Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Lookism study thread

W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
I intend to post a new study every day highlighting lookism and its effects in life and judgements about someone. I do so with the intention of giving confidence in our experiences of seeing ugly people treated significantly differently, and to motivate the focus on improving looks. These studies shouldn't really be taken to explain specific situations but instead highlight a trend of effect to indicate we are correct.

Studies posted in this thread will also include the treatment of ugly men and women, and will note any difference. 
Red Shambhala has a thread which is focusing on the blackpill nature of dating, sexual preferences, and more : Red Shambhalas thread - "Archived Black Pill Studies"

Anyone can comment or dump related studies to lookism but I'll be posting a new one daily until I get lazy. I haven't had to read papers for years, so I might make some mistakes.



Study 1 :
Attractiveness Differences Between Twins Predicts Evaluations of Self and Co-Twin

My Casual summary : 
Even between twins, DZ and MZ, ratings of attractiveness from objective raters can accurately predict how they view each other for things such as social competence and emotional stability. Despite only 1/3 of the twins ratings on who was more attractive matching with the objective ratings.

How attractiveness was determined :
145 undergraduates ( 49 male , 96 female) rated Twin A for attractiveness. 75 different underraduates ( 27 male, 48 female ) rated Twin B for attractiveness. They were rated 1 to 7.

Summary
The goal of the current study was to determine the power of attractiveness effects by testing whether these social judgments are made where attractiveness differences are smallest: between twins. Differences in facial attractiveness predicted twins’ evaluations of self and their co-twin (n = 158; 54 male). In twin pairs, the more attractive twin judged their less attractive sibling as less physically attractive, athletic, socially competent, and emotionally stable. The less attractive twin did the reverse. Given that even negligible differences in facial attractiveness predicted self and co-twin attitudes, these results provide the strongest test yet of appearance-based stereotypes.
The results of this study demonstrate the power of appearance-based stereotypes. Surprisingly, even twin siblings evaluate themselves and each other based on the attractiveness differences observed by independent raters. This effect is shown most dramatically in their evaluations of their co-twins; differences in unbiased ratings of facial attractiveness predict assessments of social competence, leadership ability, emotional stability, athletic ability, and physical attractiveness. Furthermore, twins evaluated themselves based on the same attractiveness differences. The more attractive siblings evaluated themselves as more intelligent, as having higher job competency, a better sense of humor, and as liking themselves more than their less attractive twins rated themselves. Note that there are several possible mechanisms that might account for these differences.
Chart - https://i.imgur.com/8M3hWr7.jpg

Notes :  
>Examining the 149 participants overall, 58 (38.93%) rated themselves and their sibling as equally attractive.
>Of those who rated either themselves or their twin as more attractive, only 51 participants’ ratings were in the same direction as the objective ratings (56.67%).

Year : 2013
Participants : 158 twins, 79 pairs. 54 male twins, 104 female twins. University age twins from the United States.
 
L

LDPE

Greycel
Joined
Nov 27, 2017
Posts
90
Online
0
I really like your posts. Keep on posting these wonderful blackpills in text format
 
nausea

nausea

Fesikh
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
16,637
Online
16d 13h 49m
dumbcel here

did not understand the results
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
nausea said:
dumbcel here
did not understand the results
They got other people to rate how attractive the twins were. Then asked the twins to rate each other on a load of stuff. The attractive twin was rated higher on stuff, the less attractive twin rated lower. It just shows how attractiveness can predict judgement about people even when they're twins, i.e. lookism.
 
nausea

nausea

Fesikh
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
16,637
Online
16d 13h 49m
Wizard said:
They got other people to rate how attractive the twins were. Then asked the twins to rate each other on a load of stuff. The attractive twin was rated higher on stuff, the less attractive twin rated lower. It just shows how attractiveness can predict judgement about people even when they're twins, i.e. lookism.

but they are TWINS

that's what I do not get ...
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
nausea said:
but they are TWINS
that's what I do not get ...
Oh sorry, the twins were identical and non-identical twins ( MZ & DZ ). It was meant to show small differences lead to attractiveness stereotypes. Non-identical speaks for itself. Identical twins can still have differences in appearance from how they grew up, if only minor. I think anyway.
 
nausea

nausea

Fesikh
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Posts
16,637
Online
16d 13h 49m
Wizard said:
Oh sorry, the twins were identical and non-identical twins ( MZ & DZ ). It was meant to show small differences lead to attractiveness stereotypes. Non-identical speaks for itself. Identical twins can still have differences in appearance from how they grew up, if only minor. I think anyway.

it's ogre

look at this https://incels.is/showthread.php?tid=4172
 
Kointo

Kointo

27 y/o khhv neet outcast
-
Joined
Nov 19, 2017
Posts
22,209
Online
0
Of course Wizard is at it again with the blackpill of the day. Keep up the quality posts.
 
kodoku

kodoku

stand-shitter
★★
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
654
Online
2d 2h 25m
Would like to read a blackpill like this about height. So my mom can stop saying height doesn't matter.
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
Study 2
Homeliness is in the disgust sensitivity of the beholder: Relatively unattractive faces appear especially unattractive to individuals higher in pathogen disgust
http://www.ehbonline.org/article/S1090-5138(12)00023-2/fulltext

My casual summary
People with a high "pathogen disgust" ( Disgusted by moldy food, wounds, etc ) find unattractive faces extra unattractive. Sexual disgust or moral disgust had no influence.  They do not find attractive faces more attractive or less attractive, unattractive faces are just more unattractive for those sensitive to "pathogen disgust". The hypothetical "avoid unfit" mating strategy highlights the possibility that the ugly may be affected by effects which simply enhance their unattractiveness, inapplicable to the attractive. 

Incel theory
In a society obsessed with cleanliness and hygiene, and a general heightened pathogen disgust, the unattractive will be disproportionately judged as disgusting. "Just shower bro."

[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]How attractiveness was determined :[/font]
[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]
In all three studies reported below, participants rated faces that varied in attractiveness; for each participant, we calculated mean ratings for eight attractive targets and eight unattractive targets (gender balanced). (In Studies 1, 2, and 3, there were 32, 30, and 30 target faces, respectively.
[/font]
Summary
Across three studies, we examined correlations between disgust sensitivity and attractiveness ratings assigned to attractive and unattractive target individuals. The overall pattern of results provided support for the avoid unfit hypothesis: Unattractive faces appeared especially unattractive to individuals higher in sensitivity to pathogen disgust. Importantly, this effect was specific to unattractive faces. No positive correlation was found between pathogen disgust and ratings of the attractive faces, failing to support the approach fit hypothesis. Moreover, no negative correlation was found between pathogen disgust and ratings of the attractive faces, ruling out the less interesting “avoid all” alternative hypothesis. Furthermore, neither sexual nor moral disgust scores were found to be associated with any of the attractiveness ratings (there were effects involving sexual disgust in Studies 1 and 2, but these were in opposite directions), ruling out the possibility that a general, nonspecific sensitivity to negative emotions is associated with attractiveness perceptions. In Study 3, we attempted to experimentally manipulate pathogen disgust and found that it had no effect on attractiveness ratings.

Notes
Furthermore, some evidence suggests that mate-searching strategy may be best described as “simply avoid the worst” (Grammer, Fink, Juette, Ronzal, & Thornhill, 2002). As noted by Zebrowitz and Montpare (2008), “we perceive unattractive people more negatively than attractive people because unattractive faces show more similarity to the faces of unfit or unhealthy individuals that are adaptive for us to recognize”

Avoid unfit hypothesis: Higher pathogen disgust is associated with lower ratings of relatively unattractive faces (i.e., compared with low-pathogen-disgust participants, high-pathogen-disgust participants will assign lower ratings to relatively unattractive targets).

In Study 2 (but not in Studies 1 and 3), the key correlation between pathogen disgust and ratings of unattractive faces) was found to be marginally stronger for opposite-sex than same-sex targets, suggesting that the effect may be particularly pertinent to mate-choice contexts. However,

Year : 2012
Participants : "As a meta-analysis, we combined data from the three studies (N=327; 244 women, 83 men)" - undergraduates




kodoku said:
Would like to read a blackpill like this about height. So my mom can stop saying height doesn't matter.

I'll get there eventually maybe, I've never looked in to it so maybe I'll do a height study once a week or something.
 
S

SwansonSamsonite

Recruit
★★
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
129
Online
2m
kodoku said:
Would like to read a blackpill like this about height. So my mom can stop saying height doesn't matter.

You asked for it. Warning, it's brutal:
The Impact and Importance of Height on Mate Selection

Here is just a snippet:
"I argue that practices such as arranged marriages and political disenfranchisement of women, which were common in Europe until late 19th century, suppressed the effect of sexual selection for height. However, as European cultures became more socially progressive, sexual equality increased, allowing innate mate selection preferences to be expressed more fully. I use a cultural historical analysis and population genetics modeling to show that, in three European countries, average height increased rapidly after cultural changes that led to greater freedom in female mate selection, and that the rate and degree of height increase fits well what would be expected from a sexual selection process."

"From a genetic perspective height is an important signal of good genes. Taller men have been found to live longer than their shorter counter parts. This powerful combination of social and genetic advantages for the children of taller men provides a strong basis for expecting positive sexual selection pressure for height in humans. Sexual selection for height has been well documented in a host of cultures. This female preference for taller mates can also be observed across a range of cultures further supporting the hypothesis that it is an evolved psychological trait. This preference has ramifications in the quality and quantity of mates a male might have as well. Taller men are found to have ―prettier girlfriends, as defined by feminine characteristics such as desirable hip-to-waist ratios and skin quality. Taller men also have more long term and short term mates and have sex at earlier ages and later into life. Women’s preference for tall mates also increases during the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle, when the probability of conception is greatest, which also argues for the adaptive origin of this preference."

Holy shit. This sentence alone tears apart any mental gymnastics about height not being important. Women are literally wired in such a way that makes it easier for tall men to reproduce. Let that sink in.

"Finally, infidelity studies have found that when a woman cheats she is more likely to do so with a mate who is taller than her current partner.
Consistent with the theory of sexual selection for height, taller men have been found to have more offspring than shorter men. There is also evidence that taller men are more likely to have long term mating partners and to have more partners than shorter men."
 
bkdreamkb

bkdreamkb

unemployed and alcoholic
★★★★
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
831
Online
1d 6h 2m
LDPE said:
I really like your posts. Keep on posting these wonderful blackpills in text format
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
Study 3
A replication and extension of 'physical attractiveness and mental illness'
https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/a-replication-and-extension-of-physical-attractiveness-and-mental

My Casual summary
The unattractive patients in state mental hospitals had more severe diagnoses, longer hospital stays, and less visitors (Original study).
People in state mental hospitals were as attractive as low-income strangers, but less attractive than middle-income and high-income strangers.
Provides support for the a relationship between looks and income and provides support for interpersonal lookism.

How attractiveness was determined

Photos of patients when they were first admitted to the state hospital, and photos of patients from their highschool years book, were rated on a 7 point scale by five male and five female undergraduate volunteers. The volunteers also rated the photos of the control subjects.

Summary
In summary, the current study generally supported Farina et al.'s (1977) earlier findings in that hospitalized psychiatric patients were less attractive than nonhospitalized controls (at least for middle- and upper-income controls). The relation between attractiveness and mental illness cannot be attributed to the effects of institutionalization, since even in high school, patients were less attractive than their peers. Furthermore, the current findings are consistent with the earlier data in showing significant negative social consequences of unattractiveness within the hospital setting. Less attractive patients had more severe diagnoses and longer hospital stays. The current data differ from Farina et al.'s, however, in that there were no significant differences in attractiveness be- tween the patient group (who were of low socioeconomic status) and a low-income control group. The fact that patients were similar in attractiveness to low-income controls suggests that negative social influences on unattractive people may result in a variety of bad outcomes (possibly including lowered social mobility) as well as resulting in emotional disturbances. Future research could clarify this question by investigating the relation between physical attractiveness and mental illness in middle- and upper-income psychiatric patients.

Notes
This relation between socioeconomic status and attractiveness was surprising in view of the fact that the photographs included only facial features, eliminating the influence of hair style, makeup, jewelry, and clothing. Comparing the patient group with shopper control subjects, patients were rated significantly less attractive than middle- income controls, f(45) = 2.2, p < .05, and significantly less attractive than high-in- come controls ?(41) = 3.5, p < .005. How- ever, there were no significant differences in attractiveness between patients and low- income controls.

Finally, as discussed above, if physical attractiveness is related to the occurrence of mental illness, then patients should have been relatively unattractive prior to their hospitalization. The current study tested this hypothesis by comparing the attractiveness ratings of patients' high school yearbook pictures with those of the nearest same-sex yearbook picture. This comparison revealed that patients were less attractive than their peers even in high school, t(54) = 3.3,p < .005. These

There are two possible interpretations of these findings. First, it could be argued that negative social influences on unattractive people result in a variety of bad outcomes, including both mental illness and low socioeconomic status. Previous research on the social disadvantages of physical unattractiveness has pointed to a wide variety of negative consequences, including lowered social mobility (Dion et al., 1972; Elder, 1969). Thus, being physically unattractive might constitute a nonspecific source of stress. Physical unattractiveness would be associated with a wide range of negative outcomes, one of which might be mental illness. Alternatively, however, it is possible to argue that physical attractiveness is not related to the occurrence of mental illness per se but rather to the social consequences of displaying mentally ill behavior. That is, people who are poor and/or unattractive may be sent to state hospitals, whereas people who are affluent and/or attractive may display the same symptoms but be referred to other facilities.

For example, Farina et al. found that within their patient sample, less attractive patients were visited less often and remained hospitalized for longer periods.

Year : 1980
Participants : The patient group (n =28) included 9 male and 19 female patients between the ages of 18 and 30 years. Patients had an average of 11.4 years of education and were from families in which the father's income averaged $10,000 per year or less. Control subjects were 21 males and 32 females
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
Study 4
The good, the bad, and the ugly: An fMRI investigation of the functional anatomic correlates of stigma
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17470910600670579

My Casual Summary
This study was actually focused on brain area activation. However it showed unattractive faces were considered the most disgusting compared to the obese, heavily pierced, and transexual faces. The FMRI showed activation in areas associated with inhibition when viewing unattractive faces, along with other results, which supported the theory that for stigma like piercings which are considered within someones control our brains would not show as much inhibition for the reaction compared to something like unattractiveness which is not within the persons control. Despite that inhibition unattractiveness still lead to the highest mean disgust from participants.

How attractiveness was determined : [font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]The stigmatized faces were selected from websites that uniquely contained images of people who were self-described members of one of the four stigmatized groups (e.g., websites for piercing artists or transsexuals, dating websites for[/font][font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] overweight people). The control pictures were photos that had been previously rated on attractiveness and trustworthiness by Dartmouth undergraduates. In each category, there were equal numbers of male and female images. (It doesn't say what website the unattractive came from)[/font]

Summary
Social interactions require fast and efficient person perception, which is best achieved through the process of categorization. However, this process can produce pernicious outcomes, particularly in the case of stigma. This study used fMRI to investigate the neural correlates involved in forming both explicit (‘‘Do you like or dislike this person?’’) and implicit (‘‘Is this a male or female?’’) judgments of people possessing well-established stigmatized conditions (obesity, facial piercings, transsexuality, and unattractiveness), as well as normal controls. Participants also made post-scan disgust ratings on all the faces that they viewed during imaging. These ratings were subsequently examined (modeled linearly) in a parametric analysis. Regions of interest that emerged include areas previously demonstrated to respond to aversive and disgust-inducing material (amygdala and insula), as well as regions strongly associated with inhibition and control (anterior cingulate and lateral prefrontal cortex). Further, greater differences in activation were observed in the implicit condition for both the amygdala and prefrontal cortical regions in response to the most negatively perceived faces. Specifically, as subcortical responses (e.g., amygdala) increased, cortical responses (e.g., lateral PFC and anterior cingulate) also increased, indicating the possibility of inhibitory processing. These findings help elucidate the neural underpinnings of stigma.

AJGA6ba.jpg


Notes
In order to rule out the possibility that these findings were driven by participants’ relative familiarity with these categories of faces, a group of separate subjects from the Dartmouth community (n38) rated how familiar they were with the categories of stigma we presented. [...] Participants were asked to rate on a 7-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 most infrequent to 7 most frequent) how often they interacted with someone who was obese, had numerous facial piercings, was transsexual, or was unattractive (see Table 1). Correlations between the familiarity ratings and the mean signal changes in the ROIs described above were not significant.

Subsequent t-tests revealed that control faces were more liked than the stigma faces (paired t-tests between normal faces and stigma faces all revealed pB/ .001). Additionally, among the stigma faces, transsexuals and unattractive faces were the most disliked (pB/ .01 for all comparisons; see Table 1).

But, it is also possible that we may have attenuated the response to body weight by only showing faces.

[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Year : [/font][font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]2006[/font]
[font=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]Participants : 22  participants between the ages of 18 and 27 were recruited from the Dartmouth community.[/font]
 
W

Wizard

Greycel
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Posts
9
Online
0
I'm just depressing myself focusing on this stuff, can't do it anymore. Taking a long break - later
 
idkwattodowithlife

idkwattodowithlife

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
7,519
Online
0
I see man, good luck with your break.
 
shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape7
shape8
Top