Structural equation modeling of female gait attractiveness using gait kinematics.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 10 2023
19 10 2023
Historique:
received:
25
04
2023
accepted:
16
10
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
20
10
2023
entrez:
19
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In our social lives, movement's attractiveness greatly affects interpersonal cognition, and gait kinematics mediates walkers' attractiveness. However, no model using gait kinematics has so far predicted gait attractiveness. Thus, this study constructed models of female gait attractiveness with gait kinematics and physique factors as explanatory variables for both barefoot and high-heel walking. First, using motion capture data from 17 women walking, including seven professional runway models, we created gait animations. We also calculated the following gait kinematics as candidate variables to explain walking's attractiveness: four body-silhouette-related variables and six health-related variables. Then, 60 observers evaluated each gait animation's attractiveness and femininity. We performed correlation analysis between these variables and evaluation scores to obtain explanatory variables. Structural equation modeling suggested two models for gait attractiveness, one composed of trunk and head silhouette factors and the other of physique, trunk silhouette, and health-related gait factors. The study's results deepened our understanding of mechanisms behind nonverbal interpersonal cognition through physical movement and brought us closer to realization of artificial generation of attractive gait motions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37857803
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-45130-2
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-45130-2
pmc: PMC10587354
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
17823Informations de copyright
© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Norris, K. Heritable variation in a plumage indicator of viability in male great tits Parus major. Nature 362, 537–539 (1993).
Petrie, M. Improved growth and survival of offspring of peacocks with more elaborate trains. Nature 371, 598–599 (1994).
Symons, D. Beauty is in the adaptations of the beholder: The evolutionary psychology of human female sexual attractiveness. Sex. Nat. Sex. Cult., 80–118 (1995).
Thornhill, R. & Gangestad, S. W. Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn. Sci. 3, 452–460 (1999).
pubmed: 10562724
Gangestad, S. W. & Scheyd, G. J. The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 34, 523–548 (2005).
Singh, D. & Singh, D. Shape and significance of feminine beauty: An evolutionary perspective. Sex Roles 64, 723–731 (2011).
Lewis, D. M. G., Russell, E. M., Al-Shawaf, L. & Buss, D. M. Lumbar curvature: A previously undiscovered standard of attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 36, 345–350 (2015).
Voracek, M. & Fisher, M. L. Shapely centrefolds? Temporal change in body measures: Trend analysis. BMJ 325, 1447–1448 (2002).
pubmed: 12493660
pmcid: 139033
Singh, D. & Singh, D. Role of body fat and body shape on judgment of female health and attractiveness: An evolutionary perspective. Psihol. Teme. 15, 331–350 (2006).
Whitcome, K. K., Shapiro, L. J. & Lieberman, D. E. Fetal load and the evolution of lumbar lordosis in bipedal hominins. Nature 450, 1075–1078 (2007).
pubmed: 18075592
Spies, C. et al. Relation of obesity to heart failure hospitalization and cardiovascular events in persons with stable coronary heart disease (from the heart and soul study). Am. J. Cardiol. 104, 883–889 (2009).
pubmed: 19766751
Streeter, S. A. & McBurney, D. H. Waist-hip ratio and attractiveness: New evidence and a critique of “a critical test” Evol. Hum. Behav. 24, 88–98 (2003).
Lippa, R. Sex typing and the perception of body outlines. J. Pers. 51, 667–682 (1983).
pubmed: 6668535
Johnson, K. L., Iida, M. & Tassinary, L. G. Person (mis)perception: Functionally biased sex categorization of bodies. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 4982–4989 (2012).
pubmed: 23075835
pmcid: 3497247
Nicholson, L. Interpreting gender. Signs J. Women Cult. Soc. 20, 79–105 (1994).
Groesz, L. M., Levine, M. P. & Murnen, S. K. The effect of experimental presentation of thin media images on body satisfaction: A meta-analytic review. Int. J. Eat. Disord. 31, 1–16 (2002).
pubmed: 11835293
Hawkins, N., Richards, P. S., Granley, H. M. & Stein, D. M. The impact of exposure to the thin-ideal media image on women. Eat. Disord. 12, 35–50 (2004).
pubmed: 16864303
Grabe, S., Ward, L. M. & Hyde, J. S. The role of the media in body image concerns among women: A meta-analysis of experimental and correlational studies. Psychol. Bull. 134, 460–476 (2008).
pubmed: 18444705
Coetzee, V., Re, D., Perrett, D. I., Tiddeman, B. P. & Xiao, D. Judging the health and attractiveness of female faces: Is the most attractive level of facial adiposity also considered the healthiest?. Body Image 8, 190–193 (2011).
pubmed: 21354874
Wolf, N. The Beauty Myth: How Images of Beauty are Used Against Women (Random House, 2013).
Stephen, I. D. & Perera, A. T. M. Judging the difference between attractiveness and health: Does exposure to model images influence the judgments made by men and women?. PLOS One 9, e86302 (2014).
pubmed: 24466014
pmcid: 3896486
Brierley, M. E., Brooks, K. R., Mond, J., Stevenson, R. J. & Stephen, I. D. The body and the beautiful: Health, attractiveness and body composition in men’s and women’s bodies. PLOS One 11, e0156722 (2016).
pubmed: 27257677
pmcid: 4892674
Barkema, D. D., Derrick, T. R. & Martin, P. E. Heel height affects lower extremity frontal plane joint moments during walking. Gait Posture. 35, 483–488 (2012).
pubmed: 22169388
Guéguen, N. High heels increase women’s attractiveness. Arch. Sex. Behav. 44, 2227–2235 (2015).
pubmed: 25408499
Lewis, D. M. G. et al. Why women wear high heels: evolution, lumbar curvature, and attractiveness. Front. Psychol. 8, 1875 (2017).
pubmed: 29180972
pmcid: 5693914
Sadr, J., Troje, N. F. & Nakayama, K. Axes vs. averages: High-level representations of dynamic point-light forms. Vis. Cogn. 14, 119–122 (2006).
Morris, P. H., White, J., Morrison, E. R. & Fisher, K. High heels as supernormal stimuli: How wearing high heels affects judgements of female attractiveness. Evol. Hum. Behav. 34, 176–181 (2013).
Roether, C. L., Omlor, L., Christensen, A. & Giese, M. A. Critical features for the perception of emotion from gait. J. Vis. 9, 15 (2009).
Thoresen, J. C., Vuong, Q. C. & Atkinson, A. P. First impressions: Gait cues drive reliable trait judgements. Cognition. 124, 261–271 (2012).
pubmed: 22717166
Schneider, S. et al. Show me how you walk and I tell you how you feel—a functional near-infrared spectroscopy study on emotion perception based on human gait. Neuroimage. 85, 380–390 (2014).
pubmed: 23921096
Tanabe, H., Fujii, K., Kaneko, N., Yokoyama, H. & Nakazawa, K. Biomechanical strategies to maximize gait attractiveness among women. Front. Sports Act. Living. 5, 1091470 (2023).
pubmed: 36816467
pmcid: 9932886
Hamrin, E. et al. Muscle strength and balance in post-stroke patients. Ups. J. Med. Sci. 87, 11–26 (1982).
pubmed: 7123700
Nakamura, R., Hosokawa, T. & Tsuji, I. Relationship of muscle strength for knee extension to walking capacity in patients with spastic hemiparesis. Tohoku J. Exp. Med. 145, 335–340 (1985).
pubmed: 4002220
Bohannon, R. W. Comfortable and maximum walking speed of adults aged 20–79 years: Reference values and determinants. Age Ageing. 26, 15–19 (1997).
pubmed: 9143432
Hausdorff, J. M., Cudkowicz, M. E., Firtion, R., Wei, J. Y. & Goldberger, A. L. Gait variability and basal ganglia disorders: Stride-to-stride variations of gait cycle timing in Parkinson’s disease and Huntington’s disease. Mov. Disord. 13, 428–437 (1998).
pubmed: 9613733
Begg, R., Best, R., Dell’Oro, L. & Taylor, S. Minimum foot clearance during walking: Strategies for the minimisation of trip-related falls. Gait Posture. 25, 191–198 (2007).
pubmed: 16678418
Patterson, K. K., Gage, W. H., Brooks, D., Black, S. E. & McIlroy, W. E. Evaluation of gait symmetry after stroke: A comparison of current methods and recommendations for standardization. Gait Posture. 31, 241–246 (2010).
pubmed: 19932621
Patterson, K. K., Nadkarni, N. K., Black, S. E. & McIlroy, W. E. Gait symmetry and velocity differ in their relationship to age. Gait Posture 35, 590–594 (2012).
pubmed: 22300728
pmcid: 3914537
Tucker, M. R. et al. Control strategies for active lower extremity prosthetics and orthotics: A review. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 12, 1 (2015).
pubmed: 25557982
pmcid: 4326520
Boekesteijn, R. J., van Gerven, J., Geurts, A. C. H. & Smulders, K. Objective gait assessment in individuals with knee osteoarthritis using inertial sensors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gait Posture 98, 109–120 (2022).
pubmed: 36099732
Johnson, K. L. & Tassinary, L. G. Perceiving sex directly and indirectly: Meaning in motion and morphology. Psychol. Sci. 16, 890–897 (2005).
pubmed: 16262776
McDonnell, R., Jörg, S., Hodgins, J. K., Newell, F. & O’Sullivan, C. Virtual shapers & movers: Form and motion affect sex perception in Proceedings of the 4th Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization. 7–10, (2007)
Bruening, D. A., Frimenko, R. E., Goodyear, C. D., Bowden, D. R. & Fullenkamp, A. M. Sex differences in whole body gait kinematics at preferred speeds. Gait Posture. 41, 540–545 (2015).
pubmed: 25548119
Kozlowski, L. T. & Cutting, J. E. Recognizing the sex of a walker from a dynamic point-light display. Percept. Psychophys. 21, 575–580 (1977).
Mather, G. & Murdoch, L. Gender discrimination in biological motion displays based on dynamic cues. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 258, 273–279 (1994).
Von der Lippe, G. Media image: Sport, gender and national identities in five European countries. Int. Rev. Sociol. Sport. 37, 371–395 (2002).
Klomsten, A. T., Marsh, H. W. & Skaalvik, E. M. Adolescents’ perceptions of masculine and feminine values in sport and physical education: A study of gender differences. Sex Roles 52, 625–636 (2005).
D’Argenio, G., Finisguerra, A. & Urgesi, C. Motion and gender-typing features interact in the perception of human bodies. Front. Neurosci. 14, 277 (2020).
pubmed: 32372898
pmcid: 7186348
Chatterjee, A. The neuropsychology of visual artistic production. Neuropsychologia 42, 1568–1583 (2004).
pubmed: 15246293
Chatterjee, A. Neuroaesthetics: A coming of age story. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23(1), 53–62 (2011).
pubmed: 20175677
Winter, D. A. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement 4th edn. (Wiley, 2009).
Kurabayashi, J., Mochimaru, M. & Kouchi, M. Validation of the estimation methods for the hip joint center. J. Soc. Biomech. 27, 29–36 (2003).
Reed, M. P., Manary, M. A., & Schneider, L. W. Methods for measuring and representing automobile occupant posture. SAE Technical Paper Series. (1999).
Nummenmaa, L., Hietanen, J. K., Santtila, P. & Hyönä, J. Gender and visibility of sexual cues influence eye movements while viewing faces and bodies. Arch. Sex. Behav. 41, 1439–1451 (2012).
pubmed: 22402995
Wolfe, E. W. & Smith, E. V. Jr. Instrument development tools and activities for measure validation using Rasch models: Part I—Instrument development tools. J. Appl. Meas. 8, 97–123 (2007).
pubmed: 17215568
Ullman, J. B. & Bentler, P. M. Structural equation modeling. Handbook of psychology. 2
Fox, J. Applied Regression Analysis and Generalized Linear Models (Sage, 2015).
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H. & Müller, H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol. Res. 8, 23–74 (2003).
Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbom, D. LISREL VI User’s guide 3rd edn. (Scientific Software, 1984).
Tanaka, J. S. & Huba, G. J. Confirmatory hierarchical factor analyses of psychological distress measures. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 46, 621–635 (1984).
Bentler, P. M. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol. Bull. 107, 238–246 (1990).
pubmed: 2320703
Steiger, J. H. & Lind, J. M. Statistically-based tests for the number of common factors (Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, 1980).
Browne, M. W. & Cudeck, R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Testing Structural Equation Models (eds Bollen, K. A. & Long, J. S.) 136–162 (Sage, 1993).
Marsh, H. W. & Grayson, D. Latent variable models of multitrait-multimethod data. In Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications (ed. Hoyle, R.) 177–198 (Sage, 1995).
Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling 5th edn. (Routledge, 2022).
Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3, 424–453 (1998).
Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 6, 1–55 (1999).
Anderson, J. C. & Gerbing, D. W. The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indices for maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Psychometrika 49, 155–173 (1984).
World Health Organization. The world health report 2002: reducing risks, promoting healthy life. World Health Organization, 2002.
Gross, M. M., Crane, E. A. & Fredrickson, B. L. Effort-shape and kinematic assessment of bodily expression of emotion during gait. Hum. Mov. Sci. 31, 202–221 (2012).
pubmed: 21835480
Venture, G. et al. Recognizing emotions conveyed by human gait. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 6, 621–632 (2014).
Kreifelts, B., Ethofer, T., Shiozawa, T., Grodd, W. & Wildgruber, D. Cerebral representation of non-verbal emotional perception: fMRI reveals audiovisual integration area between voice- and face-sensitive regions in the superior temporal sulcus. Neuropsychologia 47, 3059–3066 (2009).
pubmed: 19596021
Kreifelts, B., Ethofer, T., Huberle, E., Grodd, W. & Wildgruber, D. Association of trait emotional intelligence and individual fMRI-activation patterns during the perception of social signals from voice and face. Hum. Brain Mapp. 31, 979–991 (2010).
pubmed: 19937724
Grèzes, J., Pichon, S. & De Gelder, B. Perceiving fear in dynamic body expressions. Neuroimage 35, 959–967 (2007).
pubmed: 17270466
de Gelder, B. et al. Standing up for the body. Recent progress in uncovering the networks involved in the perception of bodies and bodily expressions. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 34, 513–527 (2010).
pubmed: 19857515
de Rooij, M. et al. SEM-based out-of-sample predictions. Struct. Equ. Model. Multidiscip. J. 30, 132–148 (2023).
Periyasami, S. & Periyasamy, A. P. Metaverse as future promising platform business model: Case study on fashion value chain. Businesses. 2, 527–545 (2022).
Mystakidis, S. Metaverse. Encyclopedia 2, 486–497 (2022).