Full Text: To the Editor:

We were delighted to see the issue of esthetics in dentistry addressed in the recent editorial by Dr. Ronald E. Goldstein (1993). However, we were concerned with Dr. Goldstein's selection and interpretation of psychological literature pertaining to the benefits of physical attractiveness. Specifically, we feel that Dr. Goldstein overstated the benefits of physical attractiveness and failed to cite significant studies which suggest that physical attractiveness may not be uniformiy beneficial.

While the "what is beautiful is good" stereotype has long been cited as one of the most robust findings in the psychological literature, recent data indicate that the effects of physical attractiveness may not be as generalized or as positive as once thought. A recent metaanalysis of the physical attractiveness literature (Eagly et al., 1991) noted major limitations in the general assumption that physical attractiveness is always beneficial. The results of their meta-analysis suggest that beauty serves as a strong cue for assumptions of social ease, but has little effect on perceptions of honesty, virtue, helpfulness, potency, or general emotional adjustment. In fact, Adams (1982) has noted instances in which beauty may be a handicap, especially in inferences about vanity and self-centeredness.

Similarly, other authors in the psychological literature have cautioned against oversimplified interpretations of the "beauty is good" phenomenon. Such authors have noted that many factors contribute to impression formation, such as non-verbal gesturing, social skills, vocal attractiveness, and social reference group (e.g., Zuckerman et al., 1991). Others have noted that the typical lab-based physical attractiveness research design is not representative of real-life interaction (Shaw et al., 1985).

While some researchers have employed field research methods to study the effects of physical attractiveness, such studies are rare. When Reis et al. (1980) studied physical attractiveness in a naturalistic setting, they found that moderately attractive college women had more dates and more same-sex socializing than did very attractive college women. Clearly, the effects of physical attractiveness are not as apparent as Dr. Goldstein suggests.

We do not wish to imply that esthetic changes could not have a significant effect on psychological functioning or quality of life. However, we were concerned that readers unfamiliar with the literature were left with the impression that the major questions in this area have already been answered. While we wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Goldstein's recommendation that more research should focus on psychological aspects of esthetics in dentistry, we wish to point out that the major issues in this research are far from resolved. >>> Esthetic Dentistry.