Bad Boys and Gals Present as More Attractive

People who score higher on negative personality traits know how to look hotter when they try harder than do those with more stable characters. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Why are we attracted to people we know are trouble. People may assume they’re drawn to danger or risk taking. But in fact, people with dark personalities may look hotter when they try harder than do those with more stable character traits.

Scientists gave personality tests to more than 100 subjects to rate them for what’s called Dark Triad traits—that’s Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy. They then took different photographs of each subject. One was a so-called “adorned condition” where the participants were turned out clothed and styled. In the “unadorned condition” they were presented as neutrally as possible: their hair was pulled back, they changed into grey sweat pants and tee shirts, and they wore no makeup or other adornments. And they maintained neutral facial expressions.

The pictures were then shown to volunteers who rated them for attractiveness. And the people who exhibited the Dark Triad traits were rated as significantly more attractive in the adorned state than in their unadorned state. But the subjects who did not have dark traits did not get an attractiveness boost from getting dressed up and coiffed. The study is the journal Social Psychological Personality and Science. [Nicholas S. Holtzman and Michael J. Strube, People with Dark Personalities Tend to Create a Physically Attractive Veneer]


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.


So before you fall for Mr. Wrong, check him out in sweatpants.

—Christie Nicholson

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe