Surprising insights from the social sciences
Demoting prizewinners, the magic of touching, and the case for stubble.
NOTE TO BACHELORS: put down that razor before you go out this weekend. Researchers in England used a software program to design and morph three male faces - rated equally attractive in clean-shaven form by a group of women - with five levels of facial hair, up to a full beard. This set of 15 faces was then evaluated in random order by another group of women. In line with previous research, perceptions of masculinity, dominance, aggression, maturity, and age all increased in proportion to facial hair. However, attractiveness was highest for light-stubble faces and lowest for clean-shaven and fully bearded faces. The authors note that this result could be due to contemporary fashion, the particular age preferences of the (university) women in the study, or stubble signaling a happy middle ground of masculinity.
Neave, N. and Shields, K., "The Effects of Facial Hair Manipulation on Female Perceptions of Attractiveness, Masculinity, and Dominance in Male Faces," Personality and Individual Differences (October 2008).
IF YOU'VE BEEN wondering why politicians are always reaching into crowds, shaking hands, throwing arms around shoulders, or giving hugs, now you have a scientific answer. A team of researchers found that people who had been touched were more generous in responding to someone else's generosity. Specifically, volunteers at UCLA were randomly assigned to be massaged or just wait in a room for 15 minutes and then play an anonymous, one-shot, money-giving game via computer. Those who were massaged returned 38 percent of the money that was given to them, compared with 11 percent for those who were not massaged. The researchers also drew blood from each person before and after the experiment to see if physiological changes - namely in the level of the hormone oxytocin, which is known to influence bonding behavior - could explain the effect. There was an increase in oxytocin only for those people who were massaged and then played the game, suggesting that oxytocin might be responsible for the extra generosity. Women produced more oxytocin and returned more money after being massaged than men.
Morhenn, V. et al., "Monetary Sacrifice Among Strangers is Mediated by Endogenous Oxytocin Release after Physical Contact," Evolution and Human Behavior (forthcoming).
. . .
ONE OF THE hottest issues in national politics is judicial appointments, given that the judiciary has the power to act against, or in place of, the will of the legislative or executive branches. While previous research has shown that judges are not immune to ideological voting, two law professors decided to dig deeper and examine how judges choose which judges to cite in their opinions. The professors examined the thousands of opinions written in 1998 and 1999 by judges in the federal appeals courts. The analysis looked at which judges were cited outside a judge's own circuit - something that is entirely discretionary, and not constrained by precedent - allowing for a clearer view of bias. The professors found that the pattern of citations did appear to be influenced by political affiliation, especially in cases on controversial topics like civil rights or capital punishment.
Choi, S. and Gulati, M., "Bias in Judicial Citations: A Window into the Behavior of Judges?" Journal of Legal Studies (January 2008).
. . .
IN SPORTS, FREE agency has allowed players, especially star players, to earn dramatically higher salaries. This has been good for players, but it also means that team owners have to be smarter in their hiring practices. But are they? An economist examined performance and salary data for all hitters in Major League Baseball who signed free-agent contracts between 1985 and 2004. He found that many teams systematically over-estimated the predictive value of a player's performance in the most recent season, relative to earlier seasons, in setting salary levels. This kind of error was especially acute for older players, and it was generally committed by teams who underperformed relative to their payroll (e.g., Tampa Bay vis-a-vis overperformers like Oakland).
Healy, A., "Do Firms Have Short Memories? Evidence from Major League Baseball," Journal of Sports Economics (August 2008).
. . .
A RIGOROUS NEW study by two economists suggests that CEOs let success go to their heads just like anyone else, and that, without strict oversight, a company's stakeholders get taken for a ride. The authors compiled a list of CEOs who won performance awards from major national business publications between 1975 and 2002. Compared with companies run by similar CEOs who didn't happen to get an award, both the stock and operating performance of companies run by award-winning CEOs were worse over the next three years. At the same time, award-winning CEOs were paid increasingly more - in stock and options - relative to similar CEOs. Award-winning CEOs were more likely to pursue outside activities like writing books, joining other corporate boards, and lowering their golf handicap. Award-winning CEOs were also more likely to manipulate their companies' earnings, and more likely to report negative earnings after five years. Does this suggest, perhaps, that a CEO who wins an award should be immediately demoted?
Malmendier, U. and Tate, G., "Superstar CEOs," National Bureau of Economic Research (June 2008).
Kevin Lewis is an Ideas columnist. He can be reached at kevin.lewis.ideas@gmail.com.
