Gender Differences in the Effect of Facial Attractiveness

Attractive faces elicit a larger early posterior negativity and late parietal positivity, both of which are associated with higher arousal, ... Articles KielanYarrow CityUniversityofLondon,UnitedKingdom RuthS.Ogden LiverpoolJohnMooresUniversity,UnitedKingdom YukiMurai UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,UnitedStates Theeditorandreviewers'affiliationsarethelatestprovidedontheirLoopresearchprofilesandmaynotreflecttheirsituationatthetimeofreview. Abstract Introduction Experiment1 Experiment2 Discussion Conclusion AuthorContributions Funding ConflictofInterestStatement SupplementaryMaterial References SuggestaResearchTopic> DownloadArticle DownloadPDF ReadCube EPUB XML(NLM) Supplementary Material Exportcitation EndNote ReferenceManager SimpleTEXTfile BibTex totalviews ViewArticleImpact SuggestaResearchTopic> SHAREON OpenSupplementalData ORIGINALRESEARCHarticle Front.Psychol.,04June2019 |https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01292 GenderDifferencesintheEffectofFacialAttractivenessonPerceptionofTime YuTian1,2,LingjingLi3,HuazhanYin4andXitingHuang1,2* 1SchoolofPsychology,SouthwestUniversity,Chongqing,China 2KeyResearchBaseofHumanitiesandSocialSciences,SouthwestUniversity,Chongqing,China 3TheExperimentalMiddleSchoolAttachedtoYunnanNormalUniversity,Kunming,China 4CognitionandHumanBehaviorKeyLaboratoryofHunanProvince,HunanNormalUniversity,Changsha,China Timeperceptionplaysafundamentalroleinhumansocialactivities,anditcanbeinfluencedinsocialsituationsbyvariousfactors,includingfacialattractiveness.However,intheeyesofobserversofdifferentgenders,theattractivenessofafacevaries.Thecurrentstudyaimedtoexplorewhethergendermodulatestheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Toaccountforindividualdifferencesinestheticstandards,thecriticalstimulipresentedtoeachparticipantwereselectedfromanimagepoolbasedontheparticipant’sownattractivenessjudgments.InExperiment1,menandwomenperformedastimuliselectiontaskfollowedbyatemporalreproductiontasktomeasuretheirtimeperceptionoffacesofdifferentattractivenesslevelsandgender.Tocontrolforthepotentialinfluenceoftaskorder,Experiment2flippedtheorderoftheselectionandtemporaltasks.Takentogether,theexperimentsshowedthatbothmenandwomenexhibitedlongerreproduceddurationsforattractiveopposite-sexfacesthanforunattractiveopposite-sexfaces;conversely,inthesame-sexfacecondition,womenstillexhibitedlongerreproduceddurationsforattractivefacesthanforunattractivefaces,whereastheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptionamongmentendedtobesmallerorevenfailtoreachsignificance.Theseresultssuggestthatgenderdifferencesplayanimportantroleintheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception. Introduction AlbertEinsteinsaid,“Putyourhandonahotstoveforaminute,anditseemslikeanhour.Sitwithaprettygirlforanhour,anditseemslikeaminute.”AlthoughEinstein’spurposeistoillustrate“relativity,”italsoreflectsaphenomenonwhereinpeople’stimeperceptionisnotstable,andhowattractivenesscanmodulateit. Inempiricalresearch,attractivefacesareoftenusedtomanipulateattractiveness.Moreover,someresearchershaverecruitedwomenasparticipantstoexaminetheeffectofattractivenessontimeperception.Forexample,Ogden(2013)usedimagesoffemalefacestoinvestigatehowattractivenessaffectedthetimeperceptionofwomen.Thefacialimageswerepresentedtoparticipantsfor124,348,582,767,958,and1,183ms,andtheparticipantsverballyestimatedhowlongeachimagelastedinmillisecondsafteradelayrangingfrom1,000to1,500ms.Participantsunderestimatedthedurationofdisplayofunattractivefemalefacesrelativetothatofattractiveandneutralfaces.Inanotherstudy,Arantesetal.(2013)presentedimagesofbothmaleandfemalefacestowomenfor133,233,300,383,533,1,050,and2,100ms,andtheninstructedthemtoreproducethedurationofeachimage.Theyfoundthatparticipants’reproduceddurationsforattractivemalefaceswerelongerthanweretheircorrespondingestimatesforunattractivemalefaces,whereastherewasnosignificantdifferenceinwomen’sestimateddurationsforattractiveandunattractivefemalefaces.TomasandŠpanić(2016)exploredhowfacialexpressionandattractivenessinteractwithtimeperception.Theypresentedfacialimagestoparticipantsfor400to1,600msandaskedthemtodeterminewhetherthedurationofeachimagewasmoresimilartotheshort(400ms)orlonganchorduration(1,600ms).Participantstendedtojudgethedisplaydurationofangryfacesaslongercomparedtoneutralones,butonlywhenthefaceswereattractive;theeffectdidnotoccurinthecaseofunattractivefaces.Itseemsthatthereisaneffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptiondespitetheinconsistentresults. Inthefieldoftimepsychology,temporalvariationcanbeexplainedbyScalarExpectancyTheory(SET),whichwasdevelopedfromtheinternalclockmodel(Treisman,1963).SETassumestheexistenceofaninternalclock/pacemaker-accumulatordevicewherebytimeismeasuredaccordingtothenumberofpulsesgeneratedbyanarousal-relatedpacemakerandcountedbyanaccumulatorthroughtheclosingofanattention-controlledswitch(Gibbonetal.,1984).Anincreaseinarousalisgenerallyassociatedwithaccelerationofthepacemaker.Whenattentionisorientedtowardtiming,theswitchclosesandpulsespassintotheaccumulator.Thepulsesareblockedwhenattentionisorientedawayfromtiming.Alternatively,ZakayandBlock(1997)createdtheAttentional-GateModel(AGM)toexplaintheroleofattentionintiming.AGMproposesthatanattentionalgateisusedinsteadoftheswitchseeninSET.Unlikethisswitch,whichonceclosedisthoughttoremainclosedthroughoutagiveninstanceoftiming,thegateintheAGMcanopenandclosethroughoutthetiming.Theextenttowhichthegateclosesisdeterminedbytheamountofattentionallocatedtothetiming.Thereisempiricalevidencefortheeffectofarousalandattentionontimeperception.Forexample,researcherswhomeasuredarousalthroughbothpsychophysiologicalresponseandsubjectiveratingfoundthattemporaldilatingisrelatedtoincreasingarousal(Angrillietal.,1997;Mellaetal.,2011;vanHedgeretal.,2017;Piovesanetal.,2018).Furthermore,stimulithatcaptureattentionearlymayresultinalongertimeperceptionthanotherstimuli(Grommetetal.,2011).Researcherswhomanipulatedtheallocationofattentionhaveobservedthatthemoreattentionisallocatedtotiming,thelongertheperceivedtime(Macaretal.,1994;Chenetal.,2007;Matthewsetal.,2012).Thus,arousalandattentionareconsideredtobethetwomaindeterminantsoftimeperception(Lakeetal.,2016). Additionally,empiricalresearchhasshownthatfacialattractivenessmightmodulatearousalinwomen.Attractivefacesevokeasignificantfacialelectromyographicresponserelativetounattractivefaces(HazlettandHoehn-Saric,2000).Theactivationofreward-relatedareasisgreaterwhenviewingattractivefacescomparedtoviewingunattractivefaces,althoughtheamygdalaresponsetobothattractiveandunattractivefacesisundifferentiated(Liangetal.,2010).Attractivefaceselicitalargerearlyposteriornegativityandlateparietalpositivity,bothofwhichareassociatedwithhigherarousal,comparedtounattractivefaces(Werheidetal.,2007;Paulmannetal.,2013).Furthermore,facialattractivenesshasalsobeenshowntomodulateattentioninwomen.Attractivefacescapturemoreattentionthandounattractivefaces(SuiandLiu,2009;Valuchetal.,2015).Attractivefacesarealsomoreeffectivelytrackedthanareunattractivefaces(LiuandChen,2012),evenwhenthelow-levelpropertiesofthefaces(i.e.,luminance,contrast,andcolorsaturation)areequalized(Lietal.,2016).Therefore,women’ssubjectiveperceptionofthedurationforwhichanattractiveorunattractivefaceappearsmightdifferasaresultofthesevariationsinarousalandattention. Althoughvariousaspectsofthestimuliandexperimentalsettingsmayhavecontributedtotheinconsistentresultsdescribedabove(Arantesetal.,2013;TomasandŠpanić,2016),webelievethatthefailuretoaccountforindividualdifferencesinestheticpreferencesiscritical.Specifically,previousmanipulationsofattractivenesshavebeenbasedonaverageratingsofattractiveness,inwhichresearcherspresentedimageswithhighaverageratingsinattractivefaceconditions,andthosewithlowaverageratingsinunattractivefaceconditions;thus,thesamematerialswerepresentedtoeachparticipant.Althoughindividuals’standardsforfacialestheticshavemuchincommon,thereisvariationinthesestandardsamongobserversarisingfrombiological,psychological,behavioral,andsocialfactors(Cunninghametal.,1995;Kouetal.,2013).Thus,thesepreviousresearchersmighthavefailedtomanipulateattractivenesseffectively,especiallythosewhoonlypresentedfiveimages,siximages,orasingleimageineachattractivenesscondition(Arantesetal.,2013;Ogden,2013;TomasandŠpanić,2016).Thus,previousmanipulationsofattractivenessmighthaveintroducedinstabilityintotheresults. Furthermore,previousresearchershavefocusedonperceptioninwomenandignoredmen.Someevidencesuggeststhattherearemanygenderdifferencesinnon-verbaldecoding(Hall,1978,1990;HallandGunnery,2013;Fischeretal.,2018).Thereissomeevidencethattheobserver’sgendermaymodulatetheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Forexample,inthedomainofarousal,researchershaveobservedthatanarousal-relatedneuralregion(e.g.,orbito-frontalcortex)ismoreactivewhenmenviewedattractivefemalefacesthanwhenwomenviewedattractivemalefaces(Cloutieretal.,2008).Attractivefemalefacesevokestrongerarousal-relatedelectroencephalographicactivation(i.e.,latepositivecomponent)thandounattractivefemalefacesinmen,whileasimilareffectisnotobservedinwomen(Zhangetal.,2012).Inthedomainofattention,althoughbothmenandwomenhaveattentionalbiastoattractivefaces(Aharonetal.,2001;Iariaetal.,2008),menshowastrongerbiasthandowomentowardattractiveopposite-sexfaces.Thatis,attractivefemalefacescaptureandretainmen’sattentionmoreeffectivelythandoattractivemalefaces,whereaswomenexhibitnoattentionalbiastowardopposite-sexattractivefaces(Maneretal.,2003;Valuchetal.,2015).ItisreasonabletohypothesizethattheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptionmaydifferbetweenmenandwomenaccordingtoSET. Toexplorewhethergendermodulatestheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception,werecruitedbothmenandwomentocompleteatemporalmeasurementtaskwhileviewingattractivefemalefaces,attractivemalefaces,unattractivefemalefaces,andunattractivemalefacesasstimuli.Givenindividualdifferencesinestheticstandards,weassembledapoolofimagesofmaleandfemalefacesofvaryinglevelsofattractiveness,andaskedeachparticipanttoselectseveralattractiveandunattractivesame-sexandopposite-sexfacesastheirpersonalstimuli.Althoughmanytypesoftemporalmeasurementhavebeenusedinpreviousstudies,thecurrentstudyadoptedthetemporalreproductiontaskbecause(1)comparedwithtemporaldiscrimination,itdirectlyreflectsthelengthoftimeperceptionanddoesnotrequiretheuseofmemorytomaintainthetemporalanchors;(2)comparedwithverbalestimation,itdoesnotrequiresemanticprocessingtotranslatetemporalinformationintowords;and(3)ithavebeenobservedtobesensitivetobotharousalandattention(Grondin,2010;GilandDroit-Volet,2011;RattatandDroit-Volet,2012;Ogdenetal.,2014).Weonlyrecruitedheterosexualparticipantswithoutsocialanxietybecausesexualpreferenceandsocialanxietybothcanaffecttimeperception(SamsonandJanssen,2014;Jusyteetal.,2015).Moreover,differencesindistinctivenessbetweenattractiveandunattractivefaceswereaccountedfor,asitmightinfluencetimeperception(Ogden,2013). Experiment1 Methods Participants Twentymenand20womenwererecruitedforthisstudy.Thissamplesizeisconsistentwiththatofapreviousstudy(Ogden,2013),andanaprioripoweranalysisindicatedasampleof24wouldhaveadequatepower(1–β≥0.80)todetectamediumeffect,ηp2=0.06(Fauletal.,2007).Participantsrangedinagefrom18to29(mean±SD=21.20±3.21)years.AllparticipantsreportedthemselvestobeChinese,heterosexual,right-handed,andtohavenormalorcorrected-to-normalvision.TheChineseversionoftheLiebowitzSocialAnxietyScale(HeandZhang,2004)showedthatallparticipants’scoredbelow30,indicatingtheyhadnosocialanxiety(HeandZhang,2004). ApparatusandMaterials APCwitha17″LCDscreen(1,024×768pixels,60Hz)andakeyboardwasusedtopresentstimuliandrecorddataviaE-Prime1.1(PsychologicalSoftwareTools,Pittsburgh,PA,UnitedStates). Givenindividualdifferencesinestheticstandards,thestimuliforeachparticipantwerebasedontheparticipant’sselectionfromanimagepool.Thisimagepool,whichwasspecificallymadeforthecurrentstudybytheauthors,consistedof24colorimagesofChinesefaces(12maleand12female).Allfaceshadaneutralexpression;theheadfacedthecameradirectly;theeyeslookeddirectlyintothecamera;andnoornamentationwaspresent.Accordingtoqualitativeestimatesprovidedbysevenexpertswithexperienceinfacialattractivenessstudies,theseimageswerediscernibleingender,heterogeneousinattractiveness,andhomogeneousinage.Theseimageswerestandardizedtoasizeof320×400pixelswithawhitebackground.Wedidnotstandardizeskincolororskinblemishesbecausetheyareknowntobecomponentsofattractiveness(Finketal.,2006).Participantswereinstructedtoratetheattractivenessanddistinctivenessofeachfaceona9-pointLikertscale,andtoselect4attractivefemalefaces,4attractivemalefaces,4unattractivefemalefaces,and4unattractivemalefacesastheirpersonalizedstimuli.Kendall’scoefficientofconcordanceshowedamoderateinconsistencyinparticipants’selections,W=0.44,p<0.001,suggestingthatindividualdifferencesinfacialestheticdoexist;assuch,usingpersonalizedstimuliwasdeemedappropriate.Arepeated-measuresANOVAoverattractivenessscores,withAttractiveness(attractivevs.unattractive)andFacialgender(malevs.female)aswithin-subjectsfactors,revealedasignificantmaineffectofAttractiveness,F(1,39)=2049.33,p<0.001,ηp2=0.98.Thescoresweresystematicallylowerfortheunattractiveimagesthanfortheattractiveimages,p<0.001.NeitherthemaineffectofFacialgender(p=0.75)northeinteractionbetweenAttractivenessandFacialgender(p=0.83)wassignificant,suggestingthatthemanipulationofattractivenesswaseffective.Inaddition,anotherrepeated-measuresANOVAusingthesamedesignfordistinctivenessscoresshowedthatthemaineffectsofAttractiveness(p=0.92)andFacialgender(p=0.53)werenotsignificant,andneitherwastheinteractionbetweenAttractivenessandFacialgender(p=0.87),suggestingthatthedistinctivenessoffaceswasmatched(Table1).FortheMaterials,seeSupplementary MaterialsandTask(DataSheet3). TABLE1 Table1.Meanscores(standarddeviation)ofattractivenessanddistinctivenessforthefacesinExperiment1. Procedure Theexperimentlastedapproximately35minandconsistedoftwophases.Phase1wasdedicatedtoselectionoftheparticipant’spersonalizedstimuli,andPhase2aimedtomeasuretheirtimeperceptionusingatemporalreproductiontask.Participantswereseatedinaquietandwell-litroomatadistanceofapproximately60cmfromthescreen,whichsubtendedlessthan16°ofthehorizontalandverticalvisualangles,forthedurationoftheexperiment.Theparticipantsgavetheirwritteninformedconsentpriortotheexperiment.ThelocalethicscommitteeofSouthwestUniversityapprovedtheexperimentalprotocol. Phase1consistedofthreeparts.First,the24facialimagesintheimagepoolwerepresentedtotheparticipantsthreetimesinarandomordertofamiliarizetheparticipantswiththewholeimagepool.Theparticipantsweretheninstructedtoratetheattractivenessanddistinctivenessofeachfaceona9-pointLikertscalerangingfrom“notatall”to“extremely.”Finally,theparticipantswereaskedtoselect4attractivefemalefaces,4attractivemalefaces,4unattractivefemalefaces,and4unattractivemalefacesfromamongthe24facialimagesforuseastheirpersonalizedstimuli. Phase2beganwiththeprovisionofdetailedinstructionsthatinformedtheparticipantofthenatureofthetemporalreproductiontask.Followingthis,eachtrialbeganwiththepresentationofafixationlastingbetween500and750ms.Thiswasimmediatelyfollowedbyafacialimage,whichwaspresentedforavariabledurationof1,000,1,500,2,000,2,500,or3,000ms.Subsequently,aquestionmarkappearedonthecomputerscreencueingtheparticipanttoreproducethedurationofthefacialimage.Thisremainedonthescreeneitherfor3,000msoruntiltheparticipantrespondedbypressingthespacebarforadurationequivalenttotheamountoftimethefacialimagewaspresented.Animageofapinkovalwithawhitebackgroundappearedatthecenterofthescreenatthebeginningofthekeypressandremainedonthescreenuntiltheparticipantreleasedthespacebar,Figure1.FortheMaterials,seeSupplementaryMaterialsandTask(DataSheet3).Toensurethattheprocedurewasconsistentforeachparticipant,all24imagesfromtheoriginalpoolwerepresentedonceforeachduration,foratotalof120experimentaltrials.Theunselectedimageswereusedasfillers;therefore,thedatarecordedforthemwereexcludedfromfurtheranalysis.Fivepracticetrials(inwhichoneadditionalfacialimageofeachdurationwaspresented)werecompletedatthebeginningofthetasktoclarifytheinstructionsandtofamiliarizeparticipantswiththetask.AttheendofPhase2,theparticipantswereaskedtorespondtothequestion“Howcloselydidyoufollowtheinstructionsgiventoyouregardingreproducingthedurationofeachfacialimage?”Responsesweregivenona9-pointLikertscalerangingfrom“notatall”to“completely.” FIGURE1 Figure1.Schematicillustrationofthetemporalreproductiontask. Statistics Aprocedurebasedonpreviousstudieswasappliedtocontrolforoutliers(Changetal.,2011;RammsayerandVerner,2014).First,wecheckedwhethertheratingsgivenforself-reportedcompliancewiththedurationreproductiontaskwereequaltoorlesserthan5.However,alltheratingscoresrangedfrom7to9,andthemeanscore(8.38±0.77)wassignificantlyhigherthanwasthemidpoint(i.e.,5),t(38)=27.76,p<0.001;thus,noneoftheparticipantswereexcludedaccordingtothefirstcriterion.Second,allreproduceddurationsthatweremorethan±2SDsfromthemeanforeachconditionwereconsideredinvalidtrials.Ofalltrials,0.94%wereremovedfromthedatapoolbasedonthiscriterion.Third,eachparticipant’sremainingreproduceddurationsweresubmittedtoaone-wayANOVAwithObjectiveduration(1,000,1,500,2,000,2,500,and3,000ms)asthewithin-subjectsfactor.Thelackofasignificantmaineffectaswellasanynon-significantdifferencesamongthefivelevelswouldimplyanindividual’sinabilitytoreproducethedurations.Noneoftheparticipantswereexcludedaccordingtothisfinalcriterion. StatisticalanalysiswasperformedusingSPSSStatistics20.0(IBMCorp.,Armonk,NY,UnitedStates).Thesignificancelevelwassetat0.05.Afour-wayrepeated-measuresANOVAwasperformedontheaveragereproduceddurations,withObjectiveduration(1,000,1,500,2,000,2,500,and3,000ms),Attractiveness(attractiveandunattractive),andFacialgender(maleandfemale)aswithin-subjectsfactors,andParticipantgender(maleandfemale)asabetween-subjectsfactor.PosthoctestingofthemaineffectswasconductedusingtheBonferronimethod.Significantinteractionswereanalyzedusingsimpleeffectsmodels.Partialη-squared(ηp2)wasreportedasameasureofeffectsize. Results Thefour-wayANOVArevealedasignificantmaineffectofObjectiveduration,F(4,152)=285.89,p<0.001,ηp2=0.88,posthocanalysisshowedthatthereproduceddurationsincreasedalongwithincreasesinobjectivedurationsandweresignificantlydifferentfromeachother,ps<0.001.ThemaineffectofAttractivenesswasalsosignificant,F(1,38)=16.02,p<0.001,ηp2=0.30,andwasmodulatedbyFacialgender,asrevealedbyasignificantinteractionbetweenAttractivenessandFacialgender,F(1,38)=6.22,p<0.05,ηp2=0.14.Athree-wayinteractionbetweenAttractiveness,Facialgender,andParticipantgenderwasalsosignificant,F(1,38)=8.33,p<0.01,ηp2=0.18.Noothersignificantmaineffectsorinteractionswereobserved,ps>0.20.TheaveragedurationsreproducedineachconditionarepresentedinFigure2. FIGURE2 Figure2.AveragereproduceddurationsforeachconditioninExperiment1.Theerrorbarrepresentsthestandarddeviation. Wefurtheranalyzedthethree-wayinteractionbydividingitintermsofparticipantgender.Amongmen,arepeated-measuresANOVAwasconductedforthereproduceddurations,withAttractiveness(attractivevs.unattractive)andFacialgender(malevs.female)aswithin-subjectsfactors.ThemaineffectofFacialgenderwasnotsignificant,p=0.98.AsignificantmaineffectofAttractivenesswasfound,F(1,19)=4.47,p<0.05,ηp2=0.19,whichwasmodulatedbyfacialgender,asrevealedbyasignificantinteractionbetweenthesefactors,F(1,19)=13.90,p<0.01,ηp2=0.42.Thesimpleeffectsanalysisshowedthatintheattractivefacecondition,theaveragereproduceddurationwaslongerforfemalefaces(1683.95±347.65ms)thanformalefaces(1628.10±350.43ms),p<0.01.Theaveragereproduceddurationwasshorterforfemalefaces(1576.26±350.95ms)thanformalefaces(1632.78±347.33ms)intheunattractivefacecondition,p<0.01.Additionally,theaveragereproduceddurationwaslongerforattractivefacesthanforunattractivefacesinthefemalefacecondition,p<0.01.Incontrast,theaveragereproduceddurationdidnotsignificantlydifferbetweenattractivefacesandunattractivefacesinthemalefacecondition,p=0.88. Referringtowomen,arepeated-measuresANOVAwasconductedoverreproduceddurationsusingthesamedesignasmaleparticipants.TheresultsshowedasignificantmaineffectofAttractiveness,F(1,19)=13.66,p<0.01,ηp2=0.42,suchthatreproduceddurationsweresystematicallyshorterfortheunattractivefaces(1595.57±374.49ms)thanfortheattractivefaces(1672.04±379.73ms),p<0.01.ThemaineffectofFacialgender(p=0.24)andtheinteractionbetweenattractivenessandfacialgender(p=0.78)failedtoreachsignificance.Fortherawdata,seeSupplementaryDataSheet1. Insummary,theresultsofExperiment1showedthatwomen’stimeperceptionwhenviewingattractivefacesislongerthanthatwhenviewingunattractivefaces,regardlessoffacegender,andthatthiseffectoffacialattractivenesswasonlyobservedinmenwhentheyviewedfemalefaces.Inotherwords,theeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptionshowedagenderdifference.However,sinceExperiment1requiredparticipantstorateandselectthestimulibeforetheycompletedthetemporaltask,participantsmighthavebeenawareoftheexperimentalpurpose.Awarenessoftimedistortionshasbeenfoundtoregulatetimeperception(Droit-Voletetal.,2015).Moreover,ourparticipantswereexposedtothestimulimultipletimesbeforethetemporaltask,andrepeatedexposuretoastimulushasbeenshowntoincreaseitsattractiveness(PeskinandNewell,2004).Consequently,toavoidthepotentialinfluenceofawarenessandexposure,weaddedanotherexperimentinwhichtheratingandselectionofstimuliwasperformedafterthetemporaltask. Experiment2 Methods Participants Another20menand20womenwererecruitedforthisexperiment.Participantsrangedinagefrom18to25(20.85±1.87)years.AllparticipantsreportedthemselvestobeChinese,heterosexual,right-handed,andtohavenormalorcorrected-to-normalvision.TheirscoresontheLiebowitzSocialAnxietyScalewereallbelow30,indicatingtheyhadnosocialanxiety(HeandZhang,2004). ApparatusandMaterials TheapparatusandmaterialswerethesameasinExperiment1. Kendall’scoefficientofconcordancecalculatedfromparticipants’stimuliselectionindicatedamoderateinconsistencyinselectionamongparticipants,W=0.46,p<0.001,suggestingthattheuseofpersonalizedstimuliwasappropriate.Therepeated-measuresANOVAexaminingattractivenessscores,withAttractiveness(attractivevs.unattractive)andFacialgender(malevs.female)aswithin-subjectsfactors,revealedasignificantmaineffectofAttractiveness,F(1,39)=1604.86,p<0.001,ηp2=0.98.Thescoresweresystematicallylowerforunattractiveimagesthanforattractiveimages,p<0.001.NeitherthemaineffectofFacialgender(p=0.18)northeinteractionbetweenAttractivenessandFacialgender(p=0.30)wassignificant,suggestingthatthemanipulationofattractivenesswaseffective.Anotherrepeated-measuresANOVAfordistinctivenessscores,usingthesamedesign,showedthatthemaineffectsofAttractiveness(p=0.99)andFacialgender(p=0.39)werenotsignificant,andtheirinteractionwasalsonotsignificant(p=0.37),suggestingthatthedistinctivenessofthefacialstimulididnotdiffer(Table2). TABLE2 Table2.Meanscores(standarddeviations)ofattractivenessanddistinctivenessforthefacesinExperiment2. Procedure TheprocedurewasthesameasinExperiment1,exceptthattheselectiontask(Phase1)cameafterthetemporaltask(Phase2).Theparticipantsgavetheirwritteninformedconsentbeforetheexperiment.ThelocalethicscommitteeofSouthwestUniversityapprovedtheexperimentalprotocol. Statistics ThemethodofcontrollingoutlierswasthesameasinExperiment1.Noneoftheparticipantswereexcludedaftercheckingtheirself-reportedcomplianceratings,astheirscoresrangedfrom7to9andthemeanscore(8.55±0.50)wassignificantlyhigherthanthemidpoint(i.e.,5),t(39)=44.56,p<0.001.Furthermore,0.81%ofalltrialswereremovedfromthedataaccordingtothesecondcriterion(i.e.,theirreproduceddurationsexceeded±2SDsfromthemean).Noneoftheparticipantswereexcludedbasedonthefinalcriterionbecausetheresultsoftheone-wayANOVAsindicatedthatallparticipantsfollowedtheinstructionstoreproducethetargetdurations. ThestatisticalanalysismethodwasthesameasthatinExperiment1. Results Arepeated-measuresANOVAwasconductedforreproduceddurations,withObjectiveduration(1,000,1,500,2,000,2,500,and3,000ms),Attractiveness(attractiveandunattractive),andFacialgender(maleandfemale)aswithin-subjectsfactors,andParticipantgender(maleandfemale)asabetween-subjectsfactor.ThefindingsrevealedasignificantmaineffectofObjectiveduration,F(4,152)=325.02,p<0.001,ηp2=0.90,andposthocanalysisshowedthatthereproduceddurationssignificantlyincreasedwiththeobjectiveduration,ps<0.001.ThemaineffectofAttractivenesswasalsosignificant,F(1,38)=57.58,p<0.001,ηp2=0.60,andwasmodulatedbyFacialgenderandParticipantgender,asrevealedbyasignificantthree-wayinteraction,F(1,38)=5.78,p<0.05,ηp2=0.13.Noothersignificantmaineffectsorinteractionswereobserved,ps>0.06.TheaveragedurationsreproducedineachconditionwerepresentedinFigure3. FIGURE3 Figure3.AveragereproduceddurationsforeachconditioninExperiment2.Theerrorbarrepresentsthestandarddeviation. Tofurtheranalyzethesignificantthree-wayinteraction,weperformedseparateanalysesaccordingtoParticipantgender.Amongmen,arepeated-measuresANOVAwasconductedforreproduceddurations,withAttractiveness(attractivevs.unattractive)andFacialgender(malevs.female)aswithin-subjectsfactors.ThemaineffectofFacialgenderwasnotsignificant,p=0.28.However,asignificantmaineffectofAttractivenesswasfound,F(1,19)=45.16,p<0.001,ηp2=0.70,whichwasmodulatedbyFacialgender,asrevealedbyasignificantinteractionbetweenthesefactors,F(1,19)=6.57,p<0.05,ηp2=0.26.Theanalysisofthesimpleeffectsshowedthatinboththemaleandfemalefaceconditions,theaveragereproduceddurationwaslongerforattractive(male:1623.11±268.81ms;female:1681.53±287.67ms)facesthanforunattractivefaces(male:1576.58±278.91ms;female:1579.23±306.11ms),ps<0.01.However,intheattractivefacecondition,theaveragereproduceddurationwaslongerforfemalefacesthanformalefaces,p<0.05.Theaveragereproduceddurationforfemalefaceswasnotsignificantlydifferentfromthatformalefacesintheunattractivefacecondition,p=0.93. Amongwomen,weconductedanotherrepeated-measuresANOVAusingthesamedesignasformen.TheresultsshowedasignificantmaineffectofAttractiveness,F(1,19)=22.37,p<0.001,ηp2=0.54,suchthatthereproduceddurationsweresystematicallyshorterfortheunattractivefaces(1585.26±317.99ms)thanfortheattractivefaces(1668.12±310.94ms),p<0.01.NeitherthemaineffectofFacialgender(p=0.47)northeinteractionbetweenattractivenessandfacialgender(p=0.51)wassignificant.Fortherawdata,seeSupplementaryDataSheet2. TheresultsofExperiment2showedthatwomen’stimeperceptionforbothattractivemaleandfemalefaceswassystematicallylongerthanwasthatforunattractivefaces.Amongmen,howevertheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptionwasgreaterwhentheyviewedfemalefacesthanwhentheyviewedmalefaces.Tosummarize,Experiment2confirmedthatthegenderfactorisabletomodulatetheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception. Discussion Theaimofthecurrentstudywastoexaminewhethergendermodulatestheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Usingatemporalreproductiontask,Experiment1measuredparticipants’timeperceptionoffacesofdifferentattractivenesslevelsandgenderaftercompletingafacialattractivenessselectiontask.Toavoidthepotentialinfluenceoftaskorder,Experiment2settheselectiontaskafterthetemporaltask.Inlinewithourhypothesis,bothexperimentsshowedthatparticipantgendermodulatestheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception,suchthatmenandwomenshowedinconsistentperformancefortimeperceptionwhenviewingsame-sexfaces. Inthecurrentstudy,themanipulationofattractivenesswascarriedoutbasedonindividualparticipants’personalestheticstandards.Thisrepresentsasalientdifferencefrommostpreviousstudies.Previousresearchersselectedstimulibasedonaverageratingsofattractiveness,withthesamestimulibeingpresentedtoeveryparticipant(Arantesetal.,2013;Ogden,2013;TomasandŠpanić,2016).Instead,werequiredparticipanttochoosestimulithattheyconsideredtobeattractiveandunattractive.Althoughthereisasetofsomeestheticstandardsforfacesthatiscommonacrossalmostallhumans,someaspectsoftheseestheticstandardsmaydifferamongpeopleasaresultoftheirbiological,psychological,behavioral,andsocialbackgrounds(Cunninghametal.,1995;Kouetal.,2013).Therefore,thecurrentmethodofmanipulatingattractivenessmightbemoreeffectivethanpreviousmethods,especiallyforthecurrentsmall-samplestudy. Furthermore,weexcludedorcontrolledforseveralsalientpotentialinfluencesontheextenttowhichfacialattractivenesscouldaffecttimeperception.Ogden(2013)statedthatfacialdistinctivenessisanimportantfactorinhowfacialattractivenessaffectstimeperception.Thatis,unattractivefacesmaycausepeopletodiverttheirattentionawayfromthepassageoftimebecauseunattractivefacesaremoredistinctiveandatypicalthanareattractivefaces.However,thecurrentstudyobservedthatfacialattractivenesshasinfluenceontimeperceptionintheabsenceofsignificantdifferencesinthedistinctiveness,suggestingthattheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperceptionmaybeindependentoffacialdistinctiveness.Arantesetal.(2013)presentedfaceswithsmilingandneutralexpressionsasstimuliandobservedthatfacialattractivenessaffectstimeperception,sotheirresultsmighthavearisenfromaconfoundbetweenfacialattractivenessandexpression,assmilingexpressionsusuallyinducetheperceptionofalongerdisplaytimecomparedtoneutralexpressions(GilandDroit-Volet,2012).Toavoidsuchconfounds,thestimulipresentedinthecurrentstudyconsistedonlyoffaceswithneutralexpressions.Furthermore,socialanxietyhasbeenshowntoleadtotheperceptionoflongerdisplaytimesforfaces(Jusyteetal.,2015),andsexualpreferencemaymodulatearousalandattentiontosame-andopposite-sexfaces(SamsonandJanssen,2014),therebyinfluencingtimeperception.Wethereforerecruitedheterosexualparticipantswithoutsocialanxietytoavoidthepotentialinfluencesofthesefactorsandobservetheindependenteffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Althoughtherearesomedifferencesinmethodsbetweenthecurrentstudyandpreviousstudies,wehavereplicatedtosomeextentthepreviousfindingsthatattractivefacesforwomeninducedtheperceptionofalongerdisplaytimethandidunattractivefaces(Arantesetal.,2013;Ogden,2013;TomasandŠpanić,2016).Thesefindingssuggestthattheeffectoffacialattractivenessonwomen’stimeperceptionisrepeatableandstable. Importantly,ourresultsrevealedtheimportantroleplayedbygenderintheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Specifically,womenexhibitedalongertimeperceptionforattractivefacesthanforunattractivefaces,regardlessoffacialgender.Formen,ontheotherhand,timeperceptionforattractivefemalefaceswaslongerthanthatforunattractivefemalefaces,whiletheeffectofattractivenessontimeperceptionformalefaceswassmaller(Experiment2)ordidnotevenreachsignificance(Experiment1). Asmentionedintheintroduction,thetemporaldilatingeffectcanbeexplainedbythecriticalroleplayedbyarousalinspeedinguptheinternalclock.Previousstudieshavefoundthatbothmenandwomenmaybearousedmorebyattractivethanbyunattractiveopposite-sexfaces(Liangetal.,2010;Paulmannetal.,2013).Incontrast,agenderdifferencebetweenmenandwomentosame-sexfaceshasbeenfound.Thatis,arousalcanbeinducedinwomenbybothsame-andopposite-sexattractivefaces(HazlettandHoehn-Saric,2000),butthereislittleevidencethatfacialattractivenessaffectsmen’sarousalinresponsetosame-sexfaces.AccordingtoSET,theincreasedarousalisassociatedwithanacceleratedinternalclock,andmayresultinalongertimeperception(Gibbonetal.,1984;Lakeetal.,2016).Therefore,itislogicaltoinferthatthearousalmechanismcontributessignificantlytothegenderdifferenceinthetemporaldilationeffectofattractiveness. However,thetemporaldilatingeffectcanbealsoexplainedbyanincreaseintheamountofattentionalresourcesallocatedtotiming.Previousresearchersfoundthatalthoughattractivefacescaptureattentionfasterthandounattractivefaces,menshowastrongerbiastowardattractiveopposite-sexfacesthandowomen(SuiandLiu,2009;Valuchetal.,2015).AccordingtoSET,capturingattentionearlierwouldresultinfixedadditivetiming.However,thecontributionofadditivetimingtodilatingtimeperceptionwoulddecreasewiththeincreaseinobjectiveduration.SincewefailedtoobserveanyinteractionbetweenAttractivenessandObjectiveduration,wethinkthattheadditivetimingeffectofattentioncontributeslittletogenderdifferencesinthetemporaldilationeffectofattractiveness.Oneexplanationmaylieinthestimuluspresentationtime.Previousstudiesthathaveobservedasignificanteffectofadditivetimingmainlyusedsubsecondstimuli(MattesandUlrich,1998;Ennsetal.,1999;Tseetal.,2004),whereasthecurrentstudyusedsuprasecondstimuli.Thus,thedilatingeffectofadditivetimingmighthavebeenoverwhelmedbythelongstimuluspresentationtime. Someresearchersfoundthatitiseasierforopposite-sexattractivefacestoholdtheattentionofbothmenandwomenthanforopposite-sexunattractivefacesasaresultofevolutionaryinstincts(Valuchetal.,2015;Lietal.,2016;Xuetal.,2016).Incontrast,whenviewingsame-sexfaces,attractivefaceswerefoundtobemoreeffectiveincapturingwomen’sattentioncomparedtounattractivefaces(Maneretal.,2003;Valuchetal.,2015).Asimilareffectwasnotobservedinmen(Maneretal.,2003).Thesefindingsindicatethatfacialattractivenessaffectsattention,andmaydistracttheattentionallocatedtotiming.However,wedidnotobserveatemporaldilationeffectforrelativelyunattractivetoattractivefaces.Thus,attentionmightplayaweakroleingenderdifferenceswiththetemporaldilationeffectofattractiveness.Itshouldbenotedthataswedidnotmanipulatearousalorattention,sotheseinferencesrequirefurtherverification.Moreover,theseinferencesmaynotbeextendedtothestudiesthatusedsubsecondtimescales,becausethetimescalesofthecurrentstudyweresuprasecond,andpreviousstudieshaveshownthesubsecondandsupraseconddurationsareprocessedusingdifferentmechanisms(Pouthasetal.,2005;LewisandMiall,2006;Hayashietal.,2014;MuraiandYotsumoto,2016). Severallimitationsofthepresentstudyanddirectionsforfuturestudiesshouldbenoted.First,allthemalefacialimagespresentedinthecurrentstudywerewithoutfacialhair.Facialhair,whichisamalesecondarysexualcharacteristic,signalsunderlyinghealth,age,andsocialdominanceinmen,therebyenhancingtheirattractivenesstowomen(Dixsonetal.,2016).Futureresearcherscouldexaminewhethersecondarysexualcharacteristics,suchasfacialhair,modulatetheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception,whichwouldfurtheradvanceunderstandingofthesegenderdifferences.Second,wecomparedonlyattractivewithunattractivefacesanddidnotincludeaneutralcondition.Thus,wedonotknowwhetherattractiveandunattractivefaceswereperceivedaslonger,shorterorthesameforneutralfaces.Futureresearchshouldincludeaneutralconditiontoimprovethislimitation.Third,althoughourresultsandtheresultsofpreviousstudiesdemonstratedthatfacialattractivenessaffectsthetimeperception,fewstudieshaveexploredthemechanismunderlyingthiseffect.Althoughmoststudieshaveinferredthatarousalandattentionareimportantdeterminantsoftimeperception,inconsistentinferenceshavebeenmadeabouthowtheyoperateinthisrole.Therefore,futureresearchshoulddirectlyexplorethesemechanisms.Fourth,thetypeoftemporaltaskcaninfluencethetemporaleffect(GilandDroit-Volet,2011;Ogdenetal.,2014).Discrimination,production,verbalestimation,andreproductionarefourmaintasksusedintemporalresearchstudies(Grondin,2010;Mionietal.,2016).Thereproductiontaskadoptedinthecurrentstudyhasbeenfoundtobemoresensitivetoattentionthanisthediscriminationtask(Baudouinetal.,2006;RattatandDroit-Volet,2012),requiresmoreworkingmemorytomaintaintemporalinformationthandoestheproductiontask(Mionietal.,2016),anddoesnotrequireadditionalsemanticprocessingtotranslatetemporalinformationforverbalestimation(Ogdenetal.,2014).Therefore,therepeatabilityofthecurrentstudymightdependontasktypeanditshouldbeverifiedunderdifferentmethodologicalconditions. Conclusion Inconclusion,thecurrentstudyprovidesevidencethatgendermodulatestheeffectoffacialattractivenessontimeperception.Whenviewingopposite-sexfaces,bothmenandwomenperceivedtimetolastlongerforattractivefacesrelativetounattractivefaces;however,whenviewingsame-sexfaces,womenstillperceivedthetimeaslongerinthecaseofattractivefaces,whiletheeffectoffacialattractivenessonmen’stimeperceptiontendedtodecrease.Thesefindingsprovideevidenceofhowgenderinfluenceshowfacialattractivenessaffectstimeperception. AuthorContributions YT,HY,andXHdesignedtheexperiment.YTandLLacquiredandanalyzedthedata.Allauthorscontributedtotheinterpretationofthedataandapprovedthefinalversionofthemanuscript. Funding ThisresearchwassupportedbytheNationalNaturalScienceFoundationofChina(31671125). ConflictofInterestStatement Theauthorsdeclarethattheresearchwasconductedintheabsenceofanycommercialorfinancialrelationshipsthatcouldbeconstruedasapotentialconflictofinterest. SupplementaryMaterial TheSupplementaryMaterialforthisarticlecanbefoundonlineat:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01292/full#supplementary-material References Aharon,I.,Etcoff,N.,Ariely,D.,Chabris,C.F.,O’Connor,E.,andBreiter,H.C.(2001).Beautifulfaceshaverewardvalue:fMRIbehavioralevidence.Neuron32,537–551.doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00491-3 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Angrilli,A.,Cherubini,P.,Pavese,A.,andManfredini,S.(1997).Theinfluenceofaffectivefactorsontimeperception.Percept.Psychophys.59,972–982.doi:10.3758/BF03205512 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Arantes,J.,Berg,M.E.,andWearden,J.H.(2013).Females’durationestimatesofbriefly-viewedmale,butnotfemale,photographsdependonattractiveness.Evol.Psychol.11,104–119.doi:10.1177/147470491301100110 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Baudouin,A.,Vanneste,S.,Isingrini,M.,andPouthas,V.(2006).Differentialinvolvementofinternalclockandworkingmemoryintheproductionandreproductionofduration:astudyonolderadults.ActaPsychol.121,285–296.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.07.004 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chang,A.Y.-C.,Tzeng,O.J.L.,Hung,D.L.,andWu,D.H.(2011).Bigtimeisnotalwayslong:numericalmagnitudeautomaticallyaffectstimereproduction.Psychol.Sci.22,1567–1573.doi:10.1177/0956797611418837 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Chen,Y.,Zhang,Z.,Huang,X.,Guo,X.,Yuan,H.,andZhang,T.(2007).Attentionalmodulationoftimeperception:anERPstudy.ActaPsychol.Sin.39,1002–1011. GoogleScholar Cloutier,J.,Heatherton,T.F.,Whalen,P.J.,andKelley,W.M.(2008).Areattractivepeoplerewarding?Sexdifferencesintheneuralsubstratesoffacialattractiveness.J.Cogn.Neurosci.20,941–951.doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20062 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Cunningham,M.R.,Roberts,A.R.,Barbee,A.P.,Druen,P.B.,andWu,C.H.(1995).“Theirideasofbeautyare,onthewhole,thesameasours”:consistencyandvariabilityinthecross-culturalperceptionoffemalephysicalattractiveness.J.Personal.Soc.Psychol.68,261–279.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.68.2.261 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Dixson,B.J.W.,Sulikowski,D.,Gouda-Vossos,A.,Rantala,M.J.,andBrooks,R.C.(2016).Themasculinityparadox:facialmasculinityandbeardednessinteracttodeterminewomen’sratingsofmen’sfacialattractiveness.J.Evol.Biol.29,2311–2320.doi:10.1111/jeb.12958 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Droit-Volet,S.,Lamotte,M.,andIzaute,M.(2015).Theconsciousawarenessoftimedistortionsregulatestheeffectofemotionontheperceptionoftime.Conscious.Cogn.38,155–164.doi:10.1016/j.concog.2015.02.021 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Enns,J.T.,Brehaut,J.C.,andShore,D.I.(1999).Thedurationofabriefeventinthemind’seye.J.Gen.Psychol.126,355–372.doi:10.1080/00221309909595371 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Faul,F.,Erdfelder,E.,Lang,A.-G.,andBuchner,A.(2007).G*Power3:aflexiblestatisticalpoweranalysisprogramforthesocial,behavioral,andbiomedicalsciences.Behav.Res.Methods39,175–191.doi:10.3758/bf03193146 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fink,B.,Grammer,K.,andMatts,P.J.(2006).Visibleskincolordistributionplaysaroleintheperceptionofage,attractiveness,andhealthinfemalefaces.Evol.Hum.Behav.27,433–442.doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.08.007 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fischer,A.H.,Kret,M.E.,andBroekens,J.(2018).Genderdifferencesinemotionperceptionandself-reportedemotionalintelligence:atestoftheemotionsensitivityhypothesis.PLoSOne13:e0190712.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0190712 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gibbon,J.,Church,R.M.,andMeck,W.H.(1984).Scalartiminginmemory.Ann.N.Y.Acad.Sci.423,52–77.doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1984.tb23417.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gil,S.,andDroit-Volet,S.(2012).Emotionaltimedistortions:thefundamentalroleofarousal.Cogn.Emot.26,847–862.doi:10.1080/02699931.2011.625401 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gil,S.,andDroit-Volet,S.(2011).Timefliesinthepresenceofangryfacesdependingonthetemporaltaskused!ActaPsychol.136,354–362.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.12.010 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Grommet,E.K.,Droit-Volet,S.,Gil,S.,Hemmes,N.S.,Baker,A.H.,andBrown,B.L.(2011).Timeestimationoffearcuesinhumanobservers.Behav.Processes86,88–93.doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2010.10.003 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Grondin,S.(2010).Timingandtimeperception:areviewofrecentbehavioralandneurosciencefindingsandtheoreticaldirections.Atten.Percept.Psychophys.72,561–582.doi:10.3758/APP.72.3.561 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hall,J.,andGunnery,S.D.(2013).Genderdifferencesinnonverbalcommunication.NonverbalCommun.Handb.Commun.Sci.2,639–669. GoogleScholar Hall,J.A.(1978).Gendereffectsindecodingnonverbalcues.Psychol.Bull.85,845–857.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.85.4.845 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hall,J.A.(1990).NonverbalSexDifferences:AccuracyofCommunicationandExpressiveStyle.Baltimore,MD:JohnsHopkinsUniversityPress. GoogleScholar Hayashi,M.J.,Kantele,M.,Walsh,V.,Carlson,S.,andKanai,R.(2014).Dissociableneuroanatomicalcorrelatesofsubsecondandsuprasecondtimeperception.J.Cogn.Neurosci.26,1685–1693.doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00580 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hazlett,R.L.,andHoehn-Saric,R.(2000).Effectsofperceivedphysicalattractivenessonfemales’facialdisplaysandaffect.Evol.Hum.Behav.21,49–57.doi:10.1016/s1090-5138(99)00036-7 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar He,Y.,andZhang,M.(2004).Psychometricinvestigationofliebowitzsocialanxietyscale.J.Diagn.ConceptsPract.3,89–93. GoogleScholar Iaria,G.,Fox,C.J.,Waite,C.T.,Aharon,I.,andBarton,J.J.S.(2008).Thecontributionofthefusiformgyrusandsuperiortemporalsulcusinprocessingfacialattractiveness:neuropsychologicalandneuroimagingevidence.Neuroscience155,409–422.doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.05.046 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Jusyte,A.,Schneidt,A.,andSchönenberg,M.(2015).Temporalestimationofthreateningstimuliinsocialanxietydisorder:Investigationoftheeffectsofstateanxietyandfearfulness.J.Behav.Ther.Exp.Psychiatry47,25–33.doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.11.006 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kou,H.,Yanhua,S.U.,Zhang,Y.,Kong,F.,Yuanyan,H.U.,Wang,Y.,etal.(2013).Influentialfactorsoffacialattractiveness:theobserverhypothesis.Adv.Psychol.Sci.21,2144–2153.doi:10.3724/sp.j.1042.2013.02144 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lake,J.I.,LaBar,K.S.,andMeck,W.H.(2016).Emotionalmodulationofintervaltimingandtimeperception.Neurosci.Biobehav.Rev.64,403–420.doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.03.003 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lewis,P.A.,andMiall,R.C.(2006).Rememberingthetime:acontinuousclock.TrendsCogn.Sci.10,401–406.doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.07.006 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Li,J.,Oksama,L.,andHyönä,J.(2016).Howfacialattractivenessaffectssustainedattention.Scand.J.Psychol.57,383–392.doi:10.1111/sjop.12304 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Liang,X.,Zebrowitz,L.A.,andZhang,Y.(2010).Neuralactivationinthe“rewardcircuit”showsanonlinearresponsetofacialattractiveness.Soc.Neurosci.5,320–334.doi:10.1080/17470911003619916 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Liu,C.H.,andChen,W.(2012).Beautyisbetterpursued:effectsofattractivenessinmultiple-facetracking.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.65,553–564.doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.624186 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Macar,F.,Grondin,S.,andCasini,L.(1994).Controlledattentionsharinginfluencestimeestimation.Mem.Cognit.22,673–686.doi:10.3758/bf03209252 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Maner,J.K.,Kenrick,D.T.,Becker,D.V.,Delton,A.W.,Hofer,B.,Wilbur,C.J.,etal.(2003).Sexuallyselectivecognition:beautycapturesthemindofthebeholder.J.Pers.Soc.Psychol.85:1107.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.6.1107 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Mattes,S.,andUlrich,R.(1998).Directedattentionprolongstheperceiveddurationofabriefstimulus.Percept.Psychophys.60,1305–1317.doi:10.3758/bf03207993 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Matthews,A.R.,He,O.H.,Buhusi,M.,andBuhusi,C.V.(2012).Dissociationoftheroleoftheprelimbiccortexinintervaltimingandresourceallocation:beneficialeffectofnorepinephrineanddopaminereuptakeinhibitornomifensineonanxiety-inducingdistraction.Front.Integr.Neurosci.6:111.doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00111 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Mella,N.,Conty,L.,andPouthas,V.(2011).Theroleofphysiologicalarousalintimeperception:psychophysiologicalevidencefromanemotionregulationparadigm.BrainCogn.75,182–187.doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2010.11.012 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Mioni,G.,Stablum,F.,Prunetti,E.,andGrondin,S.(2016).Timeperceptioninanxiousanddepressedpatients:acomparisonbetweentimereproductionandtimeproductiontasks.J.Affect.Disord.196,154–163.doi:10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.047 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Murai,Y.,andYotsumoto,Y.(2016).Timescale-andsensorymodality-dependencyofthecentraltendencyoftimeperception.PLoSOne11:e0158921.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0158921 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ogden,R.S.(2013).Theeffectoffacialattractivenessontemporalperception.Cogn.Emot.27,1292–1304.doi:10.1080/02699931.2013.769426 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ogden,R.S.,Wearden,J.H.,andMontgomery,C.(2014).Thedifferentialcontributionofexecutivefunctionstotemporalgeneralisation,reproductionandverbalestimation.ActaPsychol.152,84–94.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.07.014 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Paulmann,S.,Bleichner,M.,andKotz,S.A.E.(2013).Valence,arousal,andtaskeffectsinemotionalprosodyprocessing.Front.Psychol.4:345.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00345 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Peskin,M.,andNewell,F.N.(2004).Familiaritybreedsattraction:effectsofexposureontheattractivenessoftypicalanddistinctivefaces.Perception33,147–157.doi:10.1068/p5028 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Piovesan,A.,Mirams,L.,Poole,H.,Moore,D.,andOgden,R.(2018).Therelationshipbetweenpain-inducedautonomicarousalandperceivedduration.Emotion[Epubaheadofprint]doi:10.1037/emo0000512 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pouthas,V.,George,N.,Poline,J.B.,Pfeuty,M.,Vandemoorteele,P.F.,Hugueville,L.,etal.(2005).Neuralnetworkinvolvedintimeperception:anfMRIstudycomparinglongandshortintervalestimation.Hum.BrainMapp.25,433–441.doi:10.1002/hbm.20126 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Rammsayer,T.H.,andVerner,M.(2014).Theeffectofnontemporalstimulussizeonperceiveddurationasassessedbythemethodofreproduction.J.Vis.14:17.doi:10.1167/14.5.17 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Rattat,A.C.,andDroit-Volet,S.(2012).Whatisthebestandeasiestmethodofpreventingcountingindifferenttemporaltasks?Behav.Res.Methods44,67–80.doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0135-3 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Samson,L.,andJanssen,E.(2014).Sexualandaffectiveresponsestosame-andopposite-sexstimuliinheterosexualandhomosexualmen:assessmentandmanipulationofvisualattention.Arch.Sex.Behav.43,917–930.doi:10.1007/s10508-013-0221-y PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Sui,J.,andLiu,C.H.(2009).Canbeautybeignored?Effectsoffacialattractivenessoncovertattention.Psychon.Bull.Rev.16,276–281.doi:10.3758/PBR.16.2.276 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tomas,J.,andŠpanić,A.M.(2016).Angryandbeautiful:theinteractiveeffectoffacialexpressionandattractivenessontimeperception.Psychol.Top.25,299–315. GoogleScholar Treisman,M.(1963).Temporaldiscriminationandtheindifferenceinterval.Implicationsforamodelofthe“internalclock”.Psychol.Monogr.77,1–31.doi:10.1037/h0093864 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tse,P.U.,Intriligator,J.,Rivest,J.,andCavanagh,P.(2004).Attentionandthesubjectiveexpansionoftime.Percept.Psychophys.66,1171–1189.doi:10.3758/BF03196844 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Valuch,C.,Pflüger,L.S.,Wallner,B.,Laeng,B.,andAnsorge,U.(2015).Usingeyetrackingtotestforindividualdifferencesinattentiontoattractivefaces.Front.Psychol.6:42.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00042 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar vanHedger,K.,Necka,E.A.,Barakzai,A.K.,andNorman,G.J.(2017).Theinfluenceofsocialstressontimeperceptionandpsychophysiologicalreactivity.Psychophysiology54,706–712.doi:10.1111/psyp.12836 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Werheid,K.,Schacht,A.,andSommer,W.(2007).Facialattractivenessmodulatesearlyandlateevent-relatedbrainpotentials.Biol.Psychol.76,100–108.doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2007.06.008 PubMedAbstract|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Xu,H.,Niu,D.,andLi,Q.(2016).Facialattractivenessandmatevalue:anevolutionarypsychologyperspective.Adv.Psychol.Sci.24:1130.doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2016.01130 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Zakay,D.,andBlock,R.A.(1997).Temporalcognition.Curr.Dir.Psychol.Sci.6,12–16.doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep11512604 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Zhang,Y.,Kong,F.,Guo,Y.,Ren,J.,andChen,H.(2012).Explicitmemoryorimplicitmemory:anERPstudyonmemorybiastowardfemalefacialattractiveness.ActaSci.Nat.Univ.Pekin.48,160–168. GoogleScholar Keywords:timeperception,facialattractiveness,genderdifference,estheticstandards,temporalreproductiontask Citation:TianY,LiL,YinHandHuangX(2019)GenderDifferencesintheEffectofFacialAttractivenessonPerceptionofTime.Front.Psychol.10:1292.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01292 Received:29November2018;Accepted:16May2019;Published:04June2019. Editedby: KielanYarrow,City,UniversityofLondon,UnitedKingdom Reviewedby: RuthSarahOgden,LiverpoolJohnMooresUniversity,UnitedKingdom YukiMurai,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley,UnitedStates Copyright©2019Tian,Li,YinandHuang.Thisisanopen-accessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(CCBY).Theuse,distributionorreproductioninotherforumsispermitted,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)andthecopyrightowner(s)arecreditedandthattheoriginalpublicationinthisjournaliscited,inaccordancewithacceptedacademicpractice.Nouse,distributionorreproductionispermittedwhichdoesnotcomplywiththeseterms. *Correspondence:XitingHuang,[email protected] COMMENTARY ORIGINALARTICLE Peoplealsolookedat SuggestaResearchTopic>