So why did they choose symmetry as the criteria for judging if the people were beautiful and selfish, instead of choosing if the people were blonde and selfish. or had dimples and were selfish?
There is a well known trait in people to match people on looks when asked to match a selection of individuals to other in the selection range.
When people were also asked to rate people as more or less attractive one of the trends for attractivenes was a symmetical face.
As I recall there was resaerch into babies spending more time looking at symmetrical faces then none symmetrical faces.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but on a statistical level there are trends to suggest that generally people find more symmetrical faces more attractive.
Another point I rememeber is that people go for people within there looks range (e.g. 7/10s go for 7/10). Again, this is just a general rule.
Think of it as a rule of thumb.
So why did they choose symmetry as the criteria for judging if the people were beautiful and selfish, instead of choosing if the people were blonde and selfish. or had dimples and were selfish?
You have it wrong, they asked "what is a common factor in these people who have been rated attractive, oh I see, they are very symmetrical".
From an evolutionary perspective any asymmetry in the face could indicate a body that has not developed as effectively as a more symmetrical body and is thus less attractive in term of fittness.
Or a lumpy face with a colliflour ear is idicative of getting into fights aand not being a stable choice in partner.
I could do a study tomorrow just like this one, and find people who ALWAYS choose the less symmetrical faces, and show this is people's preference.
But then you would be putting the cart before the horse. As explained, the conclusion was derived from the evidence rather than the conclusion was sought.
That's cooking the books and it ain't science.
Edited by Larni, : significant to trends