MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Steven Almaraz Candidate for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy ______________________________________ Director Kurt Hugenberg ______________________________________ Reader Allen McConnell ______________________________________ Reader Jonathan Kunstman ______________________________________ Graduate School Representative Monica Schneider ABSTRACT APPARENT SOCIOSEXUAL ORIENTATION: FACIAL CORRELATES AND CONSEQUENCES OF WOMEN’S UNRESTRICTED APPEARANCE by Steven M. Almaraz People make quick work of forming a variety of impressions of one another based on minimal information. Recent work has shown that people are able to make judgments of others’ Apparent Sociosexual Orientation (ASO) – an estimation of how interested another person is in uncommitted sexual activity – based on facial information alone. In the present work, I used three studies to expand the understanding of this poorly understood facial judgment by investigating the dimensionality of ASO (Study 1), the facial predictors of ASO (Study 2), and the consequences of these ASO judgments on men’s hostility and benevolence towards women (Study 3). In Study 1, I showed that men’s judgments of women’s Apparent Sociosexual Orientation were organized into judgments of women’s appearance of unrestricted attitudes and desires (Intrapersonal ASO) and their appearance of unrestricted behaviors (Behavioral ASO). Study 2 revealed that more attractive and more dominant appearing women were perceived as more sexually unrestricted. In Study 3, I found that women who appeared to engage in more unrestricted behavior were subjected to increased benevolent sexism, though this effect was primarily driven by unrestricted appearing women’s attractiveness. However, women who appeared to have sexually unrestricted attitudes and desires were subjected to increased hostility, even when controlling for the effects of the facial correlates found in Study 2. Taken together, this work sheds light on how men make judgments of women’s Apparent Sociosexual Orientation and reveals the effects these judgments have on which women are subjected to hostile and benevolent sexism. APPARENT SOCIOSEXUAL ORIENTATION: FACIAL CORRELATES AND CONSEQUENCES OF WOMEN’S UNRESTRICTED APPEARANCE A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of Miami University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Psychology by Steven M. Almaraz The Graduate School Miami University Oxford, Ohio 2019 Dissertation Director: Kurt Hugenberg © Steven Michael Almaraz 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables ............................................................................................................. v List of Figures .......................................................................................................... vi Dedication ............................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgments ................................................................................................. viii Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 Individual Sociosexual Orientation ...................................................................... 3 Apparent Sociosexual Orientation ....................................................................... 6 Downstream Implications of ASO for Social Judgment: The Case of Ambivalent Sexism ............................................................................................. 9 Present Work ...................................................................................................... 11 Study 1: Judgments of Women’s Sociosexuality .................................................... 12 Preliminary Study 1 ............................................................................................ 15 Method ................................................................................................................ 15 Results ................................................................................................................ 18 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 20 Study 2: Predicting Apparent Sociosexuality Judgments from Targets’ Facial Cues ......................................................................................................................... 21 Preliminary Study 2 ............................................................................................ 22 Method ................................................................................................................ 24 Results ................................................................................................................ 24 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 27 Study 3: Are Hostile and Benevolent Sexism Differentially Targeted at Women Varying in Apparent Sociosexual Orientation? ......................................... 28 Preliminary Study 3 ............................................................................................ 31 Method ................................................................................................................ 31 iii Results ................................................................................................................ 33 Discussion .......................................................................................................... 36 General Discussion .................................................................................................. 36 Moving Forward ................................................................................................. 42 Limitations and Future Directions ...................................................................... 44 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 47 References ............................................................................................................... 48 Tables ....................................................................................................................... 57 Figures ..................................................................................................................... 61 Appendix A – Preliminary Study 1 ......................................................................... 63 Appendix B – Apparent Sociosexual Orientation Inventory ................................... 67 Appendix C – Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory ..................................... 69 Appendix D – Preliminary Study 2 ......................................................................... 71 Appendix E – Preliminary Study 3 .......................................................................... 74 Appendix F – Individual Ambivalent Sexism Inventory ......................................... 77 Appendix G – ASI-I Item 7 Results ........................................................................ 78 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1 – Study 1 Factor Loadings for the ASOI .................................................... 57 Table 2 – Study 2 Partial Correlations of ASO Judgments ..................................... 58 Table 3 – Study 3 Factor Loadings for the ASI-I .................................................... 59 Table 4 – Study 3 Results of Multiple Regression Analyses .................................. 60 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 – Example Stimuli ..................................................................................... 61 Figure 2 – Apparent Behavioral Unrestrictedness in Study 2 ................................. 62 vi DEDICATION To Jaclyn, For picking me up when I’m down For never giving me an inch For helping me to think differently For challenging me to always be better For weathering the storm For pushing me when I need to be pushed For listening when I need an ear I can’t imagine what this journey would have been like if I had done it alone, but I’m glad I’ll never find out This is your accomplishment too In short, you a’ight vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is the culmination of years of hard work by both myself and countless others who have been with me along the way. First, I’d like to thank my advisor Kurt Hugenberg. Kurt, you have been an incredible advisor. You always seem to know the perfect thing to say, both in research conversations and in life. These two components of your mentorship –academic support and social support – have helped transform me into the scientist and the person that I am today. Thank you. So many other professors, mentors, and colleagues are worthy of acknowledgment. Without Kerri Johnson and D.J. Lick guiding me into the world of Social Psychology at UCLA, I may never have even begun this journey. At Miami, I have been advised and taught by so many amazing professors in the social psychology area, but I would especially like to thank Jonathan Kunstman, Allen McConnell, and Heather Claypool, each of whom served on multiple committees for me in the last five years. And to my amazing classmates and colleagues, Paige Lloyd, Jason Deska, Kathleen Stanko, Taylor Tuscherer, and Pirita See, your mentorship and friendship was critical to my development. Thank you all for your