Wikipedia

User:SkyRepublic76/sandbox

For the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise, see Physiognomonics. For the 2013 Korean film, see Physiognomy (film).
Illustration in a 19th-century book about physiognomy.

Physiognomy (from the Gk. physis meaning "nature" and gnomon meaning "judge" or "interpreter") is the assessment of a person's character or personality from his or her outer appearance, especially the face. The term can also refer to the general appearance of a person, object, or terrain, without reference to its implied characteristics, as in the physiognomy of a plant community.

Credence of such study has varied from time to time. The practice was well-accepted by the ancient Greek philosophers, but fell into disrepute in the Middle Ages when practised by vagabonds and mountebanks. It was then revived and popularised by Johann Kaspar Lavater before falling from favour again in the late 19th century.[1] Physiognomy as understood in the past meets the contemporary definition of a pseudoscience.[2]

No clear evidence indicates physiognomy works, though recent studies have suggested that facial appearances do "contain a kernel of truth" about a person's personality.[1]

Physiognomy is also sometimes referred to as anthroposcopy, though the expression was more common in the 19th century when the word originated.[3]

Ancient physiognomy

edit
Further information: Physiognomonics § Ancient physiognomy before the Physiognomonics

Notions of the relationship between an individual's outward appearance and inner character are historically ancient, and occasionally appear in early Greek poetry. The first indications of a developed physiognomic theory appear in fifth century BC Athens, with the works of Zopyrus (who was featured in a dialogue by Phaedo of Elis), who was said to be an expert in the art. By the fourth century BC, the philosopher Aristotle made frequent reference to theory and literature concerning the relationship of appearance to character. Aristotle was apparently receptive to such an idea, as evidenced by a passage in his Prior Analytics:

It is possible to infer character from features, if it is granted that the body and the soul are changed together by the natural affections: I say "natural", for though perhaps by learning music a man has made some change in his soul, this is not one of those affections natural to us; rather I refer to passions and desires when I speak of natural emotions. If then this were granted and also that for each change there is a corresponding sign, and we could state the affection and sign proper to each kind of animal, we shall be able to infer character from features.

— Prior Analytics 2.27 (Trans. A. J. Jenkinson)

The first systematic physiognomic treatise to survive to the present day is a slim volume, Physiognomonica (English: Physiognomonics), ascribed to Aristotle (but probably of his "school" rather than created by the philosopher himself). The volume is divided into two parts, conjectured to have been originally two separate works. The first section discusses arguments drawn from nature or other races, and concentrates on the concept of human behavior. The second section focuses on animal behavior, dividing the animal kingdom into male and female types. From these are deduced correspondences between human form and character.

After Aristotle, the major extant works in physiognomy are:

Ancient Greek mathematician, astronomer and scientist Pythagoras, believed by some to be the originator of physiognomics, once rejected a prospective follower named Cylon because, to Pythagoras, his appearance indicated bad character.[4][full citation needed] [page needed]

After inspecting Socrates a physiognomist announced that he was given to intemperance, sensuality and violent bursts of passion; which was so contrary to Socrates image that his students accused the physiognomist of lying. Socrates put the issue to rest by saying originally he was given to all these vices; but had a particularly strong self-discipline.[5]

Middle Ages and Renaissance

edit
 
Giambattista Della Porta, De humana physiognomonia (Vico Equense [Naples]: Apud Iosephum Cacchium, 1586).

The term was common in Middle English, often written as 'fisnamy' or 'visnomy', as in the The Tale of Beryn, a spurious addition to The Canterbury Tales: "I knowe wele by thy fisnamy, thy kynd it were to stele".

Physiognomy's validity was once widely accepted. English universities taught it until Henry VIII of England outlawed "beggars and vagabonds playing 'subtile, crafty and unlawful games such as physnomye or 'palmestrye'" in 1530 or 1531.[6][7] Around this time, scholastic leaders settled on the more erudite Greek form 'physiognomy' and began to discourage the whole concept of 'fisnamy'.

Leonardo da Vinci dismissed physiognomy in the early 16th century as "false", a chimera with "no scientific foundation".[8] Nevertheless, Leonardo believed that lines caused by facial expressions could indicate personality traits. For example, he wrote that "those who have deep and noticeable lines between the eyebrows are irascible".[8]

Modern physiognomy

edit

Origin

edit
 
Johann Kaspar Lavater.

The principal promoter of physiognomy in modern times was the Swiss pastor Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741–1801) who was briefly a friend of Goethe. Lavater's essays on physiognomy were first published in German in 1772 and gained great popularity. These influential essays were translated into French and English. The two principal sources from which Lavater found 'confirmation' of his ideas were the writings of the Italian Giambattista Della Porta (1535–1615) and the English physician-philosopher Sir Thomas Browne (1605–1682), whose Religio Medici discusses the possibility of the discernment of inner qualities from the outer appearance of the face, thus:

there is surely a Physiognomy, which those experienced and Master Mendicants observe… For there are mystically in our faces certain Characters that carry in them the motto of our Souls, wherein he that cannot read A.B.C. may read our natures.

— R.M. part 2:2

Late in his life, Browne affirmed his physiognomical beliefs, writing in his Christian Morals (circa 1675):

 
Sir Thomas Browne

Since the Brow speaks often true, since Eyes and Noses have Tongues, and the countenance proclaims the heart and inclinations; let observation so far instruct thee in Physiognomical lines....we often observe that Men do most act those Creatures, whose constitution, parts, and complexion do most predominate in their mixtures. This is a corner-stone in Physiognomy… there are therefore Provincial Faces, National Lips and Noses, which testify not only the Natures of those Countries, but of those which have them elsewhere.

— C.M. Part 2 section 9

Sir Thomas Browne is also credited with the first usage of the word caricature in the English language, whence much of physiognomy movement's pseudolearning attempted to entrench itself by illustrative means.

Browne possessed several of the writings of the Italian Giambattista Della Porta, including his Of Celestial Physiognomy, which argued that it was not the stars but a person's temperament that influences facial appearance and character. In his book De humana physiognomia (1586), Porta used woodcuts of animals to illustrate human characteristics. His works are well represented in the Library of Sir Thomas Browne; both men sustained a belief in the 'doctrine of signatures' — that is, the belief that the physical structures of nature such as a plant's roots, stem, and flower, were indicative keys (or 'signatures') to their medicinal potentials.

Lavater received mixed reactions from scientists, with some accepting his research and others criticizing it.[2] For example, the harshest critic was scientist Georg Christoph Lichtenberg, who said pathognomy, discovering the character by observing the behaviour, was more effective. Writer Hannah More complained to Horace Walpole, "In vain do we boast (...) that philosophy had broken down all the strongholds of prejudice, ignorance, and superstition; and yet, at this very time (...) Lavater's physiognomy books sell at fifteen guineas a set."[2][9]

Period of popularity

edit

The popularity of physiognomy grew throughout the 18th century and into the 19th century, and it was discussed seriously by academics, who saw a lot of potential in it.[2] Many European novelists used physiognomy in the descriptions of their characters.[2] notably Balzac, Chaucer[10] and portrait artists, such as Joseph Ducreux; meanwhile, the 'Norwich connection' to physiognomy developed in the writings of Amelia Opie and travelling linguist George Borrow. A host of other 19th-century English authors were influenced by the idea, notably evident in the detailed physiognomic descriptions of characters in the novels of Charles Dickens, Thomas Hardy, and Charlotte Brontë.

Physiognomy is a central, implicit assumption underlying the plot of Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray. In 19th-century American literature, physiognomy figures prominently in the short stories of Edgar Allan Poe.[11]

Phrenology, also considered a form of physiognomy, was created around 1800 by German physician Franz Joseph Gall and Johann Spurzheim, and was widely popular in the 19th century in Europe and the United States. In the U.S., physician James W. Redfield published his Comparative Physiognomy in 1852, illustrating with 330 engravings the "Resemblances between Men and Animals". He finds these in appearance and (often metaphorically) character, e.g. Germans to Lions, Negroes to Elephants and Fishes, Chinamen to Hogs, Yankees to Bears, Jews to Goats.[12]

During the late 19th century, English psychometrician Sir Francis Galton attempted to define physiognomic characteristics of health, disease, beauty, and criminality, via a method of composite photography.[13][14] Galton's process involved the photographic superimposition of two or more faces by multiple exposures. After averaging together photographs of violent criminals, he found that the composite appeared "more respectable" than any of the faces comprising it; this was likely due to the irregularities of the skin across the constituent images being averaged out in the final blend. With the advent of computer technology during the early 1990s, Galton's composite technique has been adopted and greatly improved using computer graphics software.[15]

In the late 19th century, it became associated with phrenology and consequently discredited and rejected.[1] Modern scientists now consider physiognomy a form of pseudoscience.[2]

Modern science

edit

A February 2009 article in the New Scientist reported that physiognomy is living a small revival, with research papers trying to find links between personality traits and facial traits.[1] Still no conclusive evidence exists for any clear link.[1]

Some alternative theories have been proposed.[1] For example, the human brain tends to extrapolate emotions from facial expressions, and physiognomy would only be an overgeneralization of this skill.[1] Also, if one classifies a person as untrustworthy due to his or her face, 'and treats them as such', that person will eventually behave in an untrustworthy way toward the person holding this belief (see self-fulfilling prophecy).[1]

SkyRepublic76 Expansion

edit

Life Outcomes

edit

Modern psychological research has demonstrated the link between perceptual cues from appearance and individuals’ life outcomes in numerous domains.

Collins and Zebrowitz (1995) conducted two studies that examined how physical appearance might affect people's occupation status and job type in civilian and military settings. The results of the first study showed that taller men received higher incomes. Moreover, appearance was associated with job type. Specifically, attractive females and tall males had occupations that required qualities prototypical of the attractiveness halo. In contrast, babyfaced females and short males had jobs that were more congruent with the babyface stereotype. In addition, the results of study 2 revealed a negative correlation between males' body-weight and their job status in a military setting. Along the same lines, whereas heavier men tended to be involved in dangerous situations (e.g., gunfire), babyfaced men were more likely to be awarded, potentially due to how people distinct babyface stereotypes from heroic behaviours. [16]

Hertenstein, Hansel, Butts and Hile (2009) assessed the extent to which people's smile intensity in photographs predicted the likelihood of divorce later in their life. In two studies, researchers analysed participants' university yearbook photos and various photos taken in their childhood and early adulthood. The results of both studies demonstrated that the intensity of individuals' smile in their photos was significantly correlated with the possibility of future divorce. These effects suggest that people's emotional dispositions that could lead to life outcomes are well reflected in their facial appearance. [17]

Zebrowitz and McDonald (1991) examined the influence of litigants' facial appearance on judicial decisions across 506 small claims courts cases. The results showed that defendants facing attractive plaintiffs were more likely to lose the case than were defendants facing less attractive plaintiffs. Moreover, badyfaced defendants were more likely to win court cases that involved intentional actions rather than cases that involved negligent actions. In addition, defendants who appeared to be more facially mature tended to be required to pay higher monetary awards to plaintiffs who were babyfaced. These patterns, as the researchers suggested, reflected people's typical assumptions about babyfacedness and facial maturity. [18]

Ideology

edit

In recent years researchers have shown how ideology, such as political and religious beliefs, may be perceived from facial appearance.

Rule & Ambady (2010) examined whether people's political affiliations can be perceived based on physical appearance. In a series of studies, they found that participants could accurately judge whether U.S. Senate candidates were Democrats or Republicans by viewing the targets' photos. In addition, they replicated these effects with Democrat and Republican university students as the targets. Moreover, researchers found a relationship between participants' accurate judgments and the traits perceived from the targets' faces. Specifically, participants perceived republican targets to be more powerful than democrats. Also, whereas more powerful-looking targets tended to be judged to be Republican, targets who looked warmer were more likely to be judged as Democrats. [19]

Roberts, Girffin, McOwan, and Johnston (2011) examined whether people could perceive UK Parliament Members' political affiliations from their faces. The results revealed that participants' judgments regarding the targets' Conservative versus Labour politicians status were inaccurate. Nevertheless, when researchers created computer-generated idealised facial representations of the parties and showed these idealised faces to a new group of judges, political affiliations could be accurately categorized based on facial cues. These effects, according to the researchers, were due to the fact that computer-generated ideal faces may be more similar to how people mentally represent the Parliament Members. [20]

Rule, Garrett, and Ambady (2010) investigated the degree to which people could accurately judge whether a person is a Mormon or non-Mormon based on facial cues. The results demonstrated that participants could accurately (significantly better than chance guessing) distinguish Mormon's faces from non-Mormons' faces based on full facial cues, faces without hair, faces with eyes and mouth covered, faces without outer shape, and inverted faces. In contrast, participants' judgments based on individual facial features such as eyes, nose, and mouth were not more accurate than chance. The results also revealed that although participants were unaware of their ability to categorize religious groups, they could do so accurately based on the difference between Mormons' and non-Mormons' facial skin. Indeed, researchers found that Mormons were perceived to be more healthy than non-Mormons in terms of the skin quality.[21]

Sexual Orientation

edit

Researchers have found that people's judgments of others' sexual orientation based on facial cues are both accurate and reliable.

Rule and Ambady (2008) investigated how accurate people could categorize male sexual orientation after viewing the targets' faces for a brief period of time ranging from 33 ms to 10,000 ms. The findings showed that the accuracy of participants' judgments were significantly above chance level for faces presented for 50 ms, 100 ms, 6500 ms, 10,000 ms, and at a self-paced speed. [22]

Rule, Ambady, and Hallett (2009) assessed the accuracy, speed, and automaticity of people's categorization of female sexual orientation based on facial cues. Researchers found that people could accurately judge females' sexual orientations by viewing their face as well as eyes without eyebrows. In addition, researchers found that viewing the target faces for merely 40 ms would be sufficient for the perceives to make judgments that were better than chance guessing. Moreover, researchers found that such accurate judgments were automatic. Indeed, participants' accuracy in categorizing female sexual orientation was significantly higher when they made snap judgments than when they made calculated judgments. [23]

Rule, Ambady, Ishii, Rosen, and Hallett (2011) examined how culture may affect people's perception and categorization of male sexual orientation. The findings demonstrated that although participants came from countries (i.e., United States, Japan, and Spain) that vary in terms of the acceptance of homosexuality, their judgments of male sexual orientation based on facial information were all significantly more accurate than the chance level. Additionally, American participants made more accurate and faster judgments than did Japanese and Spanish participants. Moreover, participants from cultures whose acceptance of homosexuality is lower tended to categorize the targets to be heterosexual versus homosexual. [24]

Personality and Traits

edit

Researchers have identified the link between individuals' facial cues and personality/traits.

Carre and McCormick (2008) investigated the relationship between facial width-to-height ratio and traits such as dominance and aggression in a behavioural task and a natural setting (i.e., varsity and professional hockey games). In a series of studies, researchers found that in contrast to females, males had wider faces, higher dominance trait rating, and were more aggressive. They also found that males with higher width-to-height ratio were more aggressive, whereas such an effect did not hold true for females. In addition, researchers found that in both varsity and professional hockey games, players' higher width-to-height ratio is correlated with higher level of aggression measured by the penalty minutes obtained. [25]

Gosling, Ko, Mannarelli and Morris (2002) investigated the extent to which people's physical environments are linked to observers' perception of those individuals based on their environments. Factors that were taken into consideration in this investigation included inter-observer consensus, observer accuracy, cue utilization, and cue validity. The findings revealed that, first, independent perceives showed significant consensus regarding the impressions they formed based on personal environments. Secondly, observer impressions about the occupants based on environments along were more accurate than occupants' own ratings, occupants' peer ratings and pure physical features of the environments. Moreover, observers' accurate judgments about the occupants were dependent upon valid cues in the environments. Lastly, observers' impression accuracy was at least in part explained by prototypical gender and race characteristics. [26]

Rule, Ambady, and Adams (2009) examined how people may perceive and form impressions about human faces at full-frontal, three-quarter, and profile views. The results revealed that, despite the viewing angles, perceives formed consistent judgments of the targets' personality traits, such as aggressiveness, competence, dominance, likability, and trustworthiness, as well as physiognomy characteristics, such as attractiveness and facial maturity. Moreover, the researchers found that when observers had to make judgments about the target faces under a time constraint (i.e., 50 ms exposure to each target face), the consensus of their personality judgments was significantly reduced for faces presented from full-frontal and three-quarter views. In contrast, observers' judgments based on full-frontal and three-quarter views remained consistent across the self-paced and 50 ms viewing conditions.[27]

Leadership

edit

Modern research has also revealed how nonverbal facial cues may predict and create good leaders.

Rule and Ambady (2009) investigated how female chief executive officers' facial appearance may predict their financial success. In their study, 170 American undergraduate students judged business leaders' leadership abilities and personality traits based on the faces of 20 2006 Fortune 1000 female chief executive officers. The results revealed that participants' judgments of the targets' leadership and competence were significantly correlated with the profits that the targets' companies were making. In addition, ratings of the targets facial dominance significantly predicted their own compensation.[28]

Rule and Ambady (2011) found that people could accurately predict America's top 100 law firm leaders' success, as indicated by the profits that those law firms were making, based on their photos alone. Moreover, researchers were able to replicate these effects by letting participants make the judgments based on the targets' photos from early adulthood (university yearbook pictures). The findings, therefore, suggested that the relationship between facial appearance and leadership success may be consistent across lifespan. [29]

Wong, Haselhuhn and Ormiston (2011) establish the link between the physical appearance of business leaders and their organisation's performance. Specifically, their research showed that companies led by male chief executive officers (CEO) who had wider faces performed better financially than did companies let by male CEOs who had narrower faces. In addition, these effects were moderated by the company's "decision-making dynamics". For instance, the relationship between CEOs' facial width-to-height ratio and their company's performance was significantly stronger in organisations with simple decision-making dynamics (e.g., cognitively simple leadership structure) than in organisations with more complex decision-making dynamics. [30]

Modern usage

edit

Some evidence indicates people can detect male homosexuality by looking at facial characteristics[31] or at the pattern of whorls in the scalp,[32] though subsequent research has largely refuted the findings on hair whorl patterns.[33]

A physiognomist named Yoshito Mizuno was employed from 1936 to 1945 by the Imperial Japanese Naval Aeronautics Department, examining candidates for the Naval Air Corps, after - to their surprise - Admiral Yamamoto's staff discovered that he could predict with over 80% accuracy the qualifications of candidates to become successful pilots.[34]

In 2011, the South Korean news agency Yonhap published a physiognomical analysis of the current leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-Un.[35]

edit
 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Physiognomy.

References

edit
  1. ^ a b c d e f g h How your looks betray your personality – New Scientist (Magazine issue 2695) – 11 February 2009: Roger Highfield, Richard Wiseman, and Rob Jenkins
  2. ^ a b c d e f Roy Porter (2003). "Marginalized practices". The Cambridge History of Science: Eighteenth-century science. The Cambridge History of Science. Vol. 4 (illustrated ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 495–497. ISBN 978-0-521-57243-9. Although we may now bracket physiognomy with Mesmerism as discredited or even laughable belief, many eighteenth-century writers referred to it in all seriousness as a useful science with a long history(...) Although many modern historians belittle physiognomy as a pseudoscience, at the end of the eighteenth century it was not merely a popular fad but also the subject of intense academic debate about the promises it held for future progress.
  3. ^ http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anthroposcopy
  4. ^ Riedweg, Christop, Pythagoras: His Life,Teaching, and Influence.
  5. ^ William Godwin (1876). "Lives of the Necromancers". p. 8.
  6. ^ Stimson, Frederic Jesup (1910). Popular Law-Making: A Study of the Origin, History, and Present Tendencies of Law-Making by Statute. (Reprinted 2002 by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. pp. 81–82, 86. ISBN 1-58477-094-5. LCCN 00-022513.
  7. ^ 22 Henry VIII cap. 12, sect. 4
  8. ^ a b Leonardo da Vinci (2002). André Chastel (ed.). Leonardo on Art and the Artist. Translated from French by Ellen Callman. Courier Dover Publications. pp. 144–45. ISBN 0-486-42166-X. Unabridged republication of The Genius of Leonardo da Vinci, originally published by Orion Press, New York, 1961.
  9. ^ Letter to Horace Walpole of September 1788, reproduced in W.S. Lewis, The Yale Edition of Horace Walpole's Correspondence, 48 vols. (London: oxford University Press, 1937–83), 31:279–81 (quotation at p. 280). Citation taken from Roy Porter's The Cambridge History of Science: Eighteenth-century science.
  10. ^ Auguste Elfriede Christa Canitz, Gernot Rudolf Wieland, ed. (1999). "Another look at an Old 'Science': Chaucer's Pilgrims and Physiognomy". From Arabye to Engelond: medieval studies in honour of Mahmoud Manzalaoui on his 75th birthday. Actexpress Series. University of Ottawa Press. pp. 93–110. ISBN 978-0-7766-0517-3.
  11. ^ Erik Grayson. "Weird Science, Weirder Unity: Phrenology and Physiognomy in Edgar Allan Poe" Mode 1 (2005): 56–77. Also online.
  12. ^ "Comparative Physiognomy or Resemblances between Men and Animals: Illustrated" by Jam. W. Redfield Full text on Google Books
  13. ^ Benson, P., & Perrett, D. (1991). Computer averaging and manipulations of faces. In P. Wombell (ed.), Photovideo: Photography in the age of the computer (pp. 32–38). London: Rivers Oram Press.
  14. ^ Galton, F. (1878). Composite portraits. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 8, 132–142.
  15. ^ Yamaguchi, M. K., Hirukawa, T., & Kanazawa, S. (1995). Judgment of gender through facial parts. Perception, 24, 563–575.
  16. ^ Collins, M. A., & Zebrowitz, L. A. (1995). The contributions of appearance to occupational outcomes in civilian and military settings. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 129-163.
  17. ^ Hertenstein, M. J., Hansel, C. A., Butts, A. M., & Hile, S. N. (2009). Smile intensity in photographs predicts divorce later in life. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 91-105.
  18. ^ Zebrowitz, L. A., & McDonald, S. M. (1991). The impact of litigants’ babyfacedness and attractiveness on adjudications in small claims courts. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 603-623.
  19. ^ Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2010). Democrats and Republicans can be differentiated from their faces. PLoS ONE, 5, e8733.
  20. ^ Roberts, T., Girffin, H., McOwan, P. W., & Johnston, A. (2011). Judging political affiliation from faces of UK MPs. Perception, 40, 949-952.
  21. ^ Rule, N. O., Garrett, J. V., & Ambady, N. (2010). On the perception of religious group membership from faces. PLoS ONE, 5, e14241.
  22. ^ Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2008). Brief exposures: Male sexual orientation is accurately perceived at 50-ms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1100- 1105.
  23. ^ Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., & Hallett, K. C. (2009). Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1245-1251.
  24. ^ Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., Ishii, K., Rosen, K. S., & Hallett, K. C. (2011). Found in translation: Cross-cultural consensus in the accurate categorization of male sexual orientation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 1499-1507.
  25. ^ Carre, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2008). In your face: Facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Section B, 275, 2651-2656.
  26. ^ Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A Room with a cue: Judgments of personality based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 379-398.
  27. ^ Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., & Adams, R. B., Jr. (2009). Personality in perspective: Judgmental consistency across orientations of the face. Perception, 38, 1688-1699.
  28. ^ Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2009). She’s got the look: Inferences from female chief executive officers’ faces predict their success. Sex Roles, 61, 644-652.
  29. ^ Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2011). Judgments of power from college yearbook photos and later career success. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 154-158.
  30. ^ Wong, E., Haselhuhn, M., & Ormiston, M. (2011). A face only an investor could love: CEO facial structure predicts firm financial performance. Psychological Science, 22, 1478-1483.
  31. ^ There's Something Queer about that Face, Scientific American
  32. ^ Abrahams, Marc (14 September 2009), "Sexual swirls: how your hair can say a lot about you", The Guardian, retrieved 10 October 2013
  33. ^ "Hair whorl direction and sexual orientation in human males". Behavioral Neuroscience. 123 (2): 252–6. doi:10.1037/a0014816. {{cite journal}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)
  34. ^ Agawa, The Reluctant Admiral, pp. 110–115.
  35. ^ The Face tells all, The Center For Arms Control And Non-Proliferation

Further reading

edit
edit

Category:Phrenology Category:History of neuroscience Category:Criminology Category:Pseudoscience

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:SkyRepublic76/sandbox&oldid=791865016"