The influence of wearing a mask on the projected first impressions and attractiveness levels of smiling individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of mask wearing on facial attractiveness and projected first impressions during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A total of eight models were evaluated by 200 live raters and 750 online raters both with and without masks while smiling maximally. Both live and online raters looked at the models for 15 s, then completed a first impressions questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall ratings for attractiveness were higher for both masked and unmasked conditions in-person versus online. Males were perceived more favorably both in impressions and attractiveness online when masked, whereas in person they were more favorable when unmasked. Females were perceived more favorably in impressions when unmasked both online and in person, but their attractiveness rating was higher when masked both online and in person. Regardless of gender and masking state, all first impressions were more favorable in person versus online. The differences were statistically significant (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Face masks have different effects for males versus females in both an online and in-person setting. Men are perceived more positively in-person when they smile unmasked while they are better ranked online when they smile masked. Females are better perceived in all domains other than attractiveness when smiling unmasked both online and in person. To optimize first impressions, individuals should seek to meet in person whenever possible when forming new relationships.

A Prospective, Longitudinal Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 Exposure, Use of Protective Equipment and Social Distancing in a Group of Community Physicians.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare workers experience a significant risk of exposure to and infection from SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19. Nonetheless, little research has focused on physicians' use of personal protective equipment (PPE), their concerns about becoming infected and their social distancing maneuvers. METHODS: All staff physicians at Advocate Lutheran General Hospital were invited to participate. Their COVID-19 IgG antibody level was measured and an online questionnaire was completed. The questionnaire assessed the risk of COVID-19 exposure, PPE usage, concern for contracting COVID-19, the performance of high-risk procedures, work in high-risk settings, and social distancing practices. Testing was performed in September (T0), and December 2020 (T1) at the height of the global pandemic. RESULTS: A total of 481 (26.7%) of 1800 AGLH physicians were enrolled at T0 and 458 (95% of the original group) at T1. A total of 21 (4.3%) and 39 (8.5%) participants had antibodies at T0 and T1. A total of 63 (13.8%) worked in high-risk settings and 111 (24.2%) performed high-risk procedures. Participants working in high-risk settings had increased exposure to COVID-19 infected patients (OR = 4.464 CI = 2.522-8.459, p < 0.001). Participants were highly adherent to the use of PPE and social distancing practices including mask-wearing in public (86%, 82.1%), avoiding crowds (85.1%, 85.6%), six feet distancing (83.8%, 83.4%), and avoiding public transportation (78%, 83.8%). A total of 251 (55.4%) participants expressed moderate to extreme concern about becoming infected with COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among a group of community physicians, consistent PPE use and social distancing practices were common. These practices were associated with a low level of initial acquisition of COVID-19 infections and a relatively low longitudinal risk of infection.