Eyelash length attractiveness across ethnicities.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 09 2023
08 09 2023
Historique:
received:
10
01
2023
accepted:
30
08
2023
medline:
11
9
2023
pubmed:
9
9
2023
entrez:
8
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Eyelashes evolved to protect eyes. An optimum eyelash length functions to protect eyes from external hazards such as contaminations, excessive evaporation or shear stress from airflow. They can also be an indicator of a person's health as various congenital and noncongenital diseases can lead to short or long eyelashes. The current study aimed to extend a recent investigation on the preference for eyelash length in humans from an evolutionary adaptive perspective. Specifically, the current study tested whether the inverted-U function for eyelash length preference recently reported for White faces, generalises to other ethnicities, and whether ethnic background modulates preference for eyelash lengths. To investigate this question, men and women of Asian, Black, and White ethnicities from the U.S. rated the attractiveness of female Indian, Asian, Black, and White faces with varying eyelash lengths. The eyelashes ranged in length from no eyelashes to half the width of an eye. Results showed that Asian, Black, and White men and women preference for eyelash length followed an inverted-U function across all four ethnicities, supporting a general preference for human eyelash length that is approximately one-third the width of an eye. In addition, the results showed that the most attractive eyelashes for Black women were skewed toward a greater eyelash-length to eye-width ratio when compared to the other images. The source of this skew is presently unknown, as it could reflect a change in perceptual sensitivity to eyelash length with skin colour or changes in preference related to perceptions of participants' ethnicity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37684317
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41739-5
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-41739-5
pmc: PMC10491613
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
14849Informations de copyright
© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Br J Dermatol. 2016 Apr;174(4):741-52
pubmed: 26452071
J Gen Psychol. 2018 Jan-Mar;145(1):1-20
pubmed: 29182445
Surv Ophthalmol. 2006 Nov-Dec;51(6):550-60
pubmed: 17134645
Eur J Pediatr. 2018 Jun;177(6):955-960
pubmed: 29675643
Hum Nat. 2013 Jun;24(2):126-36
pubmed: 23660975
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014 Oct;46 Pt 4:591-603
pubmed: 25199981
J R Soc Interface. 2015 Apr 6;12(105):
pubmed: 25716186
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2003 Aug;78(3):385-407
pubmed: 14558590
Biol Lett. 2014 Apr 30;10(4):20130850
pubmed: 24789138
PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e41193
pubmed: 22815966
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 4;9(1):3387
pubmed: 30833635
Curr Biol. 2006 Jan 10;16(1):63-8
pubmed: 16401423
Int J Trichology. 2012 Jan;4(1):3-18
pubmed: 22628984
Perception. 2012;41(12):1486-96
pubmed: 23586288
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2019 Mar;194:1-6
pubmed: 30685708
Biol Lett. 2011 Dec 23;7(6):892-5
pubmed: 21697166
J Neurosci Res. 2017 Jan 2;95(1-2):222-234
pubmed: 27870403
J Cogn Neurosci. 2008 Jun;20(6):941-51
pubmed: 18211242
Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2021 Sep 30;16(10):1023-1035
pubmed: 33835164
J Vis. 2009 Mar 17;9(3):11.1-10
pubmed: 19757950
Evol Hum Sci. 2021 Jul 02;3:e38
pubmed: 37588529
Neuroimage. 2013 Feb 1;66:223-31
pubmed: 23128082
Hum Nat. 2004 Sep;15(3):251-70
pubmed: 26190549
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2010 Dec;63(12):2032-9
pubmed: 20133215