Letters to the Editor
-
Ok....but you never tell us what the giveaway is.
Wide-set eyes? Small eyes? Lotsa makeup? I agree the study's ridiculous, but if you're going to tease the subject matter, you should at least tell us what the results ARE that you're snarking about.
-
Can someone post link to original article?
I refuse to watch video blogs. But would like to read the original coverage.
-
Still statistically significant
If someone exactly remembers how to calculate p values, that would be great, but I'm pretty sure 72% with a sample size of 153 is statistically significant, so your "only slightly better than half argument" is pretty weak. Of course, I didn't even have to watch the video to know your reaction, but once in a while you guys surprise me. It would be nice if you could entertain more ideas and provide more original analysis instead of snarky retorts that tell feminists what they want to hear. Until then, we'll have to do your job for you.
In this case, it's probably a mistake to say it was the eyes, since participants got to see the person's whole face, including make-up, facial expression, hairstyle, and so on. Imagining what I'd do if given such test, I'm guessing that the participants simply rated the attractive people as likely to want casual sex, which turned out to be true 72% of the time (this would also explain the low levels of confidence). This would make sense, since attractive people would be confident about their future prospects and thus not have less need to be concerned about a relationship at the moment, whereas the opposite would be the case with unattractive people, who may be worried about finding anyone at all. That's just a speculative theory, but I don't see you doing any better.
-
got to agree on the videos
I click through to read, not to watch. FWIW.
Okay, I've said my piece! I feel better now.
-
On the bright side: the Daily Mail admits some women WANT one-night stands
Whether they are subsequently called sluts or not, this is already progress, for that newspaper, and for many people in general, considering it's an admission that someone ACTUALLY WANT want CASUAL sex.
-
I'm a little confused about the photos illustrating the article
To make sure I wasn't just imagining things, I downloaded the photos and superimposed them... the long term relationship girl who is supposed to have the smaller eyes clearly has the larger eyes.
These are composite photos from the University of Aberdeen studies, I recognize them. Is there a link anywhere to the actual study referenced in the article?
-
Damn
I really need to read the article. At the bar last night, I didn't get even close to 72 percent success rate trying to pick them up, no matter how late it got or how much I had drank.
-
RE: Still statistically significant
Achilleselbow, I should clarify. It isn't that the participants were correct 72 percent of the time; it's that 72 percent of the participants were correct more than half of the time. I wasn't referring to the 72 percent figure as being "slightly better than half," but the fact that just over half of those participants' guesses were correct.
On another note, I agree with your speculation; I had been thinking the same thing myself. In fact, there's plenty else I would have liked to have discussed about the study, but these video clips do have time constraints and, unfortunately, it wasn't something I had time to write about this week.
-
So...
....what are we supposed to deduce from Tracy's eyes??
-
I vote "yes" on Tracy's videos
After yet another predictable chorus of spoiled whiny brats with and their "I don't like the videos" I feel like I should chime in with my support. I like the videos. I vote "yes" on the videos. I take a pro-video stance. Up with videos! Hooray videos! Long live videos!
And it has nothing to do with my 100% innocent and non-stalkerish crush on TCF. Really. Absolutely nothing. I mean it. Truthfully. Zero. Nada.
OK, maybe it does. A little. ;-)
-
No patience for these videos.
I third the emotion about video on Salon. I come to Salon to read, to pause as I'm reading, to think about what I've just read and to make connections to other things as I'm reading.
I've watched exactly two of these videos in the past and they were BORING. I refuse to watch any more of them.
The point of video is not to create a static shot of somebody droning on. Video is VISUAL. If you're going to do this at all, put some real work into it and produce real packages, with news and stock footage, voiceovers, additional experts, etc. Produce an enhanced VISUAL reason to click on these as an expansion on the WRITTEN theme.
There is simply no point to these Salon videos as produced, except as apparent ego strokes.
-
thanks Allie
I spend a while staring at those two sets of eyes trying to figure out how they were different . . .they are subtly different somehow, but size isn't it.
-
The tops of their heads all look alike to me
You do the math.
-
@jonnjonz - great can you copy the link from the video and paste it here?
I'd really like to read the original article. But due to my lack of video expertise, I'm having a hard time cutting a link to the original article out of the video and pasting it into my browser.
If you could do that for me, I would appreciate it.
After all, that's the advantage of online news analysis instead of TV. You can follow the links to the original sources and do your own analysis.
Many thanks in advance for your help in resolving this problem.
BTW. I'm serious. Can somebody please post a link to the original article?
-
@jello here's your link
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=558233&in_page_id=1879
-
Maybe just bitter because have strong jaw but...
How on earth do scientist come up with eyeball experiment? Extreme confuse me and unfortunate can no see Ms Tracey for explain because video on computer no work one bit!
Imagine me late night in Aberdeen bar when one scientist who just make wrong sex strategy guess with pretty woman say to other scientist: "For sure men want for have casual sex with pretty women and pretty women want for have casual sex!" Other scientist look at McEwen face on beer label and say, "Have me idea!"
Experiment that tests how stereotypes feed wishful thinking is born.
Svutlana
-
Spoiled whiny brats?
Salon (and any other web site) most likely wants to know what features its readers abhor. Click-through equals increased ad revenue, which means the success of the editorial business.
I don't feel it's spoiled, whiny, or bratty to share that feedback in the Letters to the Editor section. I will only give my personal feedback on the matter once -- no need to bend ears every time a video feature appears -- and Salon can take that feedback into consideration if it wishes.
On the other hand, reacting to other readers' feedback with name-calling could indeed be classified as childish behavior.