Appearance influences more than just beauty—it impacts income, choice, and the economy. Explore how looks shape modern society and economics through ‘Beauty Economics’.
Can good looks put food on the table?
“In the end, it’s not looks but ability that gets recognized.”
It’s a phrase I’ve heard drilled into my ears since childhood. Yes, that’s right. I’m an ‘ugly woman’ who wants to compete based on ability. But now, we live in the era of perfect ‘appearance-obsessed society’. Through rising income levels, the popularity of short-form content, and the growth of modern consumers, people’s desire and interest in appearance have only grown stronger. Appearance is valued in many places—department stores, companies, stadiums, clubs, stages—and has become people’s biggest concern. It’s only natural that pretty women attract popularity. But can being pretty put food on the table?
Judging people by their looks is human nature
Traditional societies valued skill over appearance. It was an era when the phrase “judging people by their looks” carried negative connotations. Yet, whether then or now, appearance is more than just looks.
What exactly is ‘face value’? ‘Face’ literally means appearance or looks, while ‘value’ signifies a numerical rating. ‘Face value’ refers to a person’s overall attractiveness index, encompassing all physical characteristics: looks, impression, physique, aura, and attitude. This attractiveness index holds real value and is closely tied to a person’s personality, activities, influence, and benefits.
The purpose of quantifying appearance is, of course, to rank individuals. That’s why a quantified term like ‘face value’ is used to indicate a person’s level when evaluating their looks. Born in the internet age, this term has evolved beyond a simple label as networks have developed.
It is said that humans pay more attention to attractive appearances even from infancy. Indeed, the human subconscious strongly tends to perceive ‘beauty’ as ‘good,’ leading to this behavior as a way to avoid the bad and seek the good.
‘Face value’ is an evaluative criterion that drives behavior. Although fragmentary, it helps judge things quickly and simply, making it sufficiently worthy of study in economics. Humans instinctively pursue beauty, and everyone harbors a desire for it. Beauty is closely intertwined with human interests. Over 2,000 years ago, the philosopher Aristotle told his students:
“A handsome face is as effective as any letter of recommendation.”
Throughout humanity’s long evolutionary journey, we have continually emphasized the value of not judging people solely by their appearance, striving to suppress this instinct. Yet, ‘Anti-bias’ rooted in reason and morality ultimately cannot overcome human nature.
The following excerpt from psychologist Comila Shahani-Denning’s report supports this:
“Biases about appearance manifest in every domain. For instance, when teachers grade papers, voters cast ballots, juries render verdicts, or interviewers evaluate candidates—in every situation, people are influenced by the other person’s looks.”
In traditional societies, appearance was an intangible asset whose value was underutilized. With the advent of the internet era, people no longer shy away from discussing appearance. Appearance has become a commodity, and evaluation criteria have emerged. The existence of such criteria means appearance has become marketable. In the ‘appearance economy,’ diverse industrial networks have branched out, giving rise to booming industries like plastic surgery, beauty, and selfie equipment.
The better one’s looks, the higher their income
The ‘face value’ mechanism exerts tremendous influence on consumers’ product choices. Does it also influence the realization of personal value?
The answer is “Yes.” Renowned economist Daniel Hamermesh has studied this issue from the ‘face value’ perspective for over 20 years. In his well-known paper, “Appearance and the Labor Market,” he stated:
“There is a remarkably strong positive correlation between appearance and lifetime earnings.”
Appearance affects salary. Workers with attractive looks receive higher salaries, incentives, and treatment compared to their average-looking colleagues. Daniel Hamermesh defined this as the ‘Economics of good looks’.
His research found that, holding other factors constant, men rated as somewhat less attractive earned 9% less than the national average, termed the ‘Ugliness penalty’ imposed by the market. Similarly, men rated as highly attractive earned 5% more than the national average, also under the same conditions, a phenomenon termed the ‘beauty premium’ imposed by the market.
For women, those rated as less attractive experienced a 5% lower salary than the national average due to the ‘ugliness penalty’, while those rated as highly attractive earned 4% more than the national average due to the ‘beauty premium’. Combining men and women, workers receiving poor appearance evaluations and thus subject to the ‘ugly penalty’ had salaries 7-9% lower than the national average, while workers receiving good appearance evaluations and thus benefiting from the ‘beauty premium’ had salaries 5% higher than the national average.
In their research paper titled “The Effects of Cosmetic Surgery on Marriage and the Labor Market,” Korean economists Professor Lee Soo-hyung and Professor Ryu Geun-kwan further expanded Daniel Hamermesh’s beauty economics.
They discovered that both an individual’s and their spouse’s annual salary is directly proportional to their ‘face value’. Men with above-average looks earned 15.2% more than average-looking men, while women with above-average looks earned 11.1% more than average-looking women. The spouses of men with above-average looks earned 18.8% more than the national average, and the spouses of women with above-average looks earned 12.7% more than the national average.
So, how long does it take for plastic surgery to yield these salary increases and higher spouse salaries? On average, it takes 1.3 years for men and 2.5 years for women. The group that benefited most from plastic surgery was those who transformed their below-average looks into above-average ones. The group that gained the least benefit from plastic surgery was those who were already quite attractive.
Is it natural that ‘face value’ and salary are directly proportional? Yes, it is. Numerous empirical economic studies show that individuals with high ‘face value’ demonstrate higher labor efficiency, employer wage recovery rates, loan approval rates, and preferential loan benefits compared to those with low ‘face value’.
Research by economist Ernest W. King’s team indicates employers tend to assign better tasks and pay higher wages to good-looking employees, and this cannot necessarily be attributed to discrimination.
In their paper “The Relationship Between Appearance and Real Estate Agents’ Labor Efficiency and Income,” the team analyzed data from the Multiple Listing Service (MLS), the largest real estate transaction platform in the southeastern United States. They found that, holding other factors constant, the more attractive the real estate agent hired to sell a property, the higher the selling price and the greater the seller’s transaction profit. Even so, can we really say that sellers prefering attractive real estate agents is simply discrimination?
“Attractive looks generate greater economic value.”
How does economics interpret this? Economist John Karl Scholz’s research team presented an answer in their paper “Appearance and Lifetime Earnings.” They found that among students, ‘face value’ strongly correlates with participation rates in extracurricular activities like student council, clubs, and sports programs, as well as with confidence and personality traits.
This finding reveals that students with superior looks have more opportunities to participate in diverse extracurricular activities during their school years. These experiences enhance their abilities in communication, leadership, rule-following, and teamwork, laying the groundwork for them to become sought-after talents in the future labor market.
In summary, in terms of human capital formation, individuals with superior physical appearance develop at a faster pace and to a higher, broader level than those with less attractive appearances. This is partly due to the inherent advantages of superior looks themselves, but also because of the characteristics of social human capital. The economists argue that superior physical appearance itself is a productive resource.
Attractive individuals are visually pleasing to look at and draw customer attention, a phenomenon termed ‘customer preference.’ Employers hire them precisely for the external effects stemming from their outstanding looks. This approach aims to satisfy customers and encourage repeat visits and purchases. Of course, industries where a worker’s appearance alone attracts customer attention remain few.
Economists state that the employment cost for a single worker is not determined solely by the wages paid to that employee but is also related to the happiness of their colleagues. The less a new employee fits in, the more the work environment deteriorates and the lower the happiness of their colleagues becomes. In such cases, the company has no choice but to alleviate employee dissatisfaction through wage increases to prevent staff turnover. This ultimately becomes an indirect factor that increases the hiring cost of the new employee.
Appearance Matters in Elections Too
Professor Timothy A. Judge of the University of Florida argues that superior looks boost confidence, ultimately making it easier to secure higher salaries. In other words, individuals with attractive appearances, fueled by high confidence, are more proactive and assertive in seizing opportunities. They demonstrate superior abilities in fierce competition, making it easier for them to increase their salaries.
This principle applies equally to public office elections. Ignace Bergomi’s research team at Lund University in Sweden experimentally proved this.
The team analyzed nearly 2,000 candidates from Finnish elections. They showed photos of Finnish candidates to foreigners who knew nothing about them and had them rate the candidates’ looks. They then compared these results with the election outcomes.
The comparison revealed that the candidates rated highest in attractiveness by foreigners were the ones who actually succeeded in the election. What distinguishes this experiment from Daniel Hamermesh’s salary study is that the influence of appearance was greater for women than for men in the election.
The Economist has also published similar findings. In all animal societies, including humans, individuals with superior looks who become leaders are highly likely to achieve the greatest career accomplishments. Height, physique, voice, and manner of speaking all play significant roles in this context.
While excellent looks offer many advantages, they also come with drawbacks. For instance, doctors may tend to neglect patients who are exceptionally attractive. Attractive patients may face disadvantages during treatment. People tend to associate appearance and complexion with health, leading them to underestimate the severity of illness in good-looking individuals. Research also shows doctors may not examine symptoms as thoroughly when treating attractive patients.
The worst case is for those so exceptionally good-looking that they have no one around them. It’s as if they’ve traded beauty for loneliness. A 1975 study revealed that people tend to deliberately avoid beautiful women when encountering them on the street. While this behavior might stem from respect, it also means others keep their distance because of their looks. External attractiveness generates a lot of visual energy. But it can also make it harder for others to approach them easily.
Here’s an interesting fact. According to a report from a major online dating site, people with exceptional looks actually find it harder to find dates than those considered less attractive. Perhaps this is because less attractive people don’t impose such high expectations on potential partners.
The ‘looks economy’ applies to products and brands too
People have an innate preference for beautiful things. This can broadly be termed ‘sensory stimulation,’ encompassing not just visual appeal but also pleasant scents and soft textures. Imagine a mountain of attractive products before you. Typically, the first reaction upon seeing a beautiful item is ‘It’s really pretty,’ followed by the desire ‘I want it.’ Only then does rational thought kick in: ‘Where would I use this?’ This decision-making process determines whether the product is purchased.
Particularly, today’s MZ generation grew up in a relatively affluent era with access to good education, significantly enhancing their aesthetic discernment and standards. Aesthetic elements have become a crucial factor in their purchasing behavior.
Against this backdrop, the era of ‘influencer commerce’ has dawned. Cases where influencers launch beautiful, distinctive products that go viral and generate massive sales are increasingly common. Branded products by influencers became hugely popular across diverse categories: apparel, cosmetics, food, interior goods, camping gear, automotive accessories, and pet supplies. They put particular effort into the products’ visual design. When influencers uploaded attractive photos on social media, people felt vicarious satisfaction and a desire to purchase just by seeing them. This is precisely how they generate massive sales with just a few photos.
The value of excellent exterior design lies in capturing consumer attention and attracting new customers. However, without excellent quality backing it up, customer repurchases and building loyal customers are impossible. Products must catch both rabbits: design and quality. Companies must increase R&D investment and develop innovative products to launch online commerce products that are loved for the long term, not just a flash in the pan. Modern consumers have abundant information and a wide range of choices. While they might make a first purchase because they like the design, they will quickly turn away if disappointed by the quality. Having an attractive design is certainly a good thing. However, without individuality and distinctiveness, it’s difficult to win consumers’ affection. Similarly, when evaluating a person, appearance matters initially, but talent comes next, and ultimately, it’s character that counts.
