Pierced and Prejudiced

The effect of piercing location on perceived attractiveness by participants with and without piercings.

Tom Smejka, Jasmine Martin, Amy Taylor, Caleb Fok and Wakefield Carter

ABSTRACT

Studies indicate that attractiveness affects how people are perceived on other dimensions. Researchers have therefore investigated the controllable elements of body modifications and their implications on attractiveness. This study looked at the effect of piercing location on attractiveness ratings and the influence of the participants’ own piercings. Participants were shown photos of women with piercings in different locations (nose, upper lip and no piercing) and asked to give attractiveness ratings. The results showed participants rated the upper lip (Monroe) piercings as significantly less attractive. Monroe piercings may have been seen as deviant, and therefore evoked the lowest attractiveness ratings.

INTRODUCTION

Research suggests that those who are perceived as attractive receive benefits in everyday life such as higher salaries, increased employment and better loan terms (Hamermesh, 2011). Researchers, therefore, have tried to examine how controllable elements of appearance, such as possession of piercings, influence perception of individuals.

A recent survey suggested that one out of ten people in England have a non-ear piercing (Bone, Ncube, Nichols & Noah, 2008). The most common location other than the ear lobes was the nose (19%), whereas lip piercings only accounted for 4%. Swami, Stieger, Pietschnig, Voracek, Furnham and Tovée (2012) found that pierced models were given negative ratings on a five factor personality test, with pierced males receiving the lowest scores. Conversely, Martino (2008) revealed that pierced individuals were rated more creative, mysterious and artistic. Such results may imply that perception of piercing depends on participant’s personal experience and socialisation.

Studies have also investigated specific perceptions of job suitability. McElroy, Summers and Moore (2014) found that pierced models were rated as having negative characteristics (being socially unattractive and disagreeable), leading to them being rated as less suitable for employment. A study on nursing staff revealed nurses with tattoos and facial piercings were described as less professional, approachable and confident compared with non-pierced nurses (Westerfield, Stafford, Speroni & Daniel, 2012).

A common trend with these studies is a focus on the presence or number of piercings, but few have focused on piercing location. Seiter and Sandry (2003) asked participants to rate photos of males with no piercings, an earring or a nose piercing for employability and attractiveness. They found that the models nose piercings were given the lowest employability rating, but there was no effect on attractiveness.

The present study looked at effect of piercing location (none, nose stud or upper-left lip Monroe stud) on attractiveness whilst accounting for the participants’ own piercings. The hypothesis was that models with nose piercings would be rated as more attractive by participants with piercings, since previous research has found that one motivation for getting piercings is to appear more sexually attractive (Antoszewski, Sitek, Fijałkowska, Kasielska, & Kruk-Jeromin, 2009). Non-pierced participants were expected to show a preference for non-pierced models. However, due to its relative rareness, it was expected that the Monroe piercing would be rated as the least attractive by both groups.

METHOD

Participants – The participants were an opportunistic sample of 72 people recruited in Oxford city centre. They were aged between 18 and 25 (mean 19.9, SD 1.56) with equal numbers of each gender with a facial piercing and without.

Materials – Nine photos of female faces taken from an Oxford Brookes University database were manipulated to give three versions of each face: no piercing, nose piercing and Monroe piercing. The photos were divided into three sets of nine photos with each set containing three different faces per piercing location.

Procedure – Participants were asked to rate the attractiveness of one set of nine faces on a ten point Likert scale (1 = unattractive, 10 = attractive). They were told the experiment concerned gender differences in attractiveness ratings but the true aim of the study was revealed in a debrief. The photos were presented individually and each experiment lasted approximately two minutes.

RESULTS

The results from one face (with a slightly darker skin tone) appeared to be inconsistent, and were excluded from the analysis. A Shapiro-Wilk test showed that the distributions of ratings from pierced participants and ratings of nose piercings were negatively skewed. Therefore borderline significant results were treated with caution.

Table 1 shows that both groups rated faces with Monroe piercings as the least attractive. Pierced participants appeared to show a preference to the models with nose piercings.

A mixed two-way ANOVA found no significant difference between attractiveness ratings from pierced and non-pierced participants, F(1, 70) = 0.07, p = .798. There was, however, a significant main effect of location, F(2, 140) = 6.86, p = .001, η_p² = .089 (see Figure 1). Pairwise comparisons with a Bonferroni correction found that no piercings and nose piercings were rated the same but Monroe piercings were rated as less attractive than either of the other conditions (p ≤ .023). Finally, there was no significant interaction between participant group and piercing location, F(2, 140) = 1.53, p = .220.

DISCUSSION

The results revealed no differences between pierced and non-pierced participants in their ratings of attractiveness. However, both groups rated the faces with Monroe piercings as being less attractive than faces with nose studs or no piercings.

These findings have similarities with previous studies. Seiter and Sandry (2003) found no difference in attractiveness ratings of males with an earring or nose ring. However, as found by Bone et al. (2008), lip piercings are far rarer than nose piercings. The Monroe piercing may therefore be seen as deviant. Furthermore, the lack of difference between the groups could be explained by Schorzman, Gold, Downs and Murray (2007) who found that 78% of participants said they liked piercings on others, but only 52% liked them on themselves.

Future studies could investigate the effects of age, as piercings are far more common in younger people. Since the effect of piercing location could be due to prevalence, a future study could investigate several different locations and relate the results to the relative frequencies of these piercing locations in the population.

In conclusion, attractiveness ratings by young adults were not affected by whether they had facial piercings themselves. Piercing location did have an effect, possibly due to the prevalence of different piercings. These results may reflect an underlying principle of lower perceived attractiveness when people deviate from social norms. When making a first impression, it may be better not to stand out from the crowd.

REFERENCES

Antoszewski, B., Sitek, A., Fijałkowska, M., Kasielska, A., & Kruk-Jeromin, J. (2009). Tattooing and body piercing – what motivates you to do it? International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 56, 471-479.

Bone, A., Ncube, F., Nichols, T., & Noah, N.D. (2008). Body piercing in England: a survey of piercing at sites other than earlobe. British Medical Journal, 336, 1426-1428.

Forbes, G.B. (2001). College students with tattoos and piercings: Motives, family experiences, personality factors, and perception by others. Psychological reports, 89, 774-786.

Hamermesh, D.S. (2011). Beauty pays: why attractive people are more successful. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Martino, S. (2008). Perceptions of a photograph of a woman with visible piercings. Psychological Reports, 103, 134-138.

McElroy, J.C., Summers, J.K., & Moore, K. (2014). The effect of facial piercing on perceptions of job applicants. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 125, 26-38.

Schorzman, C.M., Gold, M.A., Downs, J.S., & Murray, P.J. (2007). Body art: attitudes and practices regarding body piercing among urban undergraduates. JAOA: Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, 107, 432-438.

Seiter, J.S., & Sandry, A. (2003). Pierced for success?: The effects of ear and nose piercing on perceptions of job candidates' credibility, attractiveness, and Hirability. Communication Research Reports, 20, 287-298.

Swami, V., Stieger, S., Pietschnig, J., Voracek, M., Furnham, A., & Tovée, M.J. (2012). The influence of facial piercings and observer personality on perceptions of physical attractiveness and intelligence. European Psychologist, 17, 213.

Westerfield, H.V., Stafford, A.B., Speroni, K.G., & Daniel, M.G. (2012). Patients’ perceptions of patient care providers with tattoos and/or body piercings. Journal of Nursing Administration, 42, 160-164.

Text dated 18 December 2014. Web version 1 December 2017