Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298 303

A thin slice of violence: distinguishing violent from nonviolent sex offenders at a glance
Tyler F. Stillman, Jon K. Maner, Roy F. Baumeister
Florida State University, FL 32306-4301, USA Initial receipt 26 September 2009; final revision received 2 December 2009

Abstract A growing body of literature in evolutionary psychology suggests that person perception processes are adaptively tuned. The current investigation tested the hypothesis that people would be able to detect a propensity for violence in other people, based only on a brief glance at their face. Participants estimated the propensity for violence in 87 registered sex offenders after seeing photos of them for 2 s each. Estimated likelihood of violence was significantly related to actual violent history, suggesting that violent tendencies can be accurately inferred from a brief look at a person's face. Cues indicative of high masculinity and high levels of male sex hormones (heavy brow, general facial masculinity, high physical strength, younger age) were related to accurate judgments. Other cues such as facial emotion and good grooming were not associated with an actual history of violence, but nevertheless correlated with raters' judgments. Although there were no sex differences in accuracy, on average women thought targets were more violent than men did. Findings speak to the accuracy and efficiency with which people can detect potential threats to physical well-being. 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Thin slices; Person perception; Face processing; Violence; Aggression; Facial morphology

1. Introduction Humans are a highly social species (e.g., Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Cosmides & Tooby, 1992). Throughout evolutionary history, humans have been in constant contact with other people and were in frequent contact with individuals with whom they were relatively unfamiliar. Interactions with unfamiliar others are not all of equal value; some individuals may afford valuable opportunities, such as the prospect of resource gain, affiliation or mating. Other individuals can pose threats, such as imperiling one's physical well-being with violence. Haselton and Funder (2006) proposed that, in negotiating social interactions, the ability to accurately identify social opportunities and threats would have substantial adaptive value. The adaptive costs associated with failing to identify a physical threat are particularly perilous (e.g., Haselton &

Corresponding author. Department of Psychology, Florida State University, 1107 W. Call Street, Tallahassee, FL 32306-4301, USA. E-mail address: tylerstillman@gmail.com (T.F. Stillman). 1090-5138/$ see front matter 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.12.001

Nettle, 2006). Thus, we reasoned that people's cognitive system would be adapted so as to readily detect a propensity for violence in other people (cf. Cosmides & Tooby, 1992; Duntley & Buss, 2008). The present investigation reports data suggesting that people display the capacity to accurately identify strangers with a propensity for violence, based on extremely limited exposure. The present study tested three hypotheses. The first was that people would be able to identify those with a propensity for violence based only on a brief glance at their face. We tested this hypothesis by evaluating whether people perceived men convicted of violent sex crimes as more violent than those convicted of nonviolent sex crimes. We tested our hypothesis in this domain in part because sexual violence involves very high costs for both physical well-being and reproductive success (Duntley, 2005). Our second hypothesis was that the process by which people detect a propensity for violence in others involves identification of cues that suggest the presence of, or exposure to, high levels of male sex hormones. Third, given that exposure to violent sexual behavior is an especially relevant problem for women, we expected that women would err on the side of caution in estimating men's potential for

T.F. Stillman et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298303

299

violence, so as to avoid the costly error of falling prey to a male sexual predator (cf. Haselton & Buss, 2000). We elaborate on these hypotheses below. 1.1. Thin slices People can be surprisingly accurate in making snap judgments about other people. Extremely brief observations or thin slices can furnish better-than-chance judgments of important social traits such as extraversion (Ambady & Rosenthal, 1992). People can correctly surmise the sexual orientation of others based on gait (Johnson, Gill, Reichman, & Tassinary, 2007) or still photographs (Ambady, Hallahan, & Conner, 1999). Willingness to engage in unrestricted sexual activity can be judged from brief observations of behavior (Gangestad, Simpson, DiGeronimo & Biek, 1992; Stillman & Maner, 2009). People can distinguish cheaters from noncheaters on the basis of still facial images (Verplaetse, Vanneste, & Braeckman, 2007; but see Mehl & Buchner, 2008) and readily identify people with a propensity for antisocial behavior, as defined by handicapping a presumed competitor (Buss & Dedden, 1990; Carr, McCormick, & Mondloch, 2009). If person perception is adaptively tuned, one would expect people to be able to identify very quickly and accurately traits in others that are associated with a propensity for violence. 1.2. Relevant facial cues Participants in the present research viewed still photographs of individuals and made judgments about whether those individuals were likely to be violent. We sought to ascertain which facial features might influence their judgments, with the expectation that facial masculinity would serve as a valid cue to a person's propensity for violence. We define masculine traits as traits that signal the presence of, or exposure to, high levels of male sex hormones (testosterone). (That is, we do not discuss masculinity in the sense of gender roles, but rather with respect to sexually dimorphic characteristics.) A wealth of evolutionarily inspired research suggests that masculinity is associated with a propensity for violence (Buss, 2005; Daly & Wilson, 1988, 1994, 1997; Wilson & Daly, 1985). The male sex hormone testosterone contributes to high levels of aggression and violence in both sexes (Dabbs, 2000; Dabbs & Hargrove, 1997; Salvadora, Suay, Martinez-Sanchis, Simon, & Brain, 1999). Administering testosterone increases aggression in animals (e.g., Melloni, Connor, Hang, Harrison, & Ferris, 1997), and it increases activity in neural circuits associated with aggression in humans (Hermans, Ramsey, & van Honk, 2008; see also Albert, Walsh, & Jonik, 1993; Archer, 1991). In short, higher levels of testosterone are associated with increased aggression. Testosterone also affects facial morphology. Salivary testosterone levels correlate positively with ratings of facial masculinity (Penton-Voak & Chen, 2004). The ratio between a person's second to fourth finger reflects prenatal exposure to sex hormones (Kondo, Zakany, Innis, & Duboule, 1997; Lutchmaya, Baron-Cohen, Raggatt, Knickmeyer, & Man-

ning, 2004), and a digit ratio indicating higher prenatal testosterone exposure is related to higher perceived facial masculinity in men (Neave, Laing, Fink, & Manning, 2003). Similarly, digit ratios indicating higher prenatal exposure to testosterone covary with facialmetric measures of masculinity (Burriss, Little, & Nelson, 2007). Thus, highly masculine faces suggest exposure to, or the presence of, high levels of testosterone. Moreover, the presence of this hormone is recognizable and can be correctly interpreted through a person's physical characteristics (e.g., facial morphology). Thus, we hypothesized that accurate judgments of a person's propensity for violence would rely at least partially on perceptions of facial masculinity. 1.2.1. Other cues In addition to cues we thought would accurately signal a man's propensity for violence, we also considered cues that might serve as an incorrect basis for judging a man's proclivity towards violence. People might assume that attractive men are less likely than unattractive men to do unpleasant things (Eagley, Ashmore, Makhijani, & Longo, 1991; Thorndike, 1920) so perceivers might use attractiveness as a cue indicating a low likelihood of violence. Alternatively, judgments of masculinity and male facial attractiveness are correlated (Johnston, Hagel, Franklin, Fink, & Grammer, 2001), which could lead attractive men to be judged as being more violent. However, we did not expect judgments of attractiveness to be closely related to judgments of violence. We also assessed the six basic facial expressions (happiness, surprise, etc.; Ekman & Friesen, 1969). Insofar as such facial expressions reflect transient psychological states, we did not expect evaluations of other people's facial expressions to promote accurate judgments of violence. Facial expressions of emotion are very salient, however, so we did consider that they might nevertheless be used to judge a man's propensity for violence (e.g., anger might lead to higher judgments of violence). 1.3. Sex differences We also anticipated sex differences in the perception of offenders' proclivity for violence. Given that women may be particularly susceptible to violence, especially sexual violence, we expected that women would perceive male targets as more violent overall than men would. Failing to identify a violent man would be an especially costly error for a woman, and thus women may err on the side of thinking that a man is violent. This would be safer than assuming a man is safe until proven otherwise (cf. Haselton & Nettle, 2006). We also considered that women might be more accurate than men would, given that women might benefit disproportionally from identifying sexually violent men. 1.4. The current investigation Participants in the current study judged a man's likelihood of violence based on a quick 2-s glance at his

300

T.F. Stillman et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298303

face. All faces were those of registered sex offenders. Information about each man's precise crime was publicly available. Violent crimes included primarily aggressive rapes (e.g., with assault or with a weapon) and other crimes in which the victim was physically injured. Nonviolent sex crimes included touching (nonaggressively) an adult woman without her consent, possession of child pornography and statutory crimes. Although these latter crimes clearly are objectionable, they arguably pose less of an immediate threat to a person's physical safety. We chose to compare violent and nonviolent sex offenders for three reasons. First, evaluating perceptions of individuals who have engaged in violent crimes (as opposed to more common and mundane acts of violence) afforded a strong test of our hypotheses. Second, because information about their crimes was very specific, it allowed a high degree of certainty with respect to the nature of the person's offense (i.e., violent or nonviolent). Self-reports are one way we might have identified those prone to violence, but selfreports are often unreliable, perhaps especially when it concerns violent behavior. Our approach circumvented concerns associated with self-presentation. Third, the design allowed us to equate the two groups as much as possible, such that the operative difference between them was limited to a propensity for violence. Both groups engaged in sexual behavior that was socially discouraged, high risk and illegal. These similarities between the groups render unlikely alternative explanations based on sex drive, sexual deviance or risk taking. One caveat to the design is that the defendant's apparent masculinity could have biased juries or judges, thus leading to a harsher outcome at the individual's trial. However, masculinity is correlated with attractiveness in men (Johnston et al., 2001), and attractiveness typically leads to biases in favor of (not against) the defendant (Steffensmeier, Ulmer, & Kramer, 2006). Moreover, although defendants' appearance has been shown to influence the length of their prison sentence once convicted (Steffensmeier et al., 2006), there is less evidence that it biases the nature of the crime for which a defendant is convicted. Both convictions and sentence length are typically determined by the nature and strength of evidence (Taylor & Hosch, 2004). Thus, the advantages of the design seemed to outweigh this potential caveat. Finally, we note that while one cannot measure future violent behavior, past behavior is a reasonable proxy. In the section below, we refer to those convicted of violent offences as having a history of violence, rather than as exhibiting a likelihood of future violence. 2. Method 2.1. Stimulus materials Fifty violent and 50 nonviolent offenders were chosen from the Florida sex offender database (http://offender.fdle. state.fl.us/offender). Because strong threat-related biases

have been documented for members of ethnic minorities (e.g., Maner et al., 2005), we limited our target sample to whites. We selected all offenders in our search who had been convicted of specific, clearly violent or nonviolent crimes until we reached 50 in each category. From the 100 photos, we excluded two based on racial ambiguity, three nonviolent offenders with multiple offences that made categorization of those targets difficult and 12 with poor photograph quality, leaving a final sample of 84 images. Four female research assistants (three white, one Hispanic; mean age was 21) and two male research assistants (one black, one white; mean age was 23) were used to rate the photographs. These six research assistants rated each photo on three dimensions related to masculinity: heaviness of the brow (=.83), general facial masculinity (=.82) and apparent physical strength (=.87). Given that testosterone declines with age (Swerdloff & Wang, 1993), our analysis included offenders' actual ages, as listed on file. Further ratings included attractiveness (=.84); whether the offender was smiling (=.86); the six basic facial expressions (Ekman & Friesen, 1969): anger (=.83), disgust (=.67), fear (=.58), happiness (=.92), sadness (=.86) and surprise (=.75); and two peripheral cues: the presence of facial hair (=1.0) and care in grooming (=.88). All dimensions were rated on scales from 1 (not at all) to 9 (very). We used research assistants for these ratings, rather than simply having study participants rate these traits, so as not to force a connection between masculinity (or any other traits) and likelihood of violence in participants' minds. In other words, we sought to avoid calling attention to masculinity in a way that might unduly affect participants' reaction to the stimulus materials. 2.2. Perceived likelihood of violence 2.2.1. Participants Ninety-seven undergraduates (56 women) participated for partial course credit. Three additional participants were excluded for providing responses that indicated careless responding. 2.2.2. Procedure Participants were instructed to rate each image after it was displayed, via computer, for 2 s, from 1 (less likely to be violent) to 4 (more likely to be violent). The order of images varied across participants and had no apparent effect on responses. After completing the ratings, participants were debriefed. 3. Results 3.1. Perceived likelihood of violence Each offender's perceived likelihood of violence (PLV) was computed as the mean rating calculated across all participants. Our first primary analysis confirmed that violent offenders were judged as more violent (mean=2.50,

T.F. Stillman et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298303

301

S.D.=.41) than those who had been convicted of nonviolent crimes (mean=2.30, S.D.=.50) [t(82)=2.00, pb.05, d=.44]. Thus, participants were successful at identifying violent offenders based on their overt facial features. There was no sex difference in accuracy. However, females perceived higher likelihood of violence (mean=2.42, S.D.=.34) than males (mean=2.29, S.D.=.34) across both categories of offenders [t(95)=1.93, p=.056, d=.38]. 3.2. Facial cues Based on previous work (Stillman & Maner, 2009), we categorized each cue as valid, poor or misleading (see Table 1). Valid cues are those that correlated significantly with both perceived and actual violence (i.e., with participant ratings and with criminal history of violence). Heavy brow, high physical strength and high facial masculinity satisfied this criterion, as all were correlated with both PLV and a history of violence. Being older predicted both lower PLV and a nonviolent history. One cue, physical strength, had a significantly stronger correlation with PLV than with history of violence (z=2.09, p=.037), suggesting that this cue was valid, but may have been overused. In other words, perceiving a target as physically strong led to overly cautious estimations of PLV. Poor cues were defined as having a nonsignificant correlation with either PLV or violent criminal history (all r's.19). These included attractiveness, smiling, facial hair and the emotional expressions of surprise, fear and sadness (see Table 1).

Misleading cues were associated with perceived violence but not actual violence (r's.20 for PLV; r's.10 for actual violence). Emotional displays of disgust and anger were mistakenly taken as signs of violence. Happiness and good grooming were mistakenly taken as signs of low likelihood of violence. 3.3. Use of cues Our final question was whether the use of valid cues contributed to participants' ability to distinguish violent from nonviolent targets. To answer this question, we conducted hierarchical logistic regressions (with actual history of violence as the dependent variable). In the first step, we entered perceived likelihood of violence (Wald=3.74, p=.05), and in the second step, we entered all four valid cues (heavy brow, general facial masculinity, age and apparent physical strength). Entering these cues substantially reduced the relationship between PLV and history of violence (Wald=1.09, p=.297), suggesting that they may have been responsible for the ability to identify those with a history of violence. Similar analyses using the poor and misleading cues left the relationship between PLV and violent criminal history relatively unchanged. Thus, as one would expect, the cues categorized as poor and misleading contributed little to accurate judgments about violence. We conducted a multiple mediation analysis to determine whether the cues to masculinity mediated the relationship between PLV and history of violence. Our analysis was based on Preacher and Hayes (2008), who recommend biascorrected bootstrapping to measure multiple indirect effects (in this case, 5000 samples were taken). The total indirect effect for all four masculinity cues assessed simultaneously was significant (Z=3.72, S.E.=.08; pb.001), indicating that masculinity cues may have accounted for accuracy in perceiving men's propensity for violence. Next, we assessed the masculinity cues individually (each controlling for the others). Bootstrapping permits the construction of a 95% confidence interval around the effect size of each indirect effect. If the confidence limit does not include zero, this indicates a statistically significant mediation effect. Results showed that general facial masculinity (.08 to .35) and age (.02 to .27) were significant mediators; heaviness of brow (.04 to .06) and apparent physical strength (.14 to .10) were not. It should be noted that multicollinearity among mediators tends to attenuate specific indirect effects, so we hesitate to interpret the specific mediator results too strongly. 4. Discussion

Table 1 Correlations between offenders' attributes with actual and perceived proclivity for violence Attribute Valid cues General facial masculinity (m) Heavier brow (m) Apparent physical strengtha (m) Older age (m) Poor cues Fear (e) Higher attractiveness (m) Sadness (e) Presence of smile (e) Presence of facial hair (p) Surprise (e) Misleading cues Disgust (e) Anger (e) Better grooming (p) Happiness (e) Actual history of violence .36 .34 .33 .24 .02 .13 .07 .05 .02 .001 .07 .06 .06 .05 Perceived likelihood of violence .53 .22 .59 .47 .05 .11 .19 .17 .09 .07

.38 .58 .24 .32

e=Emotional expression, m=masculinity cue, p=peripheral cue. The superscript a denotes a significantly different correlation (z=2.09, p=.037; pb.05; p.001).

Violence and hostility are a natural part of human social life (Buss, 2005; Daly & Wilson, 1988, 1994, 1997; Thornhill & Palmer, 2000; Wilson & Daly, 1985). Duntley (2005; Duntley & Shackelford, 2008) argued that the evolution of adaptations promoting hostility created selection pressures for the coevolution of counteradaptations to

302

T.F. Stillman et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298303

avoid being victimized, and he specified the capacity to identify threatening individuals as one possible couteradaptation. The current investigation provides evidence consistent with the existence of such a counteradaptation: looking at faces for a mere 2 s each was sufficient for people to distinguish violent from nonviolent sex offenders at a rate significantly better than chance. Findings suggest that the faces of sex criminals provide valid cues as to their propensity for violence, and untrained observers can detect and correctly interpret those cues. The speed with which observers were able to form their judgments indicates the impressive speed and efficiency with which cues were decoded (c.f. Maner, Gailliot, & DeWall, 2007). The primary cues on which observers based their judgments involved signs of testosterone and masculinity. Being younger, having a heavier brow, looking more masculine overall and evincing high physical strength seemed to contribute to the accuracy of participants' judgments. These findings fit with the fact that, throughout human history, masculinity has been closely entwined with violence (Buss, 2005; Daly & Wilson, 1988, 1994, 1997; Wilson & Daly, 1985). One consequence of males' relatively small initial obligatory investment in offspring is heightened intrasexual competition for mates (Trivers, 1972), and cues to masculinity have long been associated with a relatively stable proneness to violence and aggression. There were also inaccuracies in people's judgments of aggressiveness. Mistakes included assuming that happy, well-groomed individuals were less likely to be violent. Angry or disgusted expressions were also erroneously associated with expectations for violence. Although such expressions may accurately convey a likelihood of violence at a particular moment in time, such expressions are relatively transient and may not always serve as reliable signals of a person's more stable traits. We also found that the appearance of physical strength was more strongly associated with perceptions of the likelihood of violence than with actual history of violence. This finding fits with Error Management Theory, which holds that less costly errors are sometimes made in the effort to avoid more costly errors (Haselton & Buss, 2000). In this case, mistakenly assuming a physically strong individual to be threatening would be less costly than assuming a strong violent person posed no threat. Although we observed no sex difference in accuracy, female perceivers were somewhat more likely than male perceivers to see high levels of aggressiveness in men. This finding also fits with Error Management Theory, which holds that less costly errors are sometimes made in the effort to avoid more costly errors (Haselton & Buss, 2000, 2003). In this case, assuming a high level of aggressiveness would be less costly for women than failing to detect a sexually violent man. The current findings highlight a tradeoff in mate selection. On one hand, women may be inclined to avoid highly masculine men, as masculinity serves as a cue to potential aggressiveness. Yet masculinity is also a desirable charac-

teristic to women (Bogaert, Fawcett, & Jamieson, 2009; Neave et al., 2003; Russell, 2006; but see Burriss et al., 2007; Koehler, Rhodes, & Simmons, 2004), and the propensity for aggression may make a man more attractive, so long as the aggressiveness manifests in particular ways (e.g., when it is used to protect a man's mate or directed toward outgroup members or intrasexual competitors; Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Frederick & Haselton, 2007). Thus, there are potential benefits and costs associated with women's interest in highly masculine men, and women may be sensitive to both a man's propensity for violence and his inclination to use violence in ways that would benefit vs. incur costs to the woman. Future research would benefit from evaluating the presence of these sensitivities more directly. One of the primary limitations of the current study pertains to ecological validity. Participants in our study formed judgments based on a single, still photograph of a person. Although this provided a rigorous and controlled test of our hypotheses, the contexts in which people judge one another are usually much richer and filled with dynamic information. That participants were able to so quickly detect a propensity for violence from such limited information suggests that this ability might be even stronger and more apparent in the presence of dynamic information about a person and his or her behavior, but additional research is needed to assess this directly. In conclusion, our findings indicate that a 2-s glance at a facial photograph was sufficient for making somewhat accurate inferences about whether the man pictured in the photo had a history of violence. Although observers overused some cues and were misled by others, they also focused on valid cues associated with masculinity. The ability to spot danger early in a social interaction would be adaptive, as waiting for actually violent behavior would often mean that the danger is recognized too late to be avoided. This research thus adds to the growing body of literature on adaptively tuned person perception processes. Our findings are among the first to demonstrate that people can use facial cues alone to form accurate judgments about another person's propensity for violent behavior. Acknowledgment The authors wish to thank Maggie Murphy for help gathering data. References
Albert, D. J., Walsh, M. L., & Jonik, R. H. (1993). Aggression in humans: What is its biological foundation? Neuroscience and Biobehavior Review, 17, 405425. Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 77, 538547. Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1992). Thin slices of expressive behavior as predictors of interpersonal consequences: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 111, 256274.

T.F. Stillman et al. / Evolution and Human Behavior 31 (2010) 298303 Archer, D. J. (1991). The influence of testosterone on human aggression. British Journal of Psychology, 82, 128. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497529. Bogaert, A. F., Fawcett, C. C., & Jamieson, L. K. (2009). Attractiveness, body size, masculine sex roles and 2D:4D ratios in men. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 273278. Burriss, R. P., Little, A. C., & Nelson, E. C. (2007). 2D:4D and sexually dimorphic facial characteristics. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 377384. Buss, D. M. (2005). The murderer next door: Why the mind is designed to kill. London: Penguin Books. Buss, D. M., & Dedden, L. A. (1990). Derogation of competitors. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, 395422. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204232. Carr, J. M., McCormick, C. M., & Mondloch, C. J. (2009). Facial structure is a reliable cue of aggressive behavior. Psychological Science. Cosmides, L, & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind (pp. 163228). New York: Oxford University Press. Dabbs, J. M. (2000). Heros, rogues, and lovers: Testosterone and behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill. Dabbs, J. M, & Hargrove, M. F. (1997). Age, testosterone, and behavior among female prison inmates. Psychosomatic Medicine, 59, 477480. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1988). Homicide. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1994). Evolutionary psychology of male violence. In J. Archer (Ed.), Male violence (pp. 253288). New York: Routledge. Daly, M., & Wilson, M. (1997). Crime and conflict: Homicide in evolutionary psychology perspective. Crime and Justice, 18, 251300. Duntley, J. D. (2005). Adaptations to dangers from other humans. In D. Buss (Ed.), The handbook of evolutionary psychology (pp. 224249). New York: Wiley. Duntley, J. D., & Buss, D. M. (2008). Victim adaptations. In J. Duntley, & T. Shackelford (Eds.), Evolutionary Forensic Psychology (pp. 201229). New York: Oxford University Press. Duntley, J. D., & Shackelford, T. K. (2008). Evolutionary forensic psychology: Darwinian foundations of crime and law (pp. 201229). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press. Eagley, A., Ashmore, R., Makhijani, M., & Longo, L. (1991). What is beautiful is good, butA meta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 109128. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and encoding. Semiotica, 1, 4998. Frederick, D. A., & Haselton, M. G. (2007). Why is muscularity sexy? Tests of the fitness indicator hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 11671183. Gangestad, S. W., Simpson, J. A., DiGeronimo, K., & Biek, M. (1992). Differential accuracy in person perception across traits: Examination of a functional hypothesis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 62, 688698. Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 8191. Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2003). Biases in social judgment: Design flaws or design features? In J. Forgas, K. Williams, & B. von Hippel (Eds.), Responding to the social world: Implicit and explicit processes in social judgments and decisions. New York, NY: Cambridge. Haselton, M. G., & Funder, D. (2006). The evolution of accuracy and bias in social judgment. In M. Schaller, D. T. Kenrick, & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Evolution and social psychology (pp. 1537). New York: Psychology Press. Haselton, M. G., & Nettle, D. (2006). The paranoid optimist: An integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 4766.

303

Hermans, E. J., Ramsey, N. F., & van Honk, J. (2008). Exogenous testosterone enhances responsiveness to social threat in the neural circuitry of social aggression in humans. Biological Psychiatry, 63, 263270. Johnson, K. L., Gill, S., Reichman, V., & Tassinary, L. G. (2007). Swagger, sway, and sexuality: Judging sexual orientation from motion and morphology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 321334. Johnston, V. S., Hagel, R., Franklin, M., Fink, B., & Grammer, K. (2001). Male facial attractiveness: evidence for hormone-mediated adaptive design. Evolution and Human Behavior, 22, 251267. Koehler, N., Rhodes, G., & Simmons, L. W. (2004). How well does second to fourth-digit ratio in hands correlate with indicators of masculinity in males. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B271, S223S236. Kondo, T., Zakany, J., Innis, J., & Duboule, D. (1997). Of fingers, toes and penises. Nature, 390, 29. Lutchmaya, S., Baron-Cohen, S., Raggatt, P., Knickmeyer, R., & Manning, J. T. (2004). 2nd to 4th digit ratios, fetal testosterone and estradiol. Early Human Development, 77, 2228. Maner, J. K., Gailliot, M. T., & DeWall, C. N. (2007). Adaptive attentional attunement: evidence for mating-related perceptual bias. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 2836. Maner, J. K., Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Becker, D. V., Robertson, T., Hofer, B., Delton, A., Butner, J., & Schaller, M. (2005). Functional projection: How fundamental social motives can bias interpersonal perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 6378. Mehl, B., & Buchner, A. (2008). No enhanced memory for faces of cheaters. Evolution & Human Behavior, 29, 3541. Melloni, R. H., Connor, D. F., Hang, P. T., Harrison, R. J., & Ferris, C. F. (1997). Anabolicandrogenic steroid exposure during adolescence and aggressive behavior in golden hamsters. Physiology & Behavior, 61, 359364. Neave, N., Laing, S., Fink, B., & Manning, J. T. (2003). Second to fourth digit ratio, testosterone and perceived male dominance. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 270, 21672172. Penton-Voak, I. S., & Chen, J. Y. (2004). High salivary testosterone is linked to masculine male facial appearance in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25, 229241. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879891. Russell, D. C. (2006). Raise your hand if you think I am attractive: Second and fourth digit ratio as a predictor of self- and other-ratings of attractiveness. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 9971005. Salvadora, A., Suay, F., Martinez-Sanchis, S., Simon, V. M., & Brain, P. F. (1999). Correlating testosterone and fighting in male participants in judo contests. Physiology & Behavior, 68, 205209. Stillman, T. F., & Maner, J. K. (2009). A sharp eye for her SOI: Perception and misperception of female sociosexuality at zero acquaintance. Evolution and Human Behavior. Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., & Kramer, J. (2006). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763798. Swerdloff, R. S., & Wang, C. (1993). Androgen deficiency and aging. The Western Journal of Medicine, 159, 579585. Taylor, T. S., & Hosch, H. M. (2004). An examination of jury verdicts for evidence of a similarity-leniency effect, an out-group punitiveness effect, or a black sheep effect. Law and Human Behavior, 28, 598. Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 2529. Thornhill, R., & Palmer, C. (2000). A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. Cambridge: MIT Press. Trivers, R. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In B. Campbell (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man, 18711971 (pp. 134179). Aldine: Chicago. Verplaetse, J., Vanneste, S., & Braeckman, J. (2007). You can judge a book by its cover: The sequel. A kernel of truth in predictive cheating detection. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 260271. Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1985). Competitiveness, risk-taking and violence: The young male syndrome. Ethology & Sociobiology, 6, 5973.