New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Venus in Repose

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If we see someone attractive, we say he or she is “easy on the eyes.” Now new research suggests that beautiful faces, paintings, objects or patterns are attractive because they are easy on the mind.

Previous research showed that people tend to find typical things more attractive, from watches to birds to faces. In fact, researchers found that the secret to creating an attractive face was to “average” many faces into a digital composite (right). One idea is that evolution adapted us to like typical-looking faces because they suggest good health in a prospective mate. But this notion does not explain why we would like typicality in cars, fish or other things we are not trying to mate with.

It turns out that our brains might simply “like” stimuli that do not take too much effort to process, says Piotr Winkielman, a psychologist at the University of California, San Diego. And that holds whether we are looking at a human face or a pattern of dots.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Winkielman and his colleagues created two different random patterns out of eight dots. They called one of the patterns an “Ack” and the other one a “Blub.” Then they showed people variations of these two patterns and asked them to rate each pattern as either an Ack or a Blub.

The closer each pattern was to its prototype, the faster people were able to make the classification and the more attractive they found the pattern—even though it was just a series of random dots with no obvious aesthetic value. The easier the pattern was to perceive, the prettier people found it.

“I think ultimately there's a reward for successful perception,” Winkielman says. “There's an internal brain reward for processing efficiency. By making the pattern easier to perceive, we're letting the brain give itself a pat on the proverbial back.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe