Does attractiveness buy happiness? “It depends on where you’re from”

Previous studies document that attractiveness predicts life outcomes, including well-being and social connectedness. This study investigates whether the attractiveness–outcomes link is especially strong in settings, such as many urban areas, that promote relationship constructions as a product of personal choice. This link may weaken in settings, such as many rural areas, that promote less voluntaristic-independent relationship constructions. Analyses of survey data from a national representative (United States) sample supported these hypotheses. Attractiveness (operationalized as waist-to-hip ratio) predicted well-being and social connectedness among urban (n = 257) but not rural (n = 330) women. Social connectedness mediated the urban–rural moderation of the attractiveness/well-being link. Findings suggest that frequently observed attractiveness effects are the product of particular, modern social contexts that promote relationship choice. Weight Watchers, Slim Fast, body-shaping apparel, body-contouring surgery—Americans spend billions of dollars every year on these and other attractiveness-enhancing products. Why do people go to such lengths (and sometimes endanger themselves) to increase attractiveness? In short, attractive people experience better social and psychological outcomes than unattractive people do (see Langlois et al., 2000, for a meta-analytic review). Research suggests that attractiveness enhances social connectedness such that attractive people experience more popularity and social interaction and less loneliness than less attractive people do (Feingold, 1992). Perhaps Victoria C. Plaut, Department of Psychology, University of Georgia; Glenn Adams and Stephanie L. Anderson, Department of Psychology, University of Kansas. Dr. Plaut is currently visiting in the Jurisprudence and Social Policy Program at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. We thank Robert Bartlett, Steven Beach, Keith Campbell, Michael Kernis, Hazel Rose Markus, Lenny Martin, Benoı̂t Monin, Kris Preacher, and Abraham Tesser for their helpful comments. Correspondence should be addressed to Victoria C. Plaut, University of Georgia, Department of Psychology, Athens, GA 30602, e-mail: [email protected] reflecting implications of attractiveness for social connectedness, research also suggests a positive relationship between attractiveness and aspects of hedonic well-being (i.e., subjective appraisal of life quality; see Ryan & Deci, 2001) such as life satisfaction and positive affect (Argyle, 1987/2001; Umberson & Hughes, 1987; but see Diener, Wolsic, & Fujita, 1995). Likewise, research suggests an association between attractiveness and aspects of eudaimonic well-being (i.e., positive psychological functioning centered on self-realization; Ryan & Deci, 2001) such as feelings of control and positive self-view (Langlois et al., 2000). Accounts of these attractiveness effects attribute them to greater parental investment in attractive children (Buss, 1999), an evolutionary tendency to use attractiveness as an indicator of health and reproductive potential (Thornhill & Gangestad, 1999), and differential beliefs about and treatment of attractive and unattractive people (Snyder, Tanke, & Berscheid, 1977). Without denying these explanations, we suggest that attractiveness effects are also a product of particular