Reading exercise: Personality and appearance

The notion that a person’s character can be inferred from their face traces its origins back to the ancient Greeks. It gained significant popularity in the late 18th century thanks to the Swiss poet Johann Lavater, whose ideas became a subject of discussion among intellectuals. In Darwin’s era, these ideas were largely accepted as fact. It wasn't until the association with phrenology, which fell into disrepute in the late 19th century, that physiognomy was dismissed as pseudoscience.

First impressions wield substantial influence, despite the well-worn advice against judging a book by its cover. Within a tenth of a second of seeing an unfamiliar face, we have already formed an opinion about its owner’s character—whether they are caring, trustworthy, aggressive, extroverted, competent, and so on. Once that initial judgement is formed, it is remarkably difficult to change. People also act based on these snap judgements. Politicians with competent-looking faces stand a better chance of being elected, and CEOs who appear dominant are more likely to lead a profitable company. There is also a well-established “attractiveness halo”. People considered attractive not only receive more valentines but are also judged to be more outgoing, socially competent, powerful, intelligent, and healthy.

In 1966, psychologists at the University of Michigan asked 84 undergraduates who had never met before to rate each other on five personality traits, based solely on appearance, while they sat silently for 15 minutes. For three traits—extroversion, conscientiousness, and openness—the observers' rapid judgements corresponded significantly more often with actual personality scores than would be expected by chance. More recently, researchers have revisited the connection between appearance and personality, notably Anthony Little of the University of Stirling and David Perrett of the University of St Andrews, both in the UK. They noted that the Michigan studies were not well-controlled for other factors. However, when Little and Perrett repeated the experiment using mugshots instead of live subjects, they also found a correlation between facial appearance and personality, though only in the case of extroversion and conscientiousness. Little and Perrett suggested that they only observed a correlation at the extreme ends of personality.

Justin Carre and Cheryl McCormick of Brock University in Ontario, Canada studied 90 ice-hockey players. They discovered that a broader face, where the distance between cheekbones is unusually large compared to the distance between the brow and upper lip, was significantly associated with the number of penalty minutes given for violent acts like slashing, elbowing, checking from behind, and fighting. The kernel of truth isn’t the only explanation for our tendency to make facial judgements. Leslie Zebrowitz, a psychologist at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts, argues that snap judgements are often inaccurate. She says that snap judgements are often an overgeneralisation of a more basic response. A classic example of overgeneralisation can be seen in the response of predators to eye spots, the conspicuous circular markings seen on some moths, butterflies, and fish. These markings act as a deterrent to predators because they resemble the eyes of other creatures that potential predators might view as a threat.

Another researcher who tends to favour overgeneralisation is Alexander Todorov. Together with his Princeton colleague, Nikolaas Oosterhof, he recently proposed a theory which he claims explains our snap judgements of faces in terms of their apparent threat level. Todorov and Oosterhof asked people for their immediate reactions to pictures of emotionally neutral faces, sifted through all the responses, and distilled them to two underlying factors: the perceived trustworthiness and dominance of the face. Todorov and Oosterhof conclude that personality judgements based on people’s faces are an overgeneralisation of our evolved ability to infer emotions from facial expressions, and thus a person’s intention to cause us harm and their ability to act on it. Todorov, however, emphasises that overgeneralisation does not rule out the idea that there is sometimes a kernel of truth in these assessments of personality.

So if there is a kernel of truth, where does it come from? Perrett has a suspicion that the link emerges when our biases about faces transform into self-fulfilling prophecies—an idea that other researchers investigated back in 1977. Our expectations can cause us to influence people to behave in ways that confirm those expectations: consistently treat someone as untrustworthy and they end up behaving in that way. However, this effect sometimes operates in reverse, especially for those with a more innocent appearance. The Nobel prize-winning ethologist Konrad Lorenz once suggested that baby-faced features evoke a nurturing response. Support for this idea has come from the work of Zebrowitz, who found that baby-faced boys and men stimulate an emotional centre of the brain, the amygdala, in a similar manner. But there’s a twist. Baby-faced men are, on average, better educated, more assertive and more likely to win more military awards than their more mature-looking counterparts. They are also more likely to be criminals; think Al Capone. Similarly, Zebrowitz found baby-faced boys to be argumentative and hostile, and more likely to be academic high-achievers. She calls this the “self-defeating prophecy effect”: a man with a baby face strives to confound expectations and ends up overcompensating.

There is another theory that evokes the old parental warning not to pull faces because they might freeze that way. According to this theory, our personality moulds the way our faces look. This is supported by a study from two decades ago which found that angry old people tend to look cross even when asked to adopt a neutral expression. A lifetime of scowling, grumpiness and grimaces seemed to have left its mark.

Questions 1-5

Do the following statements reflect the opinions of the author in the reading passage?

In boxes 1-5 on your answer sheet, write

YES              if the statement agrees with the views of the writer

NO               if the statement contradicts the views of the writer

NOT GIVEN    if it is impossible to say that the writer thinks about this

1 Robert Fitzroy’s first impression of Darwin was accurate.

2 The precise rules of “physiognomy” have remained unchanged since the 18th century.

3 The first impression of a person can be modified later with little effort.

4 People who appear capable are more likely to be chosen to a position of power.

5 It is unfair for good-looking people to be better treated in society.

Questions 6-10

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.

Write your answers in boxes 6-10 on your answer sheet.

6.   What’s true about Anthony Little and David Perrett’s experiment?

A    It is based on the belief that none of the conclusions in the Michigan experiment is accurate.

B    It supports parts of the conclusions in the Michigan experiment.

C    It replicates the study conditions in the Michigan experiment.

D    It has a greater range of faces than in the Michigan experiment.

7. What can be concluded from Justin Carre and Cheryl McCormick’s experiment?

A    A wide-faced man may be more aggressive.

B    Aggressive men have a wide range of facial features.

C    There is no relation between facial features and an aggressive character.

D    It’s necessary for people to be aggressive in competitive games.

8. What’s exemplified by referring to butterfly marks?

A    Threats to safety are easy to notice.

B    Instinct does not necessarily lead to accurate judgment.

C    People should learn to distinguish between accountable and unaccountable judgments.

D    Different species have various ways to notice danger.

9. What is the aim of Alexander Todorov’s study?

A    to determine the correlation between facial features and social development

B    to undermine the belief that appearance is important

C    to learn the influence of facial features on judgments of a person’s personality

D    to study the role of judgments in a person’s relationship

10. Which of the following is the conclusion of Alexander Todorov’s study?

A    People should draw accurate judgments from overgeneralization.

B    Using appearance to determine a person’s character is undependable.

C    Overgeneralization can be misleading as a way to determine a person’s character.

D    The judgment of a person’s character based on appearance may be accurate.

Questions 11-14

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-F, below.

Write the correct letter, A-F, in boxes 11-14 on your answer sheet.

11 Perret believed people behaving dishonestly

12 The writer supports the view that people with babyish features

13 According to Zebrowitz, baby-faced people who behave dominantly

14 The writer believes facial features

A   judge other people by overgeneralization,

B   may influence the behaviour of other people,

C   tend to commit criminal acts.

D   may be influenced by the low expectations of other people.

E   may show the effect of long-term behaviours.

F   may be trying to repel the expectations of other people.

Answers:

1. NO (Đoạn 1, “As Darwin’s daughter Henrietta later recalled, Fitzroy had “made up his mind that no man with such a nose could have energy”. This was hardly the case.” → Nhớ nhầm gương mặt.)

2. NOT GIVEN (Không có thông tin)

3. NO (Đoạn 3, “Once that snap judgement has formed, it is surprisingly hard to budge.” → Ấn tượng đầu rất khó để thay đổi.)

4. YES (Đoạn 3, “Politicians with competent-looking faces have a greater chance of being elected, and CEOs who look dominant are more likely to run a profitable company.” → Tỏ dáng vẻ tự tin sẽ dễ được chọn trong các buổi bầu cử.)

5. NOT GIVEN (Không có thông tin)

6. B

7. A

8. B

9. C

10. D

11. D (Đoạn 7, “Our expectations can lead us to influence people to behave in ways that confirm those expectations: consistently treat someone as untrustworthy and they end up behaving that way.”)

12. C (Đoạn 7, “Babyfaced men are, on average, better educated, more assertive and apt to win more military medals than their mature-looking counterparts. They are also more likely to be criminals.”)