Kaschel Patrick, Hildebrandt Lea
University of Wuerzburg, DE.
Int Rev Soc Psychol. 2023 Apr 21;36:5. doi: 10.5334/irsp.758. eCollection 2023.
Most studies on physical attractiveness use (static) photos to rate physical attractiveness. This might not reflect how we perceive people in real, dynamic settings. Based on inconsistent previous studies, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the ecological validity of photo-based attractiveness judgements by comparing them to dynamic stimuli ratings. Our literature search resulted in = 46 effect sizes ( = 14 studies). Although the overall correlation between ratings of static and dynamic stimuli is high ( = 0.70, 95% CI [0.52; 0.81]), heterogeneity between studies is high as well ((45) = 168.27, < 0.0001 and = 77.71%), which is mostly explained by unreported stimulus quality and within- versus between-rater designs. A Monte Carlo simulation indicated that the small correlations in some previous studies are potentially correlations which had not stabilized yet. Our findings support that the photo-rating method is an ecologically valid approach to assess physical attractiveness.
大多数关于外表吸引力的研究使用（静态）照片来评定外表吸引力。这可能无法反映我们在真实动态场景中对他人的感知。基于以往不一致的研究，我们进行了一项荟萃分析，通过将基于照片的吸引力判断与动态刺激评分进行比较，来评估其生态效度。我们的文献检索得到了46个效应量（来自14项研究）。虽然静态和动态刺激评分之间的总体相关性较高（r = 0.70，95%CI[0.52；0.81]），但研究之间的异质性也很高（Q(45) = 168.27，p < 0.0001且I² = 77.71%），这主要由未报告的刺激质量以及评分者内部与评分者之间的设计来解释。蒙特卡洛模拟表明，一些以往研究中的小相关性可能是尚未稳定的相关性。我们的研究结果支持照片评分法是评估外表吸引力的一种生态有效方法。
