ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Gender differences in attentional processes and attractiveness evaluation models during gait observation.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceiving female physical attractiveness and expressive traits from body features and body motion.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- The Psychological Nature of Female Gait Attractiveness.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Physical attractiveness plays a crucial role in building interpersonal relationships and in daily communication. Attractiveness is perceived through nonverbal information regarding one's morphological features, posture, movement, and behavior. Selective pressures throughout our species' evolutionary history have shaped sex differences in the evaluation of physical attractiveness. However, research on the process of body attractiveness perception has been limited to static information involving body images. Therefore, a better understanding of the attractiveness perception process in the real world requires an appreciation of the attractiveness perception mechanism of physical movement. Methods: This study examined the attractiveness perception of 30-s walking animations, as well as gender differences in gaze behavior and statistical models of attractiveness evaluation. We recruited 16 men and 17 women and made gender comparisons of fixation ratio to each gaze area (head, trunk, hip, leg, and others). Furthermore, the standardized estimates of the statistical models were qualitatively compared between male and female observers. Results: Male observers were highly fixated on the walkers' trunk, whereas female observers tended to shift their attention from the trunk to the legs, especially when observing high-preference animations. The statistical model for attractiveness evaluation, which used gait parameters for each gender, showed the tendency that when assessing attractiveness, male observers placed greater weight on the walkers' trunk silhouette, whereas female observers prioritized parameters requiring whole-body observation. Discussion: Gender differences in gaze behavior were observed in the assessment and perception of human movement attractiveness; such differences may reflect the evaluation model for each gender. The results suggest that men assess female gait attractiveness based on observations of the reproductive regions of the female body. In contrast, women perceive other women as potential competitors and assess female gait attractiveness based on beauty standards, which are shaped by sociocultural environments and the walker's psychological state. Our findings are the first step toward understanding the process of perceiving the attractiveness of physical movement and are expected to help generate attractive biological motions.
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.