Age Discrimination In Young Dysmorphic Face
The earliest stages of human development are some of the most delicate and critical (prenatal to late childhood), requiring great care and attention by older humans (young adults to seniors). As such, much focus must be placed on the quality of care these toddlers and young children receive, both to understand factors affecting the level of care and how to better it if it is somehow lacking. The focus of this paper is on the relationship between age discrimination in young dysmorphic faces and their perceived attractiveness. The importance of this research rests with being able to inform and address practices regarding the care of young children, especially those with facial anomalies or deformities.
Previous research has demonstrated that there are differences in the care of children, specifically between children who display dysmorphic facial features as compared to faces that are normal. In one study, researchers found that while a mother rated their interactions with their newborn as being positive, independent observation of mother-infant interactions showed that the quality of interactions suffered for babies with facial deformities as compared to those with normal faces (Barden, Ford, Jensen, Rogers-Salyer, & Salyer, 1989). The …show more content…
researchers suggested that this decline was due in part to the baby as being perceived as unattractive, which is supported by other studies that showed greater maternal responses to attractive babies and less to unattractive ones (Barden et al., 1989; Langlois & Sawin, 1981).
Defining attractiveness allows for an understanding of what constitutes an attractive face and why certain dysmorphic features maybe considered unattractive. The current study supports the idea of attractiveness as relating to a specific set of ratios between facial features, such as the distance between the eyes and mouth, as well as the overall symmetry of the face (Pallett, Link, & Lee, 2010; Little, Jones, & DeBruine, 2011). Related to this “balanced” or well-portioned facial structure, Jones and colleagues (1995) also found that neoteny in faces, or faces that conserve some semblance of youthfulness, moved the perception of those faces towards finding them attractive, which is applicable to the focus of this current study with regards to age discrimination and related attractiveness levels.
The importance of attractiveness is emphasized from the ecological perspective, which suggests that attractive faces can relay information about age more clearly and accurately than unattractive faces (Zebrowitz & Montepare, 2008). The perception of age in a face is believed to inform an observer’s assumptions about the other person’s abilities as associated with the perceived age (Ritter, Casey, Langlois, 1991). In the studies conducted by Ritter, Casey, and Langlois (1991), they demonstrated a relationship between the perception of 6-month old babies as being unattractive with being older, over-estimation of their skill set and because of this higher expectation, the unattractive babies were rated as being less competent than those perceived as attractive. Being perceived as less attractive can lead to negative social interactions, such as the previously mentioned worsened mother-infant interactions (Barden et al., 1989).
The current study provides support for the idea that unattractive dysmorphic faces distort the perception of aging in young faces.
By measuring the accuracy of participants’ perception of aging in sets of faces, some with normal faces and other with the dysmorphic features of Apert syndrome (sunken faces; tall, flat foreheads and prominent brows, eyes widely spaced, and under-bites) the rate of accuracy for the estimation of aging among the faces can be compared between dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces. It’s hypothesized that participants will more accurately rate aging in nondysmorphic faces as compared to dysmorphic faces because of the perceived level of attractiveness in nondysmorphic faces as compared to dysmorphic
faces.
Method
Participants
The total number of participants was 88 (female = 56, male = 32). The age range was 18-26, with the average being 262.53 months old (21.8775 years old) (SD = 22.875). The specific participant information is shown in Table 1. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling, with students in the Spring 2017 Cognitive Psychology class at the University of Redlands asking individuals (friends, acquaintances, family, etc.) to part take in the study.
Design
The current research was an experimental study in which the accuracy of estimating aging in dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces was measured as related to attractiveness and youthfulness. The dependent variable was how accurately participants could detect aging within a set of stimuli (cards with pictures of faces). The independent variable were the sets of cards with aged dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces, in this case children with Apert syndrome and normal children, and the control variable were another set of cards with facial alterations.
Materials and Procedure Cards with pictures of faces. Sixteen photographs were obtained of nondysmorphic male and female 1-year olds, nondysmorphic male and female 5-year olds, Apert syndrome male and female 1-year olds, and Apert syndrome male and female 5-year olds. The 16 photographs were used to create a composite/base image for each category (i.e. one male and one female 1-year old with normal features, one male and one female 5-year old with normal features, one male and one female 1-year old with Apert syndrome, one male and one female 5-year old with Apert syndrome). The images were paired together, such that the 1-year old face was paired with the 5-year old face, matching sex (female to female, male to male) and features (dysmorphic to dysmorphic, normal to normal). The paired faces were then morphed over 29 steps, so that there was a visible aging process from the 1-year to the 5-year old face over these 29 steps, consequently creating the 29 cards within each set. The control cards were created by modifying the features of these eight base faces. The modifications were informed by the ratios described in the studies conducted by Pallet, Link, and Lee (2010), thought of as a defining feature of attractiveness in a face, which are as follows: the ratio between the length of the face (top of forehead to tip of the chin) and the distance between the eyes and mouth is .36; the ratio between the width of the face (distance between the edge of the ears) and the distance between the eyes is .46. The modification was applied in a manner that made the nondysmorphic faces display dysmorphic features and the dysmorphic faces display nondysmorphic features (i.e. normal faces took on Apert syndrome traits, and Apert syndrome faces were made more normal). The same process of pairing and morphing over 29 steps was conducted on these eight sets of modified faces to yield the controls. Scoring. The cards were coded from 1 to 29 as corresponding to the progression of age morphing from the 1-year old face to the 5-year old face. The participant responses were scored by calculating Spearman’s Rho, which was dependent on the order in which the cards were selected by the participant (i.e. someone scoring very high means that the order in which the cards were selected very closely matches the coded order).
Attractiveness and youthfulness rating. Participants were asked to rate perceived attractiveness and youthfulness levels by responding to questions about the base and modified faces on a four-point Likert scale, coded as 1=Strongly Disagree and 4=Strongly Agree. Questions that were asked included how much the participants agreed with or disagreed with the faces being “Youthful,” “Homely,” “Cute,” “Mature,” and “Old,” and so on.
Procedure
Participants were selected through convenience sampling and were tested in a range of locations. After the participants were informed about the reasons for conducting this research (as a project for the Cognitive Psychology class), and consent to partake in the study was verbally communicated, they were given instructions on how to go about completing the tasks. They were told that in front of them would be laid out (randomly shuffled and randomly placed) a set of 29 cards with faces on them. Of all the cards in front of them, they were to pick out the youngest looking face, after which the next youngest would be picked, then next youngest after that and so on until all the cards were selected. As the cards were selected, the researcher would record the response on the data intake form. This was done for all four sets of cards. It should be noted that the researchers had a specific order in which to present the cards (written on the data intake form), which was used to control for any ordering effects. Also, half of the researchers were given a set of four cards that contained unmodified faces (normal male/female and Apert male/female) and the other half a set of four cards that contained modified faces (normal male/female altered to display Apert and Apert male/female altered to look normal). Participants had the freedom to rearrange the cards in any way they sought fit, as long as they did not flip over the card, which was where the coding information had been placed. After completing these tasks, the participants were asked to answer questions in the survey (previously mentioned in the attractiveness rating section). They were thanked for their time and debriefed.
Previous research has demonstrated that there are differences in the care of children, specifically between children who display dysmorphic facial features as compared to faces that are normal. In one study, researchers found that while a mother rated their interactions with their newborn as being positive, independent observation of mother-infant interactions showed that the quality of interactions suffered for babies with facial deformities as compared to those with normal faces (Barden, Ford, Jensen, Rogers-Salyer, & Salyer, 1989). The …show more content…
researchers suggested that this decline was due in part to the baby as being perceived as unattractive, which is supported by other studies that showed greater maternal responses to attractive babies and less to unattractive ones (Barden et al., 1989; Langlois & Sawin, 1981).
Defining attractiveness allows for an understanding of what constitutes an attractive face and why certain dysmorphic features maybe considered unattractive. The current study supports the idea of attractiveness as relating to a specific set of ratios between facial features, such as the distance between the eyes and mouth, as well as the overall symmetry of the face (Pallett, Link, & Lee, 2010; Little, Jones, & DeBruine, 2011). Related to this “balanced” or well-portioned facial structure, Jones and colleagues (1995) also found that neoteny in faces, or faces that conserve some semblance of youthfulness, moved the perception of those faces towards finding them attractive, which is applicable to the focus of this current study with regards to age discrimination and related attractiveness levels.
The importance of attractiveness is emphasized from the ecological perspective, which suggests that attractive faces can relay information about age more clearly and accurately than unattractive faces (Zebrowitz & Montepare, 2008). The perception of age in a face is believed to inform an observer’s assumptions about the other person’s abilities as associated with the perceived age (Ritter, Casey, Langlois, 1991). In the studies conducted by Ritter, Casey, and Langlois (1991), they demonstrated a relationship between the perception of 6-month old babies as being unattractive with being older, over-estimation of their skill set and because of this higher expectation, the unattractive babies were rated as being less competent than those perceived as attractive. Being perceived as less attractive can lead to negative social interactions, such as the previously mentioned worsened mother-infant interactions (Barden et al., 1989).
The current study provides support for the idea that unattractive dysmorphic faces distort the perception of aging in young faces.
By measuring the accuracy of participants’ perception of aging in sets of faces, some with normal faces and other with the dysmorphic features of Apert syndrome (sunken faces; tall, flat foreheads and prominent brows, eyes widely spaced, and under-bites) the rate of accuracy for the estimation of aging among the faces can be compared between dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces. It’s hypothesized that participants will more accurately rate aging in nondysmorphic faces as compared to dysmorphic faces because of the perceived level of attractiveness in nondysmorphic faces as compared to dysmorphic
faces.
Method
Participants
The total number of participants was 88 (female = 56, male = 32). The age range was 18-26, with the average being 262.53 months old (21.8775 years old) (SD = 22.875). The specific participant information is shown in Table 1. Participants were recruited via convenience sampling, with students in the Spring 2017 Cognitive Psychology class at the University of Redlands asking individuals (friends, acquaintances, family, etc.) to part take in the study.
Design
The current research was an experimental study in which the accuracy of estimating aging in dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces was measured as related to attractiveness and youthfulness. The dependent variable was how accurately participants could detect aging within a set of stimuli (cards with pictures of faces). The independent variable were the sets of cards with aged dysmorphic and nondysmorphic faces, in this case children with Apert syndrome and normal children, and the control variable were another set of cards with facial alterations.
Materials and Procedure Cards with pictures of faces. Sixteen photographs were obtained of nondysmorphic male and female 1-year olds, nondysmorphic male and female 5-year olds, Apert syndrome male and female 1-year olds, and Apert syndrome male and female 5-year olds. The 16 photographs were used to create a composite/base image for each category (i.e. one male and one female 1-year old with normal features, one male and one female 5-year old with normal features, one male and one female 1-year old with Apert syndrome, one male and one female 5-year old with Apert syndrome). The images were paired together, such that the 1-year old face was paired with the 5-year old face, matching sex (female to female, male to male) and features (dysmorphic to dysmorphic, normal to normal). The paired faces were then morphed over 29 steps, so that there was a visible aging process from the 1-year to the 5-year old face over these 29 steps, consequently creating the 29 cards within each set. The control cards were created by modifying the features of these eight base faces. The modifications were informed by the ratios described in the studies conducted by Pallet, Link, and Lee (2010), thought of as a defining feature of attractiveness in a face, which are as follows: the ratio between the length of the face (top of forehead to tip of the chin) and the distance between the eyes and mouth is .36; the ratio between the width of the face (distance between the edge of the ears) and the distance between the eyes is .46. The modification was applied in a manner that made the nondysmorphic faces display dysmorphic features and the dysmorphic faces display nondysmorphic features (i.e. normal faces took on Apert syndrome traits, and Apert syndrome faces were made more normal). The same process of pairing and morphing over 29 steps was conducted on these eight sets of modified faces to yield the controls. Scoring. The cards were coded from 1 to 29 as corresponding to the progression of age morphing from the 1-year old face to the 5-year old face. The participant responses were scored by calculating Spearman’s Rho, which was dependent on the order in which the cards were selected by the participant (i.e. someone scoring very high means that the order in which the cards were selected very closely matches the coded order).
Attractiveness and youthfulness rating. Participants were asked to rate perceived attractiveness and youthfulness levels by responding to questions about the base and modified faces on a four-point Likert scale, coded as 1=Strongly Disagree and 4=Strongly Agree. Questions that were asked included how much the participants agreed with or disagreed with the faces being “Youthful,” “Homely,” “Cute,” “Mature,” and “Old,” and so on.
Procedure
Participants were selected through convenience sampling and were tested in a range of locations. After the participants were informed about the reasons for conducting this research (as a project for the Cognitive Psychology class), and consent to partake in the study was verbally communicated, they were given instructions on how to go about completing the tasks. They were told that in front of them would be laid out (randomly shuffled and randomly placed) a set of 29 cards with faces on them. Of all the cards in front of them, they were to pick out the youngest looking face, after which the next youngest would be picked, then next youngest after that and so on until all the cards were selected. As the cards were selected, the researcher would record the response on the data intake form. This was done for all four sets of cards. It should be noted that the researchers had a specific order in which to present the cards (written on the data intake form), which was used to control for any ordering effects. Also, half of the researchers were given a set of four cards that contained unmodified faces (normal male/female and Apert male/female) and the other half a set of four cards that contained modified faces (normal male/female altered to display Apert and Apert male/female altered to look normal). Participants had the freedom to rearrange the cards in any way they sought fit, as long as they did not flip over the card, which was where the coding information had been placed. After completing these tasks, the participants were asked to answer questions in the survey (previously mentioned in the attractiveness rating section). They were thanked for their time and debriefed.