AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
criteria that provide the best choice of mate. Therefore, we
consider our results consistent with the findings of Franklin and
Adams (2010), who proved, that faces rated in a sexual context
better predicted the attractiveness ratings of faces shown in
the left than the right visual field. The reason for the stronger left
face preference in female face composites compared to male face
composites might be seen in the evolutionary importance of
beauty that is detected in facial features. Whereas a female may
follow various mating strategies (e.g. long-term mating, short-
term opportunistic copulations, extra-pair copulations or serial
mating (Gangestad and Simpson, 2000; Greiling and Buss, 2000;
Buss, 2006) and therefore their preference for the presence of
male attractiveness may not be their primary criteria, males
predominantly prefer attractive (and thus healthy – Thornhill and
Grammer, 1999) female faces. In this area, we suggest further
research leading to an investigation of the possible influence of
actual mating strategies on left or right half face preference in
ratings.
However, the tendency to choose the left part of the face in the
attractiveness rating was also proven to be statistically
significant for male faces. Even though it was not as strong as
for female faces, it was still statistically significant. This also
applies to both female and male participants (evaluators).
Therefore, we can evaluate the preference for the left half of the
face in attractiveness ratings as universal. Except for the
monitoring of the effect of the sex of the evaluator/evaluated
face on the preference for the right or left part of the face, the
handedness of the face also seems to be a factor, which can also
determine choices. According to the results of previous research
(e.g., Perrett, 2010; Frässle, Krach, Paulus, and Jansen, 2016) we
suggest this area of investigation is very important.
Literature:
1.
Abbott, J. D., Wijeratne, T., Hughes, A., Perre, D.,
and Lindell, A. K.: The influence of left and right hemisphere
brain damage on configural and featural processing of affective
faces. Laterality, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 455–472, 2014, DOI:
10.1080/1357650X.2013.862256, ISSN: 1464-0678
2.
Beaird, J. E.: Three faced. [Online]. Retrieved [2017-08-20]
from URL: <http://jasongraphix.com/journal/three-faced/> 2009.
3.
Burt, D. M. and Perrett, D. I. Perceptual asymmetries in
judgements of facial attractiveness, age, gender, speech and
expression. Neuropsychologia, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 685–693, May
1997, ISSN: 0028-3932.
4.
Buss, D. M.: Strategies of human mating. Psychological
Topics, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 239–260, 2006, ISSN: 1332-0742.
5.
Butler, S. H. and Harvey, M.: Does inversion abolish the left
chimeric face processing advantage? Neuroreport, vol. 16, no.
18, pp. 1991–1993, Dec. 2005, ISSN: 0959-4965.
6.
Campbell, R.: Speechreading: what´s MISS-ing? In Calder,
A. J., Rhodes, G., Johnson, M. H. and Haxby, J. V. (Eds.): The
Oxford Handbook of Face Perception, New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014, pp. 605–630, 916 p. ISBN: 978-0-19-
955905-3.
7.
Chen, W., Liu, C. H., and Fu, X.: Asymmetry of left versus
right lateral face in face re cognition. In Paiva, A. C. R., Prada,
R., and Picard, R. W. (Eds.): Affective Computing and Intelligent
Interaction. ACII 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol.
4738. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer, 2007, pp. 712–
713, 786 p. ISBN: 978-3-540-74888-5.
8.
De Renzi, E., Perani, D., Carlesimo, G. A. Silveri, M. C.,
and Fazio, F. Prosopagnosia can be associated with damage
confined to the right-hemisphere – an MRI and PET study and a
review of the literature. Neuropsychologia, vol. 32, no. 8, pp.
893–902, Aug. 1994, ISSN: 0028-3932.
9.
Ellis, H. D. and Florence, M.: Bodamer’s (1947) paper on
prosopagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychology, vol. 7, no. 2, pp.
81–105, March 1990, ISSN: 0264-3294.
10.
Eriksson, P. S. Nerve Cells and Memory. In:
Ramachandran, V. S. (Ed.): Encyclopedia of the Human
Brain, vol. 3, Elsevier Science USA, 2002, pp. 305–312, ISBN :
978-0-12-227210-3.
11.
Fairhill L. S. and Ishai, A.: Effective connectivity within the
distributed cortical network for face perception. Cerebral
Cortex, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 2400–2408, Oct. 2007, ISSN: 1047-
3211.
12.
Franklin, R. G. and Adams, R. B.: The two sides of beauty:
Laterality and the duality of facial attractiveness. Brain and
Cognition, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 300–305, March 2010, ISSN:
0278-2626.
13.
Frässle, S. Krach, S., Paulus, F. M., and Jansen, A.:
Handedness is related to neural mechanisms underlying
hemispheric lateralization of face processing. Scientific Reports,
vol. 6, article no. 27153,
pp. 1–17, June 2016,
DOI: 10.1038/srep27153, ISSN: 2045-2322.
14.
Gainotti, G. and Marra, C.: Differential contribution of right
and left temporo-occipital and anterior temporal lesions to face
recognition disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, vol. 5,
no. 55, pp. 1–11, June 2011, DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2011.00055,
ISSN: 1662-5161.
15.
Gangestad, S. W. and Simpson, J. A.: The evolution of
mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 675–687, Aug. 2000, ISSN: 0140-
525X.
16.
Greiling, H. and Buss, D. M.: Women’s sexual strategies:
The hidden dimension of extra-pair mating. Personality and
Individual Differences, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 929–963, May 2000,
ISSN: 0191-8869.
17.
Haxby J. V. and Gobbini, M. I.: Distributed neural systems
for face perception. In: Calder, A. J., Rhodes, G., Johnson, M. H.
and Haxby, J. V. (Eds.): The Oxford Handbook of Face
Perception, New York: Oxford University Press, 2014, pp. 93–
110, 916 p. ISBN: 978-0-19-955905-3.
18.
Hoffman, E. A. and Haxby, J. V.: Distinct representations of
eye gaze and identity in the distributed human neural system for
face perception. Nature Neuroscience, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 80–84,
Jan. 2000, doi:10.1038/71152, ISSN: 1097-6256.
19.
Jebreil, S.: Symmetry. [Online]. Retrieved [2017-09-16] from
URL: <http://sarahjebreildds. com/symmetry/> 2015.
20.
Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., and Little, A.: The role
of symmetry in attraction to average faces. Attention, Perception,
and Psychophysics, vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 1273–1277, Nov. 2007,
ISSN: 1943-3921.
21.
Jung, W. et al.: Neural correlates of the eye dominance effect
in human face perception: the left-visual-field superiority for
faces revisited. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience,
article nsx056, pp. 1–9, Apr. 2017, DOI:10.1093/scan/nsx056,
ISSN: 1749-5016.
22.
Kriegeskorte, N., Formisano, E., Soger, B., and Goebel, R.:
Individual faces elict distinct response patterns in human anterior
temporal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 104, no. 51, pp.
20600–20605, Dec. 2007, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0705654104,
ISSN: 1091-6490.
23.
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., and Feinberg, D.
R.: Symmetry and sexual dimorphism in human faces:
Interrelated preferences suggest both signal quality. Behavioral
Ecology, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 902–908, July 2008, ISSN: 1045-
2249.
24.
Maguinness, C. and Newell, F. N.: Recognising others:
adaptive changes to person recognition throughout the lifespan.
In: Schwartz, B. L., Howe, M. L., Toglia, M. P., and Otgaar, H.
(Eds.): What is Adaptive about Adaptive Memory? New York:
Oxford University Press, 2014. pp. 231–257, 352 p. ISBN:
978-
0199928057.
25.
McKone, E. and Robbins, R.: Are faces special? In: Calder,
A. J., Rhodes, G., Johnson, M. H. and Haxby, J. V. (Eds.): The
Oxford Handbook of Face Perception, New York: Oxford
University Press, 2014, pp. 149–176, 916 p. ISBN: 978-0-19-
955905-3.
26.
Moller, A. P. and Anders, P.: Developmental stability and
fitness: A review. The American Naturalist, vol. 149, no. 5, pp.
916–932, May 1997, ISSN: 0003-0147.
27.
Nicholls, M. E. R., Wolfgang, B. J., Clode, D., and Lindell,
A. K.: The effect of left and right poses on the expression of
facial emotion. Neuropsychologia, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 1662–
1165, Feb. 2002, DOI: 10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00024-6, ISSN:
0028-3932.
- 249 -