Determining determined by physical attractiveness, one’s career

Determining what is an attractive verses
an unattractive face is open to individual or culturally conditioned
interpretation. Deterred determination on exactly what features of an
attractive face makes it beautiful is tempered by the judgement of ideals
gradually signaled to a culture of a particular place and time. For example,
today in the Western society, media conditions the cultural definition of
beauty. If presented in another culture, a differing definition of
attractiveness would present itself. Likewise, in the same culture during
another era, what was considered beautiful then is starkly contrasted in
today’s definition of beauty. It appears then that defining physical
attractiveness is arbitrary and particular to a culture of a particular time.

5thAnthony
Little, Benedict Jones, and Lisa DeBruine explain how a person’s physical
attractiveness can determine vital social connectedness. Not only is dating and
ultimately, mating determined by physical attractiveness, one’s career advances
are also affected by one’s good looks. It is more likely for attractive people
to have more frequent dates and to be more satisfied with those dates than
their unattractive counterparts report. Especially for women, career
advancement is determined in great part by their physical attractiveness. Even
though research on social consequences show definite partiality to physical
attractiveness, it is hard to define exactly what makes a face beautiful.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

 

 

 

 

 

4th Not
only are people certainly recognized for their distinct physical
attractiveness, but being physically attractive is also rewarding. Brent
Scott’s and Timothy Judge’s research indicates that beauty is a socially valued
characteristic, serving as a status symbol (2013, p. 96). Evidence from the
survey indicates that the overall perception of beauty is somewhat subjective
and has the ability to influence preferences. Attractiveness bias is apparent
in work settings when considering prospective employees and promotions.
Appealing men and women are regarded and treated in a more positive manner,
receiving more social attention. Therefore, as opposed to mainstream views,
attractiveness influences opinions as well as actions towards others. While some employers are influenced by
physical appearance, overall it does not supersede work ethic and performance
efficiency when determining hiring actions, performance reviews, and
advancements. What is beautiful is not always good.

Women are more likely to seek out men with
healthy looking physical characteristics when they are experiencing peak
fertility and therefore likely to conceive. Ovulating women tend to look for
masculine characteristics that suggest a genetic advantage, such as facial
symmetry and social dominance, in order to provide the greatest benefit to
offspring. Although this type of man can provide good genes, he might be less
likely to stick around to help raise the child. Men are more inclined to find
attraction in women’s physical appearance that show signs of fertility, health,
and facial symmetry. People who share similar beliefs, morals, and interests
tend to be drawn to each other, contributing to the likelihood of a long-standing
relationship. Although judgement is a natural instinct, the tendency to form
general impressions and assign excessive importance to one dimension of a
person early on contributes to how a person or situation will be misconstrued.
The habit of prematurely judging and rejecting someone new or different because
we are not accustomed to their attributes can result in someone’s behavior
being stigmatized, ridiculed, and unaccepted. Evaluations Interpretations of
others don’t need to be accurate in order to impact the ways people react and
communicate. For instance, during an initial interaction, a person makes a
complete fool of themselves by saying something wrong, unrelated to the
conversation, or is unable to respond due to nervousness or social anxiety and
will be interpreted as unintelligent when in all reality he or she may be
highly intelligent. This will influence future interactions with this person
due to the initial perception of their intelligence. Proximity can make or
break a bond. Technology has helped to diminish some of the issues with long
distance communication. Dating sites and mobile apps offer instant access for face-to-face
interactions. Although there are apparent drawbacks with online relationships,
such as an attempt to communicate with an appealing woman or man, but is met
with no response, or when finally meeting an individual with an alluring online
profile only to find no chemistry in real life, online dating has given people
the means to find their significant other. Between 2005 and 2012, approximately
one-third of U.S. marriages were initiated from online dating and have had a
lower divorce rate opposed to marriages formed by other means (Licht, Hull,
& Ballantyne, 2017, p. 656).  

In our daily lives we identify people by
their physical characteristics. Deborah Licht, Misty Hull,
and Coco Ballantyne (2017) present insightful and pertinent information in a
cogent manner how the three most important factors proximity, similarity, and
physical attractiveness influence social interaction (p. 656). Since the
introduction of the internet and cell phones, the perception of proximity has
been altered. This technology has created an abundant avenue of prospective
face-to-face encounters. The more often a person is encountered by someone the
perceptions of that person become more pleasing and likeable. People generally
gravitate toward others who share similar attributes such as values,
mannerisms, physical build, and facial appearance. Licht, Hull, and Ballantyne
(2017) explain there is a degree of consistency in the way people rate facial
attractiveness, with facial symmetry generally considered an attractive trait (p.
657). Thus, influencing mate selection and potential relationships. The authors
depict how individuals respond to beauty and the advantages attractive people
have over others in many facets of life (2017, pp. 656-59). Humans inherently
believe that physical beauty reflects the good within a person. People tend to
regard a person’s physical appearance to be of great significance when forming
general impressions early on, then adhere to these ideals regardless of the true
nature of the person.

When conforming to societal views and preferences, one
does not only think of their interests and feelings, but is also obligated to
consider the views of their peers, which may alter their final decision to
reflect the popular beliefs. Robert Schnuerch, Judith Koppehele-Gossel, and
Henning Gibson (2015) used electroencephalography to measure brain responses
resulting from sensory, motor, and cognitive events (ERP) (p. 628). The N170
component is a negatively charged electrical spike on the EEG that occurs 170
milliseconds after viewing a face. During an experiment conducted by Schnuerch,
Koppehele-Gossel, and Gibson (2015), participants were presented with facial
images and instructed to rate the attractiveness of each one (pp. 626-27). While
conducting the first portion of the experiment the faces were shown without any
additional information. The second portion incorporated the average rating of
each face from the previous portion of the experiment. During close examination
of the data from the first and second portions of the experiment, it is evident
that when viewing a face without a rating, the N170 voltage spiked to a greater
negative charge than when viewing a face with a peer group rating; in
conclusion that the
amplitude of the N170 component negatively correlates to conformity.
Thus, peer groups influence the individual’s decision to align with or more
closely to the group’s rating.

Society’s perception of beauty significantly
influences an individual’s perception and behavior. Robert Schnuerch, Judith
Koppehele-Gossel, and Henning Gibbons (2015) tested the correlation between
social conformity regarding heuristic processing by measuring the resilience of
facial encoding at the level of brain activity (pp. 626-28). Contingent on
behavioral data utilized by the neurophysiological approach, reveals that
social conformity is a heuristic process. Upon close examination it becomes
clear that in order to be socially accepted and avoid rejection the individual
relies on social cues to aid in interpreting their own judgement rather than
looking at the information without bias. The inability to process information
may be a mild cognitive impairment of socially influenced judgements,
regardless of the justified basis, relying on social conditioning should not
overshadow one’s ability to think, seek, develop, and acknowledge truth for
themselves.

Humans are incapable of constant rational thought.
This happens outside of our awareness, in the unconscious processes of the
mind. Beauty is a great deceiver in rational thought. Given the importance of
facial beauty in human interactions, much research has focused on understanding
its effects on human behavior. Recent evidence suggests that short-term
variable health cues such as skin color also play an important role in
judgement, and other traits such as perceived intrasexual competitiveness.
Researchers have also investigated the neural systems that underlie evaluations
of facial beauty. A PET scan demonstrated that rating faces on attractiveness
increased regional cerebral blood flow in a network including the frontal
cortex, the caudate nucleus, and the visual cortex. In other words, attractive
faces were rewarding stimuli that elicited emotional responses.

Human behavior is complex and can be
difficult to understand. Anjan Chatterjee and Oshin Vartanian (2016) delineate
in their work how the relatively new scientific field of neuroaesthetics is
improving our cognizance regarding the role of aesthetic evaluations by
inspecting and determining their
biological foundation (p. 172). The perception of beauty unconsciously affects
interactions, personal preferences, and decision-making processes. A multitude
of neural networks known as the aesthetic triad encompasses the aesthetic
experiences that emerge from the interaction between emotion-valuation,
sensory-motor, and meaning-knowledge neural systems (p. 178). Chatterjee
and Vartanian (2016) discuss how the aesthetic triad can sequentially explain
the phenomena essential to aesthetics, such as the influence of environmental
factors on one’s perception of a stimulus (pp. 174-75). Bearing in mind the
significance of facial beauty and human interactions, a considerable amount of
research has concentrated on understanding aesthetic effects on human behavior.

There is an old saying “don’t judge a book
by its cover”, but to judge a person by their character. This is a more
adequate way to form an opinion of someone, but people’s natural instincts
unconsciously overpower this learned behavior. People tend to form initial
opinions of someone based on appearance. Perceptions of beauty affect social
interaction when forming friendships, romantic relationships, and casual
encounters. There are a number of factors that affect our interactions, such as
technology, societal views, human cognition, physical attractiveness, and so on.