“The pandemic provided us with a great opportunity to disentangle whether this beauty premium is due to discrimination or the result of some productive attribute,” said Adrian Mehic of Lund University in Sweden, the author of the new study....
Before the pandemic, better-looking students of both sexes tended to get better grades. This beauty premium boosted their marks by a few percentage points.... However, when lectures went online and in-person teaching ended, the attractive females suddenly lost this advantage.
The “beauty bonus” seen for the attractive females prior to the pandemic fell by about 80 per cent after the move to remote teaching. The professors, it seems, had been discriminating in their favour.
But the attractive males maintained their advantage!
“I believe that the attractive males have some productivity-enhancing attribute,” Mehic said. “Maybe because they have higher self-confidence, which should lead to better grades regardless of the mode of instruction.”
It's hard to believe, isn't it? Attractive males and females were getting better grades, but when they were not seen in person — they could have their cameras on or off for on-line lectures — the females lost nearly all their advantage and the males stayed the same. The researcher goes with the theory that the males who were attractive acquired a personality trait — confidence — that caused them to do better work.
But why wouldn't females acquire confidence from their attractiveness and why wouldn't it enhance their performance too? You'd have to say something like: The experience of being an attractive female doesn't increase your confidence. And the females never were doing better work, they were just getting higher grades because their teachers were responding to their good looks.
But why weren't the teachers responding to the good looks of the men? I'd hypothesize that there's something about female attractiveness that motivates people to help them. Perhaps there's a prejudice that all women need help, and people are selective in deciding which females to help. In this hypothesis, I'd say that when men are attractive, they are judged to be competent, and they feel confident, and, on their own, they do the same good work however the classes are done.
Posts
64 comments:
As many other will say, I will first have to see some of these beautiful Swedish college students in order to form a viable opinion... Is there a website or something one goes to?
Physically attractive females could by summarized as attractive females.
I rate this Althouse blogpost an 8 out of 10, in keeping with Social Media requirements. I would have given it a 9, but its online only and not in person.
It would probably help to know the actual number of percentages points went to each sex rather than throwing out that nebulous term “a few” and eliding over the sex difference.
What about the notion of attractive people tend to care about their appearance to others and care about details. Those are two traits that also lead to studying hard to seem intelligent and checking work carefully. How does the study account for those variables? Did the study control for despair from lockdowns? Maybe the attractive people, particularly women, unable to be social, which was a motivator for keeping up appearances started to forego their care and enter depression, both leading to poor performance in school? We do know the lockdowns increased suicides.
I’m not sold that the attraction in person meant higher grades. But then I was in engineering classes and personal appearance doesn’t help calculate dynamic loads.
"Physically attractive female university students received lower marks when lectures moved online during the pandemic, a study has found."
[criteria needed]
I'm afraid I put no stock in this study nor a media outlet's commitment to vet it. Studies like this have notoriously low rates of replication:
"The replication crisis is frequently discussed in relation to psychology and medicine, where considerable efforts have been undertaken to reinvestigate classic results, to determine both their reliability and, if found unreliable, the reasons for the failure.[3][4] Data strongly indicate that other natural, and social sciences are affected as well.[5]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
Well it doesn't help when you show up to zoom in pajamas and bed hair.
"Dirty Dancing" Causes a Dopey Debate About Art at a Swedish University
ha ha ha
One of my favorite Jane Austen adaptations is Clueless.
Mel: "You mean to tell me that you argued your way from a C+ to an A-?"
Cher: "Totally based on my powers of persuasion, you proud?"
Mel: "Honey, I couldn't be happier than if they were based on real grades."
I think you're probably right--the attractive males are favored in a way different from attractive females and they respond to it differently.
I'd be curious to know the break down by sex of the teacher. Presumably, the teachers just giving free points to the attractive women (say, by rounding up on partial credit work) are primarily men, whereas favoritism shown by female teachers to attractive male students might have a different character--maybe the female teachers spend more time on the attractive men so that, rather than just inflating their grade (which would go away as soon as the favoritism stops), they are actually teaching them better.
I'd hypothesize that there's something about female attractiveness that motivates people to help them.
Or attractive females have learned to use on their looks to get them through tough situations?
Or bj's aren't practical over Zoom....
There's a way to square this circle. The causal arrows between attractiveness, confidence and competence may not all run the same way for both sexes. Confidence is attractive, in a man. In a woman, attractiveness may lead to confidence, but isn't required at all. How that all relates to academic performance is an exercise for the reader, but is fairly obvious.
Feminine favor is masculine's knee taken with liberal moderation and a burden's folly that denies her dignity and agency.
Men know that their looks are of only limited utility?
Whereas women's looks can carry a career.
Men know that their looks are of only limited utility?
Whereas women's looks can carry a career.
The “beauty bonus” seen for the attractive females prior to the pandemic fell by about 80 per cent after the move to remote teaching. The professors, it seems, had been discriminating in their favour.
But the attractive males maintained their advantage!
Hypothesis: Female beauty takes a lot more work than male beauty
Result: Beautiful females have to put effort into it, effort that detracts form putting effort into studying
Male "beauties" do not
Further Hypothesis: Male beauties got their benefits from male classmates, who gave the help in order to get benefits that were still there in the age of Zoom
To the extent that female beauties got benefits from male classmates, lockdowns / social distancing / remote learning took away their ability to "pay" for those benefits.
"I will work with this classmate because I get to meet with her in her room to study together, so I can fantasize that it might lead to more" beats "I will work with this classmate via Zoom, where we're just sharing screens, I don't even get to check her out, let alone have any fantasizes that this will turn into a date"
Wonder how the front row of skirts fared against the 3rd row of skirts?
Further thought:
There's a difference between "charisma" and "beauty"
Among other things, charisma is about inspiring people, and you can still have it over Zoom.
While you can still be pretty over Zoom, the emotional payoff from being in a room with a pretty girl is a lot more than the emotional payoff from being in a Zoom with her.
Among other things, if all you're going to get is video, there's a lot more pretty women out there you can see, that you can't be in the room with
If you believe that male "beauties" are on average a lot more charismatic than female ones (and I'm willing to believe that), then it's not surprising that it would tend to pay off more in a Zoom world
Mike Sylwester said..."Dirty Dancing" Causes a Dopey Debate About Art at a Swedish University
Every time I hear that line, I think of the Family Guy's realistic ending to Dirty Dancing
"Physically attractive female university students received lower marks when lectures moved online during the pandemic, a study has found."
Free Manure While You Wait!: "[criteria needed]"
That's a sneaky request....
Gender differences in a warm embrace, soft boobs, a pussy when it could be aborted. Some would say penis envy, but that's with social progress served with "benefits" a la carte.
Whereas women's looks can carry a career.
Take a knee, beg, good girl. Beware social progress.
Men know that their looks are of only limited utility?
Take a knee, beg, good boy. Beware social progress.
NorthOfTheOneOhOne said...
Or bj's aren't practical over Zoom....
Unless of course you're Jeffrey Toobin. Sometimes you just have to take matters into your own hands.
Do you think it's only male professors padding grades for the smokin' hot Alpha Gams and Tri-Delts, or are the lesbian Phds playing the same angle??
Or bj's aren't practical over Zoom....
Ode to Kamala, Monica, and all the girls who raised the glass ceiling.
SHOCKER
But why wouldn't females acquire confidence from their attractiveness and why wouldn't it enhance their performance too?
This is entirely expected if you know the research.
Attractiveness and Low Self Esteem have an almost linear correlation.
The current hypothesis is that women with low self esteem try harder to look good.
There is also a hypothesis that society and culture target attractive women in ways that lower their self esteem.
Why the sexism... uh, genderism in a study? How did the male university students perform?
When SNL was equitable and inclusive before the era of that's not funny and we're not serious:
Sexual Harassment and You
Be handsome.
Be attractive.
Don't be unattractive
Words to live by.
Some may say her choice is fickle, but the pickle is her prerogative, and it is Her Choice, too, baby.
I believe that the attractive males have some productivity-enhancing attribute,” Mehic said. “Maybe because they have higher self-confidence, which should lead to better grades regardless of the mode of instruction.
My Hypothesis: Male attractiveness is based on factors that re connected to testosterone levels.
Higher testosterone = higher attractiveness.
Higher testosterone levels lead to higher drive/activity levels. Testosterone makes effort feel good.
Therefore men with higher testosterone levels will be more attractive and they will work harder in school.
Here you go: A mountain of academic research on attractiveness bias
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C47&q=attractiveness+bias&oq=attactiveness+
I've read the theory that women show skin to suggest neediness. We all know the shapes and nuances of male and female bodies, but women (1) require support for raising children, and (2) gain a serious mating advantage in being youthful / healthy / fertile for a longer period in the future. Bare female skin may be an evolved suggestion/request for compassion (warm clothing), even as it also draws the eye for potential mates.
Male attractiveness is likely correlated with "healthy DNA and a good diet" -- they are stronger competitors because they were born from strong parents who fed them well. So, their brains are probably extra healthy too. See the sad story of how the USSR Communists killed off all the best/strongest farmers (aka Kulaks) and then they all starved because they no longer had effective farmers.
All of this brutally competitive stuff is simple Darwinism. The fit, the strong, and the well-adapted tend to survive and thrive. These are proven, cold-blooded facts. But now, incorporate this into politics without starting a war or reinventing the Nazis...
Attractive people look markedly less attractive on Zoom. And homely people look markedly less homely. Zoom is the great equalizer.
Isn't the data consistent with the proposition that (a) attractive females who attend class in person receive a grading bonus, and (b) attractive males who attend class in person do not receive a grading bonus. Hence, the elimination of class attendance affects attractive females, whose average grades decline, and has no impact on the grades of attractive men.
The absence of an attractive man grading bonus could be explained in terms of some sort of downward influence on grades for attractive men, offsetting the upward influence of attractiveness generally, due to an element of sexual competition or jealousy.
The secret that predatory men have always relied on is that beautiful women are often insecure. I'd like to say that the confidence of beautiful women is expressed in other ways, but I suspect those are women who have other reasons to be secure. I suppose that's true of men as well, but men without confidence don't get noticed, and beautiful women can't help attracting attention, with or without confidence.
Let's just say I'm a sub teacher at a school where there is a dress code (high school.)
The code says skirts should be no more than 2 inches above the knee.
The real pretty girls some times pull up their skirts some toward the stomach, or whatever, and it is more like 2 inches below the privates and not the knees.
I guess the authorities don't enforce that rule so much....
There's a meme that comes around on occasion, of a female student texting her professor
Student: I'm having trouble with the assignment, can you help me
Professor: Sure, send me a picture
Student: [sexy selfie]
Professor: Of the assignment!
Now we know how Althouse got her grades.
For a while after I retired I taught advanced IT classes as an adjunct professor to B-school students at the local university. At one evening lecture every single one of my female students showed up in tight yoga pants. Were they trying to see whether they could influence me to grade on their curves? If so, it didn’t work. I double checked their homework, projects, and test scores to make sure their grades were 100% justified.
In other words, grades normalized.
Obviously, beautiful women need to be shaved bald before being allowed to enter a lecture room.
"And homely people look markedly less homely. Zoom is the great equalizer.
Uh...... no.
Was the causal difference in the male gaze or female envy? Just another social Thursday.
This sounds like junk science.
During the next lockdown, attractive girls should have the option to attend private one-on-one classes via Chaturbate.
A few percentage points advantage. More noise amplification and people climbing over each other to make some point that supports their myopic worldview.
Get a better bullshit detector
When attractive females put on makeup, do their hair, and dress with care they feel ready to take on the world, which enhances academic performance. When staying home they do none of those things, and feel that they look like a mess, depressing performance. Guys just don’t put as much effort into looking good, so when they slack off it doesn’t bother them.
How’s that for a story?
"And homely people look markedly less homely. Zoom is the great equalizer.
Uh...... no.
Through rose-colored lenses that influence perceptions of color, shape, and texture, yes. Tick tock.
I haven't read the comments and it's probably already been said. But if you are a good looking female, you literally don't have to do anything, or have anything else to offer. You can just sit back and do nothing and accomplish nothing, and still lots of men will fall over each other to give you things because they want, well, what they want. So you tend to accomplish less.
If you are a good looking male, on average, you still have to do things in the world to get stuff. You'll have it easier than uglier men, all other things equal, but in most circumstances you still have to bring something else to the table. Competence in something.
And, therefore, through necessity men are, on average, more likely to develop competence.
Yeah, I know, free stuff for women: it's the patriarchy holding women down.
serious question: did This surprise Anyone? Any One, in the entire world?
Eh. I call bullshit. Starting with the idea that people can be sorted into "attractive" and "unattractive". And that all teachers will make the same assessment.
Maybe the men did well in online classes because, like all (straight) men, they weren't distracted by the presence of the attractive women. As I remember from college, having exceptionally good-looking women in class reduced my own productivity by 30%.
I think it's possible that the female students were more adversely affected by the pandemic and the move to remote learning than the male students were and the quality of the female academic performance reflected that difficulty in adjustment, it had nothing to do with pretty vs. ugly.
Inverse effect on grading,
A cup, meh
B cup, passing
C cup, cum laude
D cup, magna cum laude
Beyond, summa cum laude
Am I a pig if I admit I clicked on the story link hoping to see a picture or two?
“Higher testosterone = higher attractiveness.”
But that’s obviously untrue.
Really high t produces a notably ugly face. Look it up.
Ann Althouse said...
“Higher testosterone = higher attractiveness.”
But that’s obviously untrue.
Really high t produces a notably ugly face. Look it up.
We are not talking about the ends of the bell curve. Stop being silly and mischaracterizing what I said.
Testosterone markers like the pronounced chin, strong brow line, lower body fat and better body confirmation are all associated with masculine attractiveness. So there is an obvious correlation.
I am sure you can find some outlier pictures. But I am talking about normalized populations.
Jupiter said...
Eh. I call bullshit. Starting with the idea that people can be sorted into "attractive" and "unattractive". And that all teachers will make the same assessment.
One such study on physical attractiveness they used computer images and software to combine faces of multiple people and average out their facial appearance. They made conglomerate pictures of people combining the faces of groups of people by averaging out total size and eye spacing nose size etc.
What they found is that the more women they used in the sample group to for a conglomerate image the more attractive the conglomerate image became.
Also if you included the conglomerate image in the group of women that was used to form it that image always scored at the top of the ratings.
What they found made men more attractive was taking a picture of a male, splitting it down the middle and creating a mirror copy that took the place of the other half of the face.
Long story longer women are judged generally by how "average" their face looks which is why these ratings don't seem to vary all that much.
Althouse said...Really high t produces a notably ugly face. Look it up.
That's awesome. You're right Professor. Andre the Giant. I get it.
But it also produces dudes who's life boat you would beg to get on if you were on a sinking ship. They're the ones who get you to shore, even if they go down with the ship.
That's why high "t" looks didn't affect their grades.
Young women getting ahead based on looks?
What breakthrough will SCIENCE bring us next?
Maybe jabbed gals with potential to produce green breast milk should they become birthing units.
Neat!
I'm not the first to notice that beauty corrupts youth.
When I was a young man, I had very high metabolism. I could eat anything and I was still skinny. That's so fucking unfair, it's not even funny.
I didn't even start to work out until I hit 40. I was like, "I got to work out to look good?"
Women like confident men with good self-awareness of body image. Women do not like confident men who walk around with a delusion of attractiveness. Unless they are billionaires or something. Women are tricky. (I'm not the first to notice that).
You can do 1000 sit-ups and then notice a beautiful woman with some fat ugly guy. That can wreck your morning.
I used to call Tuesday "Self-Improvement Tuesday." Work-out at 5:30, Bible study at 7:14, home for shower, get to work about 9.
(Unfortunately I'd want to take a nap after lunch).
Reporters are innumerate, and scientifically illiterate. They are the only remaining demographic that does not understand that social science is formatted gibberish.
Attractiveness in women makes them attractive, confidence in men makes them attractive.
Saint Croix said...
Women like confident men with good self-awareness of body image. Women do not like confident men who walk around with a delusion of attractiveness. Unless they are billionaires or something. Women are tricky. (I'm not the first to notice that).
Women are selective and more inconsistent.
When presented with a set of pictures of women men rate 50% of them attractive.
When presented with a set of pictures of men women rate 20% of them attractive.
What is interesting is that those numbers stay somewhat consistent even if you skew a set to provide unattractive/attractive pictures. But men would follow the skew more. Women only find the top set of men in any grouping attractive.
The Vault Dweller said...
Attractiveness in women makes them attractive, confidence in men makes them attractive.
Male confidence is the basis of the willingness to go fight for females. Most male mating rituals in the animal kingdom are ritualized battles to determine who will give up first and are generally non-lethal forms of combat. Our sporting events generally demonstrate this pattern.
This is also correlated with testosterone levels.
I would say ‘close, but no cigar’.
It seems like the research goes in the correct direction, then goes off the rails and draws the wrong conclusion.
So why did these smart women get dumber with online only?
Post a Comment