Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Men like 61.9% of female profiles, women like only 4.5% of male profiles
| Line 3,318: | Line 3,318: | ||
The Tinder study also found some evidence for [[hypergamy]], which, they report, matched findings from other online dating studies, namely women tended to visit more educated men than themselves about twice as often and less educated men only half as often compared to someone of equal educational status. They also found that, contrary to the popular notion that men are "intimidated" by highly educated women, a woman's education level did not significantly change a man's swiping behavior. It was ultimately found that Tinder users do not engage in educationally assortative mating patterns as similarly educated people were not more likely to match, rather there was only evidence for the existence of female hypergamy. | The Tinder study also found some evidence for [[hypergamy]], which, they report, matched findings from other online dating studies, namely women tended to visit more educated men than themselves about twice as often and less educated men only half as often compared to someone of equal educational status. They also found that, contrary to the popular notion that men are "intimidated" by highly educated women, a woman's education level did not significantly change a man's swiping behavior. It was ultimately found that Tinder users do not engage in educationally assortative mating patterns as similarly educated people were not more likely to match, rather there was only evidence for the existence of female hypergamy. | ||
The large sex differences in "superliking" are similar to sex-receptivity at Florida State University where 0% of the women accepted real-world random sex invitations, whereas 75% of men did (Clark & Hatfield 1989). | |||
Similarly, students were asked whether they intend coitus with someone met on spring to which 76% of men and 19% of women answered positively. (Maticka-Tyndale, 2010) | |||
<span style="font-size:125%">'''Quotes:'''</span> | <span style="font-size:125%">'''Quotes:'''</span> | ||
| Line 3,334: | Line 3,335: | ||
<span style="font-size:125%">'''References:'''</span> | <span style="font-size:125%">'''References:'''</span> | ||
* Neyt B, Vandenbulcke S, Baert S. 2019. ''Are men intimidated by highly educated women? Undercover on Tinder.'' Economics of Education Review. 73: 101914. [[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775719301104 Abstract]] [[http://ftp.iza.org/dp11933.pdf FullText]] | * Neyt B, Vandenbulcke S, Baert S. 2019. ''Are men intimidated by highly educated women? Undercover on Tinder.'' Economics of Education Review. 73: 101914. [[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272775719301104 Abstract]] [[http://ftp.iza.org/dp11933.pdf FullText]] | ||
* Maticka-Tyndale. 2010. ''Casual sex on spring break: Intentions and behaviors of canadian students.'' [[https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499809551941 Abstract]] | * Maticka-Tyndale. 2010. ''Casual sex on spring break: Intentions and behaviors of canadian students.'' [[https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499809551941 Abstract]] | ||
* Clark RD, Hatfield E. 1989. ''Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers.'' Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality. 2(1):39-55. [[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v02n01_04 Abstract]] | * Clark RD, Hatfield E. 1989. ''Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers.'' Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality. 2(1):39-55. [[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J056v02n01_04 Abstract]] | ||