This article was downloaded by: [Central Michigan University]

On: 01 January 2015, At: 06:56

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

The Journal of Social

Psychology
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vsoc20

Physical Attractiveness and

Exchange Theory in Interracial
Dating
a a
Bernard I. Murstein , Joseph R. Merighi & Thomas
a
E. Malloy
a
Department of Psychology , Connecticut College
Published online: 01 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Bernard I. Murstein , Joseph R. Merighi & Thomas E. Malloy (1989)
Physical Attractiveness and Exchange Theory in Interracial Dating, The Journal of
Social Psychology, 129:3, 325-334

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1989.9712049

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.
 This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015
 The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(3), 325-334

Physical Attractiveness and Exchange

Theory in Interracial Dating
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

BERNARD I. MURSTEIN
JOSEPH R. MERIGHI
THOMAS E. MALLOY
Department of Psychology
Connecticut College

ABSTRACT. lbenty interracial couples (13 pairs of a Black man and a White
woman; 7 pairs of a Black woman and a White man) were observed and rated by
judges for physical attractiveness. The couples also rated themselves and their part-
ners on this dimension. Because physical attractiveness is an important variable in
interpersonal attraction, it was argued, in accordance with exchange theory, that in a
racially prejudiced society Blacks would have to offer more to Whites than vice versa
to participate in an interracial romantic relationship. It was hypothesized, therefore,
that Blacks would exceed their White partners in physical attractiveness. The hy-
pothesis was confirmed for the judges’ ratings but not for self-concepts or percep-
tions of the partners. The reasons for the differences among the attractiveness mea-
sures and the implications of the findings as a barometer of racial status are
discussed.

THE TREATMENT OF RACE as an exchange variable in marital choice was

first put forth by Merton (1941) on the basis of the work of Davis (1941).
Acknowledging that endogamy (the tendency to marry within a particular
group, caste, or class) was firmly established in American society, Merton
nevertheless noted that when exceptions did occur, the lower caste person
gave something extra to the relationship to compensate for the higher status
of the upper caste person. Race and socioeconomic class each constituted

We are indebted to Paul Abramson, who was responsible for the collection of the
data and recruitment of the judges, and to Steve Gunn and Stuart Vysefor sugges-
tions regarding statistical analyses.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Bernard I . Murstein, Department of
Psychology, Connecticut College, New London, CT 06320.

325
 326 The Journal of Social Psychology

examples of status available for exchange. This led him to postulate a number
of hypotheses arguing that in Black-White relationships Blacks would have
to be of higher socioeconomic status to attract Whites into marriage. These
hypotheses have been only partially confirmed in reviews of the literature
(Murstein, 1973, 1986), probably because Merton failed to consider factors
other than skin color as important in exchange.
In his theory of racial intermarriage, Murstein (1973, 1986) included
many more variables that might serve as exchange. The present study sought
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

to test one such variable, physical attractiveness, which is a primary factor in

initial attraction.
In earlier research with all-White couples, Murstein found a greater-
than-chance similarity in physical attractiveness within courting couples
(Murstein, 1972) and married couples (Murstein & Christy, 1976). However,
from an exchange viewpoint, when Blacks and Whites engage in a courting
relationship in a racially prejudiced society, Whites might require that Blacks
be more attractive than they themselves as a means of compensating for
Blacks’ lesser-valued skin color.
Physical attractiveness is not the only exchange variable. Power, educa-
tion, socioeconomic status, freedom from neurosis, and a host of other vari-
ables could also serve as exchange. However, physical attractiveness is read-
ily observable, has reasonably high agreement on standards, and is a prime
factor in early courtship. Consequently, it appeared to be an ideal variable to
investigate.
Our hypothesis was that in interracial courting couples, the Black mem-
ber would be more physically attractive than the White member. Physical
attractiveness was evaluated in three ways: judges’ ratings, self-concept, and
perception of the partner. We were most confident of the veridicality of our
hypothesis for judges’ ratings, next most confident for self-evaluation, and
least confident for perception of the partner. Our reasoning was that disinter-
ested judges tend to see strangers in a fairly objective way. There are societal
ideals and standards of beauty that are quite reliable (Udry, 1965), and with a
large enough sample a normal distribution is approached. The self-concept,
however, is more subject to distortion. In a study of 99 college men and
women (Murstein, 1976, 1986), it was found that self-concepts of attractive-
ness were moderately skewed toward the positive end of the continuum. Few
individuals thought of themselves as very much below average, with the mo-
dal evaluation being somewhat above average. On the other hand, judges’
ratings from photographs showed a normal distribution. When it came to per-
ceptions of the partners, the skew toward the positive end of the continuum
was very pronounced indeed: Almost no one perceived their partner as less
than average. Given these perceptual distortions, it seemed likely that Blacks
and Whites would be most differentiated by the judges’ ratings, although the
hypothesis was tested for all three measures of attractiveness.
 Murstein, Merighi. & Malloy 327

Method

Participants
Announcements were put forth on two New England college campuses for
interracial couples ranging in degree of involvement from dating often to
being married to participate in anonymous questionnaire-type social research
on interpersonal relationships among interracial couples. Couples could ap-
pear at research rooms, write, or telephone the researchers. They were prom-
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

ised $5.00 for about an hour and a half of work. Twenty interracial couples
were recruited: 13 pairs of a Black man and a White woman; 7 pairs of a
Black woman and a White man. None of the couples were married.
The background questionnaires indicated that the participants were al-
most all students, with very little variation in age. The means ranged from
19.7 years for the Black women to 22.6 years for the White women, with the
standard deviations being about 5 years for all subgroups. The participants
were generally not religious, and all were dating consistently or living to-
gether. The Black woman-White man couples had known each other for ap-
proximately 13 months on the average; the Black man-White woman
couples, for 17 months.
The questionnaires (not germane to this study) were administered to the
couples, who were seated apart. While filling them out they were observed
by the judges, who appeared to be members of the research team.

Judges
The four judges were college students ranging from age 20 to 23 (one Black
man, one Black woman, one White man, and one White woman). ’ h ojudges
were present at each session, arriving after the couples had been seated apart
and were filling out questionnaires. They did not know which individuals
were dating each other. The judges did not rate all participants because of
limitations on their time. Each judge rated 10 couples. The two White judges
evaluated the same couples (again a result of scheduling limitations): 5 Black
man-White woman couples and 5 Black woman-White man couples. The
two Black judges evaluated the remaining couples: 8 Black man-White
woman couples and 2 Black woman-White man couples. Judges were not
allowed to discuss their ratings prior to recording them.
We recognized the possibility that attractiveness ratings might vary as a
function of the judges’ race and sex or of the judges’ race and sex in interac-
tion with the target’s race and sex. An analysis of variance (ANOVA) of
judges’ ratings of attractiveness indicated no main effects from judges’ race
or sex. Moreover, judges’ race or sex did not significantly interact with tar-
gets’ race or sex.
 328 The Journal of Social Psychology

Interjudge Reliability
The Pearson correlation between the two White judges was .96 and that be-
tween the Black judges was .83, the average being .91. This indicated that
the 7-point scale had adequate reliability and substantiatesthe claim that there
are cultural ideals of beauty shared by most people.

Design and Statistical Analysis

Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

Given the present hypothesis-that minority group members in interracial

dyads would be more attractive than their majority group partners-the in-
dividual within the interracial dyad was the appropriate unit of analysis. A
hierarchically nested design (Myers, 1972) was used to study 40 individuals
who were paired as dating couples within 20 dyads.

Sey- and partner ratings of attractiveness. In general, members of a dating

dyad are likely to perceive each other as similar in attractiveness and to per-
ceive themselves about equally attractive simply because they have paired off
as a couple. However, greater similarity within couples than between groups
on the partner ratings and self-ratings would violate the independence as-
sumption underlying the ANOVA.
The correlation of dyad members’ self-ratings and partner ratings (i.e.,
the degree of nonindependence) is appropriately estimated by the intraclass
correlation (Hays, 1973). A positive intraclass correlation indicates greater
within-dyad than between-dyad similarity, whereas a negative intraclass cor-
relation indicates greater within-dyad than between-dyad dissimilarity. Un-
biased estimates of the terms of the ANOVA assume an intraclass correlation
that does not differ significantly from zero. It was possible to compute intra-
class correlations only for the partners’ perceptions of each other and for the
self-concepts and the judges’ ratings, because only within the same variable
can between- and within-sums-of-squaresbe calculated.
As shown in Table 1, the intraclass correlation for the partner ratings was
.62 ( p < .Ol), indicating that members of the interracial dyads rated each
other similarly on attractiveness, making the within-dyad data points nonin-
dependent. The intraclass correlation for the self-ratings was .53 ( p < .Ol),
which likewise indicates that dyad members made very similar self-ratings.
Thus, the self-ratings were also nonindependent.
Given this nonindependence, the correct error term for tests of signifi-
cance of a fixed effect (in this case individual’s race) is the mean square for
the nested dyad effect (Myers, 1972). However, although this error term pro-
vides an unbiased estimate of the fixed effect, the strategy is equivalent to
testing the mean of the two dyad members’ scores. Thus, as indicated by
Kenny and LaVoie (1985), the test is at the dyadic level rather than at the
 Murstein, Merighi, & Malloy 329

TABLE 1
Intercorrelation Matrix of Physical Attractiveness
for Men and Women in Interracial Couples (N = 20)

Men, Women, Self, Self, Partner,

Women, .21
Self, .30 - .08
Self, .31 - .02 .s3**
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

Partner, .I0 .26 - .02 .25

Partner, - .06 .15 .38* .34 .62**

Note. Subscripts indicate who is responsible for rating. J = judges, M = men, and W =
women. Italics indicate intraclass correlations.
*p < .05. **p < .01.

individual level. Therefore, since our focus was on the individual level of
analysis, we could not test our prime hypothesis of greater Black than White
attractiveness using self-ratings and partner ratings , because the significant
correlations between partners would invalidate the use of individual scores.
We could, however, test judges’ ratings of attractiveness.
Although not qualifying for consideration because of the confabulated
scores, both two-way ANOVAs were computed for self- and partner ratings
with the two conditions being sex and race. No main effects or interactions
reached significance.

Judges’ ratings. Judges’ ratings avoided the nonindependence problem asso-

ciated with the self-ratings and partner ratings because these measurements
(a) did not originate from dyad members and (b) were made by individuals
who were unaware of who was dating whom. The independence of these
ratings is reflected by a nonsignificant product-moment correlation of .21
among the ratings of dyad members. Thus the hypothesis was tested with
respect to judges’ ratings.

Results
A two-way factorial ANOVA was computed, with race and sex as the inde-
pendent variables and judges’ ratings as the dependent variable. Race proved
marginally significant, F(1, 36) = 3.97, p = .05, but neither sex, F(1,
36) = 2.51, nor the Sex X Race interaction, F(1, 36) = .58, reached sig-
nificance. Note that the exact probability for race was .054, just at the .05
level conventionally accepted as demarcating significance from nonsignific-
ance. However, whereas we predicted that the Blacks would be more attrac-
tive than the Whites, the ANOVA level-of-significance tables allow for either
 330 The Journal of Social Psychology

variable (Black or White) to be higher. Hence our level of significance from

a less conservative point of view might be said to be .027.
Because of the significant race difference in attractiveness, we checked
for race differences within each type of interracial couple. The t test between
Black men and their White partners was significant, t(24) = 2.45, p < .03,
whereas that between Black women and their White partners was not,
t(12) = 0.66.
Table 1, the intercorrelation matrix for men’s and women’s various phys-
ical attractiveness measures, suggests little similarity between the different
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

measures of physical attractiveness used in this study. To determine whether

there were significant differences between the measures, we decided to con-
duct an ANOVA if the three measures were not correlated. Because men’s
and women’s scores within couples were correlated for the self and partner
measures, the sum of the scores for members of each couple was used rather
than each individual’s scores. Thus there were 20 scores (one for each couple:)
for judges’ ratings, self-ratings, and partner ratings.
Intercorrelation of these scores revealed no significant correlation with
one-tailed tests: self- and partner ratings, r(19) = .31; self- and judges’ rat-
ings, r(19) = .16; partner and judges’ ratings, r( 19) = .17. This permitted
us to conduct an ANOVA among measures of attractiveness, and this proved
to be significant, F(2,57) = 13.88, p < .001. Testing for specific mean dif-
ferences (see Table 2) revealed significant differences between judges’ ratings
and partners’ perceptions, r(38) = 5.13, p < .MI, and between partners’
ratings and self-ratings, t(38) = 3.59, p < .001, but only a nonsignificant
trend between judges’ ratings and self-ratings, t(38) = 1.54.

Discussion
With respect to the means for each measure, the findings are highly similar to
those found earlier with wholly White couples (Murstein, 1972; Murstein &
Christy, 1976). Means were lowest when the most objective measure Cjudges’
ratings) were considered. The self-concepts were somewhat positively
skewed, and partners’ perceptions were the most positively skewed. The
moderate idealization of the self-concept and more extensive idealization of
the partner created a “ceiling effect,” so that racial differences inevitably dis-
appeared as means approached the asymptote.
The data partially support an exchange interpretation in that the objective
disinterested measure of attractiveness was significant. The finding that Black
men were significantly more attractive than their White female partners but
Black women were not significantly more attractive than their White male
partners must be discussed with caution, since the sample sizes, particularly
for the latter group (7 couples), were so small. It has been observed that Black
women are less interested in interracial relationships than Black men (Staples,
 Murstein, Merighi, & Malloy 331

TABLE 2
Means for Three Measures of Attractiveness for Blacks and Whites

Judges’ Self-
N Group ratings ratings Partners’ ratings

13 Black men 5.27 4.92 6.00

7 Black women 4.71 5.43 5.86
20 Black M 4.99 5.18 5.93
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

7 White men 4.36 5.00 6.29

13 Write women 4.31 5.08 5.77
20 White M 4.34 5.04 6.03

Grand M 4.70 5.08 5.95

Note. Theoretical range of scores was from extremely unattractive ( I ) to extremely attructive
(7).

1981). Accordingly, it is conceivable that the choice of interracial partners

and the range of partner attractiveness are smaller for White men than for
White women. Further research with a greater number of participants is
needed to clarify this matter.
Subjective measures of attractiveness, such as self-concept and partners’
perception were not independent and, in any case, yielded no significant find-
ings. This finding is hardly surprising because numerous studies have shown
that when individuals like others, they perceive themselves as much more
similar to the others than is actually the case if self-evaluations are compared
(Murstein, 1967, 1976; Murstein & Lamb, 1980).
Regarding physical attractiveness, the tendency is to moderately idealize
one’s own physical attractiveness and more extensively idealize one’s part-
ner’s attractiveness. This idealization is to be expected in our couples who
were unmarried, young, and involved with someone they had known about a
year on average-long enough for liking, loving, and idealization to develop,
but not so long as to allow reality to reveal the clay feet of their paramours.
The correlation of .62 between the perceptions of the partners, coupled with
the high mean of 5.95 for this measure of attractiveness, is testimony to mu-
tual exaggeration of the partner’s attractiveness, resulting in high similarity
of attractiveness within the couple. This exaggeration is in contrast with the
finding that actual objective similarity as observed by the judges was slight
(t = .21, ns).
Another way to explain these findings is to describe physical attractive-
ness in the beginning of a relationship (first sight) as an objective or indepen-
dent variable. (Others are judged according to general societal standards of
attractiveness.) As the relationship develops, if the partners are liked and
 332 The Journal of Social Pgchology

loved, physical attractiveness becomes a subjective or dependent variable,

depending on the quality of the relationship. Thus, as demonstrated earlier
(Murstein, 1976), almost no one perceives that they have an ugly partner.
Classificationstend to be limited to average, attractive, and beautiful or hand-
some.
It is possible that the findings in earlier research of positive correlations
between perceived physical attractiveness and liking, which were attributed
to the causal influence of physical attractiveness, were in all likelihood due
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

instead to the influence of liking on perceived physical attractiveness (cf. Per-

rin, 1921). This interpretation is not to deny that physical attractiveness (as
objectively determined) can cause halo effects regarding the ,personalityattri-
butes of strangers.
Apart from the effect of liking on perceived physical attractiveness, there
may be another factor that contributes to exaggerating the partner’s good
looks. Thinking that one has an attractive partner serves to raise one’s self-
esteem because the individual may believe she or he must have something
special to merit such a catch. Moreover, American men with attractive girl-
friends are more favorably evaluated than those with unattractive girlfriends
(Meiners & Sheposh, 1977).
It is noteworthy that the correlation between the men’s self-concepts and
the judges’ ratings was just short of significance (r = .30, p < . lo), whereas
no semblance of relationship existed between the women’s self-perceptions
and those of the judges (r = - .02, ns). This finding is in line with earlier
research indicating that women’s self-concepts are more dependent on the
quality of their intimate relationships than are men’s self-concepts (Berger,
1968). Thus, women’s self-concepts are less likely to be correlated with the
ratings of disinterested judges than are men’s self-concepts.
A number of cautions are in order concerning the present findings. First,
the sample was small, and we are reluctant to generalize to other samples in
different college settings and social strata. Second, physical attractiveness is
but one of many variables that influence courtship and play a role in ex-
change.
Third, the use of skin color as an exchange variable depends on individ-
uals valuing skin color in their relationships. To the extent that racial preju-
dice weakens or disappears, the relevance of skin color for exchange weakens
or disappears. However, a 1983 Gallup Poll indicated that the majority of
Americans still oppose interracial marriage (Gallup Poll, 1983).
Fourth, the lack of correlation among different measures of physical at-
tractiveness urges caution in using such measures. Once a relationship devel-
ops, it is doubtful that participants’ ratings of partner as well as of self will
have much overlap with objective appraisal by disinterested parties.
Last, physical attractiveness as noted in the stimulus-value-role theory
of marital choice (Murstein, 1970, 1976) is most important in the first, or
 Murstein. Merighi, & Malloy 333

stimulus, stage of courtship. Individuals may adapt to attractiveness and skin

color as the relationship continues so that their influence diminishes with
time. What effect this adaptation may have on such relationships is a topic for
future research.
The idea that individuals are self-centered enough to count assets and
liabilities when engaging in courtship runs contrary to the cherished Ameri-
can myth that love is blind and conquers all. Therefore, it may seem un-
American or even racist to suggest that individuals weigh color not simply to
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

decide whether to engage in an interracial relationship, but to get the best

possible deal if they do so. However, myths are sometimes at variance with
facts, and this study along with other data (Carter & Glick, 1976; Heer, 1974;
Murstein, 1973) indicates that skin color is clearly operative as an exchange
variable in interpersonal relationships. Somehow, therefore, individuals man-
age to love those persons who provide them with the best possible deal in a
relationship.

REFERENCES
Berger, C. R. (1968). Sex differences related to self-esteem factor structure. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 32, 442-446.
Carter, H., & Glick, P. C. (1976). Marriage and divorce: A social and economic
study (rev. 4.) Cambridge,
. MA: Harvard University Press.
Davis, K. (1941). Intermarriage in caste societies. American Anthropologist, 43,
376-395.
Gallup Poll. (1983). Interracial and interfaith marriages. In The Gallup Poll: Public
Opinion 1983 (pp. 94-102). Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources.
Hays, W. L. (1973). Statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Heer, D. M. (1974). The prevalence of Black-White marriage in the United States,
1960 and 1970. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 36, 246-258.
Kenny, D. A., & LaVoie, L. (1985). Separating individual and group effects. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 339-348.
Meiners, M. L., & Sheposh, J. P. (1977). Beauty or brains: Which image for your
mate? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 3, 262-265.
Merton, R. K. (1941). Intermarriage and the social structure. Psychiatry, 4 , 361-
374.
Murstein, B. I. (1967). Empirical tests of role, complementary needs, and homo-
gamy theories of marital choice. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 29, 689-
696.
Murstein, B. I. (1970). Stimulus-value-role: A theory of marital choice. Journal of
Marriage and the Family, 32, 465-48 1.
Murstein, B. I. (1972). Physical attractiveness and marital choice. Journal of Per-
sonality and Social Psychology, 22, 8-12.
Murstein, B. I. (1973). A theory of marital choice applied to interracial marriage.
In I. R. Stuart & L. E. Abt (Eds.), Interracial marriage: Expectations and reali-
ties (pp. 18-35). New York: Grossman.
Murstein, B. I. (1976). Who will marry whom? Theories and research in marital
choice. New York: Springer.
 334 The Journal of Social Psychology

Murstein, B. I. (1986). Paths to marriage. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Murstein, B. I., & Christy, P. (1976). Physical attractiveness and marriage adjust-
ment in middle-aged couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34,
537-542.
Murstein, B. I., & Lamb, J. (1980). Correlates of liking in a woman’s cooperative
college house. Academic Psychology Bulletin, 2 , 3 1-39.
Myers, J. L. (1972). Fundamentals of experimental design (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn
& Bacon.
Pemn, F. A. C. (1921). Physical attractiveness and repulsiveness. Journal of Exper-
imental Psychology, 4 , 203-2 18.
Downloaded by [Central Michigan University] at 06:56 01 January 2015

Staples, R. (1981). The world of Black singles: Changing patterns of malelfemale

relations. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Udry, J. R. (1965). Structural correlates of feminine beauty preferences in Britain
and the United States. Sociology and Social Research, 49, 331-342.

Received April 18, 1988