Personality and Individual Differences 35 (2003) 13731383 www.elsevier.

com/locate/paid

Can you judge a book by its cover? Evidence of selfstranger agreement on personality at zero acquaintance
Mark Shevlina,*, Stephanie Walkerb, Mark N. O. Daviesb, Philip Banyardb, Christopher Alan Lewisa
a

School of Psychology, Measurement, Evaluation, and Modelling Research Unit, University of Ulster at Magee College, BT48 7JL, Northern Ireland, UK b Department of Social Sciences, Nottingham Trent University, Burton Street, Nottingham NG1 4BU, UK Received 22 March 2002; received in revised form 28 August 2002; accepted 10 November 2002

Abstract Two studies were conducted to examine the accuracy of personality assessment at zero acquaintance. In Study 1, participants were asked to rate head and shoulder colour photographs of strangers in terms of the extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism dimensions. The stranger ratings were correlated with the targets self-report ratings on these dimensions using the EPQ-R. Signicant selfstranger agreement was found for psychoticism but not for extraversion or neuroticism. Study 2 used the same general design, but the amount of visual information in head and shoulder colour photographs was manipulated and presented to strangers. In condition 1 head and shoulder colour photographs with proles were used, in condition 2 head and shoulder colour photographs with proles removed were used, and in condition 3 the images were cropped so that only the internal features of the face were visible. In all three conditions signicant selfstranger agreement was found for psychoticism but not for extraversion or neuroticism as measured by the EPP. These consistent cross-study ndings were discussed and further research suggested. # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Zero-acquaintance; Physiognomy; EPQ; Self-stranger agreement

1. Introduction The belief that personality characteristics of an individual can be reected in external physical features formed the basis of phrenology and physiognomy. Phrenology was based on the assumption that dierent traits and abilities were manifested in the shape and unevenness of the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-2871-375-619; fax: +44-2871-375-402. E-mail address: m.shevlin@Ulster.ac.uk (M. Shevlin).
0191-8869/03/$ - see front matter # 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S0191-8869(02)00356-2

1374

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

skull. Physiognomy focused primarily on the relationship between facial and personality characteristics. Although no scientic evidence was found to support the ideas of phrenology and physiognomy (Alley, 1988; Cohen, 1973) there does appear to be a strong lay belief that external features, in particular the face, do provide information about a persons character. Liggett (1974) found that ninety percent of students believed that the face was a useful source of information about a persons personality. Hassin and Trope (2000) found that 75% of Israelis thought that it was possible to know an individuals true personality from looking at their face. Indeed, there may be cross-cultural shared beliefs regarding which particular facial characteristics are associated with particular traits. McArthur and Berry (1987) found strong correlations between Korean and American students personality ratings of the same faces. Kenny and Malloy (1988) found strong stranger agreement on ratings of extraversion and conscientiousness of strangers without seeing them interact (see also Borkenau & Liebler, 1992; Kenny, Albright, Malloy, & Kashy, 1994; Kenny, Horner, Kashy, & Chu, 1992). Such ndings have previously been explained in terms of . . .socially communicated cultural stereotypes about links between personality and facial appearance (Berry & Wero, 1993, p. 498). This explanation rests upon the assumption that there is no true association between facial appearance and personality, rather that the consensus reects commonly accepted covariation between certain facial features and personality traits. However, there is growing body of evidence that suggests that facial features may indeed provide some valid information regarding a persons personality, what Berry and Wero describe as the kernel of truth hypothesis. This kernel of truth hypothesis has generally been tested using zero acquaintance designs where strangers are required to rate the personality of strangers based on minimal information. This information may take the form of short video clips of the stranger, static photographs, or a brief social interaction. The strangers are required to rate the target along particular personality dimensions, which are then correlated with the self-report ratings of the target. The resultant correlations infer selfstranger agreement at zero acquaintance. Studies have reported signicant levels of both selfstranger and acquaintancestranger agreement. In the latter case the strangers ratings of the target are correlated with ratings from close acquaintances such as family and friends. To examine acquaintancestranger agreement, Borkenau and Liebler (1993) showed short video clips (90 s) of participants to strangers who were required to rate the target on the Big Five dimensions of personality. These rating were correlated with ratings provided by the targets cohabiting partner. Signicant acquaintance (partner)stranger correlations were reported for the extraversion and culture/openness dimensions. Similarly, Berry (1990) found signicant acquaintancestranger correlations based on static facial photographs of the target. Signicant correlations were found for impressions of warmth, honesty, and social power. Selfstranger agreement has been examined under conditions of varying information. Some studies have allowed strangers to meet briey and then rate each other on particular personality dimensions. For example, Norman and Goldberg (1966) reported statistically signicant self stranger correlations for three of the Big Five dimensions (extraversion, conscientiousness, and culture) among unacquainted undergraduate students who had been in the same room for 20 min. These ndings were replicated by Watson (1989) who reported statistically signicant selfstranger correlations on ratings of extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Other studies have reduced the amount of information available to judges by using videotapes of strangers. Borkenau and Liebler (1993) experimentally manipulated the amount of information presented to

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

1375

the strangers. The targets were videotaped entering a room, walking around a table and reciting a short piece of text. Strangers then rated the targets on the Big Five dimensions of personality under two conditions; video with sound and the video with the sound turned o. Signicant self stranger correlations were reported for the extraversion and conscientiousness dimensions under both conditions, with the correlations being higher for the video and sound condition. In an earlier study, Borkenau and Liebler (1992) found signicant selfstranger correlations based on still images taken from video footage with the target person looking into the camera (p. 648). Signicant correlations were reported for extraversion and conscientiousness. Some studies have used static photographs as stimuli. Berry (1990) reported signicant selfstranger correlations based on static facial photographs on the dimensions of power and dominance. Rind and Gaudet (1993) found signicant selfstranger correlations based on static facial photographs on the dimension of social adjustment. This series of studies aimed to compliment the existing research in two ways. First, the self stranger ratings in previous research have generally been based on the personality dimensions of the Big Five. In the present studies, variants of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R: Eysenck, Eysenck & Barrett, 1985) were used which measure the traits of extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. The use of the EPQ variants allow the consistency of the ndings based on the Big Five to be tested as both the Big Five and the Eysenckian models include the dimensions of extraversion and neuroticism, and psychoticism is considered to be related negatively to conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae, 1992a). Using the Eysenck Personality Proler (EPP: Eysenck, Wilson, & Jackson, 1996) and the Big Five Inventory (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991) Aziz and Jackson (2001) reported positive correlations between the scores on the extraversion (r=0.58) and neuroticism (r=0.54) scales. A negative correlation between psychoticism and conscientiousness (r=0.47) scale scores was also reported. These ndings suggest that the traits, as measured by the two questionnaires, are similar but not interchangeable. Second, the focus is explicitly on the information from static images of the targets face. In previous research the use of video clips, or actual social contact, may have allowed extraneous sources of information to be used for ratings of personality such as clothing, gait, posture, and jewelry. Such thin slices of expressive behavior (Hassin & Trope, 2000, p. 838) are commonly used in zero-acquaintance studies, whereas physiognomic based studies rely on static images. Although the additional information available in zero-acquaintance studies may appear inconsequential, many studies have demonstrated the importance of short expressive behaviours in providing useful information (Ambady, LaPlante, Nguyen, Rosenthal, Chaumeton, & Levinson, 2002; Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992). Therefore, evidence from studies where thin slices of behaviour are included do not directly support the validity of physiognomic judgements. In this research only static facial photographs were used as stimuli and the amount of facial information was manipulated. In order to be consistent with previous research practices each participant was requested to rate each photograph in terms of attractiveness and babyfacedness as these are considered to inuence impressions of personality characteristics (Berry & Wero, 1993). Study 1 used static colour photographs of targets that completed the EPQ-R (Eysenck et al., 1985). The self-ratings of extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism were correlated with ratings from strangers. In Study 2, the amount of facial information was manipulated by successively reducing the amount of available information and selfstranger correlations were based on the EPP (Eysenck et al., 1996). First, it was predicted that signicant selfstranger agreement would be found for extraversion, which has been a consistent nding in previous research.

1376

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

Second, no signicant selfstranger agreement was expected for neuroticism, as such ndings have not been reported in the previous research literature. Third, it was predicted that self stranger agreement might be found for psychoticism, as psychoticism is considered to be related negatively to conscientiousness (Costa & McCrae, 1992a); signicant selfstranger agreement on conscientiousness has been previously reported.

2. Method: Study 1 2.1. Participants Forty-two participants agreed to act as targets, 20 males and 22 females with ages ranging from 15 to 60 (mean=33). They were recruited randomly from a campus of a university in Northern Ireland and participation agreements were signed. Twenty judges were recruited, 14 females and six males with ages ranging from 18 to 51 (mean=27). The sample of judges were primarily undergraduate psychology students from a dierent campus of the same university in Northern Ireland. 2.2. Materials and procedure Each target participant completed the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R: Eysenck et al., 1985), a 48-item self-report measuring the three personality dimensions of extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. A static colour head and shoulder full-face photograph of each target participant was taken with a Canon digital camera. Participants were asked to maintain a neutral facial expression. All photographs were randomly presented to each judge on a computer screen, each image was 9065mm. Each judge was requested to rate each photograph in terms of extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism, attractiveness, and babyfacedness on an eight-point Likert scale anchored with the labels Low and High. Descriptions of the three personality dimensions were presented to each of the judges based on the EPQ-R test manual descriptions (Eysenck et al., 1985). People high on extraversion were dened as being characteristically sociable, lively, assertive, sensation-seeking, carefree, dominant, and venturesome. People high on neuroticism were dened as being characteristically anxious, depressed, have low self-esteem, tense, irrational, shy, moody, and emotional. People high on psychoticism were dened as being characteristically aggressive, cold, egocentric, impersonal, impulsive, antisocial, and tough-minded. Ratings of attractiveness and babyfacedness were requested, where babyfacedness refers to how baby-like you nd the persons face. Each judge was asked to inform the experimenter if they recognised any of the target participants. This did not occur in any of the trails. 2.3. Results Summed scale scores for extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism were calculated for each target participant for extraversion (mean=8.78; S.D.=3.34), neuroticism (mean=5.16; S.D.=3.11), and psychoticism (mean=3.59; S.D.=2.43). Mean extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism scores for each photograph were calculated across all judges. Partial

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

1377

correlations were calculated for the target and judge ratings of each of the personality dimensions controlling for attractiveness and babyfacedness (Berry & Wero, 1993). The partial and zero-order (in parentheses) correlations between target and judge self-reported extraversion (r=0.198 (0.153), P>0.05) and neuroticism (r=0.121 (0.215), P>0.05) were not statistically signicant. For psychoticism the partial correlation was positive and statistically signicant (r=0.355, P<0.05) although the zero-order correlation was not (r=0.029, P>0.05).

3. Method: Study 2 3.1. Participants The target participants consisted of 18 male and 18 female psychology undergraduates attending an English university (mean age=22). The judges were 18 male and 42 female undergraduate students (mean age=29) at a Northern Ireland university and were not acquainted with any of the target individuals. 3.2. Materials and procedure Each target participant completed the EPP (Eysenck, et al., 1996). The EPP measures extraversion by the summed scores of three sub-scales measuring sociability (20 items), activity (20 items), and assertiveness (20 items). Neuroticism is measured by the summed scores of three subscales measuring anxiety (20 items), inferiority (20 items), and unhappiness (20 items). Psychoticism is measured by the summed scores of three sub-scales measuring risk-taking (20 items), impulsiveness (20 items), and irresponsibility (20 items). In this experiment the amount of facial information of each target participant presented to participant judges was varied across three conditions. The original stimuli comprised head and shoulder full-face (10594 mm) and left/right prole (5094 mm) colour photographs of 18 male and 18 female target participants. These were generated using a Sony Mavica digital camera and Adobe Photoshop software running on a Power MAC 8100. In condition 1, head and shoulder full-face photographs were presented between left and right proles. In condition 2 only the fullface photographs were presented, and in condition 3 edited full-face photographs were presented in which only the internal features of the face were visible. The photographs were cropped horizontally across the top of forehead and chin, and vertically down the side of the head. In each condition the stimuli were randomised and presented using Netscape Navigator 4.5. Examples of the stimuli are presented in Fig. 1. Participant judges were randomly allocated to each condition (20 in each condition) and were asked to rate each of the 36 stimuli faces on a 10-point Likert scale indicating sociability, activity and assertiveness (summed score measures extraversion), anxiety, inferiority and unhappiness (summed score measures neuroticism), risk-taking, impulsiveness and irresponsibility (summed score measures psychoticism). Each face was also rated in terms of attractiveness and babyfacedness. Mean scores for the three personality dimensions, attractiveness and babyfacedness were calculated for each photograph across all judges.

1378

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

Fig. 1. (a) Example stimuli for condition 1 (full-face and proles); (b) example stimuli for condition 2 (full-face only); (c) example stimuli for condition 3 (face features only).

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

1379

Fig. 1 (continued).

3.3. Results Consensus among judges was assessed by means of correlating the personality ratings for each photograph across each of the three experimental conditions. A high degree of inter-rater reliability in the evaluation of each of the personality dimensions was found. Ratings of extraversion were highly correlated between the three conditions (condition 1 and 2, r=0.828, P<0.05; condition 1 and 3, r=0.583, P<0.05; condition 2 and 3, r=0.598, P<0.05; =0.846), as were the ratings of neuroticism (condition 1 and 2, r=0.691, P< 0.05; condition 1 and 3, r=0.479, P< 0.05; condition 2 and 3, r=0.435, P<0.05; =0.774), and psychoticism (condition 1 and 2, r=0.839, P<0.05; condition 1 and 3, r=0.719, P <0.05; condition 2 and 3, r=0.698, P<0.05; =0.893). The mean judges personality ratings for each personality dimension were correlated with the target participants self-ratings on the extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism scales of the EPP. The total scale scores were calculated for extraversion (mean=66; S.D.=14), neuroticism (mean=35; S.D.=22), and psychoticism (mean=57; S.D.=17). For condition 1 (full-face and proles) the correlation between the target participant and judges ratings for extraversion (r=0.045, P>0.05) and neuroticism (r=0.119, P>0.05) were not signicant. The correlation for psychoticism was statistically signicant (r=0.464, P<0.05). For condition 2 (full-face only) the correlation between the target participant and judges ratings for extraversion (r=0.046, P>0.05) and neuroticism (r=0.093, P>0.05) were not signicant. The correlation for psychoticism was statistically signicant (r=0.299, P< 0.05). For condition 3 (edited face) the correlation between the target participant and judges ratings for extraversion (r=0.062, P>0.05) and neuroticism (r=0.077, P>0.05) were not signicant. The correlation for psychoticism was

1380

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

statistically signicant (r=0.304, P<0.05). When statistically controlling for attractiveness and baby facedness the partial correlation between target participant and judges ratings for psychoticism for conditions 1, 2 and 3 were r=0.460, r=0.308 and r=0.319 respectively (all p< 0.05). All partial correlations between target participant and judges ratings for extraversion and neuroticism were not statistically signicant (P>0.05).

4. Discussion The results from Study 1 showed that there was no selfstranger agreement in terms of extraversion and neuroticism. However the selfstranger partial correlation for ratings of psychoticism was statistically signicant (r=0.355). The results from Study 2 were similar. Across all three experimental conditions there was no selfstranger agreement in terms of extraversion and neuroticism. The selfstranger partial correlations for psychoticism were statistically signicant; the highest correlation was found in condition 1 (r=0.460) with the correlations for conditions 2 (r=0.308) and 3 (r=0.314) being smaller and similar in magnitude. High levels of participant consensus were also found for all three dimensions of personality. These ndings support two of the three a priori stated hypotheses. The rst hypothesis predicted that signicant selfstranger agreement for the extraversion dimension would be found. No signicant selfstranger agreement for extraversion was found. This is inconsistent with the existing research literature and may be attributable to a number of reasons. First, in these studies extraversion was measured using variants of the EPQ whereas previous research has used versions of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992b). The fact that dierent measurement instruments may lead to dierent results is suggested by the work of Borkenau and Liebler (1993). They report higher selfstranger agreement correlations when using the NEO compared with Normans (1963) ratings scales. In addition, the moderate correlations between EPQ and Big Five based measures of extraversion, as reported by Aziz & Jackson (2001), show that the dierent measures of the same dimension lead to conceptual dierences. Second, the previous research may not have represented true zero acquaintance, and the signicant self stranger correlations are attributable to sources of information other than facial characteristics. Paunonen (1991) suggested that important information, such as style of dress and nonverbal behaviour, might provide important information about the target. Discussing previous studies Paunonen claimed that . . .from the experimental procedures used by every one of the investigators collecting stranger ratings, it is apparent that opportunities were available for the so-called strangers to observe salient target behaviours (p. 472). It should be noted that in studies where signicant selfstranger correlations on extraversion were reported the strangers actually briey met the targets (Norman & Goldberg, 1966) or watched video tapes with or without sound (Borkenau & Liebler, 1993). Visual cues based on targets posture, gait, style and neatness of dress, may provide more visible information in relation to ratings of extraversion. In the two studies reported here only information from static head and shoulder and facial photographs was available. Although minimal information regarding dress and hairstyle was available in Study 1 and the rst and second conditions of Study 2 this represents much less information then provided in previous designs. This may account for the current ndings, although further research is necessary to determine the validity of this interpretation.

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

1381

The second hypothesis predicted that no signicant selfstranger agreement would be found for neuroticism. This prediction was supported in both Study 1 and 2 as no signicant selfstranger correlations were found. The third hypothesis predicted that selfstranger agreement would be found for psychoticism, as psychoticism is considered to be related negatively to conscientiousness and signicant selfstranger agreement on conscientiousness has been previously reported. The results support this prediction as signicant selfstranger correlations for psychoticism were found in both studies. In Study 1, the selfstranger correlation was r=0.355, and the correlations ranged from r=0.319 to r=0.460 in Study 2. This eect was evident even when the information was minimal, such as in condition 3 (Study 2) where only the internal features of the face were shown. The consistency of the ndings indicates there is an ability to identify psychoticism from facial characteristics, but not neuroticism or extraversion. Although these studies do not allow the authors to distinguish whether the ability to identify psychoticism is learnt or innate it is tentatively proposed that such an ability may have arisen through natural selection. The ability to identify undesirable genetically based personality traits would be useful in terms of successful mate selection (or avoidance). Sexual selection is important in K-selected species (Millar, 1998) where females and males invest heavily in ospring. As psychoticism has been shown to be related to adolescent delinquency (Aleixo & Norris, 2000; Tranah, Harnett, & Yule, 1998), adult criminality (Eysenck & Gudjonsson, 1989), drug addiction (Claridge, 1981) and biological variables associated with schizophrenia (Gray, Pickering & Gray, 1994) it may be the case that the ability to identify high levels of psychoticism is an adaptive ability. The behavioural traits associated with high psychoticism scores are not consistent with behaviours required for long-term commitment and investment in raising ospring. Such an evolutionary explanation generates testable hypotheses. For example on the basis of Triverss (1972) theory of parental investment it could be predicted that an ability to identify psychoticism is more important for females due to the dierential investment in ospring.1 Also in line with current work on face preference (Penton-Voak et al., 1999) it could be predicted that the sensitivity to psychoticism in the human face may vary as a function of the menstrual cycle. Baker and Bellis (1995) found that the timing of extra-pair copulations was associated with the risk of conception. Therefore the ability to identify psychoticism may be more evident in the luteral or menses phase rather than the follicular phase when the risk of conception is high. Although the design of these studies addressed many of the concerns raised by Paunonen (1991) regarding zero-acquaintance studies, further research in this area should be mindful of factors that may limit the strength of inferences drawn from the ndings. First, age related changes in the personality traits under investigation have been reported (Eysenck, 1988). Therefore the inuence of the targets age could be controlled for my means of sampling or by means of statistical control. Second, the images presented in Study 1, and in the rst and second conditions of Study 2, included information about hairstyles, jewelry and some clothing. Although such sources of information are far from thin slices of information, additional elimination of such information may strengthen future conclusions.

1 The analysis of males and females separately in this study would reduce the sample size, and thus the power of the statistical tests, to an unsuitable level.

1382

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

In conclusion, the results from these studies showed that there were statistically signicant correlations between self and stranger rating in terms of psychoticism, but not for extraversion or neuroticism. The mechanism by which selfstranger agreement is reached cannot be explained, although it is suggested that such an ability may have arisen through natural selection. Further research is necessary in order to substantiate such a claim.

Acknowledgements We would like to express our sincere thanks to the participants who allowed their photographs to be used in these studies. Also we would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful and insightful comments. References
Aleixo, P. A., & Norris, C. E. (2000). Personality and moral reasoning in young oenders. Personality and Individual Dierences, 28, 609623. Alley, T. R. (1988). Physiognomy and social perception. In T. R. Alley (Ed.), Social and applied aspects of perceiving faces (pp. 167186). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Ambady, N., LaPlante, D., Nguyen, T., Rosenthal, R., Chaumeton, N., & Levinson, W. (2002). Surgeons tone of voice: a clue to malpractice history. Surgery, 132, 59. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256274. Aziz, S., & Jackson, C. (2001). A comparison between three and ve factor models of Pakistani personality data. Personality and Individual Dierences, 31, 13111319. Baker, R. R., & Bellis, M. A. (1995). Human sperm competition: copulation, masturbation and indelity. London: Chapman and Hall. Berry, D. S. (1990). Taking people at face value: evidence for the kernal of truth hypothesis. Social Cognition, 8, 343361. Berry, D. S., & Wero, J. L. F. (1993). Accuracy in face perception: a view from ecological psychology. Journal of Personality, 61, 497520. Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 645657. Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1993). Convergence of stranger ratings of personality and intelligence with self-ratings, partner ratings, and measured intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 546553. Claridge, R. (1981). Psychoticism. In R. Lynn (Ed.), Dimensions of personality: papers in honour of H.J. Eysenck. Oxford: Pergamon. Cohen, R. (1973). Patterns of personality judgements. New York: Academic Press. Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992a). Four ways ve factors are basic. Personality and Individual Dierences, 13, 653665. Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992b). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI): professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources. Eysenck, H. J. (1988). Personality and ageing: an exploratory analysis. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 3, 1121. Eysenck, H., & Gudjonsson, G. (1989). The causes and cures of criminality. New York: Plenum Press. Eysenck, H. J., Wilson, G. D., & Jackson, C. J. (1996). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Proler (short form). Guilford: PSi-Press. Eysenck, S. B. G., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Dierences, 6, 2129.

M. Shevlin et al. / Personality and Individual Dierences 35 (2003) 13731383

1383

Gray, N., Pickering, A., & Gray, J. (1994). Psychoticism and dopamine D2 binding in the basal ganglia using single photon emission tomography. Personality and Individual Dierences, 17, 432434. Hassin, R., & Trope, Y. (2000). Facing faces: studies on the cognitive aspects of physiognomy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 837852. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. (1991). The Big Five Inventoryversions 4a and 54. Berkley, CA: Technical report, Institute of Personality and Social Psychology, University of California. Kenny, D. A., & Malloy, T. E. (1988). Partner eects in social interaction. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12, 3457. Kenny, D. A., Albright, L., Malloy, T. E., & Kashy, D. A. (1994). Consensus in interpersonal perception: acquaintance and the Big Five. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 245258. Kenny, D. A., Horner, C., Kashy, D. A., & Chu, L. (1992). Consensus at zero acquaintance: replication, behavioral cues, and stability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 8897. Liggett, J. C. (1974). The human face. New York: Stein & Day. McArthur, L. Z., & Berry, D. S. (1987). Cross-cultural agreement in perceptions of babyfaced adults. Journal of CrossCultural Psychology, 18, 165192. Millar, G. F. (1998). How mate choice shaped human nature: a review of sexual selection and human evolution. In C. Crawford, & D. Krebs (Eds.), Handbook of evolutionary psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes. Replicated factor structure in peer nominated personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574583. Norman, W. T., & Goldberg, L. R. (1966). Raters, ratees, and randomness in personality structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 681691. Paunonen, S. V. (1991). On the accuracy of ratings of personality by strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 471477. Penton-Voak, I. S., Perrett, D. I., Castles, D. L., Kobayashi, T., Burt, D. M., Murray, L. K., & Minamisawa, R. (1999). Menstrual cycle alters face preference. Nature, 399, 741742. Rind, B., & Gaudet, S. (1993). Judging personality traits of adolescents from photographs. The Journal of Social Psychology, 133, 815823. Tranah, T., Harnett, P., & Yule, W. (1998). Conduct disorder and personality. Personality and Individual Dierences, 24, 741745. Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man: 18711971. Chicago: Aldine. Watson, D. (1989). Strangers ratings of the ve robust personality factors: evidence of surprising accuracy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 120128.