Performance Stereotypes as a Function of Men's Facial Formidability in the Context of Intergroup Conflict

Ascriptions of men's physical prowess track formidability inferences, which frequently occur through the evaluations of men's facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR). Within these ascriptions could include downstream inferences of their coalitional utility for intergroup conflict, which could manifest in modern-day contexts as expectations for men's optimal roles in military settings. Nonetheless, despite these potential advantages, formidability may provide perceivers the basis of inferred limitations in coalitional settings, namely their intelligence. The current research tasked perceivers to evaluate the effectiveness of men in various defense-related roles as a function of their fWHR. Perceivers expected high-fWHR men to be more effective in combat than in intel roles (Study 1). The perceptions of their physical advantages persisted with concomitant knowledge of their role in combat, whereas their perceived disadvantage in intel roles was mitigated (Study 2). Low-fWHR men were further perceived as more desirable as codebreakers (Study 3). The results suggest that inferences about men's mental abilities are more readily influenced by conflicting information than those related to formidability, thereby clarifying the pervasiveness of the latter in shaping stereotypes of men's physical abilities.