This study aimed to extend previous research on female body perception by specifically examining how the model race and viewing perspective could affect body attractiveness and body size judgements, and associated body-viewing gaze behaviour. Additionally, the effect of individual differences (relating to the measurements of own body composition, body satisfaction and frequency of social comparison) on this body perception process was considered.

Our analysis showed that the avatar race had an evident impact on the body attractiveness and body size judgements. Overall, Caucasian avatars were rated as more attractive (except for size 6) and slimmer (except for size 6 and 8) than Asian and African avatars, suggesting that an in-group favouritism (Zebrowitz et al., 2007) may have caused the preference of familiar, own racial group avatars by our Caucasian participants. The effect of in-group favouritism (e.g. own-race advantages) has also been reported in face identity (Walker & Tanaka, 2003) and facial expression recognition (Elfenbein & Ambady, 2002, 2003), in which human recognition performance is biased (with increased recognition accuracy and shortened reaction time) towards their own as opposed to another race’s faces. Our Caucasian participants, however, did not make more accurate body size judgements for Caucasian avatars than for Asian or African avatars. Perhaps, different cognitive processes are needed for in-group favouritism in face recognition (i.e. categorical judgement) and body perception (i.e. quantity judgement). Nevertheless, our observation in this study implies the possible existence of a template of attractiveness that, for Caucasians, does not match up with the body structure and composition that occur in individuals of Asian and African origin. It should be noted though that the within-subject research design in this study might not fully reveal the magnitude of in-group favouritism in body perception, as our participants might be aware of the social desirability of their responses given the sensitivity of race-related issues in our society. This might have subsequently affected their ratings of body attractiveness and size. It would be interesting to revisit this research question with a between-subject research design.

Irrespective of avatar races, bodies in larger dress sizes (UK 14–18) were consistently rated less attractive than those in smaller ones (UK 6–12), with size 8/10 and 18 being rated as the most and least attractive, respectively. This observation was in agreement with previous research using body images of Caucasian models (Cundall & Guo, 2017). Clearly, although there are anatomical and preferential differences in body shape and composition cross-culturally (such as preferred WHR; Sugiyama, 2004; Tovée et al., 2006), young Caucasian women showed an overall preference for slimmer body size in all tested races, perhaps as a result of thinner female bodies being portrayed as the ideal body shape (particularly) within media platforms (Jiang & Vartanian, 2016). From this perspective, female representation of body attractiveness has an evolutionary foundation, which is arguably reinforced through societal influences.

Interestingly, when judging body size, participants consistently overestimated the smaller dress sizes (UK6, 8), whilst the larger sizes (UK16, 18) were underestimated. This might be partly caused by the participants’ desire of conforming to social etiquette, in which it is inappropriate to call someone skinny or fat (Swami et al., 2008). The cognitive bias in quantative judgements (Hastie & Dawes, 2001), such as an tendency to shift towards the middle of the scale when there is uncertainty in magnitude judgments, might be another contributing factor. It is also possible for the purpose of self-protection, as estimating body sizes closer to own body size would potentially protect self-esteem. In contrast, body size estimations were most accurate for size 10 and 12 avatars, as these sizes are likely to elicit less self-concern about own body size which resulted in more accurate judgements.

Regarding the associated body-viewing gaze behaviour, the avatar race showed no impact on our participants’ body-viewing gaze distribution, indicating their preference for Caucasian avatars was not reflected on the cognitive processing stage of body information selection and extraction. In other words, irrespective of avatar races, the same bodily cues were sampled and analyzed by our participants for assessing body attractiveness and body size. The viewing perspectives, on the other hand, could modify the amount of time directed at the whole body. Across different viewpoints, the frontal-view body tended to attract the highest proportion of viewing time, followed by the mid-profile view and then the rear-view body. It seems that the frontal and mid-profile views are more informative for judging female body shape.

Interestingly, although the viewing time allocated at a given body feature (e.g. waist–hip) was quantitatively different across viewpoints, the overall pattern of gaze distribution at different local body features (e.g. head, upper body, waist–hip, legs and arms) was qualitatively similar across viewpoints (Fig. 4). In particular for both the frontal and mid-profile views, the upper-body region attracted the largest proportion of viewing time, followed by the waist–hip region then the heads, and finally the legs and arms. These findings are consistent with previous observation that both the upper-body and waist–hip regions provide diagnostic cues in assessing sexual maturity, body attractiveness and body size (Cornelissen et al., 2009; Lykins, Ferris, & Graham, 2014; Garza, Heredia, & Cieslicka, 2016).

A reverse pattern of gaze distribution, in which the waist–hip attracted the largest proportion of viewing time followed by the upper body, was observed when the avatars were dressed in full clothes (rather than dressed in underwear in this study) and consequently visual cues from the upper body (e.g. chest size) became more ambiguous (Cundall & Guo, 2017). This would imply that only body features containing clear diagnostic information are likely to receive detailed visual inspection in body viewing and explains why the avatars in this study, who were dressed in underwear, received a large amount of gaze at the upper-body region.

The least amount of visual inspection was directed at the legs and arms, respectively, due to the limited amount of information they provide on body attractiveness and body size perception. In the context of mate selection theory (Buss, 2003), these body features receive little attention from men when looking for a mate (Hall et al., 2011) and thus receive little attention from women when assessing competition and individual mate value.

Regarding individual differences in female body perception, our participants’ own body composition measurements (e.g. BMI, WHR, chest size) and satisfaction level did not affect their judgement of other women’s body attractiveness and body size, but could influence their gaze allocation at local body features. Specifically, individuals with higher BMI and WHR tended to look more at the upper-body region in mid-profile view. As chest is more visible in mid-profile view and consequently its shape and size can be more accurately judged, longer gaze allocation at this region could be for comparative purpose. For example, mate selection theory would suggest that BMI and WHR impact women’s own attractiveness level or ‘market’ value, and the female chest region is indicative of attractiveness (Singh & Young, 1995; Cornelissen et al., 2009). Therefore, women with a larger BMI and WHR (hence with less attractiveness level) view this body region longer as they have a greater need to evaluate other women’s ‘market’ value. Indeed, within our participant group, those with higher BMI and WHR were also more likely to engage in social comparison with other women (indicated by higher PACS scores), possibly due to their dissimilar to the idealised slender frame which is glamorised in Western societies (Smolak & Murnen, 2008). Alternatively, this region attracted more visual attention due to it being less changeable than BMI and WHR. Therefore, gaze allocation was diverted to this neighbouring region (relative to waist–hip) for self-protection purposes (Cundall & Guo, 2017).

Additionally, those individuals scoring higher in PACS attended less often at the waist–hip region in the rear-view bodies, further indicating that the rear view was probably less informative for female body assessment and social comparison than the frontal and mid-profile views. Among self-rated own body feature satisfaction scores, only leg satisfaction score was negatively correlated with viewing at the leg region in the frontal-view bodies, suggesting those participants with high leg satisfaction allocated gaze at alternative body regions. Unlike previous research (e.g. Jansen et al., 2005; Cundall & Guo, 2017), this less frequent own body satisfaction-related gaze comparison or avoidant behaviour (i.e. women look more or less at the body regions rated low in own-body satisfaction) observed in this study may be (at least partly) explained by the clothing effect. Our avatars were dressed in underwear, hence containing little ambiguous information regarding body composition (e.g. waist–hip size) and reducing prolonged viewing and analysis of local bodily cues.

In conclusion, this study has enriched the current research literature by demonstrating an in-group favouritism in body perception, in which body attractiveness and body size judgements are influenced by the viewed body race. The body-viewing gaze allocation, on the other hand, is not affected by the body race but can be modulated by the viewing perspectives. Furthermore, the participants’ own body composition and satisfaction level could influence their gaze allocation at local body features in body viewing. Taken together, it seems that both body perception and body-viewing gaze behaviour are subject to group and individual biases.