02.02.2013 Views

Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review

Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review

Maxims or Myths of Beauty? A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

418 LANGLOIS ET AL.<br />

Appendix E<br />

Studies Included in <strong>Meta</strong>-Analysis <strong>of</strong> Treatment <strong>of</strong> Attractive <strong>and</strong> Unattractive Adults<br />

Physical Physical<br />

Sample Target Agent Rater attractiveness attractiveness<br />

Study size gender gender type measure range Familiarity d<br />

Alaln (1985) 48 B B I F<br />

Alcock, Solano, & Kayson (1998) 80 B B I G<br />

S. M. Anderson & Bern (1981) 24 B M I F<br />

S. M. Anderson & Bern (1981) 24 B F I F<br />

Benson, Karabenick, & Lemer (1976) 604 B B I F<br />

Brundage, Derlega, & Cash (1977) 32 M F I F<br />

Byrne, Ervin, & Lamberth (1970) 44 M F N G<br />

Byrne, Erviu, & Lamberth (1970) 44 F M N G<br />

H. E. Cavi<strong>or</strong>, Hayes, & Cavi<strong>or</strong> (1974) 75 F B I F<br />

Chalken (1979) 68 B B I F<br />

DePaulo, Tang, & Stone (1987) 8 B B I F<br />

Efran & Patterson (1974) 79 NR B I F<br />

Farina et al. (1977), Study 2 50 F B I F<br />

Kleck & Rubenstein (1975) 40 F M I G<br />

Langlois et al. (1987), Study 1 30 F B I F<br />

Langlois et al. (1987), Study 2 34 F B I F<br />

Langlois, Ritter, Roggman, & Vaughan (1991)~ Study 1 ' 60 B B I F<br />

Langlois, Ritter, Roggman, & Vaughan (1991), Study 2 40 F B I F<br />

Langlois, Roggman, & Rieser-Danner (1990), Study 1 60 F B I F<br />

Mathes & Edwards (1978), Study 1 68 B B N G<br />

Minas, Hartnett, & Nay (1975) 40 F B N G<br />

Nadler (1980) 40 F F I F<br />

Pellegrini, Hicks, Meyers-Winton, & Antal (1978) 96 B B N G<br />

PoweU & Dabbs (1976), Study 1 30 B B NR F<br />

Raza & Carpenter (1987) 171 B B N G<br />

Romer & Berkson (1980) 176 B B N G<br />

Samuels & Ewy (1985) 26 B B I F<br />

Samuels & Ewy (1985) 35 B B I F<br />

J. A. Shea & Adams (1984) 437 M F N F<br />

J. A. Shea & Adams (1984) 219 F M N F<br />

Siater et al. (1998) 16 F B I F<br />

Sroufe, Chaikin, Cook, & Freeman (1977), Study 1 90 F B I F<br />

Sroufe, Chaikin, Cook, & Freeman (1977), Study 2 90 F B I F<br />

Stewart (1980) 67 B NR I G<br />

Stewart (1984) 60 B NR I G<br />

Stokes & Bickman (1974) 80 F F I G<br />

West & Brown (1975), Study 1 60 F M NR G<br />

Wilson (1978) 30 F M NR F<br />

Wilson (1978) 40 F M NR F<br />

D 1 0.66<br />

D 1 0.81<br />

D 2 0.39<br />

D 2 0.10<br />

D 1 0.24<br />

D I 0.44<br />

C 2 0.12<br />

C 2 0.71<br />

C 3 0.49<br />

D 2 0.32<br />

D 1 0.88<br />

D 1 0.86<br />

C 3 1.02<br />

D 2 0.81<br />

D 1 0.73<br />

D 1 0.80<br />

D 1 0.55<br />

D 1 0.66<br />

C 2 0.60<br />

D 2 0.62<br />

D 2 0.99<br />

D 1 0.66<br />

D 2 0.85<br />

C 1 1.96<br />

C 2 0.70<br />

D 3 0.26<br />

D 1 3.78<br />

C 1 4.95<br />

C 3 0.47<br />

D 3 0.43<br />

D 1 9.31<br />

D 1 0.53<br />

C 1 0.43<br />

C 1 0.62<br />

D 1 0.94<br />

D 1 0.62<br />

D 2 0.34<br />

D 1 1.04<br />

D 1 1.29<br />

Note. M = male; F = female; B = both; I = independent; N = nonindependent; F = facial measure; G = global measure; C = continuous; D =<br />

dichotomous; 1 = less; 3 = m<strong>or</strong>e.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!