1. Visual Stimuli Two dimensional Line drawings Realistic? Representative? Valid?

2. Henss (2000) Facial attractiveness research Differences between line drawings and photographs Artifacts and/or validity re: WHR using line drawings?

3. Method Colour photographs, digitally manipulated by tightening or widening hips Original, smaller WHR, wider WHR Between-subjects design (each subject only saw one picture) Standard type of rating questions (e.g., attractiveness, fecundity, youthfulness, etc.) and personality

4. Images

5. Range of WHRs Quite inconsistent Different poses of figures Stimulus123456 Smaller0.740.730.680.720.710.68 Original0.770.760.700.790.760.72 Wider0.820.810.710.850.800.74

6. Results Only attractiveness was significantly affected by manipulation of WHR Smaller WHR was most attractive, then original, and lastly wider Tightening hips makes woman appear taller –Lower 175.5cm, original 174.2cm, wider 173.6cm Smaller WHR, smaller BMI; related to height

7. Overall In general, confirms Singh’s WHR findings Still, valid arguments against line drawings Why use single individual as varied stimuli? –Issue of generalization Different individuals were given different ratings on personality dimensions in this study Consistent with facial research, showing that personality judgments influence attractiveness ratings

8. Puhl & Boland (2001) Computer manipulated full figure photographs Selected from a number of women to get two models with WHR of 0.72 and 0.86, both in healthy BMI range Width of figures reduced and increased by 20% –Assumption that this would correspond to underweight and overweight BMI conditions Between subjects design

9. Images

10. Results Underweight significantly more attractive Model B more attractive than model A Fecundity differences Subjects distinguished weight levels Females rated figures more attractive than males

11. Interpretation Strongly within the sociocultural perspective Model B has higher WHR (more “tubular”), therefore, must support media preference for thin (i.e., “tubular”) models However…

12. Swami et al. (2008) Not just WHR literature utilizing line drawings Vast majority of body image studies has traditionally relied on 2D line drawing representations Photographic Figure Rating Scale (PFRS) –10 photographic images of real women varying in BMI Is this a valid scale?

13. Images

14. Measures Rank figures from thinnest to heaviest Identify any figures that were emaciated or obese Body Appreciation Scale –13 items measuring body image Demographic measures of subjects

15. Findings and Implications PFRS shows good construct validity BMIs from images can be successfully and consistently rank ordered Further testing of this type for future (and even current) image banks would be beneficial Can apply same approach to 3D images

16. Fan et al. (2004) Body scanned 31 Caucasian females 3D “wire frame” figures Blue figures on grey background Rotated 360° Hong Kong Chinese male and female raters –Mostly students in fashion and textile department Rate for attractiveness

17. Images

18. Results

19. Linear regression: BMI and WHR accounted for 75.8% of variance –BMI (72.7%), WHR (1.4%) Log regression: now BMI and WHR account for 82.1% –BMI (80.4%), WHR (1.7%)

20. Smith, Cornelissens & Tovee (2007) Evaluating assessment of health in mate choice Colour video clips of 43 actual women showing 360° rotational views of their figures Mean age = 20.7 BMIs from 18.4 to 26.7 (mean=22.4) Percent body fat from 21.1-34.2% (mean=27.7%) Cardiovascular fitness (VO 2 ) WHR (0.72-0.84, mean=0.74), WCR, torso-to-leg ratio, leg length Caucasians, but differences in skin tone

21. Example Image

22. Results No significance relationships between attractiveness and cardiovascular fitness or WHR Significant relationships between attractiveness and % body fat and skin tone index

23. Role of Characteristics With these stimuli, attractiveness judgments best explained by % body fat –WHR and WCR both co-vary with body weight Darker skin tone given higher attractiveness ratings –Social hierarchy of tanning? –Seems largely specific to Caucasians in Western culture

24. Fitness More realistic images than any earlier 3D representations Cardiovascular fitness is good predictor of long- term health Perhaps only assessed during physical activity –Brown et al. (2005) dancing study Ancestrally, body fat may have been closely linked to cardiovascular health –In modern industrial society, body fat and cardiovascular fitness can be decoupled –Makes fitness judgments more difficult

25. 18 Years Later… Initial implications of universal preference for WHR=0.7 not supported However, with a few exceptions, findings support male preference for lower WHRs over higher WHRs

26. Shape and Weight A consistent, ongoing issue of confounds Difficult to successfully separate Camps of shape supporters and weight supporters

27. WHR as First Pass Filter? Probably not Weight (BMI, volumetric estimations, etc.) probably account for greater variability in attractiveness judgments Facial features Personality Complex interactive function

28. Effects of Weight Removed Does WHR make significant predictions of attractiveness with effects of weight removed Seems to be “yes” Both empirical and theoretical support for importance of WHR in judgments Both shape and weight predictors of health and fertility

29. Environmental Parameters Local resource hypothesis Recent work showing that adaptations may be more rapid than previously believed Evolved adaptations are generally predispositions, especially at the level of complex behaviour Intersection with learning

30. Limitations of Studies re: EEA University students (age, socioeconomics, enculturation) Culture (1st world, 3rd world, hunter- gatherer) Comparisons back to actual EEA E.g., consider the ambiguities of the role of clothing…

31. Progression in Science Started as a rather simple, but testable, EP hypothesis Good scientific theories are “fruitful” Nearly 20 years on A lot of research has been generated