Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review.

By J. Langlois, Lisa Kalakanis, Adam J. Rubenstein, Andrea E. Larson, Monica Hallam, Monica Smoot. Psychological bulletin, 2000

2,423 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Marketing

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ab73e70e7421d3aff7e8e6e01e32e486a0326d13

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Marketing

Citations in the corpus

IS BEAUTIFUL ALWAYS GOOD? IMPLICIT BENEFITS OF FACIAL ATTRACTIVENESS (2004, background): “Daily experience (and an extensive literature) attests that good-looking people are more popular with their peers and are treated more favorably by others than their unattractive counterparts (Langlois et al., 2000).”
Testing an Adaptationist Theory of Trait Covariation: Relative Bargaining Power as a Common Calibrator of an Interpersonal Syndrome (2013, background): “…evidence indicates that certain of these trait dimensions can be predicted from variations in RBP-enhancing phenotypic features such as physical attractiveness (Feingold, 1992; Langlois et al., 2000; Lukaszewski & Roney, 2011; Smith et al., 2009) and physical strength (Lukaszewski & Roney, 2011).”
The Impact of Candidate Appearance and Advertising Strategies on Election Results (2011, background): “It parallels research in face perception that reports high levels of interrater agreement on ratings of attractiveness and facial emotion across gender and culture (Ekman 2004; Langlois et al. 2000).”
Beauty, gender and stereotypes : Evidence from laboratory experiments (2008, background): “Finally, simply knowing what each other player has chosen can also have an impact.”
Happiness and despair on the catwalk: Need satisfaction, well-being, and personality adjustment among fashion models (2007, methodology): “Even though a great deal of evidence shows that attractive people, compared to less attractive ones, are generally treated more favorably and are better adjusted (Langlois et al., 2000), these benefits of attractiveness did not extend to our groups of professional fashion models.”
EvaluaTiNg faCES ON TruSTwOrThiNESS afTEr miNimal TimE ExpOSurE (2009, background): “…and there is abundant research about the effects of facial appearance on social outcomes (e.g., Blair, Judd, & Chapleau, 2004; Eberhardt, Davies, Purdie-Vaughns, & Johnson, 2006; Hamermesh & Biddle, 1994; Hassin & Trope, 2000; Langlois et al., 2000; Montepare & Zebrowitz, 1998; Zebrowitz, 1999).”
Humor ability reveals intelligence, predicts mating success, and is higher in males. (2011, background): “longevity (Gottfredson & Deary, 2004), body symmetry (Banks, Batchelor, & McDaniel, 2010), physical attractiveness (Langlois et al., 2000) and semen quality (Arden, Gottfredson, Miller, & Pierce, 2008).”
TARGET ARTICLE: Evolutionary Foundations of Cultural Variation: Evoked Culture and Mate Preferences (2006, neutral): “They did not explain the nature of the physical attractiveness stereotype itself, and hence they took it and its content for granted (though evolutionary perspectives do speak to it; e.g., Langlois et al., 2000).”
Visual adaptation to masculine and feminine faces influences generalized preferences and perceptions of trustworthiness (2006, background): “Face preferences and perceptions influence important social interactions including partner and associate choices, hiring decisions, and voting behavior (e.g., Langlois et al., 2000; Todorov, Mandisodza, Goren, & Hall, 2005).”
Judging a Book by its Cover: Beauty and Expectations in the Trust Game (2006, background): “) Consistent with the meta-analysis by Langlois et al. (2000) we find that subjects are in substantial agreement concerning their evaluations.”