave themselves. This longitudinal, multi-reporter study examines the effects of physical attractiveness on adolescents’ illicit drug use and romantic relationship functioning later in adolescence, controlling for their peer- perceived popularity. Hypotheses. Physical Attractiveness will predict increased likelihood of having tried marijuana four years later.. Physical attractiveness will predict better observed relationship quality with romantic partner one year later.. Physical attractiveness will predict romantic partner report of less conflict in the relationship four years later. Measures. Physical Attractiveness Coding System Teen’s physical attractiveness was coded at Time 1 using a naïve coding system (Schad & Allen, 2009, unpublished manuscript) in which no specific instruction as to what to look for was given - coders personal ideas about physical attractiveness were used as the basis of coding. Both males and females were used on an ethnically diverse coding team (ICC =.89).. Autonomy & Relatedness Coding System Each adolescent-partner dyad participated in an 8-min videotaped task in which they were presented with a hypothetical dilemma (dating court). They were then asked to try to resolve any differences in their choices and to come up with a consensus. The Autonomy-Relatedness Coding System for Peer Interactions was adapted for use with romantic partner dyads to code these interactions (Allen et al. 2001). The coding system employed (J. P. Allen et al. 2000, unpublished manuscript, 1994) yields ratings for the adolescent’s overall behavior toward their partner in the interaction, as well as for their partner’s overall behavior toward them. The positive relatedness scale was used, which captures behaviors indicating a warm and friendly interaction. Positive relatedness behaviors include validating partner’s statements, being engaged with the task, and how warm the teen is towards their partner. High scores on this scale indicate increased frequency and intensity of behaviors promoting relatedness, whereas low scores mean very few and low intensity behaviors promoting relatedness.. Conflict in Relationships Teens’ romantic partners’ at Time 3 reported the amount of conflict in the relationship as measured by the Network of Relationships Inventory (Furman, 1996). This 3-item scale was reported on a 5-point Likert scale (α =.86).. Marijuana Use Teens completed a 36-item measure about their drug use. This measure was adapted from the Alcohol and Drug Use Questionnaire used in the Monitoring the Future surveys (Johnston et al. 1987, 2006). Marijuana use was assessed by asking teens to report whether or not they had tried marijuana ever. Method Conclusions Results Participants  184 teenagers along with their best friends and romantic partners.  58% Caucasian, 29% African American, and 13% Mixed or Other ethnicity.  Average household income was within the $30,000 to $39,000 range..  Target teen mean age was 17.32 years at Time 1, 18.30 at Time 2, and 21.66 at Time 3..  Romantic partner mean age was 19.24 years at Time 2 and 22.27 at Time 3.. Procedures. At Time 1, target teens’ physical attractiveness was coded at Time 1 using a naïve coding system. Similarly, more physically attractive teens at age 17 have friends who are also more likely to have ever tried marijuana by age 21 (odds ratio = 1.58, p <.05; Figure 1). In contrast, results show that more physically attractive teens have better quality romantic relationships. For instance, more attractive teens at age 17 are behaving in a more positive manner with their romantic partners during an argument (β =.29, p <.05; age 18). For example, these teens show more collaboration, more warmth, and are more engagement with their romantic partner. Moreover, the partners of more physically attractive teens report less conflict in the relationship (β = -.24, p <.05) at age 21 (Figure 2). Figure 1. Physical Attractiveness Predicting a Higher Likelihood that Teens Will Try Marijuana as well as Have Friends Who Will Try Marijuana Four Years Later. Regression results suggest that, after controlling for effects of popularity, teens who are rated by coders as more physically attractive at age 17 are more likely to have ever tried marijuana by age 21 (odds ratio = 1.53, p <.05). Note: * p <.05; ** p <.01; *** p <.001 Figure 2. Physical Attractiveness Predicting Better Quality Romantic Relationships One to Four Years Later. Note: * p <.05; ** p <.01; *** p <.001 At Time 2, teen’s positive relatedness towards partner was assessed during an observational revealed differences task. At Time 3, Romantic partners’ report of conflict in the relationship was measured using the Network of Relationships Inventory (Furman, 1996). Teens’ and their best friends’ also reported ever having tried marijuana on a measure adapted from the Monitoring the Future surveys (Johnston et al., 2006). Thus, results indicate that: A) physical attractiveness is predictive of both positive and negative outcomes later in adolescence; B) attractive people tend to act more positively toward others; and C) physical attractiveness may explain variance beyond popularity.