Citation
Marshall, Riley L. & Dunkel, Curtis S. (2017). Physical attractiveness and the general factor of personality. Western Illinois University Graduate Research Conference. Macomb, Il.Abstract
Personality traits covary such that an individual who possesses a desirable trait is more likely to possess another desirable trait, suggesting a General Factor of Personality (GFP; Figueredo, Vásquez, Brumbach & Schneider, 2004). The GFP is thought to reflect social effectiveness, and evolutionarily reproductive fitness. Physical attractiveness also contributes to reproductive fitness, so due to mutation-selection balance it is likely that the GFP and physical attractiveness (PA) would be correlated (Dunkel & Van der Linden, 2014). This association is the focus of the current investigation. Specifically, the associations between the GFP and physical attractiveness was examined using a behavioral genetic framework. Data were derived from the sibling subsample of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (N=1639; Harris et al., 2009). This investigation utilizes data from the fourth wave, which occurred when the participants were between the ages of 25-33. During this wave, measures of personality and self-rated and rater-based physical attractiveness were collected. Univariate Cholesky models were used to determine the genetic and environmental contributions to the GFP and PA. Bivariate Cholesky models were used to investigate the extent to which genetic factors and environmental factors contributed to the relationship between PA and the GFP. Univariate Cholesky models showed significant additive genetic and non-shared environmental effects, but the non-shared environmental effects were more substantial in all cases. A bivariate Cholesky model of GFP and rater-based PA revealed that the covariance between these two constructs was due entirely to genetic factors (Table 1). On the other hand, additive genetic factors and non-shared environmental factors were responsible for the association between self-reported physical attractiveness and the GFP (Table 2). The covariance between rater-based PA and GFP was entirely due to genetic factors. This suggests that rater-based PA and GFP are both reflective of a genetically-based fitness factor. On the other hand, the association between self-rated PA and GFP was primarily due to non-shared environmental factors. This reflects a possible response bias in the reporting of both constructs (Bäckström & Björklund, 2016). Additionally, it is likely that self-rated PA is influenced by experiences, such as social interactions, that enforce beliefs about attractiveness (Kurzban and Weeden, 2005). Taken together, these results show that differential processes shape the associations between rater-based and self-reported physical attractiveness and the GFP.URL
http://www.wiu.edu/graduate_studies/graduate_research_conference/GRC-2017-Abstracts.pdfReference Type
Conference proceedingBook Title
Western Illinois University Graduate Research ConferenceAuthor(s)
Marshall, Riley L.Dunkel, Curtis S.