To Enhance,or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application

Abstract

Makeup is a tool that women use to shape their image and gain benefits in both inter- and intrasexual selection. As makeup enables the hiding or enhancing of facial features, it allows women to strategically shape impressions in a given context. It affects interpersonal perceptions, workplace impressions, and can attract romantic partners. However, research has primarily focused on examining everyday makeup use, although the amount and type of makeup can vary depending on the situation and the motivation to make an impression. In two studies, we investigated how the intended amount and application of makeup differ depending on various situational contexts. Specifically, in Study 1 (N = 533), we explored the everyday and party contexts, while in Study 2 (N = 400), we additionally introduced the contexts of mating and threat. The results show that: 1) women intend to put on more makeup in a more diligent way in party contexts compared to everyday contexts, 2) the intended diligence of makeup application is the highest in contexts were women expect an attractive man to be present, and the lowest when a threatening context is introduced, 3) these effects are partially or fully mediated by women's motivation to make an impression, and 4) neither sociosexual orientation nor appearance orientation significantly moderated the obtained effects. Our studies extend previous research on makeup application as an appearance-enhancing or worsening strategy by further investigating the signaling function of women's makeup and its strategic use in various situational contexts. We discuss the results from a functional evolutionary perspective.

Keywords

makeup application appearance enhancement appearance worsening motivation evolutionary psychology

Human interest in improving physical appearance has a long history (Walter et al., 2020), and is deeply rooted in evolution (Davis & Arnocky, 2020). Body beauty products form an industry that drives huge profits every year, with women playing a pivotal role as consumers. A study conducted in 93 countries showed (Kowal et al., 2022) that women spend significantly more time than men on appearance-enhancing activities, with an average of 4 h per day, which is in line with the fact that cross-culturally, men highly value women's physical attractiveness in short-term and long-term relationships (e.g., Buss et al., 2001; Meltzer et al., 2014; Thomas et al., 2020; Walter et al., 2020). Women can modify their appearance to various ends, such as attracting potential mates, acquiring status, friends, or economic resources (Kellie, 2021; Bradshaw & DelPriore, 2021). Undoubtedly, an important context for understanding appearance-enhancing behavior is related to mating, as women can strategically shape their image to gain benefits both in inter- and intrasexual selection (Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Valentova et al., 2021). Women's enhanced appearance can positively influence how they are perceived and evaluated by potential partners, as physical attractiveness functions as a cue of mate quality and reproductive value (Gangestad & Scheyd, 2005; Jasienska et al., 2006; Jokela, 2009). At the same time, women may use various appearance-altering techniques to stand out and outcompete other women for the attention and interest of desirable mates (Fisher & Cox, 2011; Olson et al., 2021).

Our studies focus exclusively on women's makeup as a tool to enhance their appearance (see Davis & Arnocky, 2020). Makeup allows individuals to hide or enhance particular facial features, and as such allows women to strategically shape impressions in a given context (Kellie et al., 2021). It affects perceptions of competence and warmth (Etcoff et al., 2011), allows for favorable impressions in the workplace (Klatt et al., 2016), and plays an important role in attracting romantic partners (Hill et al., 2012; Mafra et al., 2020). However, to date, the vast majority of makeup research has been limited to examining everyday makeup use (Batres et al., 2018; Mafra et al., 2020), with very few exceptions (Regan, 2011; Kellie et al., 2021), while the amount of makeup and the form it takes can vary depending on the situation. If makeup is used as a strategic tool, then we should observe variance in its application according to specific contexts. For instance, in the context of courtship behaviors, such as a party situation where the presence of a potential attractive mate is expected, women may feel more motivated to increase their attractiveness to impress the man, and consequently, put more effort into their makeup application, compared to a situation where the presence of attractive mates is not expected. Importantly, self-presentation modification may not always be directed at enhancing attractiveness, but at worsening it instead (Valentova et al., 2021). Thus, we should expect women to refrain from improving their appearance in contexts which would rather motivate them to avoid attention and hide (e.g., the presence of a stalker during a party).

Our studies expand on previous research by further investigating the signaling function of women's makeup and its strategic use. We investigated how the amount and diligence of intended makeup application differ depending on various situational contexts. Specifically, Study 1 consisted of two experimental conditions (everyday and party contexts), while Study 2 included four conditions (the same as in Study 1 and additionally a party with an attractive man present and a party with a threatening man present). Importantly, we tested the possible psychological mechanism of these effects (Study 2), namely we investigated whether the motivation to make a positive/negative impression would mediate the relationship between situational contexts and makeup intentions.

Self-Presentation Modifications: Appearance Enhancing and Worsening

Managing one's appearance is an intrinsic part of human nature as it has been practiced across various cultures throughout human history (see Davis & Arnocky, 2020). We shape our image strategically by wearing specific clothing, makeup, and hairstyles or by changing how we look more permanently with tattoos, tanning, and other interventions. Interestingly, body modifications are not exclusively human and are also found in various animal species, for instance, in birds. Cosmetics in birds are substances that convey a different color or texture of mature feathers, which can be secreted onto the feathers, but also actively applied by a bird with the use of substances acquired from the environment, such as soil (Delhey et al., 2007). Non-human self-adornment is assumed to serve mainly camouflage functions (Ruxton & Stevens, 2015), although such practices, in many instances, are expressed during breeding, which point to their sexual signaling function (for a review see Delhey et al., 2007). In the case of humans, self-presentation modifications can be directed both at enhancing as well as at worsening (or at least not at improving) one's appearance (Valentova et al., 2021). In the former case, self-presentation enhancement is usually directed at making a positive impression of oneself with others: women aim to elevate their attractiveness in order to create favorable impressions in the contexts of the workplace (Klatt et al., 2016), social interactions (e.g., Mileva et al., 2016), and romantic relationships (Mafra et al., 2020). In the latter case, appearance worsening or otherwise choosing not to improve it would be rather directed at hiding and not attracting unwanted attention in order to protect oneself. However, to date, there is barely any evidence showing that women engage in behaviors that are intended to make them less attractive to men in order to protect themselves from harassment or assault.

Why do women modify their appearance in the mating context? Throughout evolution, the strategy of choosing a preferred mate has become widespread among sexually reproducing animals. Due to the great variation in individuals’ ability to provide reproductive benefits, certain members of the population are considered more attractive than others (Buss & Schmitt, 2019). As women's reproductive potential is vastly constrained by biological factors leading to age-related cessation in fertility (Ahmed et al., 2019), ancestral men faced the adaptive problem of correctly identifying fertile and healthy mates, which resulted in their preference for youth and attractiveness (Buss & Schmitt, 2019). By signaling these traits, women may increase their attractiveness to potential mates and enhance their reproductive success (Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Gangestad & Scheyd, 2005). Eventually, those who best conform to the appearance that is most desired by the opposite sex will be more likely to find a valuable mate than those who signal less attractive physical attributes (Jokela, 2009; Rhodes et al., 2005). As a consequence, women are expected to compete more over their physical appearance, particularly in terms of features that signal youthfulness, femininity, good health, and reproductive potential (Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Valentova et al., 2017). Indeed, appearance enhancement is an important competitive tool among women (Buss & Dedden, 1990; see also Bendixen & Kennair, 2015). For instance, in the context of makeup application, it has been observed that women impose a strategic beautification penalty on female targets that have enhanced their appearance with cosmetics (Delpriore et al., 2018). Specifically, women tend to make more negative judgments about other women who wear cosmetics compared to those who do not and experience a decreased desire to affiliate with women who wear makeup.

Important components of what heterosexual men find physically attractive in a mate are juvenile features (Davis & Arnocky, 2020). Males show attraction to females with neotenous facial proportions, that is, a combination of large eyes, a small nose, and full lips (Jones et al., 1995). These can function as a supernormal stimulus when intensified (e.g., with the use of cosmetics), meaning that an exaggerated version of a stimulus, for example, when eyes appear much larger after applying make-up, elicits a stronger response than the stimulus for which it evolved, for example, naturally large eyes (Barrett, 2010). Originally, Tinbergen (1953) conducted experiments using artificial plaster eggs in a range of sizes and patterns, discovering that the majority of birds showed a preference for eggs with markings more pronounced than their own, colors that were more vibrant than their own, and a larger size than their own. In the same vein, limbal ring, which is a dark ring around the iris of the eye, serves as a visual cue to youth and/or health that can be accentuated with dark eyeliners (Lewis & Buss, 2021), and as a consequence, heighten women's attractiveness (Brown & Sacco, 2018). Eyeliner can also make the eyes appear larger (Matsushita et al., 2015) and create the appearance of a whiter sclera, which can enhance perceptions of attractiveness (Provine et al., 2013). Similarly, long eyelashes, which men find attractive (Pazhoohi & Kingston, 2020), can be modified with mascara or eyelash conditioners and serums. The underlying assumption for these effects is that women exaggerate facial features that have been shaped by sexual selection to advertise aspects of their physical condition (Batres et al., 2018; Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Jones & Kramer, 2015). Furthermore, in a number of primate species, both male and female individuals develop noticeable reddish and blood-filled body parts that are appealing to the opposite sex (Dixson, 1983), which very likely signal high hemoglobin levels and lack of ongoing infection (Jones, 1996). In humans, we have evolved everted human lips that can serve such a function, and when red in women, are perceived as highly attractive (Stephen & McKeegan, 2010). However, despite all the meaningful rationale for this assumption of facial attractiveness signaling aspects of physical condition, we should keep in mind that, for now, evidence for this claim is far from clear (Jones et al., 2021; see also Mengelkoch et al., 2022). It is just as likely that appearance-enhancement behaviors are used to mask facial cues that indicate current illness, such as signs of fatigue or pallor, rather than to enhance the signals of long-term good health (Jones et al., 2021). Indeed, there is some evidence that women in poorer health were more inclined to use cosmetics than their healthier counterparts (Milroy et al., 2002).

Makeup as a Strategic Tool for Self-Presentation

The main function of cosmetics is to improve the physical appearance of the face (Russel et al., 2018). By increasing the contrast between eyebrows, eyes, lips, and skin, cosmetics enhance dimorphic traits that signal femininity (Etcoff et al., 2011), and improve skin texture by making it look more homogeneous and luminous, which is supposed to serve as a signal of youth and health (e.g., Nash et al., 2006; Porcheron et al., 2013; Russell et al., 2016). Therefore, makeup can be used to enhance evolutionarily important facial indicators of high mate value, since the reproductive capacity determined by those traits is an important factor of a woman's value as a potential partner (Buss, 1989). Studies (e.g., Jacob et al., 2010) have indicated that makeup increases attractiveness and the likelihood of courtship behaviors, both when applied professionally (Etcoff et al., 2011; Mulhern et al., 2003) and when self-applied (Workman & Johnson, 1991), although the attractiveness enhancement effect for self-applied cosmetics has been found to be small (Jones & Kramer, 2015).

Makeup is a tool used by women to present themselves differently in various contexts. The context in which makeup is worn can have a profound impact on how women are perceived and the effects of their appearance decisions. Research has not only shown that wearing more makeup is often associated with being perceived as sexually available (Osborn, 1996; Mileva et al., 2016; Batres et al., 2018), but this perception can vary depending on the perceiver (Meltzer, 2019). In professional settings, women can use makeup to enhance their perceived leadership ability and create favorable impressions (Klatt et al., 2016; Netchaeva & Rees, 2016), while in romantic contexts, wearing makeup can increase perceived dominance and prestige, and aid in attracting a wider variety of partners (Mafra et al., 2020; Mileva et al., 2016). The situational context also plays a crucial role in the outcomes of wearing makeup, with heavier makeup potentially affecting women's leadership evaluations negatively (Cox & Glick, 1986; James et al., 2018) or positively impacting their subjective well-being (Diener et al., 2009). Indeed, makeup changes a woman's perception of herself. It has the power to increase a woman's self-esteem (Brdar et al., 1996; Tran et al., 2020), and as a consequence can improve cognitive performance (Palumbo et al., 2017). In fact, makeup can serve as a type of psychological “mask” (see Robertson et al., 2021), which helps to reduce negative self-perception (Korichi et al., 2008), and allow individuals with elevated levels of social anxiety to present a more confident and self-assured image to the public (Miller & Cox, 1982; Robertson et al., 2008).

There are several noteworthy individual differences that have been shown to modify the effects of makeup application and how it is perceived. The first one is sociosexual orientation, which refers to the individual differences in willingness to engage in casual sex (Simpson & Gangestad, 1991). However, research investigating the correlation between makeup and sociosexuality has produced inconsistent findings. For instance, a study conducted by Wagstaff (2018) showed that women who wore a greater amount of makeup reported higher levels of unrestricted sociosexuality compared to those who wore a smaller amount of makeup. On the contrary, a study by Batres et al. (2018) pointed to no correlation between self-reported sociosexuality and makeup use. It should be noted, though, that in the latter case, the authors solely examined everyday makeup usage, which may not be a relevant context for signaling availability due to unrestricted sociosexual orientation. We argue that sociosexuality can play an important role in shaping decisions regarding makeup applications in mating contexts, specifically because makeup and the amount applied in a situation involving flirting are perceived by men as signals of women's sociosexuality (Mafra et al., 2020).

Another important moderator is appearance orientation which refers to an individual's focus on their physical appearance and the importance one places on one's image. As shown by Mafra et al. (2022), women who care more about making sure their appearance is always impeccable, use makeup more often, spend more time applying it, along with spending more money on cosmetics.

Given that the application of makeup can result in diverse consequences and influence how a woman is perceived by individuals of both the same and opposite sex, it is crucial to understand how women use makeup as a tactic for self-presentation. The style and degree of makeup a woman chooses to apply may vary depending on numerous factors, such as how attractive or competitive she feels, with whom she anticipates she will interact, and the context in which that interaction will occur (Valentova et al., 2021; Wagstaff, 2018). For instance, in the context of courtship behaviors, such as a party situation where the presence of a potential attractive partner is expected, women may feel a stronger motivation to increase their attractiveness and might be more inclined to signal their availability. On the other hand, there are situations in which a woman may be motivated to do the opposite. As suggested by Valentova et al. (2021), there are situations in which an individual does not want to stand out from the crowd, seeking to avoid attention instead. It is possible that in a situation of danger, a woman may want to make her appearance worse, or at least avoid enhancing it.

Present Studies

We present two studies that examine the impact of situational contexts on intentions regarding makeup application, specifically the amount of intended makeup (intensity of makeup and the number of cosmetic categories planned to be used), and the level of diligence anticipated during its application. We investigated whether makeup application intentions differ depending on various situational contexts, namely an everyday context, a party context, a party context where an attractive man is present (mating context), and a party context where a threatening man is present (threatening context). We predicted that women would intend to apply more intense makeup in a more diligent way in the party context than in the everyday context, and even more intensely and more diligently in the mating context compared to other conditions. On the contrary, we predicted that women would intend to apply less intense makeup in a less diligent way in the threatening context. Importantly, we investigated the possible psychological mechanism of these effects, namely whether the motivation to make a positive impression would mediate the relationship between situational contexts and makeup use intentions. Additionally, we checked for moderating effects of sociosexual orientation and appearance orientation. We predicted that enhancing effects would be more pronounced for highly unrestricted women and for those who are highly concerned with how they look. However, in the case of the threatening context, we anticipated that worsening effects would be independent of both sociosexual orientation and appearance orientation. Threatening situations should trigger avoidance motivation for all types of women.

Study 1

In Study 1, we introduced two situational contexts, namely the everyday context, and the context of a party, where women were expected to meet attractive others. We investigated whether women would intend to put on more intense makeup in a more diligent way in the party context compared to everyday context. Additionally, in this study we tested for the moderating role of sociosexual orientation.

Method

Participants

Data were collected from Polish participants who anonymously completed an online survey on Qualtrics.com via a link distributed through social media using the snowball method. The inclusion criteria were to be at least 18 years old, female, and heterosexual or bisexual. From the initial 537 female participants, 4 participants were excluded as they were under 17 years old, or they declared a homosexual orientation. Finally, 533 women were included in the final analysis. All were sexually interested in men (heterosexual 77%, bisexual 23%), 22% were single (Mage = 27.51; SD = 6.35). Sensitivity calculations made using the G*Power 3.1.9.2 software (Faul et al., 2007) indicate that for a model including one tested predictor and two total predictors, the N = 533 sample is sufficient to detect an effect with a size of f² = .02 with 1-Beta = 0.95. Given that the observed f² for moderations were > 0.25, our study had sufficient power. The study procedure was approved by the Institutional Ethical Review Board at SWPS University.

Context Manipulation

Participants were randomly assigned to one of two experimental groups, where they were introduced to a story that activated the situational context. Participants were instructed to read a short story and imagine that they had to put makeup on for either an ordinary everyday situation no different from other days, or a party situation where they would interact with attractive people. Then the intensity and diligence of makeup that the participants would apply in this situation were measured. The stories were similar to each other to minimize the effect of other factors. The first group (party context; N = 273) was introduced to the weekend party situation: “It's Friday night and you're getting ready to go out on the town with your friends. You plan to visit a few bars and maybe go to a club. You expect that there will be a lot of attractive people at the event. You sit in front of a mirror and apply makeup to your face.” The second group (everyday context; N = 260) was introduced to a neutral context of a usual workday: “As always, during the week you get up in the morning and get ready for work. You've been working there for a long time and have settled into a rhythm that suits you. After breakfast and a cup of coffee, you sit in front of a mirror and apply makeup to your face.”

Procedure and Measures

After giving consent to take part in the study, participants answered the sociosexual orientation questionnaire and were randomly assigned to one of the experimental conditions. Then they filled out questionnaires on diligence and intensity of intended makeup. The whole procedure took around 7 min.

Dependent Variables

Intensity of intended makeup. In order to assess the amount of makeup participants would apply in a given context, we asked them to indicate the planned intensity of makeup for the lips, eyes, and face separately on scales from 0 to 100, where the higher the value, the more intense the makeup. In each question, pictures were presented to the respondents as reference points (0 = lips, eyes or face without makeup; 100 = lips, eyes, face with highly intense makeup). The index for the intensity of intended makeup was computed by averaging the ratings for all three items (Cronbach's α = .81).

Diligence of intended makeup application. In order to assess the diligence of planned makeup application in a given context, we asked participants to answer the following question: “In this situation, when applying makeup, would you try to do it more carefully than usual?” (1 = definitely not, 7 = definitely yes).

Moderating variable

Sociosexual orientation. To measure sociosexual orientation, the participants completed the Revised Sociosexuality Orientation Inventory (SOI-R, Penke & Asendorpf, 2008). The SOI-R is a nine-item questionnaire assessing participants’ attitudes about, history of, and desire for commitment-free sex. Sample items include “I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying ‘casual’ sex with different partners’’ or “Sex without love is OK.” Nine items were scored on a five-point scale and summed to form a general sociosexual orientation score (Cronbach's α = .83). Higher sociosexual orientation scores reflect a more sexually unrestricted orientation.

Controlled variable

Age. As individuals can use makeup in order to cover the signs of aging and deterioration of their appearance (Davis & Arnocky, 2020), controlling for age is crucial to ensure that the observed effects are not confounded by age-related factors.

Instructions for situational context manipulations and all the measures included in Study 1 can be found online in Supplementary Materials at: https://osf.io/p34vg/

Results

First, we conducted the analysis of simple correlation for all independent and dependent variables. Details of these correlations are presented in Table 1 and separate descriptive statistics for each experimental context are presented in Table 2.

Table 1.

Pearson Correlation Coefficients (r) among all Independent and Dependent Variables in Analyses in Study 1 (N = 533).

	1	2	3	4
1. Makeup—Intensity	-
2. Makeup—Diligence	.61**
3. SOI	.04	.09*
4. Age	.03	<.01	-.05	-

Note. SOI = sociosexual orientation.

* p < .05, ** p < .001.

Table 2.

Mean (M) and Standard Deviation (SD) Statistics for Experimental Contexts in Study 1 (N = 533).

	M	SD
Everyday context
Makeup—Intensity	37.57	20.74
Makeup—Diligence	3.30	1.32
SOI	3.14	1.03
Age	27.50	6.27
Party context
Makeup—Intensity	58.91	20.70
Makeup—Diligence	5.33	1.48
SOI	3.17	0.99
Age	27.52	6.43

Note. SOI = sociosexual orientation.

Effects of Context on Makeup Application Intentions

Women declared putting on significantly more intense makeup in the party context (M = 58.91) than in the everyday context (M = 37.57; t(531) = 11.89, p < .001; Cohen's d = 1.03). For diligence, there was also a significant difference between the experimental groups, with women declaring significantly higher levels of diligence in the party context (M = 5.33) than in the daily context (M = 3.30, t(531) = 16.64, p < .001; Cohen's d = 1.44).

Sociosexual Orientation as a Moderator of the Relationship Between Context and Makeup Application Intentions

We tested the moderating role of sociosexual orientation in two separate analyses for the intensity of intended makeup and diligence of makeup application, using Model 1 PROCESS version 4.1 (Hayes, 2022), with age as a controlled variable.

In the first analysis, we introduced the experimental context as a predictor, intensity of intended makeup as the outcome variable, and sociosexual orientation as the moderating variable. The model was significant, F(4, 528) = 36.03, p < .001, R²= 0.21, but the moderation effect was not, b = 1.95; 95% CI = [-1.56, 5.46].

In the second analysis, we introduced the experimental context as a predictor, diligence of makeup application as the outcome variable, and sociosexual orientation as the moderating variable. The model was significant, F(4, 528) = 72.03, p < .001, R² = .35, but the moderation effect was not, b = 0.21; 95% CI = [-.02, .45]. Detailed results of these analyses are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Conditional Effects of the Context on Intensity and Diligence of Intended Makeup Application at Values of the Sociosexual Orientation in Study 1 (N = 533).

		Intensity of makeup
Moderator name	Moderator value	B	SE	t	p	95 CI*
Moderator name	Moderator value	B	SE	t	p	LLCI	ULCI
Sociosexual orientation	(−1 SD) 2.15	19.42	2.54	7.65	<.001	14.43	24.41
Sociosexual orientation	(Mean) 3.16	23.32	1.80	11.87	<.001	17.80	24.85
	(+1 SD) 4.17	23.21	2.54	9.14	<.001	18.23	28.21

		Diligence of makeup application
Moderator name	Moderator value	b	SE	t	p	95 CI*
Moderator name	Moderator value	b	SE	t	p	LLCI	ULCI
Sociosexual orientation	(−1 SD) 2.15	1.80	.17	10.53	<.001	1.47	2.14
	(Mean) 3.16	2.02	.12	16.69	<.001	1.78	2.26
	(+1 SD) 4.17	2.23	.17	13.05	<.001	1.90	2.57

*95% CI is presented as bias-corrected and accelerated 5,000 bootstrapping. Control variable: age.

Discussion

Study 1 showed that, in line with our expectations, women intended to apply makeup significantly more intensely and in a more diligent way when planning to meet attractive others during the party, compared to the common day context. However, what cannot be inferred from this result is why women intended to apply more intense makeup in a more diligent way for a party with attractive people compared to an everyday context. For example, it could be because they wanted to impress attractive men, compete with attractive women, make a good impression in general, or all of the above. This question should be investigated in future studies.

Sociosexual orientation was positively correlated with intentions to apply makeup diligently, but it did not moderate the relationship between situational context and intended makeup intensity or application diligence. Women intended to put on more intense makeup in a more diligent way in a party context than in an everyday context independently of their restricted or unrestricted sexuality. There was no correlation between sociosexual orientation and the intended intensity of makeup, which replicates the results of the study conducted by Batres et al. (2018).

Study 2

The second study aimed to expand upon the findings of Study 1 by investigating the relationship between situational context and intended makeup application in more detail. Specifically, we added two situational contexts to those from Study 1, to test whether the expected presence of an attractive potential partner or the presence of a threatening man would affect the intentions of makeup application. Importantly, we introduced motivation to make an impression as a potential mediator of the main effects. We predicted that women would feel a stronger motivation to make an impression in the context of a party compared to everyday contexts, particularly if they expected the presence of an attractive potential partner. We investigated whether this increased motivation would translate into intentions to apply more intense makeup in a more diligent manner. Conversely, we expected the opposite pattern of results for the threatening context. In this case, women should be less motivated to make an impression and, as a consequence, should intend to apply less intense makeup with less diligence.

In order to increase the reliability of measuring makeup intensity and diligence, we changed the scales for these measures. Additionally, we introduced another dependent variable, referring to the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used by women in different situational contexts. This, along with makeup intensity, provides another way to measure the amount of intended makeup. We predicted that women would intend to use more cosmetic categories in the mating context compared to other situations, and significantly fewer in the threatening situation. Furthermore, we hypothesized that these effects would be mediated by the motivation to make an impression.

In addition to measuring sociosexual orientation as a potential moderator, we also included a measure of appearance orientation. We predicted that the expected results for all our dependent variables would be particularly evident for women who place high importance on their physical appearance. Finally, to better control for individual differences in makeup application practices, we included measures of makeup use frequency and typical amount of applied makeup as covariate variables in our analyses.

Method

Participants

Data were collected from Polish participants who anonymously completed an online survey on Qualtrics.com via the link distributed through social media using the snowball method. The inclusion criteria were to be a least 18 years old, female, and heterosexual or bisexual. From the initial 453 participants, 53 were excluded due to being male, declaring a homosexual orientation or due to taking an improbable length of time to complete the survey. In the final analyses, 400 heterosexual (61.8%) or bisexual (37.8%) women were included. 26.5% were single, and 73.5% were in a relationship (M age = 31.84, SD = 9.28). Sensitivity calculations made using the G*Power 3.1.9.2 software (Faul et al., 2007) indicate that for a model including four independent groups, the N = 400 sample is sufficient to detect an effect size of f = .21 with 1-Beta = 0.95. Given that all the observed f for one-way ANOVA analyses were > 0.27, our study had sufficient power. This was also true for moderated mediation analyses. The study procedure was approved by the Institutional Ethical Review Board at SWPS University.

Context Manipulation

In Study 2, two additional situational contexts were added to test whether the expected presence of an attractive potential partner or the presence of a threatening man would affect the intentions of makeup application. Therefore, each participant was randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups, in which the situational context was activated by a story introducing the situation. Two experimental groups were similar to Study 1, that is the everyday context group (N = 82), and the party context group (N = 114). In the party context, participants were told they would attend a party, but this time no information was provided regarding the people who would be attending. The third, mating context group (N = 104), was introduced to a party situation where a potential, attractive partner would be present: “It's Friday night and you're going out alone to a party. You know that there will be a man at the event whom you really like, and you are interested in him. You stand in front of a mirror and apply makeup to your face.” The last group was presented with a threatening context (N = 100), namely a situation in which they were threatened by a man who had already insistently tried to flirt in the past: “It's Friday night and you're going out alone to a party. You know that there will be a man there whom you are trying to avoid, because at the previous party he unequivocally tried to establish a relationship with you, but you were repulsed by the flirting attempts on his part. The man was very persistent, and you not only felt uncomfortable, but also sensed a threat from him, because he did not respond to your clear signals that you were not interested. You stand in front of a mirror and apply makeup to your face.”

Procedure and Measures

After giving consent to taking part in the study, participants were randomly assigned to one of the experimental conditions. Then they filled out the questionnaires on motivation to make an impression, diligence and intensity of makeup they would intend to apply, as well as the number of cosmetic categories they would intend to use in a specific experimental context. Afterward, they provided data on sociosexual orientation, appearance orientation, and control variables, in a random order. At the end, participants answered demographic questions. The whole procedure took around 10 min.

Dependent Variables

Intensity of intended makeup. In order to more accurately measure the declared amount of makeup, the scale from study 1 was improved. We used 1-5 scales and each point on the scale corresponded to a picture of differing makeup intensity, for the lips and eyes separately, but not for the entire face. Lipstick intensity in degrees of scale was constructed by computer-assisted color application using the program PhotoWorks (version 16.0; following Sulikowski et al., 2022) with 5 degrees of intensity, where 1 = no lipstick color at all, 5 = 100% lipstick color. No other effects were applied. Women were instructed to consider only the intensity of cosmetics on the lips, not the color. To further minimize the effect of color, we randomly assigned participants to one of three different lipstick colors (red, dark red, and pink). Eye makeup color were shades of black (eyeliner, eyeshadow, mascara). For the eye makeup scale, we used a series of images from the “Stages of Eye Makeup Sue Bryce” tutorial, available on Pinterest.com, which displayed the stages from natural (no makeup) to full smokey eye makeup application. Each step of the scale corresponded with a photo of progressively more intense eye makeup (1 = natural, no makeup to 5 = intense makeup). Scores of both scales (eye and lip makeup intensity) were averaged to measure overall intensity of makeup. A higher mean indicated that the woman would intend to apply more intense makeup.

Number of cosmetic categories intended to be used. To enhance the accuracy and reliability of the measurement of the amount of makeup, we incorporated an adapted scale from the Cosmetics Use Inventory (Cash & Cash, 1982) following Mafra et al. (2020) where women were asked to specify how many out of 5 groups of cosmetics they would use in the specific experimental context in the study (1. base, concealer and/or powder; 2. mascara, 3. eyeliner or eye pencil; 4. eyeshadow; 5. lipstick and/or gloss). The higher the number of indicated groups, the more cosmetics women would use in a specific experimental situation.

Diligence of intended makeup application. In order to improve the measurement of the diligence of makeup application relative to Study 1, an 8-item scale was created that tested whether, in a given situation, the effort to accurately apply makeup would be greater than usual. Participants answered on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = definitely not, 7 = definitely yes), e.g., “Would you choose to apply makeup with a more time-consuming and demanding technique, but with a better result?,” “Would you pay more attention than usual to the accuracy of makeup application in this situation?” The factor analysis confirmed that items from this scale load on one factor¹, so the index for diligence of makeup application was computed by averaging the ratings for all eight items (Cronbach's α = .93). A higher mean indicated that the woman would put in more effort when applying makeup.

Moderating Variables

Sociosexual orientation. As in Study 1, we used the Revised Sociosexuality Orientation Inventory (SOI-R, Penke & Asendorpf, 2008) and created a general sociosexual orientation score (Cronbach's α = .82).

Appearance orientation. In order to assess women's appearance orientation, we used the subscale of the Multidimensional Body–Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ–AS) by Cash (2017) in the Polish adaptation (Izydorczyk & Lizińczyk, 2022). The appearance orientation subscale consists of seven items, e.g., “I check myself in the mirror whenever I can,” answered on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The index was computed by averaging the ratings for all seven items (Cronbach's α = .86).

Mediating variable

Motivation to make a good impression. This variable was assessed by two questions: “In this situation, to what extent would you care about looking good?,” “Would you try to enhance your appearance more than usual to make an impression?,” answered on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = definitely not, 7 = definitely yes). The index of motivation was computed by averaging the ratings for two items (Cronbach's α = .75). A higher score indicates a higher motivation to impress with one's appearance.

Controlled Variables

Frequency of using makeup. As a first controlled variable, we assessed the usual frequency of makeup application with a scale used by Wagstaff (2018). Women were asked to indicate how many days per week they wear any makeup and how many days per week they would have a completely made-up face, from 0 to 7 days. Additionally, participants could choose the option of not wearing makeup at all. The index for the frequency of using makeup was computed by summing the ratings for both items.

Typical number of cosmetic categories used. As a second controlled variable, we measured the amount of makeup women typically apply. This was assessed with a scale adapted from the Cosmetics Use Inventory (Cash & Cash, 1982) following Mafra et al. (2020), where subjects were asked to specify how many out of 5 groups of cosmetics they usually use (1. base, concealer and/or powder; 2. mascara, 3. eyeliner or eye pencil; 4. eyeshadow; 5. lipstick and/or gloss). The higher the number of indicated groups, the more cosmetics women use on a daily basis.

Age. As in Study 1, we considered age as an important variable to be controlled.

Instructions for situational context manipulations and all the measures included in Study 2 can be found online in Supplementary Materials at: https://osf.io/p34vg/

Results

First, we conducted the analysis of simple correlation for all independent and dependent variables. Details of these correlations are presented in Table 4 and separate descriptive statistics for each experimental context are presented in Table 5.

Table 4.

Pearson Correlation Coefficients (r) among all Independent and Dependent Variables in Analyses in Study 2 (N = 400).

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1. Diligence	3.87	1.44	-
2. Intensity	2.33	0.92	.47***
3. Number of cosmetic categories (in contexts)	3.21	1.19	.40***	.62***
4. SOI	3.31	3.31	.02	.11*	.04
5. Appearance orientation	3.12	0.79	.28***	.25***	.19***	-.03
6. Motivation	4.92	1.36	.70***	.38***	.43***	.05	.21***
7. Age	31.84	9.28	-.08	-.12**	<.01	-.10	-.03	-.06
8. Frequency	8.68	4.20	.19***	.24***	.22***	.04	.43***	.15**	.05
9. Typical number of cosmetic categories	2.64	1.03	.11*	.35***	.44***	.07	.19***	.06	.10*	.30***	-

Note. SOI = sociosexual orientation.

* p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.

Table 5.

Mean (M) and Standard Deviation (SD) Statistics for Experimental Contexts in Study 2 (N = 400).

	M	SD
Everyday context
Makeup—Intensity	1.96	0.82
Makeup—Diligence	3.53	1.09
Makeup—Number of cosmetic categories used in context	2.70	1.10
Motivation to make a good impression	4.63	1.05
SOI	3.24	1.35
Appearance Orientation	3.26	0.80
Age	30.79	8.93
Typical number of cosmetic categories used (usual)	2.60	1.10
Frequency of makeup application (usual)	9.35	4.17
Party context
Makeup—Intensity	2.57	0.94
Makeup—Diligence	4.17	1.46
Makeup—Number of cosmetic categories used in context	3.43	1.22
Motivation to make a good impression	5.36	1.06
SOI	3.25	1.41
Appearance Orientation	3.06	0.72
Age	32.52	9.81
Typical number of cosmetic categories used (usual)	2.68	1.08
Frequency of makeup application (usual)	8.61	4.16
Mating context
Makeup—Intensity	2.50	0.84
Makeup—Diligence	4.75	1.25
Makeup—Number of cosmetic categories used in context	3.56	1.09
Motivation to make a good impression	5.88	0.94
SOI	3.26	1.32
Appearance Orientation	3.07	0.83
Age	31.69	9.07
Typical number of cosmetic categories used (usual)	2.51	0.86
Frequency of makeup application (usual)	8.45	4.00
Threat context
Makeup—Intensity	2.20	0.93
Makeup—Diligence	2.91	1.17
Makeup—Number of cosmetic categories used in context	3.03	1.15
Motivation to make a good impression	3.64	1.21
SOI	3.50	1.40
Appearance Orientation	3.14	0.82
Age	32.07	9.19
Typical number of cosmetic categories used (usual)	2.76	1.06
Frequency of makeup application (usual)	8.40	4.47

Note. SOI = sociosexual orientation.

Contextual Differences in Intensity of Intended Makeup, Diligence of Makeup Application, and Intended Number of Cosmetic Categories to Be Used

To test for differences in the intensity of intended makeup, diligence of makeup application, as well as in the number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, three separate one-way analyses of variance were conducted with the frequency of applying makeup, the typical number of cosmetic categories used, and participants’ age as covariates. As shown in Figure 1 (panel A), compared to the everyday context (M = 1.93), women intended to apply significantly more intense makeup in party situations, both with (M = 2.60, p < .001) and without (M = 2.59, p < .001) the presence of an attractive potential partner, but not in the party situation, where they expected a potential presence of a threatening man (M = 2.19, p = .175), F(3, 384) = 15.57, p < .001, Eta²p = .11.

Figure 1.

Mean Intensity of Intended Makeup (A), Mean Number of Cosmetic Categories Intended to Be Used (B) and Diligence of Makeup Application (C) as a function of context.

For the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used (see Figure 1, panel B), the results mimicked those for the intensity of makeup. Compared to the everyday context (M = 2.68), women intended to use more cosmetic categories in party situations, both with (M = 3.73, p < .001) and without (M = 3.46, p < .001) the presence of an attractive potential partner, but not in the threatening situation (M = 3.00, p = .182), F(3, 384) = 20.74, p < .001, Eta²p = .14.

In terms of diligence in makeup application (see Figure 1, panel C), compared to the everyday context (M = 3.48), women intended to be less diligent in a threatening situation (M = 2.92, p = .015), more diligent in a party situation (M = 4.21, p < .001), and most diligent in a party situation when a potential attractive partner was expected to be present (M = 4.79, p < .001), F(3, 384) = 43.75, p < .001, Eta²p = .26.

If we further compare the party context with the mating context, we can see that the declared diligence of makeup application in the mating context was significantly higher than in the party context (p = .004), while the declared intensity of intended makeup (p = 1.00), as well as the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used (p = .274) were not significantly different in the two conditions.

Motivation to Make an Impression as a Mediator Between Context and Intentions of Makeup Application

To test whether the motivation to make an impression significantly mediated the context effects on intentions of makeup application, we conducted nine separate bootstrapped mediation analyses with 5,000 resamples using Hayes’ SPSS macro Model 4 (Hayes, 2022). Mediation was considered significant if 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals (CI) for the indirect effect did not include zero (Preacher & Hayes, 2004). In all tested mediational models, we controlled for the usual frequency of applying makeup, the typical number of cosmetic categories used, and participants’ age.

In the first step, we tested in the three separate mediational analyses, whether the effects of context (party context vs. everyday context) on intensity of intended makeup, the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used, and the diligence of intended makeup application were mediated by the motivation to make an impression. Indeed, as shown in Figure 2 (panels 1a, 1b, 1c), the indirect effect was significant for the intensity of intended makeup, CI = [.06, .27], for the number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, CI = [.08, .34], as well as for the diligence of makeup application, CI = [.30, .76]. The effect for diligence of makeup application was fully mediated by the motivation to make an impression, indicating that the relationship between the context and diligence is entirely explained by the motivation to make a good impression. On the other hand, the effects of context on the intensity of intended makeup and the number of cosmetic categories were partially mediated. This suggests that the party context influenced the intensity of makeup and the number of cosmetic categories both directly (without the presence of motivation) and indirectly (via the motivation to make a good impression).

Figure 2.

Unstandardized Regression Coefficients for the Relationship Between Contexts (Everyday vs. Party Contexts – panels 1a, 1b, 1c; Party vs. Mating Contexts – panels 2a, 2b, 2c; Everyday vs. Threatening Contexts – panels 3a, 3b, 3c) and the Intensity of Intended Makeup (a), Number of Cosmetic Categories Planned to Be Used (b), and Diligence of Makeup Application (c). Mediator variable: Motivation to Make a Good Impression.

In the next step, we ran the same analyses testing whether the effects of context (party context vs. mating context) on intensity of intended makeup, the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used, and the diligence of intended makeup application were mediated by the motivation to make an impression. As shown in Figure 2 (panels 2a, 2b, 2c), the mating context triggered a higher motivation to make a good impression, which further translated into a higher intensity of intended makeup, CI = [.07, .26], higher number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, CI = [.11, .35], and higher diligence of makeup application, CI = [.23, .73]. In all these cases we observed full mediations. This means that the differences observed in these dependent variables between the party context and the mating context can be entirely explained by the differences in the motivation to make a good impression. This explains the lack of significant differences in the intensity of makeup and the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used between the party context and mating context in previously described one-way ANOVAs.

Finally, we tested whether the effects of context (threatening context vs. everyday context) on intensity of intended makeup, the number of cosmetic categories intended to be used, and the diligence of intended makeup application were mediated by the motivation to make an impression. As can be seen in Figure 2 (panels 3a, 3b, 3c), this was indeed the case: the motivation to make a good impression was higher in the everyday context than in the threatening context, and that motivation led to a higher intensity of intended makeup, CI = [.07, .29], higher number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, CI = [.12, .45], and higher diligence of makeup application, CI = [.28, .65]. For the diligence of makeup application this was a full mediation: the lower intended diligence in applying makeup in the threatening context (compared to the everyday context) was entirely explained by the lower motivation to make a good impression.

Moderators of the Relationship Between Context and Intensity of Intended Makeup, Number of Cosmetic Categories Planned to be Used, and Diligence of Makeup Application

To investigate whether the obtained mediational effects are further moderated by sociosexual orientation or appearance orientation, we conducted eighteen bootstrapped moderated mediation analyses with 5,000 resamples using Hayes’ SPSS macro Model 8 (Hayes, 2022). The results of the analyses can be found in the Supplementary Materials, Tables 1-18. In all of the analyses, neither the sociosexual orientation nor appearance orientation moderated the mediated relationship between contexts and intentions for makeup application (ps > .05).

Discussion

Study 2 showed that the situational context significantly influenced women's makeup application intentions. Specifically, women intended to apply more intense makeup and use more categories of cosmetics when going to a party compared to the everyday context, regardless of whether a potential attractive partner would be present at the party or not. However, the potential salience of an attractive man significantly increased the intended diligence in makeup application in comparison with all other presented situations. Undoubtedly, diligence of makeup application can translate into better makeup quality, even if you plan to use the same number of cosmetics and achieve the same level of intensity. The threatening context did not affect women's intentions concerning the intensity of makeup or the number of cosmetic categories planned to be used in comparison to the everyday context. In both of these conditions, women intended to use the same number of cosmetics and to create the same moderately intensive makeup. However, once again, it was diligence of makeup application that differed significantly. Women intended to apply their makeup less diligently in the threatening context when compared to each of the other situations.

Importantly, Study 2 allowed the potential mechanism of these effects to be tested, namely the mediational role of the motivation to make a good impression. As expected, the motivation to make a good impression significantly mediated all the effects of context on our dependent variables. Apparently, the specific context triggers either a motivation to enhance appearance, as in the mating opportunities, or not to enhance, as in the threatening context. This motivation further translates into intentions of makeup intensity, the number of cosmetic categories used, and the diligence of makeup application. This supports the idea that makeup can be used strategically to shape women's appearance according to their current motivations.

Study 2 confirmed the results of Study 1 in that, once again, sociosexual orientation did not moderate the relationship between situational context and the intensity of intended makeup, number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, nor the diligence of makeup application. Situational context triggered specific motivations to make an impression, which further affected intentions of makeup application regardless of women's sociosexual orientation.

Makeup application intentions in specific contexts were also independent of women's appearance orientation, which was contrary to our expectations. Apparently, motivation is the essential factor in shaping both the diligence and the amount of makeup applied, functioning independently from appearance orientation. The lack of moderation effects for appearance orientation is also contradictory to the results presented by Mafra et al. (2022), which indicate that appearance orientation is a significant predictor of women's cosmetics use. However, it should be noted that the dependent variable used in their study focused on the frequency of applying makeup, money spent on cosmetics, and time spent on applying makeup. Therefore, it mainly reflects the average use of makeup and does not account for the situational contexts that may influence women to apply makeup differently than usual, such as a party or meeting an attractive potential partner, where a woman may be particularly motivated to enhance her appearance.

General Discussion

Makeup seems to be a very powerful tool for women's self-presentation as the use of makeup has a significant impact on the way women are perceived by others (e.g., Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Hill et al., 2012; Klatt et al., 2016; Mafra et al., 2020). As such, it is essential to understand how women use makeup as a means of strategic self-presentation. The specific style and degree of makeup a woman chooses to apply can vary significantly depending on a range of factors, including how attractive or competitive she feels, with whom she expects to interact, and the context in which that interaction will occur (Kellie et al., 2021). Despite the potential significant role that contextual factors play in makeup application, the majority of research in this area has focused on everyday makeup use (Batres et al., 2018; Mafra et al., 2020), which may not accurately reflect the variability of makeup use across different situations. Consequently, there is a critical need for further research that examines how situational contexts affect women's makeup decisions and application methods (see Lewis & Buss, 2021; Valentova et al., 2021).

Our studies expand on previous research by further investigating the signaling function of women's makeup and its strategic use. Our focus was on specific contexts, both related to mating opportunities as well as risks, and how they shape women's makeup application intentions (intensity of intended makeup, number of cosmetic categories planned to be used, and diligence of makeup application). We have shown that varying contexts can elicit distinct levels of motivation for women to make a favorable impression, which then significantly influences their intended application of makeup. This finding aligns with the functional perspective of appearance-modifying behavior, indicating that makeup can be used strategically to enhance or not to enhance one's appearance depending on the situational context (Davis & Arnocky, 2020; Lewis & Buss, 2021; Valentova et al., 2021). Our evolutionary thinking complements existing sociocultural models that highlight important sociocultural factors that influence appearance-enhancement practices, including exposure to unrealistic physical standards through media representation (Barlett et al., 2008), adherence to social norms (Randazzo & Solomon, 2018), patriarchal cultures (Leve et al., 2012), conformity to gender roles (Lennon & Rudd, 1994), or sexual objectification (Strelan & Hargreaves, 2005). While sociocultural models focus on the influence of social and cultural factors on individual's desire to enhance their appearance, the evolutionary perspective points to the adaptive functions of these behaviors. Specifically, our studies indicate that makeup practices depend on specific contexts that shape women's motivations to make a good or bad impression. These motivations, in turn, lead to adaptive behavioral responses that increase chances for success in the mating market or enable efficient avoidance of unwanted attention in threatening situations. Thus, the evolutionary perspective enriches our comprehension of why these practices emerge and how they contribute to human behavior in various social contexts. It is important to note that the evolutionary perspective enriches our comprehension of why these practices emerge and how they contribute to human behavior in various social contexts. However, it is also worth acknowledging that sociocultural hypotheses could similarly predict that women would apply more or less makeup with varying diligence in different social contexts. Nevertheless, the evolutionary framework provides an ultimate explanation for why that might be the case.

Our studies indicate that diligence in makeup application is important to assess when investigating appearance-enhancing practices. Although women intended to use the same number of cosmetic categories and achieve the same intensity of makeup in the party condition whether or not an attractive man was present, they estimated their diligence as higher in the former case. Indeed, diligence is likely to impact the final appearance of makeup. Individuals who apply makeup diligently are more likely to achieve the desired look, whereas those who apply makeup carelessly may not achieve the intended results. Questionnaires used to measure makeup so far (e.g., Mafra et al., 2020), first proposed by Cash & Cash (1982), or those used by Wagstaff (2018) or Sulikowski et al. (2022) refer to the frequency, time, and money that women spend on average on makeup over a certain number of days. Although these are great in assessing usual habits regarding makeup usage, this tool is not sensitive enough to track diversity in makeup application that may occur depending on the situational context, such as when a woman is trying to make an impression or meet an attractive potential partner. Our suggestion is that a woman's careful application of makeup can greatly enhance her attractiveness. This idea is supported by research findings which demonstrate that makeup applied by professionals can significantly increase a woman's perceived attractiveness (Batres et al., 2021). Further research should continue to explore both amount and diligence in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of makeup application behavior.

Our results highlight the significant role of motivation to make a good impression in shaping makeup application decisions. In fact, this motivation mediated all the effects of contexts on makeup application intentions. Importantly, if we did not include the motivation in our study we would not have observed some of the effects, as motivation fully mediated the vast majority of results, entirely explaining them. This motivation seems to explain the intensity of makeup and the effort women put into its application in various contexts. Therefore, if a woman anticipates the presence of a man whom she wants to impress, she will apply more intense makeup and do so more precisely, using more cosmetic categories than usual. But, when she anticipates the presence of a man whom she perceives as threatening, this context will lower the motivation to make a good impression and result in applying less makeup with less precision. This finding is consistent with the predictions of Lewis and Buss (2021) and Valentova et al. (2021), who emphasized that in certain situational contexts, a woman may want to blend in with the crowd, not emphasize her attractiveness, or even appear less attractive. Obviously, this would apply not only to makeup usage but to the wide array of appearance modifications that women use to create a specific impression (Davis & Arnocky, 2020).

Interestingly, our studies did not confirm the moderating role of appearance orientation in the relationship between specific contexts and both the amount and the diligence of makeup application. Contexts shaped women's intentions of makeup similarly, regardless of whether they cared more or less about their appearance. This finding points to the fundamental role of motivation to make an impression, which can work independently from appearance orientation. It seems to be an overriding factor, influencing women's decisions on how to apply makeup and adapt their appearance to specific social situations. This claim, however, requires further empirical investigation.

We also did not find any moderating role of sociosexual orientation, which corresponds with the results of the study conducted by Batres et al. (2018). Our studies suggest that specific contexts influenced makeup intentions independently of whether women declared restricted or unrestricted sociosexual orientation. As it was what we expected for the threatening context, we predicted that it would moderate the amount and the diligence of makeup in the mating context. One possible explanation for why sociosexual orientation did not moderate makeup intentions is that makeup application is influenced more strongly by the immediate context and situational cues rather than individual differences in sociosexual orientation. Makeup behavior, especially when influenced by specific contexts (e.g., parties, mating opportunities, threatening situations), may be more responsive to the immediate goals and motivations that the context elicits, rather than being driven by long-term sexual attitudes.

There are several limitations to our studies that should be taken into consideration. One limitation is the declarative nature of measures of intended makeup intensity and diligence, which is a common but poor practice in this field of research (e.g., Mafra et al., 2020; Sulikowski et al., 2022). As declarative measures of makeup usage vastly undermine the reliability of research on makeup, future studies should be conducted in laboratory settings to assess the makeup women actually apply under specific context manipulations.

In Study 1, as anticipated, women expressed a stronger intention to apply makeup with a higher intensity and diligence when preparing to meet attractive individuals at a party. However, the specific group of attractive individuals they imagined remains unclear. We investigated it in a little more detail in Study 2, revealing that when women anticipated meeting an attractive man at a party, they intended to be more diligent in their makeup application. Future studies should examine whether women would use more intense makeup and apply it with greater diligence when preparing to meet an attractive man or woman. This exploration should encompass not only intersexual courtship motives but also intrasexual competition motives. Intrasexual competition plays a significant role in shaping human behavior, including appearance-enhancing practices among women (Varella et al., 2017). As an example, when women were exposed to images of attractive individuals of the same sex, they showed a higher tendency to engage in risky appearance-enhancing behaviors, such as using diet pills (Hill & Durante, 2011). Investigating makeup application in the context of intrasexual selection would allow us to understand how individuals strategically use makeup to compete with others of the same sex not only for mates, but also for social status, attention, and resources.

Additionally, future research should explore the motivation behind makeup application in different settings. While our studies provided new insights into the underlying process of makeup application, there is still much to be learned about the specific reasons as to why women apply makeup in different situations, and why they want to make a good or bad impression.

Another potential limitation of our studies is that we assessed SOI, appearance orientation, and the other control variables after the experimental manipulations. While these variables are generally expected to be relatively stable and minimally influenced by situational contexts, it is possible that thinking about meeting an attractive man could have had an impact on the women's appearance orientation scores, for instance. To address this potential concern, we examined whether the scores for each control variable significantly varied across situational contexts. Our analysis found no statistically significant differences among the experimental groups for any of the tested variables (p-values > .05), thereby alleviating this concern.

Overall, our studies have brought new insights into the role of different contexts on makeup application decisions, as well as the potential motivational mechanism underlying these decisions. Specifically, we demonstrated that women's intentions regarding makeup application are strongly influenced by situational context, leading to more intense and diligent makeup choices in positive social and mating situations, and less diligence in threatening situations. Additionally, our findings emphasize the importance of measuring both the diligence of makeup application and the motivation triggered by specific situational contexts to better understand appearance-enhancing practices. These results contribute to a deeper understanding of how makeup use can be strategically employed to shape women's appearance based on their current motivations and social circumstances. Future research should seek to confirm the ecological accuracy of these results and expand upon them by exploring the specific motivations behind makeup application in a variety of different settings.

In conclusion, our study sheds new light on the intricate dynamics of human behavior, particularly within the context of mating, reproductive strategies, sexual selection, and intrasexual competition. These findings not only contribute to a broader understanding of human nature but also hold specific implications for women's sociability and wellbeing. By delving into the psychological underpinnings of makeup use, we pave the way for a deeper comprehension of how women employ cosmetics to communicate and navigate social settings. As such, this research contributes to enhancing our understanding of women's social relationships, self-presentation, and their overall appearance-related mental health.

Supplemental Material

sj-xlsx-1-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 - Supplemental material for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application

Supplemental material, sj-xlsx-1-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application by Malgorzata Biesiadecka, Aleksandra Szymkow and Wieslaw Baryla in Evolutionary Psychology

Supplemental Material

sj-xlsx-2-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 - Supplemental material for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application

Supplemental material, sj-xlsx-2-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application by Malgorzata Biesiadecka, Aleksandra Szymkow and Wieslaw Baryla in Evolutionary Psychology

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-3-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 - Supplemental material for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application by Malgorzata Biesiadecka, Aleksandra Szymkow and Wieslaw Baryla in Evolutionary Psychology

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-4-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 - Supplemental material for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application

Supplemental material, sj-docx-4-evp-10.1177_14747049231219283 for To Enhance, or not to Enhance: The Situational Context Shapes Women's Intentions on Amount and Diligence of Makeup Application by Malgorzata Biesiadecka, Aleksandra Szymkow and Wieslaw Baryla in Evolutionary Psychology

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Ministry of Education and Higher Education subvention granted to SWPS University (grant number 1307-11).

Data Availability Statement

The datasets presented in two studies can be found in online repositories at:

ORCID iDs

Malgorzata Biesiadecka

Aleksandra Szymkow

Wieslaw Baryla

Supplemental Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at:

Notes

References

Ahmed

T. A.

Ahmed

S. M.

El-Gammal

Shouman

Ahmed

Mansour

El-Badri

(2019). Oocyte aging: The role of cellular and environmental factors and impact on female fertility. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 1247, 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/5584_2019_456

Barlett

C. P.

Vowels

C. L.

Saucier

D. A.

(2008). Meta-analyses of the effects of media images on men’s body-image concerns. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27(3), 279–310. https://doi.org/https ://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2008.27.3.279

Barrett

(2010). Supernormal stimuli: How primal urges overran their evolutionary purpose. W. W. Norton & Company.

Batres

Porcheron

Courrèges

Russell

(2021). Professional versus self- applied makeup: Do makeup artists add value? Perception, 50(8), 709–719. https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066211029218

Batres

Russell

Simpson

J. A.

Campbell

Hansen

A. M.

Cronk

(2018). Evidence that makeup is a false signal of sociosexuality. Personality and Individual Differences, 122, 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.023

Bendixen

Kennair

L. E. O.

(2015). Revisiting judgment of strategic self-promotion and competitor derogation tactics. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 32(8), 1056–1082. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514558959

Bradshaw

H. K.

DelPriore

D. J.

(2021). Beautification is more than mere mate attraction: Extending evolutionary perspectives on female appearance enhancement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(1), 43–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-01952-7

Brdar

Tkalčić

Bezinović

(1996). Women’s cosmetic use and self-concept. Studia Psychologica, 38(1-2), 45–54.

Brown

Sacco

D. F.

(2018). Put a (limbal) ring on it: Women perceive men’s limbal rings as a health cue in short-term mating domains. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167217733072

10.

Buss

D. M.

(1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0https://doi.org/ 0023992

11.

Buss

D. M.

Dedden

L. A.

(1990). Derogation of competitors. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7(3), 395–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407590073006

12.

Buss

D. M.

Schmitt

D. P.

(2019). Mate preferences and their behavioral manifestations. Annual Review of Psychology, 70(1), 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-103408

13.

Buss

D. M.

Shackelford

T. K.

Kirkpatrick

L. A.

Larsen

R. J.

(2001). A half century of mate preferences: The cultural evolution of values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 491–503. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00491.x

14.

Cash

(1982). Women's use of cosmetics: Psychosocial correlates and consequences. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 4(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2494.1982.tb00295.x

15.

Cash

T. F

. (2017). Multidimensional Body–Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ). In Wade

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of feeding and eating disorders. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-104-6_3

16.

Cox

C. L.

Glick

W. H.

(1986). Resume evaluations and cosmetics use: When more is not better. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 14(1-2), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287847

17.

Davis

A. C.

Arnocky

(2020). An evolutionary perspective on appearance enhancement behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(1), 3–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-020-01745-4

18.

Delhey

Peters

Kempenaers

(2007). Cosmetic coloration in birds: Occurrence, function, and evolution. The American Naturalist, 169(S1), S145–S158. https://doi.org/10.1086/510095

19.

DelPriore

D. J.

Bradshaw

H. K.

Hill

S. E.

(2018). Appearance enhancement produces a strategic beautification penalty among women. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12(4), 348–366. https://doi.org/https ://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000118

20.

Diener

(2009). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. In Diener

(Ed.), Culture and well-being. Social indicators research series, Vol. 38 (pp. 43–70). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2352-0_3

21.

Dixson

A. F.

(1983). Observations on the evolution and behavioral significance of “sexual skin” in female primates. Advances in the Study of Behavior, 13, 63–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-3454(08)60286-7

22.

Etcoff

N. L.

Stock

Haley

L. E.

Vickery

S. A.

House

D. M.

(2011). Cosmetics as a feature of the extended human phenotype: Modulation of the perception of biologically important facial signals. PLoS ONE, 6(10), e25656. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025656

23.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A.-G.

Buchner

(2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146

24.

Fisher

Cox

(2011). Four strategies used during intrasexual competition for mates. Personal Relationships, 18(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01307.x

25.

Gangestad

S. W.

Scheyd

G. J.

(2005). The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annual Review of Anthropology, 34(1), 523–548. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143733

26.

Hayes

A. F.

(2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. The Guilford Press.

27.

Hill

S. E.

Durante

K. M.

(2011). Courtship, competition, and the pursuit of attractiveness: Mating goals facilitate health-related risk taking and strategic risk suppression in women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(3), 383–394. https://doi.org/https ://doi.org/10.1177/01461/67210/39560/3

28.

Hill

S. E.

Rodeheffer

C. D.

Griskevicius

Durante

White

A. E.

(2012). Boosting beauty in an economic decline: Mating, spending, and the lipstick effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(2), 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028657

29.

Izydorczyk

Lizińczyk

(2022). Factor structure of the Polish version of multidimensional body-self relations questionnaire-appearance scales (MBSRQ-PL). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 6097. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106097

30.

Jacob

Guéguen

Boulbry

Ardiccioni

(2010). Waitresses’ facial cosmetics and tipping: A field experiment. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(1), 188–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.04.003

31.

James

E. A.

Jenkins

Watkins

C. D.

(2018). Negative effects of makeup use on perceptions of leadership ability across two ethnicities. Perception, 47(5), 540–549. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006618763263

32.

Jasienska

Lipson

S. F.

Ellison

P. T.

Thune

Ziomkiewicz

(2006). Symmetrical women have higher potential fertility. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(5), 390–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.01.001

33.

Jokela

(2009). Physical attractiveness and reproductive success in humans: Evidence from the late 20th century United States. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(5), 342–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.03.006

34.

Jones

A. L.

Kramer

S. S.

(2015). Facial cosmetics have little effect on attractiveness judgments compared with identity. Perception, 44(1), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1068/p7904

35.

Jones

B. C.

Jones

A. L.

Shiramizu

Anderson

(2021). What does women’s facial attractiveness signal? Implications for an evolutionary perspective on appearance enhancement. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-01955-4

36.

Jones

(1996). Physical attractiveness and the theory of sexual selection: Results from five populations. Museum of Anthropology Publications.

37.

Jones

Brace

C. L.

Jankowiak

Laland

K. N.

Musselman

L. E.

Langlois

J. H.

Roggman

L. A.

Pérusse

Schweder

Symons

(1995). Sexual selection, physical attractiveness, and facial neoteny: Cross-cultural evidence and implications [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 36(5), 723–748. https://doi.org/10.1086/204427

38.

Kellie

Blake

Brooks

(2021). Behind the makeup: The effects of cosmetics on women's self-objectification, and their objectification by others. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 703–721. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/6uy7z

39.

Klatt

Eimler

Krämer

(2016). Makeup your mind: The impact of styling on perceived competence and warmth of female leaders. The Journal of Social Psychology, 156(5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2015.1129303

40.

Korichi

Pelle-de-Queral

Gazano

Aubert

(2008). Why women use makeup: Implication of psychological traits in makeup functions. Journal of Cosmetic Science, 59(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2494.2008.00452_3.X

41.

Kowal

Sorokowski

Pisanski

Valentova

J. V.

Varella

M. A. C.

Frederick

D. A.

Al-Shawaf

García

F. E.

Giammusso

Gjoneska

Kozma

Otterbring

Papadatou-Pastou

Pfuhl

Stöckli

Studzinska

Toplu-Demirtaş

Touloumakos

A. K.

Bakos

B. E.

Zumárraga-Espinosa

(2022). Predictors of enhancing human physical attractiveness: Data from 93 countries. Evolution and Human Behavior, 43(6), 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2022.08.003

42.

Lennon

S. J.

Rudd

N. A.

(1994). Linkages between attitudes toward gender roles, body satisfaction, self-esteem, and appearance management behaviors in women. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 23(2), 94–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077727X94232002

43.

Leve

Rubin

Pusic

(2012). Cosmetic surgery and neo- liberalisms: Managing risk and responsibility. Feminism & Psychology, 22(1), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353511https://doi.org/ 424361

44.

Lewis

D. M.

Buss

D. M.

(2021). Appearance enhancement: A cue-based approach. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(1), 73–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-01957-2

45.

Mafra

A. L.

Silva

C. S.

Varella

M. A.

Valentova

J. V.

(2022). The contrasting effects of body image and self-esteem in the makeup usage. PLoS ONE, 17(3), e0265197. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265197

46.

Mafra

A. L.

Varella

M. A. C.

Defelipe

R. P.

Anchieta

N. M.

de Almeida

C. A. G.

Valentova

J. V.

(2020). Makeup usage in women as a tactic to attract mates and compete with rivals. Personality and Individual Differences, 163, Article 110042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110042

47.

Matsushita

Morikawa

Yamanami

(2015). Measurement of eye size illusion caused by eyeliner, mascara, and eye shadow. Journal of Cosmetic Science, 66(3), 161–174.

48.

Meltzer

A. L.

McNulty

J. K.

Jackson

G. L.

Karney

B. R.

(2014). Men still value physical attractiveness in a long-term mate more than women: Rejoinder to Eastwick, Neff, Finkel, Luchies, and Hunt (2014). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106(3), 435–440. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035342

49.

Meltzer

M. A.

Bartlett

J. C.

(2019). Holistic processing and unitization in face recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(8), 1386–1406. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000640

50.

Mengelkoch

Gassen

Prokosch

M. L.

Boehm

G. W.

Hill

S. E.

(2022). More than just a pretty face? the relationship between immune function and perceived facial attractiveness. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 289, 20212476. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2476

51.

Mileva

V. R.

Jones

A. L.

Russell

Little

A. C.

(2016). Sex differences in the perceived dominance and prestige of women with and without cosmetics. Perception, 45(10), 1166–1183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006616652053

52.

Miller

L. C.

Cox

C. L.

(1982). For appearances’ sake: Public self-consciousness and makeup use. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8(4), 748–751. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167282084023

53.

Milroy

Cronk

Campbell

Simpson

(2002, June 19–23). Health and cosmetics: Can female signals of health and beauty be faked by the use of cosmetics? [Conference session]. Human Behavior and Evolutionary Society 14th Annual Meeting: Proceedings of a Conference, New Brunswick, NJ, United States.

54.

Mulhern

Fieldman

Hussey

Leveque

J.-L.

Pineau

(2003). Do cosmetics enhance female Caucasian facial attractiveness? International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 25(4), 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2494.2003.00188.x

55.

Nash

Fieldman

Hussey

Lévêque

J.-L.

Pineau

(2006). Cosmetics: They influence more than Caucasian female facial attractiveness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(2), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00016.x

56.

Netchaeva

Rees

(2016). Strategically stunning: The professional motivations behind the lipstick effect. Psychological Science, 27(8), 1157–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616654677

57.

Olson

E. S.

Doss

E. R.

Perilloux

(2021). Friend or foe? Mate presence and rival type influence clothing-based female intrasexual competition. Evolutionary Psychological Science, 7, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-020-00260-y

58.

Osborn

D. R.

(1996). Beauty is as beauty does? Makeup and posture effects on physical attractiveness judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/http:// dx.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1996.tb01837.x

59.

Palumbo

Fairfield

Mammarella

Di Domenico

(2017). Does make-up make you feel smarter? The “lipstick effect” extended to academic achievement. Cogent Psychology, 4(1), Article 1327635. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2017.1327635

60.

Pazhoohi

Kingstone

(2020). The effect of eyelash length on attractiveness: A previously uninvestigated indicator of beauty. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 16(2), 176–180. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000243

61.

Penke

Asendorpf

J. B.

(2008). Beyond global sociosexual orientations: A more differentiated look at sociosexuality and its effects on courtship and romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(5), 1113–1135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1113

62.

Porcheron

Mauger

Russell

(2013). Aspects of facial contrast decrease with age and are cues for age perception. PLoS ONE, 8(3), e57985. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0057985

63.

Preacher

K. J.

Hayes

A. F.

(2004). SPSS And SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553

64.

Provine

R. R.

Cabrera

M. O.

Nave-Blodgett

(2013). Red, yellow, and super-white sclera. Human Nature, 24(2), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-013-9168-x

65.

Randazzo

K. D.

Solmon

(2018). Exploring social norms as a framework to understand decisions to be physically active. Quest (Grand Rapids, Mich ), 70(1), 64–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2017.1335646

66.

Regan

P. C.

(2011). Cinderella revisited: Women’s appearance modification as a function of target audience sex and attractiveness. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39(4), 563–576. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2011.39.4.563

67.

Rhodes

Simmons

L. W.

Peters

(2005). Attractiveness and sexual behavior: Does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evolution and Human Behavior, 26(2), 186–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2004.08.014

68.

Robertson

Fieldman

Hussey

T. B.

(2008). Who wears cosmetics? Individual differences and their relationship with cosmetic usage. Individual Differences Research, 6(1), 38–56.

69.

Robertson

J. M.

Kingsley

B. E.

(2021). Behind the façade: Motivations for cosmetic usage by women. SAGE Open, 11(4), 215824402110615. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211061573

70.

Russell

Batres

Courrèges

Kaminski

Soppelsa

Morizot

Porcheron

(2018). Differential effects of makeup on perceived age. British Journal of Psychology, 110(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12337

71.

Russell

Porcheron

Sweda

J. R.

Jones

A. L.

Mauger

Morizot

(2016). Facial contrast is a cue for perceiving health from the face. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(9), 1354–1362. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000219

72.

Ruxton

G. D.

Stevens

(2015). The evolutionary ecology of decorating behaviour. Biology Letters, 11(6), 20150325. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2015.0325

73.

Simpson

J. A.

Gangestad

S. W.

(1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 870–883. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.870

74.

Stephen

I. D.

McKeegan

A. M.

(2010). Lip colour affects perceived sex typicality and attractiveness of human faces. Perception, 39(8), 1104–1110. https://doi.org/10.1068/p6730

75.

Strelan

Hargreaves

(2005). Reasons for exercise and body esteem: Men’s responses to self-objectification. Sex Roles, 53(7), 495–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-7137-5

76.

Sulikowski

Ensor

Wagstaff

(2022). Mate-value moderates the function of make-up as a signal of intrasexual aggression. Personality and Individual Differences, 185, 111275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111275

77.

Thomas

A. G.

Jonason

P. K.

Blackburn

Kennair

L. E. O.

Lowe

Malouff

N. P.

(2020). Mate preference priorities in the East and West: A cross-cultural test of the mate preference priority model. Journal of Personality, 88(3), 606–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12514

78.

Tinbergen

(1953). The herring gull's world; a study of the social behaviour of birds. Collins.

79.

Tran

Rosales

Copes

(2020). Paint a better mood? Effects of makeup use on YouTube beauty influencers’ self-esteem. SAGE Open, 10(2), 215824402093359. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020933591

80.

Valentova

J. V.

Mafra

A. L.

Varella

M. A.

(2021). Enhancing the evolutionary science of self-presentation modification. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 51(1), 79–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-01975-0

81.

Valentova

J. V.

Varella

M. A.

Havlíček

Kleisner

(2017). Positive association between vocal and facial attractiveness in women but not in men: A cross-cultural study. Behavioural Processes, 135, 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.12.005

82.

Varella

M. A.

Valentova

J. V.

Fernández

A. M.

(2017). Evolution of artistic and aesthetic propensities through female competitive ornamentation. In Fisher

M. L.

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of women and competition (pp. 757–783). Oxford University Press.

83.

Wagstaff

D. L.

(2018). Comparing mating motivations, social processes, and personality as predictors of women’s cosmetics use. Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, 12(4), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/ebs0000119

84.

Walter

K. V.

Conroy-Beam

Buss

D. M.

Asao

Sorokowska

Sorokowski

Zupančič

(2020). Sex differences in mate preferences across 45 countries: A large-scale replication. Psychological Science, 31(4), 408–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620904154

85.

Workman

J. E.

Johnson

K. K. P.

(1991). The role of cosmetics in impression formation. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 10(1), 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887302X9101000109

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

3.75 MB

0.08 MB

0.12 MB

0.16 MB