Table 1.
Sample Information.
Table 2.
Zero-Order Matrix.
Fig 1.
This bar graph shows the increased accuracy of the different perceived competence variables when controlling for perceived attractiveness. The same pattern emerges when controlling for the additional variables of sex and age of face.
Fig 2.
Composite images of percieved consientiousness.
The images presented reflect the top and bottom 25% of faces percieved as most (left) and least (right) conscientious. The attractiveness halo would suggest that faces percieved as most conscientious (left) would be more attractive than the faces rated as least conscientious (right).
Fig 3.
This figure shows the noise in perceived conscientiousness (the overlap between perceived attractiveness and perceived conscientiousness) and how by suppressing this noise results in an improved predictor of actual academic performance (greater overlap between the remaining perceived conscientiousness and actual academic performance).