Advertisement

Sex Roles

, Volume 79, Issue 7–8, pp 449–463 | Cite as

Beauty Is in the Eye of the Beer Holder: An Initial Investigation of the Effects of Alcohol, Attractiveness, Warmth, and Competence on the Objectifying Gaze in Men

  • Abigail R. Riemer
  • Michelle Haikalis
  • Molly R. Franz
  • Michael D. Dodd
  • David DiLillo
  • Sarah J. Gervais
Original Article

Abstract

Despite literature revealing the adverse consequences of objectifying gazes for women, little work has empirically examined origins of objectifying gazes by perceivers. Integrating alcohol myopia and objectification theories, we examined the effects of alcohol as well as perceived female attractiveness, warmth, and competence on objectifying gazes. Specifically, male undergraduates (n = 49) from a large U.S. Midwestern university were administered either an alcoholic or placebo beverage. After consumption, participants were asked to focus on the appearance or personality (counterbalanced) of pictured women who were previously rated as high, average, or low in attractiveness, warmth, and competence. Replicating previous work, appearance focus increased objectifying gazes as measured by decreased visual dwell time on women’s faces and increased dwell time on women’s bodies. Additionally, alcohol increased objectifying gazes. Whereas greater perceived attractiveness increased objectifying gazes, more perceived warmth and perceived competence decreased objectifying gazes. Furthermore, the effects of warmth and competence perceptions on objectifying gazes were moderated by alcohol condition; intoxicated participants objectified women low in warmth and competence to a greater extent than did sober participants. Implications for understanding men’s objectifying perceptions of women are addressed, shedding light on potential interventions for clinicians and policymakers to reduce alcohol-involved objectification and related sexual aggression.

Keywords

Objectification Myopia Eye fixation Alcohol intoxication Physical attractiveness Competence Impression formation Humanization 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by a grant to the fifth and sixth authors by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Office of Research and Economic Development. We would also like to thank Gwenith Nuss and Mark Mills for their assistance with developing the stimuli and procedure as well as our undergraduate research assistants, Mandy Boothe, Ellen Dudley, Marco Gullickson, Autumn Kramer, Tran Le, Lindsay Undeland, Elise Polly, whom were essential in the data collection process.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

All of the research reported in the manuscript complies with APA ethical standards in the treatment of human participants. The Institutional Review Board of the University at which this study was conducted approved of the study and informed consent procedures.

Supplementary material

11199_2017_876_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.9 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1933 kb)

References

  1. Abbey, A., Zawacki, T., & McAuslan, P. (2000). Alcohol’s effects on sexual perception. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 61, 688–697.  10.15288/jsa.2000.61.688.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  3. Archer, D., Iritani, B., Kimes, D. D., & Barrios, M. (1983). Face-ism: Five studies of sex differences in facial prominence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 725–735.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.4.725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartky, S. L. (1990). Femininity and domination: Studies in the phenomenology of oppression. New-York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Bernard, P., Gervais, S. J., Allen, J., Campomizzi, S., & Klein, O. (2012). Integrating sexual objectification with object versus person recognition: The sexualized-body-inversion hypothesis. Psychological Science, 23, 469–471.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611434748.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernard, P., Gervais, S., Allen, J., Delmee, A., & Klein, O. (2015). From sex objects to human beings: Masking sexual body parts and humanization as moderators to women’s objectification. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315580125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bodenhausen, G. V., Macrae, C. N., & Garst, J. (1997). Stereotypes in thought and deed: Social-cognitive origins of intergroup discrimination. In C. Sedikides, J. Schopler, & C. A. Insko (Eds.), Intergroup cognition and intergroup behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Bradlyn, A., & Young, L. (1983). Parameters influencing the effectiveness of the balanced placebo design in alcohol research. In L. A. Pohorecky & J. Brick (Eds.), Stress and alcohol use (pp. 87–103). New York: Elsevier Biomedical.Google Scholar
  9. Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate selection: Evolutionary hypothesis tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Calogero, R. M., Tantleff-Dunn, S., & Thompson, J. K. (Eds.). (2011). Self-objectification in women: Causes, consequences, and counteractions. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.  https://doi.org/10.1037/12304-000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Calogero, R. M., & Tylka, T. L. (2014). Sanctioning resistance to sexual objectification: An integrative system justification perspective. Journal of Social Issues, 70, 763–778.  https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. Cowan, N. (2005). Working memory capacity. New York: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2004). When professionals become mothers, warmth doesn’t cut the ice. Journal of Social Issues, 60, 701–718.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-4537.2004.00381.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eckes, T. (2002). Paternalistic and envious gender stereotypes: Testing predictions from the stereotype content model. Sex Roles, 47, 99–114.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021020920715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekman, P. (1993). Facial expression and emotion. American Psychologist, 48, 384–392.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.4.384.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114, 864–886.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Fairchild, K., & Rudman, L. A. (2008). Everyday stranger harassment and women’s objectification. Social Justice Research, 21, 338–357.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-008-0073-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Farris, C., Treat, T. A., Viken, R. J., & McFall, R. M. (2008). Sexual coercion and the misperception of sexual interest. Clinical Psychology Review, 28, 48–66.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.03.002.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fillmore, M. T., & Vogel-Sprott, M. (1998). Behavioral impairment under alcohol: Cognitive and pharmacokinetic factors. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 22, 1476–1482.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-0277.1998.tb03938.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fiske, S. T. (2013). Varieties of (de)humanization: Divided by competition and status. In S. J. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (de)humanization: 60th Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 53–71). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fiske, S. T., & Neuberg, S. L. (1990). A continuum of impression formation, from category-based to individuating processes: Influences of information and motivation on attention and interpretation. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 1–74.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Franz, M. R., Haikalis, M., Riemer, A. R., Parrott, D. J., Gervais, S. J., & DiLillo, D. (2017). Further validation of a laboratory analog sexual aggression task: Associations with novel risk factors for sexual violence. Violence and Victims (in press).Google Scholar
  25. Fredrickson, B. L., & Roberts, T.-A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21, 173–206.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gallagher, K. E., Hudepohl, A. D., & Parrott, D. J. (2010). Power of being present: The role of mindfulness on the relation between men’s alcohol use and sexual aggression toward intimate partners. Aggressive Behavior, 36, 405–413.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20351.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Gervais, S. J., Davidson, M. M., Styck, K., Canivez, G., & DiLillo, D. (2017). The development and psychometric properties of the interpersonal sexual objectification scale-perpetration version. Psychology of Violence.  https://doi.org/10.1037/vio0000148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gervais, S. J., DiLillo, D., & McChargue, D. (2014). Understanding the link between men’s alcohol use and sexual violence perpetration: The mediating role of sexual objectification. Psychology of Violence, 4, 156–169.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Gervais, S. J., Holland, A. M., & Dodd, M. D. (2013). My eyes are up here: The nature of the objectifying gaze toward women. Sex Roles, 69, 557–570.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-013-0316-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Giancola, P. R. (2002). Irritability, acute alcohol consumption and aggressive behavior in men and women. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 68, 263–274.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-8716(02)00221-1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Giancola, P. R. (2004). Difficult temperament, acute alcohol intoxication, and aggressive behavior. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 74, 135–145.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2003.11.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Giancola, P. R., Josephs, R. A., Dewall, C. N., & Gunn, R. L. (2009a). Applying the attention-allocation model to the explanation of alcohol-related aggression: Implications for prevention. Substance Use & Misuse, 44, 1263–1279.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10826080902960049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Giancola, P. R., Levinson, C. A., Corman, M. D., Godlaski, A. J., Morris, D. H., Phillips, J. P., et al. (2009b). Men and women, alcohol and aggression. Experimental and Clinical Psychpharmacology, 17, 154–164.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315, 619.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134475.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Gueguen, N. (2007). Women’s bust size and men’s courtship solicitation. Body Image, 4, 386–390.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bodyim.2007.06.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Hall, J. A., Coats, E. J., & Smith LeBeau, L. (2005). Nonverbal behavior and the vertical dimension of social relations: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 898–924.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.898.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Harris, L. T., & Fiske, S. T. (2006). Dehumanizing the lowest of the low: Neuro-imaging responses to extreme outgroups. Psychological Science, 17, 847–853.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01793.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Harris, L. T., & Fiske, S. T. (2009). Social neuroscience evidence for dehumanized perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 20, 192–231.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280902954988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 252–264.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Haslam, N., Bain, P., Bastian, B., Douge, L., & Lee, M. (2005). More human than you: Attributing humanness to self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 937–950.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.937.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Haslam, N., Loughnan, S., Kashima, Y., & Bain, P. (2008). Attributing and denying humanness to others. European Review of Social Psychology, 19, 55–85.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280801981645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Heflick, N. A., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2009). Objectifying Sarah Palin: Evidence that objectification causes women to be perceived as less competent and less fully human. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 598–601.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Heflick, N. A., & Goldenberg, J. L. (2011). Sarah Palin, a nation object(ifie)s: The role of appearance focus in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Sex Roles, 65, 149–155.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-010-9901-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Heflick, N. A., Goldenberg, J. L., Cooper, D. P., & Puvia, E. (2011). From women to objects: Appearance focus, target gender, and perceptions of warmth, morality and competence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 572–581.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2010.12.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Henderson, J. M. (2003). Human gaze control during real-world scene perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 498–504.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Henderson, J. M., Williams, C. C., Castelhano, M. S., & Falk, R. J. (2003). Eye movements and picture processing during recognition. Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 725–734.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hewig, J., Trippe, R. H., Hecht, H., Straube, T., & Miltner, W. H. R. (2008). Gender differences for specific body regions when looking at men and women. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 32, 67–78.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-007-0043-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hoffman, W., Forster, G., Stroebe, W., & Wiers, R. W. (2011). The great disinhibitor: Alcohol, food cues, and eating behavior. In V. R. Preedy, R. R. Watson, & C. R. Martin (Eds.), Handbook of behavior, food and nutrition (pp. 2977–2991). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hull, J. G., & Bond, C. F. (1986). Social and behavioral consequences of alcohol consumption and expectancy: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 347–360.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.347.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Jussim, L. (2012). Social perception and social reality: Why accuracy dominates bias and self-fulfilling prophecy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Kaschak, E. (1992). Engendered lives: A new psychology of women’s experience. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  53. Kenrick, D. T., & Gutierres, S. E. (1980). Effect and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 131–140.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kozee, H. B., Tylka, T. L., Augustus-Horvath, A., & Denchik, A. (2007). Development and psychometric evaluation of the interpersonal sexual objectification scale. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 176–189.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2007.00351.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lewis, D. M. G., Russell, E. M., Al-Shawaf, L., & Buss, D. (2016). Lumbar curvature: A previously undiscovered standard of attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 345–350.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2015.01.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Loughnan, S., Haslam, N., Murnane, T., Vaes, J., Reynolds, C., & Suitner, C. (2010). Objectification leads to depersonalization: The denial of mind and moral concern to objectified others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 709–717.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lykins, A. D., Meana, M., & Strauss, G. P. (2008). Sex differences in visual attention to erotic and non-erotic stimuli. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 219–228.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-007-9208-x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Marlowe, F., & Westman, A. (2001). Preferred waist-to-hip ratio and ecology. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 481–489.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00039-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Martin, C. S., Earleywine, M., Finn, P. R., & Young, R. D. (1990). Some boundary conditions for effective use of alcohol placebos. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 51, 500–505.  10.15288/jsa.1990.51.500.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Martin, C. S., & Sayette, M. A. (1993). Experimental design in alcohol administration research: Limitations and alternatives in the manipulation of dosage-set. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 54, 750–761.  10.15288/jsa.1993.54.750.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215–238.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.3.215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.101.2.343.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Miller, G. F. (1988). How mate choice shaped human nature: A review of sexual selection and human evolution. In C. Crawford & D. Krebs (Eds.), Evolution and human behavior: Ideas, issues, and applications (pp. 87–93). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  64. Moradi, B., & Huang, Y. P. (2008). Objectification theory and psychology of women: A decade of advances and future directions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 32, 377–398.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.2008.00452.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Morton, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition. Psychological Review, 98, 164–181.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.164.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema. Screen, 16, 6–18.  https://doi.org/10.1093/screen/16.3.6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Noll, S. M., & Fredrickson, B. L. (1998). A mediational model linking self-objectification, body shame, and disordered eating. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22, 623–636.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1998.tb00181.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nummenmaa, L., Hietanen, J. K., Santtila, P., & Hyönä, J. (2012). Gender and visibility of sexual cues influence eye movements while viewing faces and bodies. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 41, 1439–1451.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-012-9911-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Phillips, J. P., & Giancola, P. R. (2008). Experimentally induced anxiety attenuates alcohol-related aggression in men. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 16, 43–56.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1064-1297.16.1.43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Rudman, L. A., & Borgida, E. (1995). The afterglow of construct accessibility: The behavioral consequences of priming men to view women as sexual objects. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 493–517.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1995.1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Rudman, L. A., & Mescher, K. (2012). Of animals and objects: Men’s implicit dehumanization of women and likelihood of sexual aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 734–746.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212436401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Singh, D. (1993). Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: Role of waist-to-hip ratio. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 293–307.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.65.2.293.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 656–666.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.35.9.656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stangor, C., Lynch, L., Duan, C., & Glass, B. (1992). Categorization of individuals on the basis of multiple social features. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 207–218.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Steele, C. M., & Josephs, R. A. (1990). Alcohol myopia: Its prized and dangerous effects. American Psychologist, 45, 921–933.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.45.8.921.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Swim, J. K., Hyers, L. L., Cohen, L. L., & Ferguson, M. J. (2001). Everyday sexism: Evidence for its incidence, nature, and psychological impact from three daily diary studies. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 31–53.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Tassinary, L. G., & Hansen, K. A. (1998). A critical test of the waist-to-hip-ratio hypothesis of female physical attractiveness. Psychological Science, 9, 150–155.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Testa, M., Fillmore, M. T., Norris, J., Abbey, A., Curtin, J. J., Leonard, K. E., … Hayman, L. W. (2006). Understanding alcohol expectancy effects: Revisiting the placebo condition. Alcohol Clinical Experimental Research, 30, 339–248.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1530.0277.2006.00039.x.
  80. Tiggemann, M., & Williams, E. (2012). The role of self-objectification in disordered eating, depressed mood, and sexual functioning among women: A comprehensive test of objectification theory. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 36, 66–75.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684311420250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Vaes, J., Paladino, P., & Puvia, E. (2011). Are sexualized women complete human beings? Why men and women dehumanize sexually objectified women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 774–785.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Ven, T. V., & Beck, J. (2009). Getting drunk and hooking up: An exploratory study of the relationship between alcohol intoxication and causal coupling in a university sample. Sociological Spectrum, 29, 626–648.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02732170903051417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Watkins, L. E., DiLillo, D., & Maldonado, R. C. (2015). The interactive effects of emotion regulation and alcohol intoxication on lab-based intimate partner aggression. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 29, 653–663.  https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000074.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. Wenzlaff, F., Briken, P., & Dekker, A. (2015). Video-based eye tracking in sex research: A systematic literature review. The Journal of Sex Research, 0, 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1107524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wojciszke, B. (2005). Morality and competence in person-and self-perception. European Review of Social Psychology, 16, 155–188.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280500229619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zelazniewicz, A. M., & Pawlowski, B. (2011). Female breast size attractiveness for men as a function of sociosexual orientation (restricted vs. unrestricted). Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 1129–1135.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-011-9850-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abigail R. Riemer
    • 1
  • Michelle Haikalis
    • 1
  • Molly R. Franz
    • 1
  • Michael D. Dodd
    • 1
  • David DiLillo
    • 1
  • Sarah J. Gervais
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA

Personalised recommendations