Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Males Prefer a Larger Bust Size in Women Than Females Themselves: An Experimental Study on Female Bodily Attractiveness with Varying Weight, Bust Size, Waist Width, Hip Width, and Leg Length Independently

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Save article
View saved research
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

What determines a female figure as attractive and is there a consensus of both sexes in judging female bodily attractiveness? To answer these questions, an extensive experiment was conducted using high-quality photographic stimulus material, several systematically varied figure parameters (weight, hip width, waist width, bust size, and leg length), and a large sample of 34,000 participants. The results showed that women prefer slightly wider hips, a narrower waist, and longer legs than men (highly significant but small effects). A clear difference was found with regard to the ideal bust size: 40% of men but only 25% of women preferred a large bust. The findings are discussed with respect to the changed role of women in Western industrialized countries who tend to concentrate on their career rather than on reproduction, and the effect of a curvaceous body with a large-sized bust on social perception.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from €39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  1. Barber N (1995) The evolutionary psychology of physical attractiveness: Sexual selection and human morphology. Ethol Sociobiol 16:395–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Buss DM (1995) Evolutionary psychology: a new paradigm for psychological science. Psychol Inquiry 6:1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Buss DM (2007) The evolution of human mating. Acta Psychologica Sinica 39:502–512

    Google Scholar 

  4. Singh D, Luis S (1994) Ethnic and gender consensus for the effect of WHR on judgment of women’s attractiveness. Hum Nat 6:51–65

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Symons D (1979) The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  6. Buss DM, Schmitt DP (1993) Sexual strategies theory: an evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychol Rev 100:204–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Weeden J, Sabini J (2005) Physical attractiveness and health in Western societies: a review. Psychol Bull 131:635–653

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rhodes G (2006) The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Ann Rev Psychol 57:199–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW (2006) Facial sexual dimorphism, developmental stability, and susceptibility to disease in men and women. Evol Hum Behav 27:131–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ley CJ, Lees B, Stevenson JC (1992) Sex- and menopause-associated changes in body-fat distribution. Maturitas 15:261–262

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rebuffe-Scrive M (1988) Metabolic differences in fat deposits. In: Bouchard C, Johnston FE (eds) Fat distribution during growth and later health outcome. Alan R. Liss, New York, pp 163–173

    Google Scholar 

  12. de-Ridder CM, Bruning PF, Zonderland ML, Thijssen JH, Bonfrer JM, Blankenstein MA, Huisveld IA, Erich WB (1990) Body fat mass, body fat distribution, and plasma hormones in early puberty in females. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 70:888–893

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Zaadstra BM, Seidell JC, Van-Noord PA, te Velde ER, Habbema JD, Vrieswijk B, Karbaat J (1993) Fat and female fecundity: prospective study of effect of body fat distribution on conception rates. BMJ 306:484–487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Furnham A, Lavanchy M, McClelland A (2001) Waist to hip ratio and facial attractiveness: a pilot study. Pers Indiv Differ 30:491–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Furnham A, Tan T, McManus C (1997) Waist-to-hip ratio and preferences for body shape: a replication and extension. Pers Indiv Differ 22:539–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Henss R (1995) Waist-to-hip ratio and attractiveness. Replication and extension. Pers Indiv Differ 19:479–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Henss R (2000) Waist-to-hip ratio and female attractiveness. Evidence from photographic stimuli and methodological considerations. Pers Indiv Differ 28:501–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Singh D (1993) Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: role of waist-to-hip ratio. J Pers Soc Psychol 65:293–307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Singh D (1993) Body shape and women’s attractiveness: the critical role of waist-hip ratio. Hum Nat 4:297–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Singh D (1994) Is thin really beautiful and good? Relationship between waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and female attractiveness. Pers Indiv Differ 16:123–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Singh D (1994) Waist-to-hip ratio and judgments of attractiveness and healthiness by male and female physicians. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 18:731–737

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Singh D (1994) Body fat distribution and perception of desirable female body shape by young black men and women. Int J Eat Disord 16:289–294

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Singh D (1995) Female health, attractiveness, and desirability for relationships: role of breast asymmetry and waist-to-hip ratio. Ethol Sociobiol 16:465–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Singh D, Young R (1995) Body weight, WHR, breasts and hips: role in judgments of female attractiveness and desirability for relationships. Ethol Sociobiol 16:483–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Streeter SA, McBurney DH (2003) Waist-hip ratio and attractiveness: new evidence and a critique of “a critical test”. Evol Hum Behav 24:88–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Furnham A, Petrides KV, Constantinides A (2005) The effects of body mass index and waist-to-hip ratio on ratings of female attractiveness, fecundity, and health. Pers Indiv Differ 38:1823–1834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson KL, Tassinary LG (2007) Interpersonal metaperception: the importance of compatibility in the aesthetic appreciation of bodily cues. In: Swami V, Furnham AF (eds) The body beautiful: evolutionary and socio-cultural perspectives. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  28. Swami V (2007) The missing arms of Vénus de Milo: reflections on the science of physical attractiveness. The Book Guild, Brighton

    Google Scholar 

  29. Swami V, Furnham A (2008) The psychology of physical attraction. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  30. Swami V, Furnham A (2007) The body beautiful: evolutionary and socio-cultural perspectives. Macmillan, London

    Google Scholar 

  31. Furnham A, Reeves E (2006) The relative influence of facial neoteny and waist-to-hip ratio on judgements of female attractiveness and fecundity. Psychol Health Med 11:129–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Tovée MJ, Cornelissen PL (1999) The mystery of female beauty. Nature 399:215–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Tovée MJ, Maisey DS, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL (1999) Visual cues to female physical attractiveness. Proc Biol Sci 266:211–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tovée MJ, Mason SM, Emery JL, McCluskey SE, Cohen-Tovée EM (1997) Supermodels: stick insects or hourglasses? Lancet 350:1474–1475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tovée MJ, Reinhardt S, Emery JL, Cornelissen PL (1998) Optimum body-mass index and maximum sexual attractiveness. Lancet 352:548–1242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tovée MJ, Cornelissen PL (2001) Female and male perceptions of female physical attractiveness in front-view and profile. Br J Psychol 92:391–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yu DW, Shepard GH (1998) Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Nature 396:321–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Smith KL, Cornelissen PL, Tovee MJ (2007) Color 3D bodies and judgements of human female attractiveness. Evol Hum Behav 28:48–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sobal J, Stunkard AJ (1989) Socioeconomic status and obesity: a review of the literature. Psychol Bull 105:260–275

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Anderson JL, Crawford CB, Nadeau J, Lindberg T (1992) Was the Duchess of Windsor right? A cross-cultural review of the socioecology of ideals of female body shape. Ethol Sociobiol 13:197–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Barber N (1998) Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in women: Tests of a reproductive model. Int J Eat Disord 23:449–454

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Barber N (1998) Secular changes in standards of bodily attractiveness in American women: different masculine and feminine ideals. J Psychol 132:87–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Fisher ML, Voracek M (2006) The shape of beauty: determinants of female physical attractiveness. J Cosmet Dermatol 5:190–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Silverstein B, Peterson B, Perdue L (1986) Some correlates of thin standard of bodily attractiveness for women. Int J Eat Disord 5:895–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Voracek M, Fisher ML (2002) Shapely centrefolds? temporal change in body measures: trend analysis. BMJ 325:1447–1448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Voracek M, Fisher ML (2006) Success is all in the measures: androgenousness, curvaceousness, and starring frequencies in adult media actresses. Arch Sex Behav 35:297–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Jasienska G, Ziomkiewicz A, Ellison PT, Lipson SF, Thune I (2004) Large breasts and narrow waists indicate high reproductive potential in women. Proc Biol Sci 271:1213–1217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Smith GD, Greenwood R, Gunnell D, Sweetnam P, Yarnell J, Elwood P (2001) Leg length, insulin resistance, and coronary heart disease risk: the Caerphilly Study. J Epidemiol Community Health 55:867–872

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Gunnell D, May M, Ben-Shlomo Y, Yarnell J, Smith GD (2003) Height, leg length, and cancer: the Caerphilly Study. Nutr Cancer 47:34–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gunnell D, Whitley E, Upton MN, McConnachie A, Smith GD, Watt GC (2003) Associations of height, leg length, and lung function with cardiovascular risk factors in the Midspan Family Study. J Epidemiol Community Health 57:141–146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Gunnell DJ, Davey-Smith G, Frankel S, Nanchahal K, Braddon FE, Pemberton J, Peters TJ (1998) Childhood leg length and adult mortality: follow up of the Carnegie (Boyd Orr) Survey of Diet and Health in Pre-war Britain. J Epidemiol Community Health 52:142–152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Gunnell DJ, Smith GD, Holly JM, Frankel S (1998) Leg length and risk of cancer in the Boyd Orr cohort. BMJ 317:1350–1351

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Langenberg C, Hardy R, Kuh D, Wadsworth ME (2003) Influence of height, leg and trunk length on pulse pressure, systolic and diastolic blood pressure. J Hypertens 21:537–543

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Lawlor DA, Ebrahim S, Davey-Smith G (2002) The association between components of adult height and Type II diabetes and insulin resistance: British Women’s Heart and Health Study. Diabetologia 45:1097–1106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Morris D (1987) Bodywatching. Grafton Books, London

    Google Scholar 

  56. Swami V, Einon D, Furnham A (2006) The leg-to-body ratio as a human aesthetic criterion. Body Image 3:317–323

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Allal N, Sear R, Prentice AM, Mace R (2004) An evolutionary model of stature, age at first birth and reproductive success in Gambian women. Proc Biol Sci 271:465–470

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Sorokowski P, Pawlowski B (2008) Adaptive preferences for leg length in a potential partner. Evol Hum Behav 29:86–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Buss DM (1992) Mate preference mechanisms: Consequences for partner choice and intrasexual competition. In: Barkow JH, Cosmides L, Tooby J (eds) The adapted mind: evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 249–266

    Google Scholar 

  60. Fallon AE, Rozin P (1985) Sex differences in perceptions of desirable body shape. J Abnorm Psychol 94:102–105

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Rozin P, Fallon A (1988) Body image, attitudes to weight, and misperceptions of figure preferences of the opposite sex: a comparison of men and women in two generations. J Abnorm Psychol 97:342–345

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Gitter AG, Lomranz J, Saxe L, Bar-Tal Y (1983) Perceptions of female physique characteristics by American and Israeli students. J Soc Psychol 121:7–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Jones D (1997) An evolutionary perspective on physical attractiveness. Evol Anthropol 5:97–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Tantleff-Dunn S (2001) Breast and chest size: ideals and stereotypes through the 1990 s. Sex Roles 45:231–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Horvath T (1981) Physical attractiveness: the influence of selected torso parameters. Arch Sex Behav 10:21–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Furnham A, Hester C, Weir C (1990) Sex differences in the preferences for specific female body shapes. Sex Roles 22:743–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Thompson JK, Tantleff S (1992) Female and male ratings of upper torso: actual, ideal, and sterotypical conceptions. J Soc Behav Pers 7:345–354

    Google Scholar 

  68. Byrd-Bredbenner C, Murray J, Schlussel YR (2005) Temporal changes in anthropometric measurements of idealized females and young women in general. Women Health 41:13–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Grammer K (1995) Signale der Liebe. Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, München

    Google Scholar 

  70. Tovée MJ, Hancock PJB, Mahmoodi S, Singleton BR, Cornelissen PL (2002) Human female attractiveness: waveform analysis of body shape. Proc Biol Sci 269:2205–2213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Pokrywka L, Cabrić M, Krakowiak H (2006) Body mass index and waist: hip ratio are not enough to characterise female attractiveness. Perception 35:1693–1697

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Seifert T (2005) Anthropomorphic characteristics of centerfold models: trends towards slender figures over time. Int J Eat Disord 37:271–274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Furnham A, Dias M, McClelland A (1998) The role of body weight, waist-to-hip ratio, and breast size in judgments of female attractiveness. Sex Roles 39:311–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Furnham A, Swami V (2007) Perception of female buttocks and breast size in profile. Social Behav Pers 35:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Tassinary LG, Hansen KA (1998) A critical test of the waist-to-hip ratio hypothesis of female physical attractiveness. Psychol Sci 9:150–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Beck SB, Ward-Hull CI, McLear PM (1976) Variables related to women’s somatic preferences of the male and female body. J Pers Soc Psychol 34:1200–1210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wiggins JS, Wiggins N, Conger JC (1968) Correlates of heterosexual somatic preference. J Pers Soc Psychol 10:82–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Kleinke CL, Staneski RA (1980) First impressions of female bust size. J Soc Psychol 110:123–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Tantleff-Dunn S (2002) Biggest isn’t always best: the effect of breast size on perceptions of women. J Appl Soc Psychol 32:2253–2265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Silverstein B, Perdue L, Peterson B, Vogel L, Fantini DA (1986) Possible causes of the thin standard of bodily attractiveness for women. Int J Eat Disord 5:907–916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Swami V, Jones J, Einon D, Furnham A (2009) Men’s preferences for women’s profile waist-to-hip ratio, breast size, and ethnic group in Britain and South Africa. Br J Psychol 100:313–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Swami V, Furnham A (2009) Big and beautiful: attractiveness and health ratings of the female body by male “fat admirers”. Arch Sex Behav 38:201–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Swami V, Knight D, Tovee MJ, Davies P, Furnham A (2007) Preferences for female body size in Britain and the South Pacific. Body Image 4:219–223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Swami V, Tovee MJ (2007) The relative contribution of profile body shape and weight to judgements of women’s physical attractiveness in Britain and Malaysia. Body Image 4:391–396

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Swami V, Einon D, Furnham A (2007) Cultural significance of leg-to-body ratio preferences? evidence from Britain and rural Malaysia. Asian J Soc Psychol 10:265–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Swami V, Smith J, Tsiokris A, Georgiades C, Sangareau Y, Tovée MJ, Furnham A (2007) Male physical attractiveness in Britain and Greece: a cross-cultural study. J Soc Psychol 147:15–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Swami V, Tovee MJ (2007) Perceptions of female body weight and shape among indigenous and urban Europeans. Scand J Psychol 48:43–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Tovee MJ, Swami V, Furnham A, Mangalparsad R (2006) Changing perceptions of attractiveness as observers are exposed to a different culture. Evol Hum Behav 27:443–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Swami V, Antonakopoulos N, Tovee MJ, Furnham A (2006) A critical test of the waist-to-hip ratio hypothesis of women’s physical attractiveness in Britain and Greece. Sex Roles 54:201–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Swami V, Caprario C, Tovee MJ, Furnham A (2006) Female physical attractiveness in Britain and Japan: A cross-cultural study. Eur J Personality 20:69–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Schaefer K, Fink B, Grammer K, Mitteroecker P, Gunz P, Bookstein FL (2006) Female appearance: facial and bodily attractiveness as shape. Psychol Sci 48:187–204

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Regensburg, Medical Center, Franz Josef Strauss Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany

    Lukas Prantl

  2. Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany

    Martin Gründl

Authors
  1. Lukas Prantl
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Martin Gründl
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lukas Prantl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Prantl, L., Gründl, M. Males Prefer a Larger Bust Size in Women Than Females Themselves: An Experimental Study on Female Bodily Attractiveness with Varying Weight, Bust Size, Waist Width, Hip Width, and Leg Length Independently. Aesth Plast Surg 35, 693–702 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9669-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9669-0

Keywords