Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social psychology: Altruism · Attribution · Attitudes · Conformity · Discrimination · Groups · Interpersonal relations · Obedience · Prejudice · Norms · Perception · Index · Outline

Face-ism or facial prominence is the relative prominence of the face in the portrayal of men and women. Research shows that media tend to focus more on men's faces and women's bodies.

Origin and subsequent studies[edit | edit source]

File:Face-ism Mona Lisa.svg

Illustration of calculation of Face-ism index on two crops of the Mona Lisa.

The term “face-ism” or “facial prominence” was initially defined by Archer, Iritani, Kimes and Barrios in their five studies of sex differences in facial prominence (Archer, Iritani, Kimes & Barrios, 1983). In their study, facial prominence was measured by a Face-ism index, which is the ratio of two linear measurements, with the distance (in millimeters or any other unit) in a depiction from the top of the head to the lowest visible point of the chin being the numerator and the distance from the top of the head to the lowest visible part of the subject's body the denominator. It was found that across societies and over time, facial prominence of men has been much higher than that of women (Archer et al., 1983).

Many subsequent studies have generated consistent findings and thus helped confirm the pervasive presence of face-ism. For instance, Nigro and his colleagues (1988) observed a prevalent face-ism phenomenon in news magazines and women's magazines of the 1970s and 1980s. Similarly, Copeland (1989) documented the face-ism in prime-time television programs. Matthews (2007) provided evidence that face-ism is still present in mainstream printed media from as recently as 2004, and showed that men in intellectually focused occupations tend to have higher face-to-body ratios than women in similar professions, while women in physical occupations tend to have higher face-to-body ratios than men in similar professions. Surprisingly, in a cross-cultural study on face-ism, Konrath, Au, and Ramsey (2012) provided evidence that face-ism in photographs of politicians is more pronounced in gender-egalitarian societies compared to gender-unequal societies.

Important aspects of theory[edit | edit source]

Implication of face-ism[edit | edit source]

It was found that regardless of gender difference, news photographs featuring high face prominence tend to generate more positive ratings with regard to intelligence, ambition and physical appearance than those with low face prominence (Archer et al., 1983).

Similarly, Zuckerman (1986) argued that as a series of mental life dimensions including intelligence, personality, and character are all closely associated with the face and head, higher face-ism of men may convey impressions of greater intelligence, dominance, and control). In contrast, the greater body-ism of women serves to reinforce the stereotypical images of women as trophies or sex objects without any personalities (Hall & Crum, 1994).

Bretl and Cantor (1988) maintained that the perception of authority, credibility, confidence, competence, and even the physical build of an individual can also be affected by face-ism.

Zuckerman and Kieffer's study (1994) suggested that face-ism may not be merely restricted to gender difference but can apply to racial difference as well. For instance, the study revealed that Caucasians have higher face-ism than blacks across different media types.

Usage of theory[edit | edit source]

  • Television advertising (Bretl & Cantor, 1988)
  • News magazines and women’s magazines (Nigro, Hill, Gelbein, & Clark, 1988).
  • Prime-time television programs (Copeland, 1989).
  • American and European periodicals, American artwork and American stamps (Zuckerman & Kieffer, 1994).
  • Political candidates' websites (Anderson, B.J., 2003).
  • Occupation portrayal (Matthews, 2007).

Mixed findings[edit | edit source]

Zuckerman and Kieffer failed to confirm the determining role of face-ism in the perception of intellect (Zuckerman & Kieffer, 1994).

See also[edit | edit source]

References[edit | edit source]

  • Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D. D., Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex difference in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 725-735.
  • Bretl, D. J., & J. Cantor (1988).The portrayal of men and women in US television commercials: A recent content analysis and trends over 15 years. Sex Roles, 18, 595-609.
  • Copeland, G. A. (1989). Face-ism and Primetime Television. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 33, 209-214.
  • Hall, C.C. I. & Crum, M. J., (1994). Women and “body-isms” in television beer commercials. Sex roles: A Journal of Research, 31(5/6), 329-337.
  • Matthews, J. L. (2007). Hidden sexism: Facial prominence and its connections to gender and occupational status in popular print media. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 57, 515-525.
  • Nigro, G. N., Hill, D. E., Gelbein, M. E., & Clark, C. L. (1988). Changes in the Facial Prominence of Women and Men over the Last Decade. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 12, 225-235.
  • Zuckerman, M. & Kieffer, S.(1994). Race Differences in Face-ism: Does Facial Prominence Imply Dominance? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 86-92.
  • Zuckerman, M. (1986). On the Meaning and Implications of Facial Prominence. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 10, 215-229.
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.