Display options
Cite
Mikalsen SK, Folstad I, Yoccoz NG, et al. The spectacular human nose: an amplifier of individual quality?. PeerJ. 2014;2:e357doi: 10.7717/peerj.357.
Mikalsen, S. K., Folstad, I., Yoccoz, N. G., & Laeng, B. (2014). The spectacular human nose: an amplifier of individual quality?. PeerJ, 2e357. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.357
Mikalsen, Se Kristine Rognmo, et al. "The spectacular human nose: an amplifier of individual quality?." PeerJ vol. 2 (2014): e357. doi: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.357
Mikalsen SK, Folstad I, Yoccoz NG, Laeng B. The spectacular human nose: an amplifier of individual quality?. PeerJ. 2014 Apr 17;2:e357. doi: 10.7717/peerj.357. eCollection 2014. PMID: 24765588; PMCID: PMC3994647.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

PeerJ. 2014 Apr 17;2:e357. doi: 10.7717/peerj.357. eCollection 2014.

The spectacular human nose: an amplifier of individual quality?.

PeerJ

Se Kristine Rognmo Mikalsen, Ivar Folstad, Nigel Gilles Yoccoz, Bruno Laeng

Affiliations

  1. Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, University of Tromsø , Norway.
  2. Department of Psychology, University of Tromsø , Norway.

PMID: 24765588 PMCID: PMC3994647 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.357

Abstract

Amplifiers are signals that improve the perception of underlying differences in quality. They are cost free and advantageous to high quality individuals, but disadvantageous to low quality individuals, as poor quality is easier perceived because of the amplifier. For an amplifier to evolve, the average fitness benefit to the high quality individuals should be higher than the average cost for the low quality individuals. The human nose is, compared to the nose of most other primates, extraordinary large, fragile and easily broken-especially in male-male interactions. May it have evolved as an amplifier among high quality individuals, allowing easy assessment of individual quality and influencing the perception of attractiveness? We tested the latter by manipulating the position of the nose tip or, as a control, the mouth in facial pictures and had the pictures rated for attractiveness. Our results show that facial attractiveness failed to be influenced by mouth manipulations. Yet, facial attractiveness increased when the nose tip was artificially centered according to other facial features. Conversely, attractiveness decreased when the nose tip was displaced away from its central position. Our results suggest that our evaluation of attractiveness is clearly sensitive to the centering of the nose tip, possibly because it affects our perception of the face's symmetry and/or averageness. However, whether such centering is related to individual quality remains unclear.

Keywords: Amplifiers; Asymmetry; Attractiveness; Human; Nose; Perception; Signal

References

  1. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004 Jan;113(1):45-52 - PubMed
  2. Hum Biol. 1995 Jun;67(3):459-79 - PubMed
  3. J Trauma. 2009 Jul;67(1):147-51 - PubMed
  4. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2004 Nov;117(3):313-32 - PubMed
  5. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1969 Jan;30(1):29-37 - PubMed
  6. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:199-226 - PubMed
  7. J Theor Biol. 1997 Mar 21;185(2):139-56 - PubMed
  8. Eur J Orthod. 1999 Apr;21(2):137-43 - PubMed
  9. Perception. 2013;42(3):321-9 - PubMed
  10. Perception. 2000;29(1):31-42 - PubMed
  11. Biometrics. 1986 Mar;42(1):121-30 - PubMed
  12. Perception. 1997;26(1):75-84 - PubMed
  13. Br J Psychol. 2002 Nov;93(Pt 4):451-64 - PubMed
  14. Perception. 1993;22(2):153-76 - PubMed
  15. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2014 Jan;153(1):52-60 - PubMed
  16. Psychol Sci. 2008 Oct;19(10):998-1006 - PubMed
  17. Percept Psychophys. 1990 Sep;48(3):227-33 - PubMed
  18. Angle Orthod. 1990 Fall;60(3):191-8 - PubMed
  19. Proc Biol Sci. 2000 May 7;267(1446):917-22 - PubMed
  20. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1997 Sep;23(9):928-936 - PubMed
  21. Percept Mot Skills. 1996 Jun;82(3 Pt 2):1111-21 - PubMed
  22. Biol Psychiatry. 2002 Mar 15;51(6):507-14 - PubMed
  23. J Evol Biol. 2008 Mar;21(2):387-95 - PubMed
  24. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2003 Jan-Feb;27(1):44-9 - PubMed
  25. Am J Otolaryngol. 2005 May-Jun;26(3):181-5 - PubMed
  26. Percept Psychophys. 2005 Jan;67(1):1-13 - PubMed
  27. J Theor Biol. 2008 May 21;252(2):255-71 - PubMed
  28. Am J Rhinol. 2006 Nov-Dec;20(6):609-14 - PubMed
  29. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz. 2006 Dec 5;101 Suppl 2:133-8 - PubMed
  30. Anim Behav. 2000 Feb;59(2):423-432 - PubMed
  31. J Trauma. 1994 Jan;36(1):34-47 - PubMed
  32. Vision Res. 2009 Nov;49(23):2870-80 - PubMed
  33. J Sports Sci Med. 2006 Jul 01;5(CSSI):136-42 - PubMed
  34. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1989 Jan 23;235(1281):383-406 - PubMed
  35. Perception. 2002;31(9):1061-72 - PubMed
  36. Hum Biol. 1995 Jun;67(3):407-26 - PubMed
  37. Biol Lett. 2008 Feb 23;4(1):12-5 - PubMed
  38. Mem Cognit. 1998 Jan;26(1):146-60 - PubMed
  39. Am Nat. 1998 Feb;151(2):157-73 - PubMed
  40. J Exp Biol. 2013 Jan 15;216(Pt 2):236-44 - PubMed
  41. Trends Ecol Evol. 1996 Feb;11(2):98-102 - PubMed
  42. J Theor Biol. 1975 Sep;53(1):205-14 - PubMed

Publication Types