
Botox may increase your face value — but you're better off trying this move that doesn't cost a cent, scientists say
Botox may increase face value for a growing number of Americans, including celebs like Nicole Kidman and Meghan Trainor — but when it comes to making yourself desirable to a prospective partner, researchers say smiling can be even more effective.
New research suggests that the popular cosmetic injections do increase users' curb appeal — but when respondents in a survey were asked to rate an array of strange faces, those with upturned lips beat those who merely plumped them up.
4 The research found that smiling could be more effective at enhancing visual appeal than filler injections (pictured).
Stasique – stock.adobe.com
Scientists at Tilburg University in The Netherlands also reported that Botox users were likely to be seen as one-night stand prospects — and that getting the costly jabs weren't necessarily useful to those hoping to be taken more seriously as viable life partners.
The illusion-shattering findings, published in the journal 'Perception,' come amid a worldwide uptick in Botox usage.
Usage of the injectable 'tweakment' has become so frequent that people are actually developing an immunity.
Researchers set out to test if people who undergo Botox and other filler treatments are perceived 'more positively by others,' per study co-author Dr. Bastian Jaeger, who claimed that 'existing research on the effectiveness of these treatments is not very strong.'
To see if it's worth literally putting one's money where their mouth is, the scientists followed 114 participants who underwent Botox and dermal filler treatments, the Times Of London reported.
4 Study authors found that while Botox can make you more attractive as a mate, it won't necessarily get you to happily ever after any faster.
Vasyl – stock.adobe.com
They then asked around 3,000 people to rate their before and after pics on a 7-point attractiveness scale.
After reviewing said snaps, which were shot carefully to keep the lighting, expression and other factors consistent across the pics, participants overwhelmingly found that Botox does indeed boost people's visual appeal.
'This difference was rather small: a 0.07-point change in our 7-point attractiveness scale on average,' explained Dr. Jaeger per the Daily Mail. 'This means that on average, a person who was rated a 4 out of 7 on attractiveness before the treatment might be rated a 4.07 out of 7 after treatment.'
4 Participants were asked to evaluate the before-and-after pics of Botox recipients.
Sage Journals
There was also an increase of 0.13 with regards to how youthful the participants were thought of.
However, this paled in comparison to another, less expensive way of enhancing one's attractiveness: smiling.
Researchers found that turning one's frown upside down — and not cosmetically — caused one's so-called hotness to soar by 0.4 points, six times more than Botox.
4 'We did not see any benefits of treatment on how competent, intelligent, charismatic, friendly or trustworthy people were perceived to be,' said Jaeger.
Drobot Dean – stock.adobe.com
Meanwhile, applying makeup gave people's perceived looks a boost of 0.6 points compared to the filler treatment, which starts at around $300 for a simple forehead injection and involves obstructing nerve signals to muscles, relaxing them and curbing wrinkles.
There was another major caveat to alleged Botox-enhanced hotness.
While the aesthetic accelerant increased people's desirability as a short-term fling prospect and as a platonic pal — a rise of 0.09 in both categories — there was no statistical improvement in how they were seen as long-term partners.
It's unclear why Botox didn't up people's image as soulmate material, but scientists noted that the jabs had no effect on the perception of character traits either.
'We did not see any benefits of treatment on how competent, intelligent, charismatic, friendly or trustworthy people were perceived to be,' said Jaeger.
Interestingly, while small amounts of botox did not significantly enhance physical appeal, many people report that, 'after treatment, they find it easier to make friends and that they make a better impression on others,' per Jaeger.
Dr. Jaeger attributed this phenomenon to a placebo effect of sorts.
'It is plausible that people have more success socially, not because they look different and people treat them differently, but because they think they do and act more confidently around others (sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy),' he said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
31 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Judge allows the National Science Foundation to withhold hundreds of millions of research dollars
NEW YORK (AP) — The National Science Foundation can continue to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars from researchers in several states until litigation aimed at restoring it plays out, a federal court ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge John Cronan in New York declined to force the NSF to restart payments immediately, while the case is still being decided, as requested by the sixteen Democrat-led states who brought the suit, including New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut. In his ruling, Cronan said he would not grant the preliminary injunction in part because it may be that another court, the Court of Federal Claims, has jurisdiction over what is essentially a case about money. He also said the states failed to show that NSF's actions were counter to the agency's mandate. The lawsuit filed in May alleges that the National Science Foundation's new grant-funding priorities as well as a cap on what's known as indirect research expenses 'violate the law and jeopardize America's longstanding global leadership in STEM.' Another district court had already blocked the the cap on indirect costs — administrative expenses that allow research to get done like paying support staff and maintaining equipment. This injunction had been requested to restore funding to the grants that were cut. In April, the NSF announced a new set of priorities and began axing hundreds of grants for research focused on things like misinformation and diversity, equity and inclusion. Researchers who lost funding also were studying artificial intelligence, post-traumatic stress disorder in veterans, STEM education for K-12 students and more. Researchers were not given a specific explanation for why their grants were canceled, attorney Colleen Faherty, representing the state of New York, said during last month's hearing. Instead, they received boilerplate language stating that their work 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities." NSF has long been directed by Congress to encourage underrepresented groups like women and people with disabilities to participate in STEM. According to the lawsuit, the science foundation's funding cuts already halted efforts to train the next generation of scientists in fields like computer science, math and environmental science. A lawyer for the NSF said at the hearing that the agency has the authority to fund whatever research it deems necessary — and has since its inception in 1950. In the court filing, the government also argued that its current priorities were to 'create opportunities for all Americans everywhere' and 'not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups.' The plaintiff states are trying to 'substitute their own judgement for the judgement of the agency," Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the NSF, said during the hearing. The science foundation is still funding some projects related to expanding representation in STEM, Cronan wrote in his ruling. Per the lawsuit filed in May, for example, the University of Northern Colorado lost funding for only one of its nine programs focused on increasing participation of underrepresented groups in STEM fields. ___
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge allows the National Science Foundation to withhold hundreds of millions of research dollars
NEW YORK (AP) — The National Science Foundation can continue to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars from researchers in several states until litigation aimed at restoring it plays out, a federal court ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge John Cronan in New York declined to force the NSF to restart payments immediately, while the case is still being decided, as requested by the sixteen Democrat-led states who brought the suit, including New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut. In his ruling, Cronan said he would not grant the preliminary injunction in part because it may be that another court, the Court of Federal Claims, has jurisdiction over what is essentially a case about money. He also said the states failed to show that NSF's actions were counter to the agency's mandate. The lawsuit filed in May alleges that the National Science Foundation's new grant-funding priorities as well as a cap on what's known as indirect research expenses 'violate the law and jeopardize America's longstanding global leadership in STEM.' Another district court had already blocked the the cap on indirect costs — administrative expenses that allow research to get done like paying support staff and maintaining equipment. This injunction had been requested to restore funding to the grants that were cut. In April, the NSF announced a new set of priorities and began axing hundreds of grants for research focused on things like misinformation and diversity, equity and inclusion. Researchers who lost funding also were studying artificial intelligence, post-traumatic stress disorder in veterans, STEM education for K-12 students and more. Researchers were not given a specific explanation for why their grants were canceled, attorney Colleen Faherty, representing the state of New York, said during last month's hearing. Instead, they received boilerplate language stating that their work 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities." NSF has long been directed by Congress to encourage underrepresented groups like women and people with disabilities to participate in STEM. According to the lawsuit, the science foundation's funding cuts already halted efforts to train the next generation of scientists in fields like computer science, math and environmental science. A lawyer for the NSF said at the hearing that the agency has the authority to fund whatever research it deems necessary — and has since its inception in 1950. In the court filing, the government also argued that its current priorities were to 'create opportunities for all Americans everywhere' and 'not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups.' The plaintiff states are trying to 'substitute their own judgement for the judgement of the agency," Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the NSF, said during the hearing. The science foundation is still funding some projects related to expanding representation in STEM, Cronan wrote in his ruling. Per the lawsuit filed in May, for example, the University of Northern Colorado lost funding for only one of its nine programs focused on increasing participation of underrepresented groups in STEM fields. The states are reviewing the decision, according to spokespeople from the New York and Hawaii attorney general offices. The National Science Foundation declined to comment. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Solve the daily Crossword


Hamilton Spectator
34 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Judge allows the National Science Foundation to withhold hundreds of millions of research dollars
NEW YORK (AP) — The National Science Foundation can continue to withhold hundreds of millions of dollars from researchers in several states until litigation aimed at restoring it plays out, a federal court ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge John Cronan in New York declined to force the NSF to restart payments immediately, while the case is still being decided, as requested by the sixteen Democrat-led states who brought the suit, including New York, Hawaii, California, Colorado and Connecticut. In his ruling, Cronan said he would not grant the preliminary injunction in part because it may be that another court, the Court of Federal Claims, has jurisdiction over what is essentially a case about money. He also said the states failed to show that NSF's actions were counter to the agency's mandate. The lawsuit filed in May alleges that the National Science Foundation's new grant-funding priorities as well as a cap on what's known as indirect research expenses 'violate the law and jeopardize America's longstanding global leadership in STEM.' Another district court had already blocked the the cap on indirect costs — administrative expenses that allow research to get done like paying support staff and maintaining equipment. This injunction had been requested to restore funding to the grants that were cut. In April, the NSF announced a new set of priorities and began axing hundreds of grants for research focused on things like misinformation and diversity, equity and inclusion. Researchers who lost funding also were studying artificial intelligence, post-traumatic stress disorder in veterans, STEM education for K-12 students and more. Researchers were not given a specific explanation for why their grants were canceled, attorney Colleen Faherty, representing the state of New York, said during last month's hearing. Instead, they received boilerplate language stating that their work 'no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.' NSF has long been directed by Congress to encourage underrepresented groups like women and people with disabilities to participate in STEM. According to the lawsuit, the science foundation's funding cuts already halted efforts to train the next generation of scientists in fields like computer science, math and environmental science. A lawyer for the NSF said at the hearing that the agency has the authority to fund whatever research it deems necessary — and has since its inception in 1950. In the court filing, the government also argued that its current priorities were to 'create opportunities for all Americans everywhere' and 'not preference some groups at the expense of others, or directly/indirectly exclude individuals or groups.' The plaintiff states are trying to 'substitute their own judgement for the judgement of the agency,' Adam Gitlin, an attorney for the NSF, said during the hearing. The science foundation is still funding some projects related to expanding representation in STEM, Cronan wrote in his ruling. Per the lawsuit filed in May, for example, the University of Northern Colorado lost funding for only one of its nine programs focused on increasing participation of underrepresented groups in STEM fields. The states are reviewing the decision, according to spokespeople from the New York and Hawaii attorney general offices. The National Science Foundation declined to comment. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .