Trusted, Automoderated users
2,147
edits
Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
→The most attractive BMI range for men is ~24.5-27 and for women ~17-19 as it is most youthful
| Line 2,144: | Line 2,144: | ||
In the 2006 version of Hitsch et al.'s MIT Research Paper "What Makes You Click", probabilities of receiving first contacts were assessed for a large dating site over a 3.5 month period in 2003 (n=22,000) based on male and female BMI. It was found that men greatly preferred women of BMI around 17, which researchers noted corresponds roughly to a supermodel's thinness. By contrast, women on average contacted men with a BMI of 27 most often, which would correspond to a very muscular or mildly overweight man, depending on his physical conditioning. | In the 2006 version of Hitsch et al.'s MIT Research Paper "What Makes You Click", probabilities of receiving first contacts were assessed for a large dating site over a 3.5 month period in 2003 (n=22,000) based on male and female BMI. It was found that men greatly preferred women of BMI around 17, which researchers noted corresponds roughly to a supermodel's thinness. By contrast, women on average contacted men with a BMI of 27 most often, which would correspond to a very muscular or mildly overweight man, depending on his physical conditioning. | ||
The effects of modifying weight were most pronounced for women, where for example a woman of BMI 25 would be expected to receive 90% more first-contact messages if she attained a BMI of 17 instead. | The effects of modifying weight were most pronounced for women, where for example a woman of BMI 25 would be expected to receive 90% more first-contact messages if she attained a BMI of 17 instead. Similarly powerful outcome modifying effects based on weight were not possible for men. | ||
Caveats for this data would be that they were unable to get clear data on outcomes for men BMI <18 likely due to low sample of men at this low a weight, range of variation for outcomes in men became quite large above BMI 32-34 (perhaps because this range would include both aggressive bodybuilders and severely obese men), and although this data was part of their original 2006 analysis, they chose not to include it in their final publication later in 2010. | Caveats for this data would be that they were unable to get clear data on outcomes for men BMI <18 likely due to low sample of men at this low a weight, range of variation for outcomes in men became quite large above BMI 32-34 (perhaps because this range would include both aggressive bodybuilders and severely obese men), and although this data was part of their original 2006 analysis, they chose not to include it in their final publication later in 2010. | ||