People “read” others’ inner traits based on their faces. They attribute positive traits to those who are more attractive (beauty-is-good) and negative to those with facial anomalies (anomalous-is-bad). But how do the “reader’s” traits impact
this process? Do more empathetic “readers” and those sensitive to disgust judge faces differently? We tested the hypothesis that viewers’ psychological attributes affect judgments of people with facial scars and palsies. We predicted that participants who are less empathic and more sensitive to pathogen disgust would judge more harshly the warmth and competence of people with anomalous faces and also dehumanize them. We conducted an online study with 1493 participants, who assessed 31 psychological traits of anomalous faces presented in photographs. Using principal component analysis, we found that empathic concern did not affect impressions of warmth and dehumanization but did matter for competence.More empathetic participants saw anomalous faces as more competent. Sensitivity to pathogen disgust did not affect
warmth and dehumanization but did affect competence. Higher sensitivity was related to higher competence assessments. Additionally, those with higher personal distress judged anomalous faces as less warm and competent and dehumanized them more. Those with higher sensitivity to sexual disgust judged faces as less warm, more competent, and dehumanized them more. We conclude that the question “who the reader is?” is crucial when studying “face-reading”.
