With regard to digital morphing methods, a significant majority of faces in both samples elicited directional preferences for either masculine or feminine versions, even though there was no relationship between "natural" morphological masculinity and attractiveness in either set of photos.
In two independent samples, geometric morphometric analysis of the configuration of a large number of facial landmarks was used to generate an objective measure of natural variation in morphological masculinity, and the extent to which it predicted attractiveness was assessed.
Morphological masculinity appears to influence perceived dominance (Perrett et al. 1998; Swaddle and Reierson 2002; Boothroyd et al. 2007), which, in turn, predicts future attainment of rank in certain environments (Mueller and Mazur 1996).
Morphological masculinity was calculated in the same manner as sample 1, using a set of 150 faces (75 male, 75 female) from the same population, and with discriminant function scores again being used as an index of facial masculinity (with high scores indicating a more masculine facial structure; Fig. 1 a) for examples).
These findings suggest that facial morphological masculinity may contribute less to men's attractiveness than previously assumed.
The present study investigated morphological priming in children and evaluated the correlation between morphological priming and morphological awareness scores.
To our knowledge, however, the relation between morphological awareness and morphological priming has never been investigated.
The NIH funded research explores interactions between morphological and physiological changes in the aging primate cortex.
No correlations between morphological awareness scores and morphological priming effects were found.
This seeming paradox between hyper masculinity and caring masculinities appears to be embedded within military culture, perhaps reflecting the flexibility and ambiguity inherent in constructions of hegemonic masculinity.
