The Deal, November 2011, documents a study in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin that has identified a disadvantage in being attractive in appearance. It found that being good looking was not an asset in job interviews when interviewed by someone of the same sex who sees a candidate as a threat. The authors found that attractive candidates were preferred over less attractive candidates only when interviewed by members of the opposite sex (which they said was true for both women and men).
But attractive candidates were at a disadvantage when interviewed by same-sex interviewers who viewed them as a threat in the workplace. There was no significant difference between how men and women judge candidates – instead, the key influence was the self-esteem level of interviewers. Therefore, the researchers found that male interviewers who see attractive males as a threat will select an unattractive male or an attractive female (the study did not state which one would be more favoured). Likewise, female interviewers who see attractive females as a threat will select an unattractive female or an attractive male. The solution is one for organizations: to avoid a bias toward appearance (attractive or unattractive) organizations should have an equal number of male and female selectors during job interviews.
Once you have a job, the amount you earn could depend on how attractive you are. Age and appearance-based discrimination was found to be a subconscious trait within the workplace. Research published in the Journal of Economic Psychology concluded that very attractive people earned 12% more than those of average appearance. A study from the University of Florida and the University of North Carolina in America found that tall people earn more than their shorter colleagues, on average. Dr. Raymond Hamden, a Clinical and Forensic Psychologist at the Human Relations Institute in Dubai, says that workplace stereotypes of attractive people are that they are more personable, approachable and successful - and therefore perform better.
Regarding our individual bias toward attractive people, researchers say it starts when we are young. Research from Exeter University in the United Kingdom showed that babies fixate on a beautiful face for longer than an average one, which they deem to be a trait within people at birth (innate) and not learned over time or susceptible to other people’s influence. As we grow older, researchers believe that we may not be conscious of what we are doing when we look at someone. Researchers think this has to do with the shape, symmetry, and proportion of a person’s face. Jared Alden, Psychologist at the German Neuroscience Centre in Dubai thinks people respond to attractiveness at mostly a non-verbal level – i.e. by how they look and not what they say, even though people often say “looks aren’t important” when it comes to people’s perception of others.
But, the researchers say that in reality (as opposed to psychological studies) it is not necessarily the very attractive that earn more (and they give Bill Clinton, Richard Branson, and Warren Buffet as examples of being neither tall nor particularly attractive). What about the famously unattractive but highly successful comedienne Phyllis Diller or comic film director Woody Allen? However, they question what part charisma, intelligence, determination, hard work and other non-visual characteristics play in the rise of someone’s earnings. Dr. Raymond Hamden adds that the three major factors that, when combined, influence income and financial gains are: (1) physical attractiveness; (2) intelligence; and (3) personality.
Others question what attractiveness really is – what defines a beautiful person? What place does inner beauty play over outer beauty? In other words, what effect does a pretty face but an ugly personality have in the workplace? And do the beautiful people really get the best relationships, the best jobs, and the best pay packet? Hamden says being evaluated on merits brings social, professional and psychological rewards – being judged on looks alone does not. Naturally there are individuals and organizations that focus on dedication, commitment, and experience when hiring staff and determining incomes, and not looks.
The psychologists, Hamden and Alden, add that being attractive has its drawbacks in the workplace because others place higher expectations on them when they may only have average capabilities. In the longer term, for the attractive people when under such high expectations, they may be more susceptible to anxiety, stress, depression, or burn-out. Besides, good looks may be temporary, are subject to interpretation, and are the obsession of the media. Therefore retaining a positive self-perception and being beautiful on the inside, the psychologists say, can be more influential than great hair or a pretty face.
In addition, the psychologists’ five top tips for attractiveness are: (1) smile; (2) be friendly; (3) have a confident posture - shoulders back, head up, etc. tend to catch people’s eye rather than shuffling or looking defeated; (4) maintain serene body language – instead of biting nails, fidgeting, shifting positions, or nervously playing with hair or equipment; and (5) speak positively – instead of constantly complaining, putting people down, or making negative comments. Basically, they say, looking good starts with looking confident.
Hamden and Alden say that if you want to make yourself more attractive (without cosmetic surgery), the focus should not only be on intelligence, dedication, commitment, and experience in the workplace, but also on being healthy, cooperative, productive, exuding confidence, and making the most of the assets you have.
Comments
Post a Comment