Association Between Physical Appearance & Personality

In addition to the superficial, nonverbal cue of body build, or "somatype," we also present a range of less apparent traits and behaviors which are less clearly defined by anatomy. Even so, we will see that these behaviors are sex-specific, to the extent that males and females interact according to different nonverbal agendas. These male and female differences in interaction appear to originate both in culture and physiology, although an interaction of gender and environment is the most likely hypothesis.

A review of the current literature shows that differences in gender and physical appearance are the two most important variables influencing nonverbal communication. What physical and character traits do we value in men? What female attributes are most desirable? Do we always strive for the best looking partner?

Generally, the sexes are attracted to one another on the basis of what Walster and her colleagues called the "matching hypothesis" (cited in Knapp, 1989, p. 159). The matching hypothesis argues that we may be attracted to only the best-looking partners, but we will accept someone at least as good looking as we are. In other words, we ar

. . .
ysical standards of beauty change to suit popular expectation, and thus, taste. What about non-physical traits associated with the somatypes? According to Knapp (1989), the mesomorph is perceived as being stronger, more masculine, better-looking, more adventurous, younger, taller, more mature in behavior, and more self-reliant than the ectomorph, who is considered to be stubborn, suspicious of others, tense, and pessimistic. Endomorphs were seen as warm-hearted and sympathetic (p. 166). Empathy for endomorphs may be natural, but sympathy does not make for a stimulating date. Knapp (1989) goes on to describe the effects of hair length, clothing, and artifacts (beauty aids), on nonverbal communication. These attributes are less important than somatype for the obvious reason that we can control them. We will return to these controllable aspects of appearance after we consider some of the more unconscious ways in which males and females nonverbally communicate. In a chapter called "The Look of Power," Ellyson (cited in Ridgeway, 1992) examines the relationships among social power, gender, and human nonverbal power displays, particularly involving visual behavior (p. 50). He asserts that women, compared to men, smile more freq
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Nancy Henley's, Ellyson Macoby's, Elaine Hatfield, According Knapp, , Power Ellyson, Sports Illustrated, nonverbal communication, social power, American Psychologist, epstein 1988, physical attractiveness, knapp 1989, schellenberg 1993, visual dominance, physical appearance, macoby 1990, matching hypothesis, Knapp Mark, Schellenberg James, proportion spent looking, ellyson cited ridgeway, 218 epstein 1988, according knapp 1989, cited ridgeway 1992,
Approximate Word count = 2181
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Association Between Physical Appearance & Personality