Sign in or 
Share this
Are You Looking Good or Looking Evil?
In their study about explaining evil, Miller, Gordon, and Buddie have found evidence supporting the idea that when someone explains evil behavior, they are perceived as condoning the evil actions. While that information might be alarming, it may be more alarming that people would make similar judgments based upon a persons' looks.
A recent study conducted by Angela Griffin and Judith Langlois at the University of Texas: Austin supports this relationship between attractiveness and the estimated "goodness" or "badness" of a person. Their research supports the results of a prior study that found those who are deemed more attractive are belie
ved to possess more positive characteristics and more positive traits than unattractive people. This finding came to be known as the "beauty-is-good" stereotype.
Do people make value judgments on individuals based upon looks?
According to their research, yes. By examining the table above, it is evident that those with high attractiveness are perceived to be more sociable, more altruistic, and more intelligent than those rated with medium levels of attractiveness. The same is true for those who are rated as having low attractiveness, or being unattractive; the difference between low and medium attractiveness is greater than the difference between medium and high attractiveness in each category. The above table only depicts the ideas of adults; the table that depicts the thoughts of children reflects the same pattern.
While this finding feeds the stereotype that those who are more attractive are also better people, there is no proof that this perception is legitimate. Thus, one could think that the attractive woman is more intelligent, altruistic, and sociable than the unattractive one, but there's no evidence to prove this thought to be more than a stereotype. What does remain certain from this study is that "unattractive women are at a disadvantage" in comparison to both highly attractive and moderately attractive individuals.
What are the leadership implications of this phenomena?
Leadership studies has never been a beauty contest, but perhaps there ought to be a beauty component added. Why? Because if it's true that more attractive people are attributed "better" characteristics, then one can deduct that attractive leaders might appear to be good despite their actions. This stereotyping phenomena could have disastrous implications for leaders, particularly if they have a pretty face because despite their actions as leaders, they might still "look good." If they look good, their people might project more goodness onto them than due, leaving the potential to overlook some of the bad stuff. At the same time, those leaders who are unattractive are under a more critical eye by those scrutinizing them, since those who are more unattractive are attributed "bad" characteristics.
Was Mao attractive? Hitler? Pol-Pot? Eichmann? Winston Mosley? One might hope that they'd win the ugly contest so that people did not perceive them in a more favorable light, disguising their evil behaviors. But if they were thought to be more attractive than average, would they be able to push the envelope of evil even further, since they are already perceived with heightened goodness from their dashing good looks?
What questions does this raise?
Is beauty in the eye of the beholder, or it is absolute? Can someones "badness" be decreased by perceived goodness? Can you add bad and good together? We might never know, but it's sure interesting to think about.
References
Griffin, A. & Langlois, J. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty good or is ugly bad? Social Cognition, 24, 187-206.
Miller, A. G., Gordon, A. K., & Buddie, A. M. (1999). Accounting for evil and cruelty: Is to explain to condone? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 254-268.
A recent study conducted by Angela Griffin and Judith Langlois at the University of Texas: Austin supports this relationship between attractiveness and the estimated "goodness" or "badness" of a person. Their research supports the results of a prior study that found those who are deemed more attractive are belie
ved to possess more positive characteristics and more positive traits than unattractive people. This finding came to be known as the "beauty-is-good" stereotype.Do people make value judgments on individuals based upon looks?
According to their research, yes. By examining the table above, it is evident that those with high attractiveness are perceived to be more sociable, more altruistic, and more intelligent than those rated with medium levels of attractiveness. The same is true for those who are rated as having low attractiveness, or being unattractive; the difference between low and medium attractiveness is greater than the difference between medium and high attractiveness in each category. The above table only depicts the ideas of adults; the table that depicts the thoughts of children reflects the same pattern.
While this finding feeds the stereotype that those who are more attractive are also better people, there is no proof that this perception is legitimate. Thus, one could think that the attractive woman is more intelligent, altruistic, and sociable than the unattractive one, but there's no evidence to prove this thought to be more than a stereotype. What does remain certain from this study is that "unattractive women are at a disadvantage" in comparison to both highly attractive and moderately attractive individuals.
What are the leadership implications of this phenomena?
Leadership studies has never been a beauty contest, but perhaps there ought to be a beauty component added. Why? Because if it's true that more attractive people are attributed "better" characteristics, then one can deduct that attractive leaders might appear to be good despite their actions. This stereotyping phenomena could have disastrous implications for leaders, particularly if they have a pretty face because despite their actions as leaders, they might still "look good." If they look good, their people might project more goodness onto them than due, leaving the potential to overlook some of the bad stuff. At the same time, those leaders who are unattractive are under a more critical eye by those scrutinizing them, since those who are more unattractive are attributed "bad" characteristics.
Was Mao attractive? Hitler? Pol-Pot? Eichmann? Winston Mosley? One might hope that they'd win the ugly contest so that people did not perceive them in a more favorable light, disguising their evil behaviors. But if they were thought to be more attractive than average, would they be able to push the envelope of evil even further, since they are already perceived with heightened goodness from their dashing good looks?
 |  |  |  |  |
What questions does this raise?
Is beauty in the eye of the beholder, or it is absolute? Can someones "badness" be decreased by perceived goodness? Can you add bad and good together? We might never know, but it's sure interesting to think about.
References
Griffin, A. & Langlois, J. (2006). Stereotype directionality and attractiveness stereotyping: Is beauty good or is ugly bad? Social Cognition, 24, 187-206.
Miller, A. G., Gordon, A. K., & Buddie, A. M. (1999). Accounting for evil and cruelty: Is to explain to condone? Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 254-268.
lauraliz1812 |
Latest page update: made by lauraliz1812
, Oct 17 2008, 11:50 AM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by lauraliz1812
42 words added 12 words deleted view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
attractiveness
bad
beauty
good
stereotypes
ugly
More Info: links to this page
|
There are no threads for this page.
Be the first to start a new thread.
