Release time: 2024-03-10 14:02
Three Facial Features Can Tip the Scales in a Close Election
Voters prefer candidates with wide mouths, large eyes, and thin eyebrows.
KEY POINTS
Investigating the relationship between physiognomy and electability
The researchers analyzed real election outcomes.
Seemingly irrelevant facial features may tip the scales in favor of a candidate.
A candidate’s looks are important when it comes to winning an election. Studies have found that people can usually guess who won an election merely by looking at photos of the candidates. Other studies have found that political candidates who look more attractive, competent, trustworthy, or dominant have an edge over their opponents.
But what exactly is the winning look? Which specific facial features give some candidates an advantage at the ballot box? Is it a large forehead, a square chin, or something else?
Three Empirical Studies in Germany
Two behavioral scientists in Germany, Jan Landwehr and Michaela Wänke, recently reported the results of three studies in which they investigated the relationship between physiognomy and electability (Landwehr & Wänke, 2023).[1]
In the first study, 27 participants viewed the faces of 40 individuals (20 females and 20 males) and rated each person’s electability on a Likert-type scale. “Would you elect this person to an important political office?” The available options ranged from 1 (I could hardly imagine it) to 7 (I could imagine it well).
Male participants generally gave higher electability judgments, and female faces received higher electability ratings. After controlling statistically for the impact of these gender-related effects, the researchers identified three facial features—a wider mouth, larger eyes, and thinner eyebrows—that were consistently associated with higher electability ratings.[2]
In the second study, Landwehr and Wänke digitally modified eight faces (four male and four female) that were judged neutral (average) in terms of electability. The new faces were identical to the originals except that they had either a wide or narrow mouth, large or small eyes, and thin or thick eyebrows.
The researchers then recruited 396 individuals (45 percent female, average age 35 years) to participate in an online study. The participants viewed the digitally altered faces in multiple groups of four and, for each group, indicated the candidate they would vote for based on facial appearance. The participants also rated each candidate’s face in terms of trustworthiness and dominance, two characteristics that predict actual election outcomes.
The results of the second study were consistent with the results of the first. Hypothetical candidates with wider mouths, larger eyes, and thinner eyebrows were more likely to gain winning votes. As expected, candidates with wider mouths were perceived as more trustworthy and dominant. Candidates with larger eyes were viewed as more trustworthy and less dominant. Thinner eyebrows increased a candidate’s electability by a small margin but were not associated with perceived trustworthiness or dominance.
In the third study, Landwehr and Wänke analyzed real election outcomes. They located campaign photos for nearly 1500 candidates in Germany’s 2009 parliamentary elections. For each candidate, they measured mouth width, eye size, and eyebrow thickness; they also recorded the candidate’s share of the overall vote. As expected, having a wider mouth and larger eyes increased a candidate’s vote share. Eyebrow thickness, however, did not predict vote share in actual elections.
What Are the Real World Implications?
Like all responsible scientists, Landwehr and Wänke noted a few limitations to their studies. First, they decided to use Caucasian faces only in the first two studies because they wanted to compare their experimental findings with actual election results in the third study—and almost all candidates in the 2009 German parliamentary elections were Caucasian. As a result, their findings may not generalize to candidates who do not have Caucasian-looking faces.
Second, Landwehr and Wänke noted that facial features are not strong predictors of a political candidate’s success. Not by a long shot. The strongest predictors of success are the candidate’s political party affiliation and whether the candidate is an incumbent.
Nevertheless, in a very close race, seemingly irrelevant facial features may tip the scales in favor of one candidate. “All else being equal, a candidate with an advantageous facial configuration … will receive approximately one additional percentage point of votes” (Landwehr and Wänke, 2023).
Given how easy it is to alter photographs, I can easily picture a political candidate somewhere using a computer program to give himself or herself a slightly wider mouth and slightly larger eyes. In a very close election, optimized facial features may tip the scales and allow the candidate to (ironically) win by a nose.
Lawrence T. White, Ph.D., is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Beloit College in Wisconsin.
psychologytoday