I'm just looking at the full-text
Abstract
In nonhuman animals, mate-choice copying has received much attention, with studies demonstrating that females tend to copy the choices of other females for specific males. Here we show, for both men and women, that pairing with an attractive partner increases the attractiveness of opposite-sex faces for long-term relationship decisions but not short-term decisions. Our study therefore shows social transmission of face preference in humans, which may have important consequences for the evolution of human traits. Our study also highlights the flexibility of human mate choice and suggests that, for humans, learning about nonphysical traits that are important to pair-bonding drives copying-like behavior.
Fig. 1. Example face pairs shown to male participants—feminine female/feminine male (A), feminine female/masculine male (B), masculine female/feminine male (C), masculine female/masculine male (A). Female participants saw the same pairs but with male faces on the left.
Fig. 2. Ratings of attractiveness for the target faces by female (top) and male (bottom) judges. Scores are split by term and the masculinity of the opposite-sex face paired with it (feminine/masculine). The scale is the same between graphs, but the range changes.
A person's attitude to sex might be written all over their face, according to a study of attractiveness. Psychologists also found that, when it comes to selecting relationships, heterosexual men and women are looking for entirely opposite things.
Guardian
The results, published in the journal Evolution and Human Behaviour, showed that men and women could generally judge who would be more interested in a short-term fling just by looking at their expression and features. In one study of 153 participants, 72% of people correctly identified the attitudes from photographs more than half of the time. "Men who said they were interested in short-term sex were seen as looking more masculine," said Boothroyd.
I'm gonna try and read the actual study, but serious quotes like this "72% of people correctly identified the attitudes from photographs more than half of the time" aren't promising. So that basically means, and bear in mind if there were no difference it's be expected to be 50-50% in terms of correctly guessing - "more than half" doesn't really say a lot and given close to 30% got it correct half or less than half the time, it doesn't seem to say much.
When I looked at the sample pics I got them wrong! I obviously can't read people at all - or maybe that's because this is a load of shite.