ArticleAmerican journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council2016
Sex difference in attractiveness perceptions of strong and weak male walkers.
Article in American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mate assessment based on physical characteristics: a review and reflection.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025Review
- Motion and Gender-Typing Features Interact in the Perception of Human Bodies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- Article
- Reply to Durkee: 'Do the Maasai perceive weak walkers to be stronger and more attractive than strong walkers? A re-analysis of Fink et al. (2019)'.Biology letters · 2019Article
- Do the Maasai perceive weak walkers to be stronger and more attractive than strong walkers? A re-analysis of Fink et al. (2019).Biology letters · 2019Article
- Physician Gender Differences in Processing Surgical Risk Features in Videos of Standardized Patients.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2019Article
- Assessment of physical strength from gait: data from the Maasai of Tanzania.Biology letters · 2019Article
- Trash-Talking and Trolling.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2018Article
- Handgrip Strength as a Darwinian Fitness Indicator in Men.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Review
- Cross-Cultural Investigation of Male Gait Perception in Relation to Physical Strength and Speed.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesMen and women accurately assess male physical strength from facial and body morphology cues. Women's assessments of male facial attractiveness, masculinity, and dominance correlate positively with male physical strength. A positive relationship also has been reported between physical strength and attractiveness of men's dance movements. Here, we investigate men's and women's attractiveness, dominance, and strength assessments from brief samples of male gait.
methodsHandgrip strength (HGS) was measured in 70 heterosexual men and their gait was motion-captured. Men and women judged 20 precategorized strong (high HGS) and weak (low HGS) walkers on attractiveness, dominance, and strength, and provided a measure of their own HGS.
resultsBoth men and women judged strong walkers higher on dominance and strength than weak walkers. Women but not men judged strong walkers more attractive than weak walkers. These effects were independent of observers' physical strength.
conclusionsMale physical strength is conveyed not only through facial and body morphology, but also through body movements. We discuss our findings with reference to studies suggesting that physical strength provides information about male quality in contexts of inter- and intrasexual selection. Am. J. Hum. Biol. 28:913-917, 2016. © 2016Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.