Is this the new phrenology?
Linky
Really!? Anyone know how you determine an individual's long-term-fidelity? What if they're a complete scoundrel and then meet the right person...?
Some people can, but others can't? Is it me, or is that a complete non-statement?
I'm not a huge fan of quickie-"scientific" journalism such as this, because it leads to abject confusion and ultimately disbelief in the scientific method by the unwashed-masses. Instead of this being a minor way-stop, perhaps on the way to some significant psychological insight, it becomes a much ballyhooed but meaningless end-point. In a couple of months there will be an article which says the method was flawed, the study doesn't mean that, and the general public will say "yep, science... can't be trusted, how bout that ID seminar tomorrow!"...
I don't know, maybe the experimental design is sound, and I just don't like the idea that facial topology is so prejudicial... May-haps I need to put aside my pre-conceived notions in favour of the data...
What do you think?
Linky
In a Durham University-led study, researchers found that potential mates can judge whether a love interest is interested in casual sex or ready to move in their toothbrush based on their facial features — and will use this information to select a partner.
Really!? Anyone know how you determine an individual's long-term-fidelity? What if they're a complete scoundrel and then meet the right person...?
"Our results suggest that although some people can judge the sexual strategy of others simply from looking at their face, people are not always sure about their judgments, possibly because the cues are very subtle," explained lead author Lynda Boothroyd, from Durham's psychology department, in a release.
Some people can, but others can't? Is it me, or is that a complete non-statement?
I'm not a huge fan of quickie-"scientific" journalism such as this, because it leads to abject confusion and ultimately disbelief in the scientific method by the unwashed-masses. Instead of this being a minor way-stop, perhaps on the way to some significant psychological insight, it becomes a much ballyhooed but meaningless end-point. In a couple of months there will be an article which says the method was flawed, the study doesn't mean that, and the general public will say "yep, science... can't be trusted, how bout that ID seminar tomorrow!"...
I don't know, maybe the experimental design is sound, and I just don't like the idea that facial topology is so prejudicial... May-haps I need to put aside my pre-conceived notions in favour of the data...
What do you think?