Since the early twentieth century, psychologists have known that there is consensus in attributing social and personality characteristics from facial appearance. Recent studies have shown that surprisingly little time and effort are needed to arrive at this consensus. Here we review recent research on social attributions from faces. Section I outlines data-driven methods capable of identifying the perceptual basis of consensus in social attributions from faces (e.g., What makes a face look threatening?). Section II describes nonperceptual determinants of social attributions (e.g., person knowledge and incidental associations). Section III discusses evidence that attributions from faces predict important social outcomes in diverse domains (e.g., investment decisions and leader selection). In Section IV, we argue that the diagnostic validity of these attributions has been greatly overstated in the literature. In the final section, we offer an account of the functional significance of these attributions.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Ames DR, Kammrath LK, Suppes A, Bolger N. 2010. Not so fast: the (not-quite-complete) dissociation between accuracy and confidence in thin-slice impressions. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 36:264–77 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersen SM, Baum A. 1994. Transference in interpersonal relations: inferences and affect based on significant-other representations. J. Personal. 62:459–97 [Google Scholar]
  3. Andersen SM, Cole SW. 1990. “Do I know you?” The role of significant others in general social perception. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 59:384–99 [Google Scholar]
  4. Antonakis J, Dalgas O. 2009. Predicting elections: child's play!. Science 323:1183 [Google Scholar]
  5. Asch SE. 1946. Forming impressions of personality. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 41:258–90 [Google Scholar]
  6. Aviezer H, Trope Y, Todorov A. 2012. Body cues, not facial expressions, discriminate between intense positive and negative emotions. Science 338:1225–29 [Google Scholar]
  7. Back MD, Stopfer JM, Vazire S, Gaddis S, Schmukle SC. et al. 2010. Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychol. Sci. 21:372–74 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bailenson JN, Iyengar S, Yee N, Collins NA. 2008. Facial similarity between voters and candidates causes influence. Public Opin. Q. 72:935–61 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ballew CC 2nd, Todorov A. 2007. Predicting political elections from rapid and unreflective face judgments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104:17948–53 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bar M, Neta M, Linz H. 2006. Very first impressions. Emotion 6:269–78 [Google Scholar]
  11. Bayliss AP, Tipper SP. 2006. Predictive gaze cues and personality judgments: Should eye trust you?. Psychol. Sci. 17:514–20 [Google Scholar]
  12. Berry DS, McArthur LZ. 1986. Perceiving character in faces: the impact of age-related craniofacial changes on social perception. Psychol. Bull. 100:3–18 [Google Scholar]
  13. Berry DS, Zebrowitz-McArthur L. 1988. What's in a face? Facial maturity and the attribution of legal responsibility. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 14:23–33 [Google Scholar]
  14. Blair IV, Judd CM, Chapleau KM. 2004. The influence of Afrocentric facial features in criminal sentencing. Psychol. Sci. 15:674–79 [Google Scholar]
  15. Blanz V, Vetter T. 1999. A morphable model for the synthesis of 3D faces. Proc. 26th Annu. Conf. Comput. Graphics Interact. Tech. 187–94 New York: Addison-Wesley/ACM Press [Google Scholar]
  16. Blanz V, Vetter T. 2003. Face recognition based on fitting a 3D morphable model. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. IEEE Trans. 25:1063–74 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bliss-Moreau E, Barrett LF, Wright CI. 2008. Individual differences in learning the affective value of others under minimal conditions. Emotion 8:479–93 [Google Scholar]
  18. Boothroyd LG, Jones BC, Burt DM, Perrett DI. 2007. Partner characteristics associated with masculinity, health and maturity in male faces. Personal. Individ. Differ. 43:1161–73 [Google Scholar]
  19. Borkenau P, Brecke S, Möttig C, Paelecke M. 2009. Extraversion is accurately perceived after a 50-ms exposure to a face. J. Res. Personal. 43:703–6 [Google Scholar]
  20. Borkenau P, Liebler A. 1992. Trait inferences: sources of validity at zero acquaintance. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 62:645–57 [Google Scholar]
  21. Brahnam S. 2005. A computational model of the trait impressions of the face for agent perception and face synthesis. AISB J. 1:481–508 [Google Scholar]
  22. Brandenburg GC. 1926. Do physical traits portray character?. Ind. Psychol. 1:580–88 [Google Scholar]
  23. Buckingham G, DeBruine LM, Little AC, Welling LLM, Conway CA. et al. 2006. Visual adaptation to masculine and feminine faces influences generalized preferences and perceptions of trustworthiness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27:381–89 [Google Scholar]
  24. Burton AM, Jenkins R. 2011. Unfamiliar face perception. Handbook of Face Perception A Calder, JV Haxby, M Johnson, G Rhodes 287–306 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  25. Carpinella CM, Johnson KL. 2013. Appearance-based politics: Sex-typed facial cues communicate political party affiliation. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49:156–60 [Google Scholar]
  26. Carré JM, McCormick CM. 2008. In your face: Facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players. Proc. Biol. Sci. 275:2651–56 [Google Scholar]
  27. Carré JM, McCormick CM, Mondloch CJ. 2009. Facial structure is a reliable cue of aggressive behavior. Psychol. Sci. 20:1194–98 [Google Scholar]
  28. Castelli L, Carraro L, Ghitti C, Pastore M. 2009. The effects of perceived competence and sociability on electoral outcomes. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45:1152–55 [Google Scholar]
  29. Chang LJ, Doll BB, van't Wout M, Frank MJ, Sanfey AG. 2010. Seeing is believing: trustworthiness as a dynamic belief. Cogn. Psychol. 61:87–105 [Google Scholar]
  30. Chen FF, Jing Y, Lee JM. 2014. The looks of a leader: competent and trustworthy, but not dominant. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 51:27–33 [Google Scholar]
  31. Chen S, Andersen SM. 1999. Relationships from the past in the present: significant-other representations and transference in interpersonal life. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 31 MP Zanna 123–90 San Diego, CA: Academic [Google Scholar]
  32. Chiao JY, Bowman NE, Gill H. 2008. The political gender gap: gender bias in facial inferences that predict voting behavior. PLOS ONE 3:e3666 [Google Scholar]
  33. Cleeton GC, Knight FB. 1924. Validity of character judgments based on external criteria. J. Appl. Psychol. 8:215–31 [Google Scholar]
  34. Cogsdill EJ, Todorov AT, Spelke ES, Banaji MR. 2014. Inferring character from faces: a developmental study. Psychol. Sci. 25:1132–39 [Google Scholar]
  35. Deaner RO, Goetz SMM, Shattuck K, Schnotala T. 2012. Body weight, not facial width-to-height ratio, predicts aggression in pro hockey players. J. Res. Personal. 46:235–38 [Google Scholar]
  36. DeBruine LM. 2002. Facial resemblance enhances trust. Proc. R. Soc. B 269:1307–12 [Google Scholar]
  37. DeBruine LM. 2005. Trustworthy but not lust-worthy: context-specific effects of facial resemblance. Proc. R. Soc. B 272:919–22 [Google Scholar]
  38. Doallo S, Raymond JE, Shapiro KL, Kiss M, Eimer M, Nobre AC. 2012. Response inhibition results in the emotional devaluation of faces: neural correlates as revealed by fMRI. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 7:649–59 [Google Scholar]
  39. Dotsch R, Todorov A. 2012. Reverse correlating social face perception. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 3:562–71 [Google Scholar]
  40. Dotsch R, Wigboldus DHJ, Langner O, van Knippenberg A. 2008. Ethnic out-group faces are biased in the prejudiced mind. Psychol. Sci. 19:978–80 [Google Scholar]
  41. Dotsch R, Wigboldus DHJ, van Knippenberg A. 2011. Biased allocation of faces to social categories. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 100:999–1014 [Google Scholar]
  42. Dotsch R, Wigboldus DHJ, Van Knippenberg A. 2013. Behavioral information biases the expected facial appearance of members of novel groups. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 43:116–25 [Google Scholar]
  43. Dumas R, Testé B. 2006. The influence of criminal facial stereotypes on juridic judgments. Swiss J. Psychol. 65:237–44 [Google Scholar]
  44. Dunham Y, Srinivasan M, Dotsch R, Barner D. 2014. Religion insulates ingroup evaluations: the development of intergroup attitudes in India. Dev. Sci. 17:311–19 [Google Scholar]
  45. Eagly AH, Ashmore RD, Makhijani MG, Longo LC. 1991. What is beautiful is good, but…: a meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychol. Bull. 110:109–28 [Google Scholar]
  46. Eberhardt JL, Davies PG, Purdie-Vaughns VJ, Johnson SL. 2006. Looking deathworthy: Perceived stereotypicality of black defendants predicts capital-sentencing outcomes. Psychol. Sci. 17:383–86 [Google Scholar]
  47. Éthier-Majcher C, Joubert S, Gosselin F. 2013. Reverse correlating trustworthy faces in young and older adults. Front. Psychol. 4:592 [Google Scholar]
  48. Fenske MJ, Raymond JE, Kessler K, Westoby N, Tipper SP. 2005. Attentional inhibition has social-emotional consequences for unfamiliar faces. Psychol. Sci. 16:753–58 [Google Scholar]
  49. Flowe HD, Humphries JE. 2011. An examination of criminal face bias in a random sample of police lineups. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 25:265–73 [Google Scholar]
  50. Freeman JB, Ma Y, Han S, Ambady N. 2013. Influences of culture and visual context on real-time social categorization. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49:206–10 [Google Scholar]
  51. Freeman JB, Penner AM, Saperstein A, Scheutz M, Ambady N. 2011. Looking the part: social status cues shape race perception. PLOS ONE 6:e25107 [Google Scholar]
  52. Frischen A, Ferrey AE, Burt DHR, Pistchik M, Fenske MJ. 2012. The affective consequences of cognitive inhibition: devaluation or neutralization?. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 38:169–79 [Google Scholar]
  53. Galton F. 1907. Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development London: JM Dent [Google Scholar]
  54. Gill D, Garrod OG, Jack RE, Schyns PG. 2014. Facial movements strategically camouflage involuntary social signals of face morphology. Psychol. Sci. 25:1079–86 [Google Scholar]
  55. Goetz SMM, Shattuck KS, Miller RM, Campbell JA, Lozoya E. et al. 2013. Social status moderates the relationship between facial structure and aggression. Psychol. Sci. 24:2329–34 [Google Scholar]
  56. Gómez-Valdés J, Hünemeier T, Quinto-Sánchez M, Paschetta C, de Azevedo S. et al. 2013. Lack of support for the association between facial shape and aggression: a reappraisal based on a worldwide population genetics perspective. PLOS ONE 8:e52317 [Google Scholar]
  57. Goren A, Todorov A. 2009. Two faces are better than one: eliminating false trait associations with faces. Soc. Cogn. 27:222–48 [Google Scholar]
  58. Gosselin F, Schyns PG. 2001. Bubbles: a technique to reveal the use of information in recognition tasks. Vis. Res. 41:2261–71 [Google Scholar]
  59. Gosselin F, Schyns PG. 2003. Superstitious perceptions reveal properties of internal representations. Psychol. Sci. 14:505–9 [Google Scholar]
  60. Graham JR, Harvey CR, Puri M. 2014. A corporate beauty contest. Durham, NC: Fuqua Sch. Bus., Duke Univ. Unpubl. manuscr. http://ssrn.com/abstract=1571469
  61. Greenwald AG, Nosek BA, Banaji MR. 2003. Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 85:197–216 [Google Scholar]
  62. Günaydin G, Zayas V, Selcuk E, Hazan C. 2012. I like you but I don't know why: Objective facial resemblance to significant others influences snap judgments. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48:350–53 [Google Scholar]
  63. Haselhuhn MP, Wong EM. 2012. Bad to the bone: Facial structure predicts unethical behaviour. Proc. Biol. Sci. B 279:571–76 [Google Scholar]
  64. Hassin R, Trope Y. 2000. Facing faces: studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 78:837–52 [Google Scholar]
  65. Hess U, Blairy S, Kleck RE. 2000. The influence of facial emotion displays, gender, and ethnicity on judgments of dominance and affiliation. J. Nonverbal Behav. 24:265–83 [Google Scholar]
  66. Hollingworth HL. 1922. Judging Human Character New York: D Appleton [Google Scholar]
  67. Hull CL. 1928. Aptitude Testing Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book [Google Scholar]
  68. Imhoff R, Dotsch R. 2013. Do we look like me or like us? Visual projection as self- or ingroup-projection. Soc. Cogn. 31:806–16 [Google Scholar]
  69. Imhoff R, Dotsch R, Bianchi M, Banse R, Wigboldus DHJ. 2011. Facing Europe: visualizing spontaneous in-group projection. Psychol. Sci. 22:1583–90 [Google Scholar]
  70. Imhoff R, Woelki J, Hanke S, Dotsch R. 2013. Warmth and competence in your face! Visual encoding of stereotype content. Front. Psychol. 4:386 [Google Scholar]
  71. Ito TA, Willadsen-Jensen EC, Kaye JT, Park B. 2011. Contextual variation in automatic evaluative bias to racially-ambiguous faces. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 47:818–23 [Google Scholar]
  72. Jack RE, Caldara R, Schyns PG. 2012a. Internal representations reveal cultural diversity in expectations of facial expressions of emotion. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 141:19–25 [Google Scholar]
  73. Jack RE, Garrod OGB, Yu H, Caldara R, Schyns PG. 2012b. Facial expressions of emotion are not culturally universal. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109:7241–44 [Google Scholar]
  74. Jahoda G. 1954. Political attitudes and judgments of other people. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 49:330–34 [Google Scholar]
  75. Jenkins R, White D, Van Montfort X, Burton AM. 2011. Variability in photos of the same face. Cognition 121:313–23 [Google Scholar]
  76. Kahneman D. 2003. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am. Psychol. 58:697–720 [Google Scholar]
  77. Karremans JC, Dotsch R, Corneille O. 2011. Romantic relationship status biases memory of faces of attractive opposite-sex others: evidence from a reverse-correlation paradigm. Cognition 121:422–26 [Google Scholar]
  78. Kleisner K, Chvatalova V, Flegr J. 2014. Perceived intelligence is associated with measured intelligence in men but not women. PLOS ONE 9:e81237 [Google Scholar]
  79. Kleisner K, Priplatova L, Frost P, Flegr J. 2013. Trustworthy-looking face meets brown eyes. PLOS ONE 8:e53285 [Google Scholar]
  80. Knutson B. 1996. Facial expressions of emotion influence interpersonal trait inferences. J. Nonverbal Behav. 20:165–82 [Google Scholar]
  81. Kontsevich LL, Tyler CW. 2004. What makes Mona Lisa smile?. Vis. Res. 44:1493–98 [Google Scholar]
  82. Kramer RS, Jones AL, Ward R. 2012. A lack of sexual dimorphism in width-to-height ratio in white European faces using 2D photographs, 3D scans, and anthropometry. PLOS ONE 7:e42705 [Google Scholar]
  83. Kraus MW, Chen S. 2010. Facial-feature resemblance elicits the transference effect. Psychol. Sci. 21:518–22 [Google Scholar]
  84. Krumhuber E, Manstead ASR, Cosker D, Marshall D, Rosin PL, Kappas A. 2007. Facial dynamics as indicators of trustworthiness and cooperative behavior. Emotion 7:730–35 [Google Scholar]
  85. Krupp DB, Debruine LM, Barclay P. 2008. A cue of kinship promotes cooperation for the public good. Evol. Hum. Behav. 29:49–55 [Google Scholar]
  86. Laird DA. 1927. The Psychology of Selecting Men New York: McGraw-Hill, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  87. Laustsen L. 2013. Decomposing the relationship between candidates' facial appearance and electoral success. Polit. Behav. doi:10.1007/s11109-013-9253-1 [Google Scholar]
  88. Lavater JC. 1800. Essays on physiognomy for the promotion of the knowledge and the love of mankind; written in the German language by J.C. Lavater, abridged from Mr. Holcrofts translation. London: printed for GGJ & J Robinson.
  89. Lawson C, Lenz GS, Baker A, Myers M. 2010. Looking like a winner: candidate appearance and electoral success in new democracies. World Polit. 62:561–93 [Google Scholar]
  90. Lefevre CE, Lewis GJ, Bates TC, Dzhelyova M, Coetzee V. et al. 2012. No evidence for sexual dimorphism of facial width-to-height ratio in four large adult samples. Evol. Hum. Behav. 33:623–27 [Google Scholar]
  91. Lenz GS, Lawson C. 2011. Looking the part: Television leads less informed citizens to vote based on candidates' appearance. Am. J. Pol. Sci. 55:574–89 [Google Scholar]
  92. Litterer OF. 1933. Stereotypes. J. Soc. Psychol. 4:59–69 [Google Scholar]
  93. Little AC, Burriss RP, Jones BC, Roberts SC. 2007. Facial appearance affects voting decisions. Evol. Hum. Behav. 28:18–27 [Google Scholar]
  94. Little AC, Burt DM, Perrett DI. 2006. What is good is beautiful: Face preference reflects desired personality. Personal. Individ. Differ. 41:1107–18 [Google Scholar]
  95. Livingston RW, Pearce NA. 2009. The teddy-bear effect: Does having a baby face benefit black chief executive officers?. Psychol. Sci. 20:1229–36 [Google Scholar]
  96. Loehr J, O'Hara RB. 2013. Facial morphology predicts male fitness and rank but not survival in Second World War Finnish soldiers. Biol. Lett. 9:20130049 [Google Scholar]
  97. Lombroso C. 2006. Criminal Man Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  98. Macrae CN, Shepherd JW. 1989. Do criminal stereotypes mediate juridic judgements?. Br. J. Soc. Psychol. 28:189–91 [Google Scholar]
  99. Mangini MC, Biederman I. 2004. Making the ineffable explicit: estimating the information employed for face classifications. Cogn. Sci. 28:209–26 [Google Scholar]
  100. Marsh AA, Adams RB Jr, Kleck RE. 2005. Why do fear and anger look the way they do? Form and social function in facial expressions. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 31:73–86 [Google Scholar]
  101. Martin DS. 1978. Person perception and real-life electoral behaviour. Aust. J. Psychol. 30:255–62 [Google Scholar]
  102. Mattes K, Spezio M, Kim H, Todorov A, Adolphs R, Alvarez RM. 2010. Predicting election outcomes from positive and negative trait assessments of candidate images. Pol. Psychol. 31:41–58 [Google Scholar]
  103. Mazur A, Mazur J, Keating C. 1984. Military rank attainment of a West Point class: effects of cadets' physical features. Am. J. Sociol. 90:125–50 [Google Scholar]
  104. McArthur LZ, Apatow K. 1984. Impressions of baby-faced adults. Soc. Cogn. 2:315–42 [Google Scholar]
  105. McArthur LZ, Baron RM. 1983. Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychol. Rev. 90:215–38 [Google Scholar]
  106. Montepare JM, Dobish H. 2003. The contribution of emotion perceptions and their overgeneralizations to trait impressions. J. Nonverbal Behav. 27:237–54 [Google Scholar]
  107. Montepare JM, Zebrowitz LA. 1998. Person perception comes of age: the salience and significance of age in social judgments. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology PZ Mark 93–161 New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
  108. Mueller U, Mazur A. 1996. Facial dominance of West Point cadets as a predictor of later military rank. Soc. Forces 74:823–50 [Google Scholar]
  109. Mueller U, Mazur A. 1997. Facial dominance in Homo sapiens as honest signaling of male quality. Behav. Ecol. 8:569–79 [Google Scholar]
  110. Naumann LP, Vazire S, Rentfrow PJ, Gosling SD. 2009. Personality judgments based on physical appearance. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 35:1661–71 [Google Scholar]
  111. Neth D, Martinez AM. 2009. Emotion perception in emotionless face images suggests a norm-based representation. J. Vis. 9:1–11 [Google Scholar]
  112. Olivola CY, Eastwick PW, Finkel EJ, Hortacsu A, Ariely D, Todorov A. 2014a. A picture is worth a thousand inferences: first impressions and mate selection in Internet matchmaking and speed-dating. Pittsburgh, PA: Tepper Sch. Bus. Carnegie Mellon Univ. Unpubl. manuscr.
  113. Olivola CY, Eubanks DL, Lovelace JB. 2014b. The many (distinctive) faces of leadership: inferring leadership domain from facial appearance. Leadersh. Q. 25817–34 [Google Scholar]
  114. Olivola CY, Sussman AB, Tsetsos K, Kang OE, Todorov A. 2012. Republicans prefer Republican-looking leaders: Political facial stereotypes predict candidate electoral success among right-leaning voters. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 3:605–13 [Google Scholar]
  115. Olivola CY, Tingley D, Bonica A, Todorov A. 2014c. The donkey in elephant's clothing: revisiting the impact and validity of political facial stereotypes. Pittsburgh, PA: Tepper Sch. Bus., Carnegie Mellon Univ.
  116. Olivola CY, Todorov A. 2010a. Elected in 100 milliseconds: appearance-based trait inferences and voting. J. Nonverbal Behav. 34:83–110 [Google Scholar]
  117. Olivola CY, Todorov A. 2010b. Fooled by first impressions? Reexamining the diagnostic value of appearance-based inferences. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 46:315–24 [Google Scholar]
  118. Oosterhof NN, Todorov A. 2008. The functional basis of face evaluation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105:11087–92 [Google Scholar]
  119. Oosterhof NN, Todorov A. 2009. Shared perceptual basis of emotional expressions and trustworthiness impressions from faces. Emotion 9:128–33 [Google Scholar]
  120. Penton-Voak IS, Pound N, Little AC, Perrett DI. 2006. Personality judgments from natural and composite facial images: more evidence for a “kernel of truth” in social perception. Soc. Cogn. 24:607–40 [Google Scholar]
  121. Porter S, England L, Juodis M, ten Brinke L, Wilson K. 2008. Is the face a window to the soul? Investigation of the accuracy of intuitive judgments of the trustworthiness of human faces. Can. J. Behav. Sci. 40:171–77 [Google Scholar]
  122. Porter S, ten Brinke L, Gustaw C. 2010. Dangerous decisions: the impact of first impressions of trustworthiness on the evaluation of legal evidence and defendant culpability. Psychol. Crime Law 16:477–91 [Google Scholar]
  123. Poutvaara P, Jordahl H, Berggren N. 2009. Faces of politicians: Babyfacedness predicts inferred competence but not electoral success. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 45:1132–35 [Google Scholar]
  124. Ratner KG, Dotsch R, Wigboldus DHJ, Van Knippenberg A, Amodio DM. 2014. Visualizing minimal ingroup and outgroup faces: implications for impressions, attitudes, and behavior. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 106:897–911 [Google Scholar]
  125. Raymond JE, Fenske MJ, Westoby N. 2005. Emotional devaluation of distracting patterns and faces: a consequence of attentional inhibition during visual search?. J. Exp. Psychol.: Hum. Percept. Perform. 31:1404–15 [Google Scholar]
  126. Rezlescu C, Duchaine B, Olivola CY, Chater N. 2012. Unfakeable facial configurations affect strategic choices in trust games with or without information about past behavior. PLOS ONE 7:e34293 [Google Scholar]
  127. Rhodes G, Jeffery L, Watson TL, Clifford CWG, Nakayama K. 2003. Fitting the mind to the world: face adaptation and attractiveness aftereffects. Psychol. Sci. 14:558–66 [Google Scholar]
  128. Robinson K, Blais C, Duncan J, Forget H, Fiset D. 2014. The dual nature of the human face: There is a little Jekyll and a little Hyde in all of us. Front. Psychol. 5:139 [Google Scholar]
  129. Rule NO, Ambady N. 2008a. Brief exposures: Male sexual orientation is accurately perceived at 50 ms. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 44:1100–5 [Google Scholar]
  130. Rule NO, Ambady N. 2008b. The face of success: Inferences from chief executive officers' appearance predict company profits. Psychol. Sci. 19:109–11 [Google Scholar]
  131. Rule NO, Ambady N. 2009. She's got the look: Inferences from female chief executive officers' faces predict their success. Sex Roles 61:644–52 [Google Scholar]
  132. Rule NO, Ambady N. 2010. Democrats and Republicans can be differentiated from their faces. PLOS ONE 5:e8733 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error