IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i14p5176-d386075.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shifts in Female Facial Attractiveness during Pregnancy

Author

Listed:
  • Dariusz P. Danel

    (Department of Anthropology, Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, 53-114 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Kasper Kalinowski

    (Independent researcher, 10-346 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Natalia Nowak-Szczepanska

    (Department of Anthropology, Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, 53-114 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Anna Ziomkiewicz-Wichary

    (Department of Anthropology, Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, 53-114 Wrocław, Poland
    Department of Anthropology, Institute of Zoology and Biomedical Research, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Krakow, Poland)

  • Anna Apanasewicz

    (Department of Anthropology, Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, 53-114 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Krzysztof Borysławski

    (Department of Anthropology, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, 51-631 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Sławomir Kozieł

    (Department of Anthropology, Ludwik Hirszfeld Institute of Immunology and Experimental Therapy, Polish Academy of Sciences, 53-114 Wrocław, Poland)

  • Danuta Kornafel

    (Department of Human Biology, University of Wroclaw, 50-138 Wroclaw, Poland)

  • Pawel Fedurek

    (Division of Psychology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, FK9 4LA Stirling, UK)

Abstract

It has been proposed that women’s physical attractiveness is a cue to temporal changes in fertility. If this is the case, we should observe shifts in attractiveness during pregnancy—a unique physiological state of temporal infertility. The aim of this study was to examine how women’s facial attractiveness changes during the subsequent trimesters of pregnancy and how it compares to that of nonpregnant women. Sixty-six pictures of pregnant women (22 pictures per trimester) and 22 of nonpregnant women (a control group) were used to generate four composite portraits, which were subsequently assessed for facial attractiveness by 117 heterosexual men. The results show considerable differences between facial attractiveness ratings depending on the status and progress of pregnancy. Nonpregnant women were perceived as the most attractive, and the attractiveness scores of pregnant women decreased throughout the course of pregnancy. Our findings show that facial attractiveness can be influenced by pregnancy and that gestation, even at its early stages, affects facial attractiveness. Considerable changes in women’s physiology that occur during pregnancy may be responsible for the observed effects.

Suggested Citation

  • Dariusz P. Danel & Kasper Kalinowski & Natalia Nowak-Szczepanska & Anna Ziomkiewicz-Wichary & Anna Apanasewicz & Krzysztof Borysławski & Sławomir Kozieł & Danuta Kornafel & Pawel Fedurek, 2020. "Shifts in Female Facial Attractiveness during Pregnancy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-10, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:5176-:d:386075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/14/5176/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/14/5176/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jan Havliček & Kelly D. Cobey & Louise Barrett & Kateřina Klapilová & S. Craig Roberts, 2015. "Greater precision, not parsimony, is the key to testing the peri-ovulation spandrel hypothesis: a response to comments on Havliček et al. 2015," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1265-1267.
    2. Karbowski, Adam & Deja, Dominik & Zawisza, Mateusz, 2016. "Perceived female intelligence as economic bad in partner choice," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 102, pages 217-222.
    3. D. I. Perrett & K. J. Lee & I. Penton-Voak & D. Rowland & S. Yoshikawa & D. M. Burt & S. P. Henzi & D. L. Castles & S. Akamatsu, 1998. "Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness," Nature, Nature, vol. 394(6696), pages 884-887, August.
    4. Jan Havliček & Kelly D. Cobey & Louise Barrett & Kateřina Klapilová & S. Craig Roberts, 2015. "The spandrels of Santa Barbara? A new perspective on the peri-ovulation paradigm," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1249-1260.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. James R. Roney & Aaron W. Lukaszewski & Zachary L. Simmons & Adar B. Eisenbruch & Rachel L. Grillot, 2015. "A between-women account of cycle-phase shifts is probably wrong: comment on Havliček et al," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1264-1265.
    2. Francisco B. Galarza & Gustavo Yamada, 2017. "Triple penalty in employment access: The role of beauty, race, and sex," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 20, pages 29-47, May.
    3. Jeanne Bovet & Michel Raymond, 2015. "Preferred Women’s Waist-to-Hip Ratio Variation over the Last 2,500 Years," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, April.
    4. Jin-Ying Zhuang & Sen Zhang & Jing Xu & Die Hu, 2014. "Discriminating Males and Unpredictable Females: Males Differentiate Self-Similar Facial Cues More than Females in the Judgment of Opposite-Sex Attractiveness," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-9, March.
    5. Alan Dixson, 2015. "Human sexuality and the menstrual cycle: comment on Havliček et al," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1261-1261.
    6. Ghoshal, Gourab & Holme, Petter, 2006. "Attractiveness and activity in Internet communities," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 364(C), pages 603-609.
    7. Anthony C. Little & Vít Třebický & Jan Havlíček & S. Craig Roberts & Karel Kleisner, 2015. "Editor's choice Human perception of fighting ability: facial cues predict winners and losers in mixed martial arts fights," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(6), pages 1470-1475.
    8. Zaneta M Thayer & Seth D Dobson, 2013. "Geographic Variation in Chin Shape Challenges the Universal Facial Attractiveness Hypothesis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-5, April.
    9. Borau, Sylvie & Bonnefon, Jean-François, 2020. "Gendered products act as the extended phenotype of human sexual dimorphism: They increase physical attractiveness and desirability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 498-508.
    10. Isabel M L Scott & Nicholas Pound & Ian D Stephen & Andrew P Clark & Ian S Penton-Voak, 2010. "Does Masculinity Matter? The Contribution of Masculine Face Shape to Male Attractiveness in Humans," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-10, October.
    11. Jan Havliček & Kelly D. Cobey & Louise Barrett & Kateřina Klapilová & S. Craig Roberts, 2015. "Greater precision, not parsimony, is the key to testing the peri-ovulation spandrel hypothesis: a response to comments on Havliček et al. 2015," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 26(5), pages 1265-1267.
    12. Erika Limoncin & Caterina Solano & Giacomo Ciocca & Daniele Mollaioli & Elena Colonnello & Andrea Sansone & Filippo Maria Nimbi & Chiara Simonelli & Renata Tambelli & Emmanuele Angelo Jannini, 2020. "Can Physical and/or Sexual Abuse Play a Role in the Female Choice of a Partner? A Cross-Sectional, Correlational Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-13, September.
    13. Gignac, Gilles E. & Zajenkowski, Marcin, 2019. "People tend to overestimate their romantic partner's intelligence even more than their own," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 41-51.
    14. Victor Shiramizu & Ciaran Docherty & Lisa M DeBruine & Benedict C Jones, 2020. "Sexual orientation predicts men’s preferences for sexually dimorphic face-shape characteristics: A replication study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-6, November.
    15. Francisco Galarza & Gustavo Yamada & Carlos Zelada, 2015. "Cuesta arriba para los afroperuanos: evidencia de la discriminación en el acceso al mercado laboral de Lima Metropolitana," Working Papers 15-03, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.
    16. Mariska E Kret & Masaki Tomonaga, 2016. "Getting to the Bottom of Face Processing. Species-Specific Inversion Effects for Faces and Behinds in Humans and Chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-13, November.
    17. José Antonio Muñoz-Reyes & Marta Iglesias-Julios & Miguel Pita & Enrique Turiegano, 2015. "Facial Features: What Women Perceive as Attractive and What Men Consider Attractive," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    18. Barnaby JW Dixson & Anthony C Little & Henry GW Dixson & Robert C Brooks, 2017. "Do prevailing environmental factors influence human preferences for facial morphology?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 28(5), pages 1217-1227.
    19. Rainer Voegeli & Rotraut Schoop & Elodie Prestat-Marquis & Anthony V Rawlings & Todd K Shackelford & Bernhard Fink, 2021. "Cross-cultural perception of female facial appearance: A multi-ethnic and multi-centre study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Nakahashi, Wataru, 2008. "Quantitative genetic models of sexual selection by male choice," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 167-181.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:14:p:5176-:d:386075. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.