Infant Attractiveness Predicts Maternal Behaviors and Attitudes

Judith H. Langlois

Department of Psychology University of Texas at Austin

· Queen Victoria, who bore nine children, once said that "an ugly baby is a very nasty object"

· It is commonly assumed that the attractiveness of an infant is neither evaluated nor important to parents; all offspring supposedly seem beautiful to doting new parents.

· The purpose of the study we report here is to examine the validity of this widely held belief by assessing the attitudes and behaviors of mothers toward their firstborn infants as a function of infant attractiveness.

Past research

· College women were asked to behave as if they were the child's parent and to correct children for committing errors on a task. The children in the study were made up to appear either more or less attractive. College women punished unattractive children more severely than attractive children despite identical child behavior.

· Elder, Van Nguyen, and Caspi (1985) examined relationships between fathers and their adolescent children during the Great Depression. They found that fathers were more harsh and punitive toward their unattractive daughters than toward their attractive daughters following the loss of a job or income.

· Parke and Sawin (1975) informally assessed the cuteness of newborns and noted that the mothers were more affectionate and maintained more eye contact toward attractive than toward unattractive infants.

· Fathers' participation in caregiving for their 3-month-olds is significantly and positively correlated with infant attractiveness assessed when the babies were newborns.

This Study

The relations between infant attractiveness and maternal behavior were examined by observing mothers feeding and playing with their firstborn infants while they were still in the hospital after giving birth ( N = 144).

· Color photographs of 163 newborn infants were taken a standard distance from the infant's face when the newborns were asleep.

· The photographs were rated for attractiveness on a 1—5 scale by a panel of undergraduate judges (54 for female infants; 40 for male infants). The reliability of the ratings as assessed by coefficient alpha was .98 for male infants and .96 for female infants.

· A main effect for attractiveness was obtained for all three factor-based scales at the hospital: Affectionate Interaction, F (1, 132) = 4.35, p < .05; Routine Caregiving, F (1, 132) = 4.25, p < .05; and Attends Others, F (1, 132) = 4.19, p < .05. Mothers of attractive infants engaged in more Affectionate Interaction with their babies than did mothers of unattractive infants. In contrast, mothers of less attractive infants engaged in more Routine Caregiving and Attended Others more than mothers of more attractive infants.

· Mothers of more attractive infants were more affectionate and playful compared with mothers of less attractive infants.

· In contrast, the mothers of less attractive infants were more likely to be attentive to other people rather than to their infant and to engage in routine caregiving rather than affectionate behavior.

Social Cognition Approach and Attraction

Remember this?

Determinants of Schema Activation:

1. Stimulus Characteristics. Stimulus characteristics of a person or situation may activate a schema.

· Physical attractiveness or unattractiveness activates attractiveness schema:

o Adams and Huston, 1975:

o Attractiveness schema:

o Richer, better jobs, more intelligent, higher self-esteem, greater social grace, more amiable personalities, better marriages, better futures.

Once the schema is activated, it affects our interpretation of information and our behavior

Discuss Snyder, Berscheid, & Tanke study now

Results of SBT study:

People who were perceived as attractive were treated better and acted more confidently

Questions:

How would an attractive person act if they had to interact with a really unattractive person?

Is there a way that social interactions in the real world can be structured so that physical attractiveness doesn’t matter as much?

Reinforcement or Reward Theory of Attraction: Donn Byrne, 1971

Attraction toward others is a function of the reinforcements we experience when we are with the person.

Overall proportion of positive vs. negative reinforcements (rewards vs. punishments) associated with somebody is our attraction level.

There are many sources of rewards

Sources of rewards:

Sources of punishments:

Equity Theory: Type of Reinforcement Theory: e.g., Adams, 1963

People aspire to maintain equity in interpersonal relationships. Inequity causes discomfort.

The degree of equity or inequity can be calculated:

Outcomes of Person A vs. Outcomes of Person B

Inputs of Person A Inputs of Person B

Equitable relationships:

Lot

Little

Lot

Little

Lot

Inequitable relationships:

Little

Lot

Little

When a relationship is inequitable we try to restore equity:

· Increase outcomes

· Decrease inputs

· Perceptual distortions of either

This is true whether we are “underbenefited” or “overbenefited”

If we’re underbenefitted we feel cheated

If we’re overbenefitted we feel guilty, or at risk for retaliation

So an attractive person might act dull when talking to a less attractive person

In real life, other attributes (e.g., willingness to work hard in a relationship) may overcome lack of attractiveness (isn’t that nice…)

Prior to starting a relationship, we judge whether another person will provide us with positive enough outcomes (rewards) for our inputs.

Present Kiesler & Baral Now

How does this study’s results fit into the equity/reinforcement approach?

What would have to happen if a high self esteem person ended up somehow in a relationship with a “moderately attractive” person? (there are several possibilities)

What would have to happen if a low self esteem person ended up somehow in a relationship with a “highly attractive” person? (there are several possibilities)

Discussion question: How does the reinforcement/equity approach account for the pratfall effect?
Main Rewards: Beauty and Status

How much agreement is there on beauty?

Within U.S.: High levels of agreement.

Across cultures:

Still high levels of agreement. Our assessment of beauty is wired in, maybe.

So: It’s not the media. The media teach us how to compensate for our own unattractiveness by buying status objects or disguising ourselves to look more rewarding.

Convincing ourselves we’re attracted to somebody

Remember this?

Physiological arousal + Cognitive labeling = emotion (Schachter’s theory)

Frustration (physiological arousal) in the presence of aggressive stimuli leads to an aggressive response.

What does Dutton & Aron’s research suggest is necessary for actual romantic behavior to be successful?