Attractiveness and beauty are our everyday obsession, yet what is real beauty? Why do we find some people beautiful and others not so much? Over the past few decades, there have been some great psychology research done on the topic. Here is what was discovered:

Symmetry

We find people with more symmetrical faces and bodies to be more attractive, sexier, and healthier according to several psychology studies as explained in Human Sexuality. We are so focused on symmetry, that in another study, participants were able to rate symmetrical faces as most attractive even when shown only one side of the face!

Although researchers really know why this is the case, one possible evolutionary explanation is that symmetry indicates normal genetic development. Since both sides of our body follow the same genetic instructions, high asymmetry might mean that this person is not the best genetically for us to reproduce with. In fact, studies have found that individuals with high asymmetry are more likely to suffer from a variety of disorders, including mental retardation, extremely premature birth, schizophrenia, and psychological and physiological distress.

Averageness

Computer-generated images that “average” several female and male faces are considered more attractive than each of the individual faces used in the composite. This seems counter-intuitive, especially since looking “average” is never a compliment. Although the “Average Jane” and “Average Joe” faces have been found to be most attractive, it is possible to create an even more attractive Jane and Joe by averaging the faces of only already attractive people.

Image via danielweinard.com.

One possible explanation for this effect might be that computer-generated average images are just ultra symmetrical, and we are attracted to the symmetry.

Masculinity-femininity

We also find faces at the extremes of femininity or masculinity most attractive as shown by experiments that “morphed” faces continuously from a hyper-masculine face to an androgynous face to a hyper-feminine face.

Image via apa psychnet.

Traits that indicate masculinity or femininity of a face include jaw width (wider in men), mouth and nose width (wider in men), chin size (larger in men), lip fullness (fuller in women), eyebrow bushiness (bushier in men), and eye size (larger in women). These traits are mostly developed as a result of sex hormones (androgens for men and estrogen for women) during puberty.

These traits are especially attractive to us because they indicate the person has undergone a normal puberty and is most likely fertile.

Waist-To-Hip-Ratio

The waist-to-hip-ratio is an important indicator of fertility. Women tend to accumulate fat in their hips, butt, and thighs, while men accumulate their fat higher up in the body.

Men therefore find women are most attractive with a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.7-0.8, and women find men most attractive with the waist-to-hip ratio of 0.9. This attractiveness ration holds true across all body sizes, from leanest to obesity, and across cultures.

However, as we know, absolute body fatness is not considered attractive in our culture today, even if the waist-to-hip ratio is attractive. However, in some cultures with scarce food resources, a higher body size for a woman indicates she has enough resources to carry out a pregnancy and is therefore found to be attractive. If you look at a lot of old paintings in an art museum, you will find that a lot of the “beautiful” women depicted were not stick-thin as some of today’s models are.

Image via Self.

Breasts And Pecs

Breasts are clearly very attractive to heterosexual men, but what size is optimal? Before you decide to get implants, one study found that increasing breast size had no effect on how men perceived a woman’s attractiveness while women found this to actually be less attractive in other women. Meanwhile, another study found that men do prefer larger-than-average breast size, but not nearly the size women think men like. I guess the question remains to be answered…

As for men, women find men with wide shoulders and large pectoral muscles (pecs) to be most attractive. According to an evolutionary explanation, this is because these features indicate strength.

Article image via People.

Having a psychological disorder such as bi-polar is considered a handicapt in our society. That is why we’re overprescribed lot’s of drugs – to make us “normal”. What if instead we used our craziness for good? Check out the short video below as bipolar comedian Joshua Walters talks about using his craziness for creativity:

What do you think? Do you agree that there are more creative uses for one’s illness? Or is being “normal” necessary in our society?

Sometimes looking at a work of art from the right angle can make all the difference. In the art installations shown here, building interiors and exteriors have been painted in various ways to make them look like patterns have been superimposed on top of them. However, this effect is only seen when looking at the space from the correct angle.

The images below show the patterns both when they’re looked at from the “proper” angle and when they’re not:

Image sources: http://www.2loop.com/3drooms.html and http://www.2loop.com/3doutdoor.html

When you hear “oral sex,” who do you automatically imagine is performing the oral sex? Most likely, you will imagine a woman performing oral sex on a man. The media deserve a great part of the blame for this; fellatio is shown much more often than cunnilingus, and when cunnilingus is shown, it is usually only in the context of sexual intercourse or comedic scenarios (Bay-Cheng & Fava, 2010).

“Many youth are influenced by and view television and movies as sources of sexual education (Bay-Cheng & Fava);” therefore we end up associating oral sex with fellatio, specifically. Women themselves tend to say that fellatio is expected, but it would be weird if cunnilingus were expected.

In reality, the prevalence of cunnilingus has increased to levels almost equaling those of fellatio since oral sex has become extremely popular among adolescents and young adults (Bay-Cheng & Fava). Then why is cunnilingus still not as expected by women as fellatio is?

The prevalence of douches, scented pads/tampons, bikini waxes, and even “cosmetic genital surgery” (Reinholtz & Muehlenhard, 1995) are indicative of the “stigmatization of female genitalia” that women face. Even the star of the movie Twilight, idolized by many adolescent girls, had said, “I really hate vaginas. I’m allergic to vagina” (Bay-Cheng & Fava). No wonder women are worried about the taste, smell, and look of their genitalia.

Cunnilingus requires the woman’s partner to be up-close and personal with her genitalia, more so than during intercourse. In order to get the utmost pleasure from receiving oral sex, she should not be worrying about the appearance, smell, and taste of her genitalia.

Although it is easier said than done, this is extremely important because women who perceive their genitals negatively get less pleasure out of cunnilingus. The study even suggests that improvement of “genital perceptions” should be used in Sex/Couple Therapy (Reinholtz & Muehlenhard).

Some questionnaire and survey studies about cunnilingus provide strong evidence for the following:

• Women worry most about their genitalia during oral sex than any other sexual activity (Reinholtz & Muehlenhard)
• Women who have positive feelings about their genitalia tend to engage in more sexual activity, and get more pleasure out of it (Reinholtz & Muehlenhard)
• Young women who subjectively (they need not be perceived as attractive by others) have more attractive bodies are more likely to have ever received oral sex (Wiedermann & Hurst, 1998).
• Young women who subjectively have more attractive faces tend to have a greater number of sexual partners (Wiedermann & Hurst).
• Young women with greater “sexual esteem” believe themselves to be more attractive (Wiedermann & Hurst).
• The women “with greater sexual openness, self-awareness, and assertiveness” are associated with both earlier cunnilingus experience and more cunnilingus partners (Bay-Cheng & Fava).

Women who are comfortable with themselves and their bodies and are not afraid to ask for what they want get the cunnilingus. Although these are correlation studies and it is possible that receiving oral sex causes the woman to become sexually assertive, the findings provide strong evidence that a woman’s self-esteem and sexual esteem play significant roles in her sex life and how much she enjoys it.

If there really is a “deep-seated cultural disdain for female genitalia,” as Bay-Cheng and Fava state in their article, how should we help young women become more confident about their genitalia so that they can have more healthy and pleasurable sex lives?

Article Image via www.360nobs.com

Apparently people who tweet at least once a day have shorter relationships according to the latest data analysis from OkTrends, the dating site OkCupid’s blog which analyzes its users data. I guess having to shorten your thoughts to 140 characters and your URLs to bit.ly every day has a way of shortening your relationships too…

Anyway, to put the joking aside, check out the OkCupid chart of their findings below:

Before you stop tweeting, keep in mind that this is a correlational finding. It does not mean that frequently using Twitter is killing your relationships. Instead it is more likely that people who use Twitter every day have another characteristic that is making their relationships shorter.

For one, frequent Twitter users probably spend more time in front of the computer tweeting instead of going out with their significant others or friends. In fact, OkTrends also found that frequent Twitter users are more likely to use their computer for self-loving…

So if your relationships are as short as your tweets, consider not only stopping your twitter activities, but also just taking more time socializing in real life with real people instead of the people in the computer…

What do you think is causing frequent tweeters to have shorter relationships?

Article image via makeliterature.com.

If you’re not into swearing or taking drugs when in pain, there is an amazing alternative for you. This method is free, non-addictive, and devoid of side-effects. Sounds like heaven, doesn’t it? Not only does meditation reduce stress among other benefits, it also substantially reduces pain according to a new study described by LiveScience.

Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center researcher Fadel Zeidan used a “pain-inducing heat device” to heat a patch of skin on the legs of healthy study volunteers who’ve never meditated before to 120 degrees Fahrenheit (ouch!) before and after an 80 minute meditation lesson, where they were taught to attend to their breath and let go of distracting thoughts and emotions. Participants rated the pain on a common subjective pain-scale while their brain activity was measured through an MRI scan.

Participants reported that the same pain was 40% less intense and 57% less unpleasant after meditating! And if you don’t believe the subjective reports, the MRI scans revealed that brain regions associated with reframing / masking pain were more active during and after meditation.

The most fascinating finding of this study is that you don’t have to join a monastery to get the benefits of meditation. A few meditation lessons in the comfort of your own home (with the help of your computer) will do the trick.

So is pain really just all in your mind?

Article image via supernatural botanicals.

I don’t swear very often. And apparently that’s a good thing…because if I’m ever in so much pain that I do end up swearing, it’ll actually make the pain much more tolerable according to fascinating new research described by Time.

To test the affect of swearing on pain, Keele University researcher Dr. Richard Stephens asked study participants to submerge their arms into a bucket of icy water while repeatedly uttering either a bad swear word or a harmless word.

Stephens found that the swearing participants were able to tolerate the pain of the icy water for much longer than those uttering a harmless word. Furthermore, this affect was the highest among study participants who were not habitual swearers – those who got to swear were able to hold their hand in the icy water 4 times longer than those who had to keep their language PG during the unpleasant experience.

Although it is not clear why exactly swearing reduces physical pain, one theory is that swearing, as an act of aggression, triggers our flight-or-fight instincts, which increase our tolerance for pain. I personally think it’s because swearing takes our focus away from the pain, especially if we don’t swear very often and its a bit awkward / wrong to say those words.

So if you swear often, consider easing on those negative words in public (as it is pretty rude anyway) and use these bad words when you actually need to use them to actually ease your pain.

Article image via dbh3.com.

What can piles of junk be used for? Apparently, some pretty neat sculptures.

From pieces of scrap metal, to piles of household trash, to mummified animals, British artists Tim Noble and Sue Webster have taken many pounds of nondescript rubbish and shined light on them, literally, to create what’s known as “shadow art.”

Here’s a sampling of some of their best shadow works (Note: titles and subject matter may not be appropriate for younger audiences):

Dirty White Trash (with Gulls), 1998

Dark Stuff, 2008

Real Life is Rubbish, 2002

HE/SHE, (Diptych) 2004

Metal Fucking Rats with Heart Shaped Tail, 2007

For other similar artworks by Noble and Webster, see the “Artwerks” photo gallery on their website.

And to read some blurbs about how the artworks were made and what they were made of, see Environmental Graffiti’s slideshow.

Sources for the images and descriptions: Environmental Graffiti, Tim Noble & Sue Webster – Artwerks, Flickr user “pashasha” (here and here), Flickr user “Jose Luis RDS”, and Simplistic Art.

If you enjoy optical illusions, it’s likely you’ve seen M.C. Escher’s famous drawings of impossible buildings, with stairs that go upward without end and channels of water that continuously flow downward. But have you ever seen these impossible scenarios in three dimensions?

Nine years ago, Andrew Lipson and Daniel Shiu spent some time trying to build Escher’s drawings out of LEGO® blocks, and they mostly succeeded in doing so without any photo-editing manipulation. Relying on choice camera angles and sheer ingenuity, the two managed to build and photograph “real-life” models of Escher’s drawings that turned out to be pretty outstanding.

Below are a few of the LEGO® models that Lipson and Shiu created. Click each of the images to see larger photos of the LEGO® models and step-by-step explanations of how the two built and photographed them:

For more of Lipson and Shiu’s LEGO® models, visit Lipson’s LEGO® page.

Also, to see Escher’s Waterfall in action, check out our Optical Illusion of the Week from two weeks ago: http://www.psychworld.com/optical-illusion-magic-waterfall-2011-03.

And for another similar Escher-inspired LEGO® model illusion—not created by Lipson or Shiu, but interesting nonetheless—take a look at the following photo, which I originally saw here:

LEGO® images (except bottommost on this page) copyright 2002-2003, by Andrew Lipson: http://www.andrewlipson.com/. Escher images copyright, Cordon Art, Baarn, the Netherlands.

We like to think we have it under control. After all, we are rational human beings, so every action we take has a rational reason behind it. Yet, if we look deeper, we will find that the more we try to rationalize our behavior, the more wrong our explanation becomes…

Consider this fascinating 1987 experiment. University of Michigan researcher Norbert Shwartz placed a dime next to the copy machine in the University library throughout the day, and later interviewed everyone who used the copy machine about their life.

Schwartz found that those who found the dime were more satisfied with their life as a whole and more optimistic about the future. And you thought you couldn’t get anything for a dime anymore!

“Those who found the dime were more happy and more satisfied and wanted to change their lives less than those who didn’t find a dime,” says Schwarz.  “It’s not the value of what you find. It’s that something positive happened to you, and surprised you.”

In another experiment, Hyunjin Song and Norbert Schwartz had participants read a Japanese lunch roll recipe and estimate how long it would take to make the roll. One set of participants read the recipe in an easy-to-read Arial font, while other participants read the same recipe in an elegant but hard-to-read Mistral font as seen below.

Common sense would tell you that font shouldn’t affect our judgment. Yet, participants who read the recipe in the Mistral font estimated it would take 36 minutes to make this recipe, while participants who read the Arial font estimated it would only take 23 minutes to make the same exact recipe!

There are many other similar studies that show how little things affect our decisions and actions in big ways. However, “the dime only works if you’re not aware you’re happy because you found it,” says Schwartz.

So the more aware you become about your environment, the less these subtle events will affect you. However, nobody can be fully aware about everything that’s going on all the time. In fact, the reason these little things affect us outside our awareness is because we have evolved to react fast to our environment, even when we’re not consciously aware of it.