Determining determined by physical attractiveness, one’s career

Determining what is an attractive versesan unattractive face is open to individual or culturally conditionedinterpretation.

Deterred determination on exactly what features of anattractive face makes it beautiful is tempered by the judgement of idealsgradually signaled to a culture of a particular place and time. For example,today in the Western society, media conditions the cultural definition ofbeauty. If presented in another culture, a differing definition ofattractiveness would present itself. Likewise, in the same culture duringanother era, what was considered beautiful then is starkly contrasted intoday’s definition of beauty. It appears then that defining physicalattractiveness is arbitrary and particular to a culture of a particular time.5thAnthonyLittle, Benedict Jones, and Lisa DeBruine explain how a person’s physicalattractiveness can determine vital social connectedness. Not only is dating andultimately, mating determined by physical attractiveness, one’s career advancesare also affected by one’s good looks. It is more likely for attractive peopleto have more frequent dates and to be more satisfied with those dates thantheir unattractive counterparts report.

Especially for women, careeradvancement is determined in great part by their physical attractiveness. Eventhough research on social consequences show definite partiality to physicalattractiveness, it is hard to define exactly what makes a face beautiful.      4th Notonly are people certainly recognized for their distinct physicalattractiveness, but being physically attractive is also rewarding. BrentScott’s and Timothy Judge’s research indicates that beauty is a socially valuedcharacteristic, serving as a status symbol (2013, p. 96). Evidence from thesurvey indicates that the overall perception of beauty is somewhat subjectiveand has the ability to influence preferences. Attractiveness bias is apparentin 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 byphysical appearance, overall it does not supersede work ethic and performanceefficiency when determining hiring actions, performance reviews, andadvancements. What is beautiful is not always good.Women are more likely to seek out men withhealthy looking physical characteristics when they are experiencing peakfertility and therefore likely to conceive.

Ovulating women tend to look formasculine characteristics that suggest a genetic advantage, such as facialsymmetry and social dominance, in order to provide the greatest benefit tooffspring. Although this type of man can provide good genes, he might be lesslikely to stick around to help raise the child. Men are more inclined to findattraction in women’s physical appearance that show signs of fertility, health,and facial symmetry.

People who share similar beliefs, morals, and intereststend to be drawn to each other, contributing to the likelihood of a long-standingrelationship. Although judgement is a natural instinct, the tendency to formgeneral impressions and assign excessive importance to one dimension of aperson early on contributes to how a person or situation will be misconstrued.The habit of prematurely judging and rejecting someone new or different becausewe are not accustomed to their attributes can result in someone’s behaviorbeing stigmatized, ridiculed, and unaccepted. Evaluations Interpretations ofothers don’t need to be accurate in order to impact the ways people react andcommunicate. For instance, during an initial interaction, a person makes acomplete fool of themselves by saying something wrong, unrelated to theconversation, or is unable to respond due to nervousness or social anxiety andwill be interpreted as unintelligent when in all reality he or she may behighly intelligent. This will influence future interactions with this persondue to the initial perception of their intelligence. Proximity can make orbreak a bond.

Technology has helped to diminish some of the issues with longdistance communication. Dating sites and mobile apps offer instant access for face-to-faceinteractions. Although there are apparent drawbacks with online relationships,such as an attempt to communicate with an appealing woman or man, but is metwith no response, or when finally meeting an individual with an alluring onlineprofile only to find no chemistry in real life, online dating has given peoplethe means to find their significant other. Between 2005 and 2012, approximatelyone-third of U.S. marriages were initiated from online dating and have had alower divorce rate opposed to marriages formed by other means (Licht, Hull,& Ballantyne, 2017, p. 656).  In our daily lives we identify people bytheir physical characteristics.

Deborah Licht, Misty Hull,and Coco Ballantyne (2017) present insightful and pertinent information in acogent manner how the three most important factors proximity, similarity, andphysical attractiveness influence social interaction (p. 656). Since theintroduction of the internet and cell phones, the perception of proximity hasbeen altered. This technology has created an abundant avenue of prospectiveface-to-face encounters. The more often a person is encountered by someone theperceptions of that person become more pleasing and likeable.

People generallygravitate 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 facialattractiveness, with facial symmetry generally considered an attractive trait (p.657).

Thus, influencing mate selection and potential relationships. The authorsdepict how individuals respond to beauty and the advantages attractive peoplehave over others in many facets of life (2017, pp. 656-59). Humans inherentlybelieve that physical beauty reflects the good within a person. People tend toregard a person’s physical appearance to be of great significance when forminggeneral impressions early on, then adhere to these ideals regardless of the truenature of the person.When conforming to societal views and preferences, onedoes not only think of their interests and feelings, but is also obligated toconsider the views of their peers, which may alter their final decision toreflect the popular beliefs.

Robert Schnuerch, Judith Koppehele-Gossel, andHenning Gibson (2015) used electroencephalography to measure brain responsesresulting from sensory, motor, and cognitive events (ERP) (p. 628). The N170component is a negatively charged electrical spike on the EEG that occurs 170milliseconds after viewing a face. During an experiment conducted by Schnuerch,Koppehele-Gossel, and Gibson (2015), participants were presented with facialimages and instructed to rate the attractiveness of each one (pp. 626-27). Whileconducting the first portion of the experiment the faces were shown without anyadditional information. The second portion incorporated the average rating ofeach face from the previous portion of the experiment. During close examinationof the data from the first and second portions of the experiment, it is evidentthat when viewing a face without a rating, the N170 voltage spiked to a greaternegative charge than when viewing a face with a peer group rating; inconclusion that theamplitude of the N170 component negatively correlates to conformity.

Thus, peer groups influence the individual’s decision to align with or moreclosely to the group’s rating. Society’s perception of beauty significantlyinfluences an individual’s perception and behavior. Robert Schnuerch, JudithKoppehele-Gossel, and Henning Gibbons (2015) tested the correlation betweensocial conformity regarding heuristic processing by measuring the resilience offacial encoding at the level of brain activity (pp. 626-28). Contingent onbehavioral data utilized by the neurophysiological approach, reveals thatsocial conformity is a heuristic process. Upon close examination it becomesclear that in order to be socially accepted and avoid rejection the individualrelies on social cues to aid in interpreting their own judgement rather thanlooking at the information without bias.

The inability to process informationmay be a mild cognitive impairment of socially influenced judgements,regardless of the justified basis, relying on social conditioning should notovershadow one’s ability to think, seek, develop, and acknowledge truth forthemselves.Humans are incapable of constant rational thought.This happens outside of our awareness, in the unconscious processes of themind.

Beauty is a great deceiver in rational thought. Given the importance offacial beauty in human interactions, much research has focused on understandingits effects on human behavior. Recent evidence suggests that short-termvariable health cues such as skin color also play an important role injudgement, and other traits such as perceived intrasexual competitiveness.Researchers have also investigated the neural systems that underlie evaluationsof facial beauty. A PET scan demonstrated that rating faces on attractivenessincreased regional cerebral blood flow in a network including the frontalcortex, the caudate nucleus, and the visual cortex. In other words, attractivefaces were rewarding stimuli that elicited emotional responses.Human behavior is complex and can bedifficult to understand.

Anjan Chatterjee and Oshin Vartanian (2016) delineatein their work how the relatively new scientific field of neuroaesthetics isimproving our cognizance regarding the role of aesthetic evaluations byinspecting and determining theirbiological foundation (p. 172). The perception of beauty unconsciously affectsinteractions, personal preferences, and decision-making processes. A multitudeof neural networks known as the aesthetic triad encompasses the aestheticexperiences that emerge from the interaction between emotion-valuation,sensory-motor, and meaning-knowledge neural systems (p. 178). Chatterjeeand Vartanian (2016) discuss how the aesthetic triad can sequentially explainthe phenomena essential to aesthetics, such as the influence of environmentalfactors on one’s perception of a stimulus (pp.

174-75). Bearing in mind thesignificance of facial beauty and human interactions, a considerable amount ofresearch has concentrated on understanding aesthetic effects on human behavior.There is an old saying “don’t judge a bookby its cover”, but to judge a person by their character.

This is a moreadequate way to form an opinion of someone, but people’s natural instinctsunconsciously overpower this learned behavior. People tend to form initialopinions of someone based on appearance. Perceptions of beauty affect socialinteraction when forming friendships, romantic relationships, and casualencounters. There are a number of factors that affect our interactions, such astechnology, societal views, human cognition, physical attractiveness, and so on.