Dems and Reps at age 3?

Or, my favorite criticism, the vague "Something smells fishy about this study, followed by an open-ended statement questioning the study's methodology but no actual analysis of the research to show that the doubt is fair".

nator writes:"Maybe they got these results (that sound fishy to me) because they didn't they take this and/or that variable into account."?

Ana writes:We recently saw a study where a link was made between young children and a preference for attractive faces. I am not sure how much worse we could get in terms of bias, or how much more such a study could depend on the time or decade in which it was done. What is or is not attractive changes very often!

What is or is not attractive changes very often!

nator writes:What is it about Psychology research that makes laypeople so easily brush it's findings aside, or assume the scientists researching an issue are complete morons who haven't already figured out the issues they believe are so damning to the study?

subbie writes:Conservatives are Satan-spawned[

ana writes:My observation was that in a study where there are so many possible variables I would not be over-eager to draw a parallel. I don't know that anyone is. As you keep repeating, its only one step of many.

Larni writes:If you think of attractiveness as symetry and smiling you can't go far wrong.

The debate over the definition of beauty has been waged by both scientists and philosophers for centuries. We tested the idea that a facial configuration close to the population mean is fundamental to attractiveness (see: Why Are Attractive Faces Preferred).First, we digitized images of faces of male and female college students (i.e., transformed the facial images into little dots of lightness and darkness called "pixels"). Each face is represented by a matrix of pixel values that can be mathematically averaged with the matrices of other faces. Once digitized and averaged together, we can turn the averaged pixel values back into images and have the composite faces rated for attractiveness (see Langlois & Roggman, 1990; Langlois et al., 1994). To see some faces averaged together, please visit our Image Morphing pages.College students rated the male and female composite faces as significantly higher in attractiveness than the individual faces used to create them, if the composites had at least 16 different faces in them. Thus, averaged faces are attractive. Note that when we use the word, "average," we mean the arithmetical mean, and not an average-looking person. If, for example, you take a female composite (averaged) face made of 32 different faces and overlay it on the face of an extremely attractive female model, the two images line up almost perfectly indicating that the model's facial configuration is very similar to the composites' facial configuration.Other researchers have suggested that the symmetry or youthfulness of a face make faces attractive. Although we agree that symmetry, youthfulness, or a smile can contribute to the attractiveness of a face, it does not necessarily make a face attractive. We have shown that faces can be highly symmetrical or youthful, but are not necessarily attractive. Thus, we view averageness as fundamental and necessary to facial attractiveness. Averageness is not the only component of attractiveness, but without it, no face will be attractive.

Artical writes:The fact that lateral reversal did not affect the results of Experiment 2 suggests that facial attractiveness is more dependent on physiognomy (of the owner) and less dependent on an asymmetrical perceptual process (in the observer) than is facial identity.

subbie writes:Yes, of course you are right. Conservatives are Satan-spawned and should be taken out and slaughtered. It's a good thing that we have the divine liberals, incapable of making any mistake or doing any wrong to save us.