Trusted, Automoderated users
2,147
edits
Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→High fWHR is associated with greater lifetime reproductive success
| Line 1,654: | Line 1,654: | ||
* ''Soldiers with wider faces had more children after controlling for wartime survival, (analysis with full data; a soldier with a face 1 s.d. wider has 1.88 times as many children.'' | * ''Soldiers with wider faces had more children after controlling for wartime survival, (analysis with full data; a soldier with a face 1 s.d. wider has 1.88 times as many children.'' | ||
* ''Previous research has found that wider-faced males are less likely to die violent deaths, but only when close physical contact is involved (e.g.death by knife wounds or strangling), and not when technology is used (death by gunshot or poisoning.)'' | * ''Previous research has found that wider-faced males are less likely to die violent deaths, but only when close physical contact is involved (e.g.death by knife wounds or strangling), and not when technology is used (death by gunshot or poisoning.)'' | ||
===<span style="font-family:'Linux Libertine, Georgia, Times, serif'; font-size:24px; font-weight: normal;">Even chickens can identify sexually dimorphic faces, to the same extent as humans</span>=== | |||
---- | |||
Ghirlanda, Jansson & Enquist (2002) conducted a novel study to examine the origins of the preference for attractive, sexually dimorphic faces in humans. | |||
The researchers constructed seven male and female faces, which were obtained by 'averaging' a set of 35 facial photographs of individuals of each sex, on a spectrum from moderately to strongly sexually dimorphic, for both sexes. | |||
A group of university students (n=7 females and n=7 males) were then requested to rate the faces in a random order, on a decile (1-10) scale for sexual attractiveness : i.e 'how desirable would it be to go out on a date with this individual'. | |||
Then the researchers utilized six chickens as experimental subjects (''Gallus gallus domesticus''; four being female chickens,) which were rewarded with food for pecking at the faces of the humans that were of the sex opposite of their own (e.g hens male faces, cocks female faces,) and trained to do so over a course of a few weeks. | |||
The researchers note that 'no reinforcement was given on test trials', so the chickens were only trained to peck faces of the correct sex, they weren't guided to pick at any particular target. | |||
Interestingly, it was discovered by the researchers that human and chicken preferences for opposite sex faces, as they varied on the dimension of sexual dimorphism were very heavily correlated (r=0.98); that is to say nearly identical. | |||
The researchers findings provide support for the hypothesis that human preferences for sexually dimorphic faces are innate and hardwired in our 'lizard brain' that is, there is a deep-seated desire for such features that even predates the evolution of modern humans. | |||
<span style="font-size:125%>'''Quotes:'''</span> | |||
* ''Human and chicken behavior was almost identical (correlation between the two gradients: r 2 = 0.98). Moreover, chicken and human data for each face never differed significantly.'' | |||
* ''We cannot of course be sure that chickens and humans processed the face images in exactly the same way. This leaves open the possibility that, while chickens use some general mechanism, humans possess instead a specially evolved mechanism for processing faces.'' | |||
* ''Ours is of course a preliminary study. We believe, however, that it shows the potentials of the comparative study of preferences. This method is not only relevant to the study of human faces, it can be applied to any communication system to evaluate whether its evolution has favored information transfer or rather is a product of receiver biases.'' | |||
<span style="font-size:125%>'''References:'''</span> | |||
* https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12110-002-1021-6 | |||
==''Money''== | ==''Money''== | ||