Lee et al. Female ☐Male 60 50 20 0 Masculinity Score Observer ratings of facial uctions on ho attractiveness and masculinity features that are considered to be sexually dimorphic in trait For this stud whe photograph on humans ere p the 1.mode masculinity rat to check whether facial ma ofemale rater scores calculated from landmark coordinates correlated correlated very highly with the averaged score from all raters (r=.94 for male raters and r=.92 for female rat so the l er c sed for all analy who were not involyed in identifving the facial land- eror than the separate scor for male and female marks)and asked them to rate all faces on attractiveness and facial masculinity.Ratings were given on 7-poin Interrater agreement was low for masculinity (intra D4 19a=.6 )Neverthe 4 Lee et al. Observer ratings of facial attractiveness and masculinity Observers also rated the photographs on a number of traits. For this study, we were primarily interested in the attractiveness ratings, but we also analyzed the facial masculinity ratings to check whether facial masculinity scores calculated from landmark coordinates correlated with subjective perceptions of facial masculinity. We presented the photos in a random order to 8 undergraduate research assistants (4 men and 4 women who were not involved in identifying the facial land￾marks) and asked them to rate all faces on attractiveness and facial masculinity. Ratings were given on 7-point scales (for attractiveness, 1 = low attractiveness, 7 = high attractiveness; for masculinity, 1 = very feminine, 7 = very masculine). We did not give raters instructions on how to judge attractiveness, but we did inform them of facial features that are considered to be sexually dimorphic in humans. Interrater agreement for attractiveness was moderate (intraclass correlation coefficient = .44, p < .001; α = .87). Averaged scores from male raters and from female raters correlated very highly with the averaged score from all raters (r = .94 for male raters and r = .92 for female rat￾ers), so the latter composite score was used for all analy￾ses because it contained substantially less measurement error than the separate scores for male and female raters. Interrater agreement was low for masculinity (intra￾class correlation coefficient = .19; α = .66). Nevertheless, there was still a significant (though modest) correlation 0 10 20 –4.00 –3.50 30 40 50 60 70 80 Frequency Masculinity Score Female Male –2.50 –2.00 –1.50 –1.00 1.00 2.00 –0.50 0.00 0.50 1.50 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 –3.00 Fig. 2. Frequency of objective facial masculinity scores from the discriminant-function analysis for males (M = .92, SD = .94) and females (M = −.80, SD = .97), before standard￾ization separately by sex. The purple portions of the bars represent overlapping distribu￾tions for males and females. Downloaded from pss.sagepub.com by Cai Xing on January 7, 2014