title: Evolution, appearance, and occupational success.
abstract: Visual characteristics, including facial appearance, are thought to play an important role in a variety of judgments and decisions that have real occupational outcomes in many settings. Indeed, there is growing evidence suggesting that appearance influences hiring decisions and even election results. For example, attractive individuals are more likely to be hired, taller men earn more, and the facial appearance of candidates has been linked to real election outcomes. In this article, we review evidence linking physical appearance to occupational success and evaluate the hypothesis that appearance based biases are consistent with predictions based on evolutionary theories of coalition formation and leadership choice. We discuss why appearance based effects are so pervasive, addressing ideas about a "kernel of truth" in attributions and about coalitional psychology. We additionally highlight that appearance may be differently related to success at work according to the types of job or task involved. For example, leaders may be chosen because the characteristics they possess are seen as best suited to lead in particular situations. During a time of war, a dominant-appearing leader may inspire confidence and intimidate enemies while during peace-time, when negotiation and diplomacy are needed, interpersonal skills may outweigh the value of a dominant leader. In line with these ideas, masculine-faced leaders are favored in war-time scenarios while feminine-faced leaders are favored in peace-time scenarios. We suggest that such environment or task specific competencies may be prevalent during selection processes, whereby individuals whose appearance best matches perceived task competences are most likely selected, and propose the general term "task-congruent selection" to describe these effects. Overall, our review highlights how potentially adaptive biases could influence choices in the work place. With respect to certain biases, understanding their origin and current prevalence is important in order to potentially reduce discrimination in the work place.
authors: School of Natural Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK. anthony.little@stir.ac.uk
authors: Anthony C
authors: AC
authors: Little
authors: Craig S
authors: CS
authors: Roberts
mesh_terms: D001504:Beauty; D005075:Biological Evolution; D001827:Body Height / Q000502:physiology; D003020:Clothing / Q000523:psychology; D004651:Employment; D005145:Face / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007857:Leadership; D008297:Male; D010560:Personnel Selection; D011057:Politics; D011585:Psychology, Applied; D011593:Psychology, Social; D012938:Social Perception; D014481:United States
references: Am J Hum Biol. 2007 Jan-Feb;19(1):82-7
references: 17160983
references: Int J Epidemiol. 2006 Jun;35(3):658-63
references: 16446353
references: Am Sociol Rev. 1969 Aug;34(4):519-33
references: 5811582
references: Am Psychol. 2004 Oct;59(7):581-94
references: 15491254
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1966 Nov;4(5):508-16
references: 6008393
references: Science. 2009 Feb 27;323(5918):1183
references: 19251621
references: PLoS One. 2010 Jan 18;5(1):e8733
references: 20090906
references: Adolescence. 1994 Summer;29(114):469-74
references: 8085496
references: Psychol Sci. 2007 Jan;18(1):19-23
references: 17362372
references: Int J Epidemiol. 1997 Aug;26(4):748-56
references: 9279606
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010 Aug;139(3):399-417
references: 20677892
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jan;54(1):74-85
references: 3346809
references: Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2006;10(4):354-71
references: 17201593
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(5):e36945
references: 22649504
references: Behav Brain Sci. 1998 Jun;21(3):353-63; discussion 363-97
references: 10097017
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33810
references: 22470479
references: Psychol Sci. 2009 Oct;20(10):1194-8
references: 19686297
references: Int J Cosmet Sci. 2009 Feb;31(1):47-54
references: 19134127
references: Evol Psychol. 2012 Aug 17;10(3):562-72
references: 22947678
references: Evol Psychol. 2012 Dec 20;10(5):802-17
references: 23253787
references: J Econom. 1997;77:159-85
references: 12292719
references: Evol Psychol. 2010 Jul 14;8(3):350-64
references: 22947805
references: J Appl Psychol. 2004 Jun;89(3):428-41
references: 15161403
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2001 Jan 7;268(1462):39-44
references: 12123296
references: J Occup Environ Med. 2004 Apr;46(4):398-412
references: 15076658
references: Psychol Sci. 2008 Feb;19(2):109-11
references: 18271856
references: Perception. 2010;39(3):356-77
references: 20465172
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Feb 22;277(1681):617-24
references: 19864283
references: Genetica. 2008 Sep;134(1):31-43
references: 18327646
references: Nature. 2000 Jan 13;403(6766):156
references: 10646589
references: Nature. 2005 Oct 27;437(7063):E10; discussion E10-1
references: 16251904
references: Psychol Bull. 2000 May;126(3):390-423
references: 10825783
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2008 Nov 22;275(1651):2651-6
references: 18713717
references: Nature. 1998 Aug 27;394(6696):884-7
references: 9732869
references: Evol Psychol. 2012 Jan 02;10(1):1-28
references: 22833842
references: Psychol Rev. 2000 Jul;107(3):411-29
references: 10941275
references: Nature. 2005 May 19;435(7040):293
references: 15902246
references: Science. 2005 Jun 10;308(5728):1623-6
references: 15947187
references: Hum Biol. 1991 Feb;63(1):19-30
references: 2004741
references: Evol Psychol. 2012 Aug 24;10(3):588-601
references: 22947680
references: Psychol Sci. 2011 Dec;22(12):1478-83
references: 22042727
references: Evol Hum Behav. 2001 May;22(3):165-196
references: 11384884
references: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2007 Sep;67(3):407-12
references: 17573903
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 May;78(5):837-52
references: 10821193
references: Econ Hum Biol. 2006 Dec;4(3):342-50
references: 16377265
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Nov;75(5):1300-20
references: 9866189
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972 Dec;24(3):285-90
references: 4655540