ArticleBrain and behavior2022
Comparisons make faces more attractive: An ERP study.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting Patient Satisfaction with Bimaxillary Surgery Outcomes: A Functional MRI Study of Neural Responses to Self-Images.Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2025Article
- EEG Microstates in Social and Affective Neuroscience.Brain topography · 2024Review
- Facial attractiveness in the eyes of men with high arousal.Brain and behavior · 2023Article
- Comparisons make faces more attractive: An ERP study.Brain and behavior · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Facial attractiveness judgment largely depends on the characteristics of the facial structure and the personality of the observer. However, little is known about the influence of contextual variations on facial attractiveness. In this electroencephalogram study, participants judged the attractiveness of faces presented individually or in pairs with either a higher-attractive face (HAF) or lower-attractive face (LAF). The attractiveness judgment rating of the target face was significantly higher when presented in pairs with HAFs or LAFs than when presented individually and was accompanied by a larger late positive complex. These results suggest that contextual faces enhance the attractiveness judgment of target faces. Microstate analyses revealed that the global field power (GFP) of state 3 was significantly correlated with the attractiveness judgment in the HAF condition whereas the GFP of state 2 was significantly correlated with the attractiveness judgment in the LAF condition. Interestingly, the GFP of state 2 mediated the relationship between narcissism and facial attractiveness judgment in the context of LAFs. Source location analyses showed that states 3 and 2 activated the superior and middle frontal gyrus, which are involved in emotion processing. Our findings suggest that facial attractiveness can be enhanced by contextual comparison with other faces, subject to personality of the observer.
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.