Social Psychology Research Proposal
Unfair Advantage: Testing the Advantage of Being Attractive in the Workforce The Halo Effect is the cognitive bias that generalizes that if an individual has one outstanding favorable character trait, the rest of that individual’s trait will be favorable. Specific to physical attractiveness, this is known as the “Attractiveness Halo.” Attractiveness plays an important role in determining social interactions. In fact, the physical attractiveness of an individual is a vital social cue utilized by others to evaluate other aspects of that individual’s abilities (Kenealy, Frude, & Shaw, 2001). Because of the attractiveness halo, attractive applicants trying to enter the workforce tend to be viewed by interviewers as being better qualified than unattractive applicants (Shahani, Dipboye, & Gehrlein, 1993.) In fact, evidence shows that this cognitive bias is so strong that it may lead attractive employees to be recommended to receive higher salaries and better promotions than unattractive employees (Morrow, McElrow, Stamper, & Wilson 1990.) .
On the other hand, unattractive individuals suffer from the opposite effect of the attractiveness halo. Studies show that less attractive than average people are also perceived as being below average in other characteristics, like intelligence, years of education, confidence, desirability from the opposite sex, sensitivity, and ability to socialize (Jones, Hansson, & Phillips, 1978.) This effect is so strong that when individuals are initially perceived to have negative rankings of superficial characteristics like attractiveness, decisions made about them later on are likely to reflect this perception (Cann, Siegfried, & Pearce, 1981).
Many television shows and movies utilize this assumption as part of their plotline. For example, in
On the other hand, unattractive individuals suffer from the opposite effect of the attractiveness halo. Studies show that less attractive than average people are also perceived as being below average in other characteristics, like intelligence, years of education, confidence, desirability from the opposite sex, sensitivity, and ability to socialize (Jones, Hansson, & Phillips, 1978.) This effect is so strong that when individuals are initially perceived to have negative rankings of superficial characteristics like attractiveness, decisions made about them later on are likely to reflect this perception (Cann, Siegfried, & Pearce, 1981).
Many television shows and movies utilize this assumption as part of their plotline. For example, in
References: Cann, A., Siegfried, W., & Pearce, L. (1981). Forced attention to specific applicant qualifications: Impact on physical attractiveness and sex of applicant biases. The Journal of Personnel Psychology, 34, 65-66. Jones, W., Hansson, R., & Phillips, A. (1978). Physical attractiveness and judgments of psychopathology. The Journal of Social Psychology, 105, 79-84. Kenealy, P., Frude, N., & Shaw, W. (2001). Influence of children’s physical attractiveness on teacher expectations. The Journal of Social Psychology, 139, 373-383. Morrow, P., McElroy, J., Stamper, B., & Wilson, M. (1990). The effects of physical attractiveness and other demographic characteristics on promotion decisions. The Journal of Management, 16, 723-736. Shahani, C., Dipboye, R., & Gehrlein, T. (1993). Attractiveness bias in the interview: Exploring the boundaries of an effect. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 14, 317-328.