Slashdot Mirror


Women Get Lots of Info From Male Faces

dtjohnson writes "Researchers at UC Santa Barbara have found that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's testosterone levels and his interest in fathering children by looking at his facial features. Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's interest in having children merely by looking at cues on photograph's of his facial features. Saliva samples were also taken from each man in the study and tested for testosterone with a $2,000-a-pop test. The women in the study were able to correctly identify the men with the highest testosterone levels just by looking at their photographs. Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."

50 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. sensationalisation sucks by malsdavis · · Score: 5, Informative

    How about using a proper source for this study?

    The summary (and the linked articles) are so sensationalised it is ridiculous.

    The BBC have a slightly better written article:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4751501.stm

    1. Re:sensationalisation sucks by Teach · · Score: 4, Funny

      I am God ...try prove otherwise.

      God doesn't leave out grammatically-significant prepositions.

      QED

      :)

      --
      Graham "Teach" Mitchell, computer science teacher, Leander HS
    2. Re:sensationalisation sucks by malsdavis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed, the trade-off is often debatable.

      But in this instance I am referring to the preferable use of a news source which actually cares about the facts of the study over a news source which is simply using the research as a launching point for the journalist to present stereotyped opinions on male and female attraction.

    3. Re:sensationalisation sucks by AhtirTano · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Besides, doesn't He have better things to do than kill time on /.? :-)

      Given that He's omnipotent, I suspect He can past on /., digg, and Kuro5hin, all at the same time--and still have time to attach meaning to the fall of every sparrow.

      The real question is: How often does He get modded as a troll for claiming He created the world in seven days?

    4. Re:sensationalisation sucks by drix · · Score: 4, Informative
      Well "Teach," if you want to be a pedant, the missing "to" in that sentence isn't a preposition. It's one half of the full infinitive "to prove," making it a particle.

      :)

      --

      I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
    5. Re:sensationalisation sucks by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 4, Funny
      In addition to proper grammar, I'd think that God would pay attention to spelling as well.

      God's speling is korrekt. It's you're speling taht's wrong.

    6. Re:sensationalisation sucks by optikSmoke · · Score: 3, Funny

      If God would kindly reread the definitions of both therefor and therefore, God would find that while both are valid words, their meanings are somewhat different. God should note that, in the context He used it, "therefor" was incorrect.

      Perhaps God should address the situation of His Divine Foot, finding it firmly in-Mouth.

    7. Re:sensationalisation sucks by Joen_w · · Score: 5, Informative

      >How about using a proper source for this study?
      How about a link to the study itself? http://primate.uchicago.edu/2006PROC.pdf

    8. Re:sensationalisation sucks by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny
      It's one half of the full infinitive "to prove," making it a particle.

      But it sometimes behaves as if it were a wave.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    9. Re:sensationalisation sucks by rbochan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The summary is indeed ridiculous.

      "Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."

      Of course they didn't, nay, COULDN'T look into that aspect. It would have to take into account the vast amounts of physical alterations that women have done to them these days, be it botox, a ton of makeup, boob-jobs, tramp stamps, nose jobs, etc. In that regard, it would be pretty difficult, if not impossible, to tell anything about one's "genes" from a photograph. While vastly more prevelent in females, it's working its weay into males as well.
      When I was a teenager, an attractive friend of mine had herself a nose-job at age 16... it was a major event back then, but that seems like nothing these days.
      A buddy of mine, age 36, just had liposuction to remove his "spare-tire", it was outpatient surgury. Imagine that... a human body being invaded by foreign objects and literally pounds of material being removed... and it's considered so comon that it's outpatient surgery.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    10. Re:sensationalisation sucks by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's interest in having children merely by looking at cues on photograph's of his facial features.

      Wow, that's like... 7 in 10 instead of 5 in 10 you might expect to get from chance alone. Remarkable

  2. Ok then by fireman+sam · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So what we have here is researchers have discovered what physical attributes of men women find attractive (whether they want short term or long term relationships). Just as it is known what physical attributes of women men find attractive.

    So women don't just want a "nice on the inside" type of man.

    --
    it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
  3. Let me fix that for you by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Researchers [CC] at U Name It have found that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's finance levels and his interest in making women feel good by looking at how much money he spends. Sixty-nine percent of the women were able to correctly judge a man's ability to buy them diamonds merely by looking at cues in his wallet. Spending samples were also taken from each man in the study and tested for wanton spending on women with a $2,000-a-pop test. The women in the study were able to correctly identify the men with the highest spending levels just by looking at their wallets. Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts, though further study is being considered at several men's clubs around the country."

  4. signs of high testosterone level by C.A.+Nony+Mouse · · Score: 2, Funny

    Acne, tounge hanging out, perspiration drops on forehead...

    --
    J
  5. beards by mikesd81 · · Score: 4, Funny

    And men with beards? What do they want?

    --
    That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
    1. Re:beards by popeyethesailor · · Score: 2, Funny

      little boys? :P

    2. Re:beards by Zardus · · Score: 3, Funny

      They want all software to be free, of course!

      Oh, and money for autographs :-)

      --
      You can mod your friends, you can mod your nose, but you can't mod your friend's nose.
  6. Small sample size? by presidentbeef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A group of 29 undergraduate students hardly seems enough to be able to generalize the results to the entire female gender.

    --
    Everything I need to know about copyrights I learned from Slashdot.
    1. Re:Small sample size? by Neil+Blender · · Score: 4, Funny

      You ever hear of a one sample t-test? You can prove whether or not something is significant with only one sample! You don't even need something to compare it to! Oh, wait - no you can't. That's not what a one sample t-test is at all. Either way, you can do some amazing shit with statistics. Especially if you don't understand what you are doing.

    2. Re:Small sample size? by mano_k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, it's sad that this seems to be quite often the problem with psychological and sociological research. The researchers present groundbreaking results about the human nature and when you look at their methods you find the results are based one nothing more than random results from a much to small sample...

      The good old Cargo Cult Science

    3. Re:Small sample size? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's not the size that counts! It's how you use it!

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    4. Re:Small sample size? by Surt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's more of a conflict between the press presentation and an understanding of detailed statistics. When you get the press presentation, it says that women can tell a man's level of testosterone. When you read the statistics, you find that with a >95% confidence level, the researchers have concluded that the participant's ratings matched testosterone level better than random chance would allow, implying that at least some of the women were getting the answers right enough that they must have been recognizing something. The numbers of participants required to make these conclusions are well understood. 20 participants is roughly the lower bound for studies of this type, and I'm sure in the actual research paper that various weaknesses of the sample were discussed (age, race distribution and such) as they nearly always are. But the press presentation will contain none of that, because the fraction of their readers who would understand the details is very small.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  7. Hidden messages... by pyrrhonist · · Score: 4, Funny
    Researchers at UC Santa Barbara have found that women have a remarkable ability to assess a man's testosterone levels and his interest in fathering children by looking at his facial features. Sixty-nine percent...

    Sorry, I just couldn't concentrate.

    --
    Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
  8. *whew* I totally misread that headline. ^^;;; by interactive_civilian · · Score: 3, Funny
    Did anyone else misread the headline? I could have sworn it said:
    Women Get Lots of Info From Male Feces

    Maybe I'm spending too much time on Fark...

    --
    "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
  9. Translation by ebrandsberg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Women are able to judge someone with aggressive genes that can father a strong child, then pick a sucker to stand with her to raise them.

    1. Re:Translation by Dis*abstraction · · Score: 5, Informative

      You jest, but some researchers think that's a very accurate description: "WHAT'S a girl to do when faced with the choice between a powerful action man who has great DNA but is likely to love her and leave her, and a carpet-and-slippers kind of bloke who will hang around and bring up the kids but may not be Mr Right in the genes department? Well, ideally, she should fool the latter into bringing up the former's children. And a piece of evidence that this is exactly what happens emerged this week from a research group led by Jan Havlicek of Charles University, in Prague."

    2. Re:Translation by budgenator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was a study pointed to by /. conducted in England that showed that a woman's first and last child was significantly less likely to be her husband's and that the lower her socio-economic class was the more likely as well, rate as high as 30% were found. The biological fathers were more likely to be of higher class than the husband.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
  10. Now it figures... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2, Funny

    No wonder women are slapping me in the face all the time.

  11. Right. Then why do so many women screw up? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The study starts wonky. Men are show pictures of adults and babies and asked wich they prefer. Mmmm, okay. In what context? Could be they had a bunch of extreme pedo's on their hand.

    Rather then testing wich photograph someone likes better perhaps a better test to see if a male is truly intrested in being a father is to see if he is one? Baby pictures are cute. Crying shitting sex-ruining babies are not.

    As for what women find more attractive. Well wasn't there another study not so long ago that claimed that it depended on the point in their cycle? So what point in their cycle where these women on?

    Personally I think the result of 60% is to close to 50% wich you could easily reach by flipping a coin. Throw in a few extreme photos of men and you got a winner. Michael Jackson vs Bob Sapp (girly man vs the guy that is gonna be your bunk mate in federal jail).

    Not so hard to judge the hormone levels there eh?

    Did the study look at how these women that guessed right actually did in there personal lives? Any single mothers or battered women? Oh they were students. Any of them been date raped?

    Frankly this study seems totally worthless. Offcourse you can tell hormones from facial features. Duh, everyone knows that it is hormones that decide your body build. Just swallow the opposites sex hormones for a while to find out.

    And testing men for the desire to be a father by showing them cute baby pictures is just stupid. Ask them "It has been 8 months since you last had sex, 2 months since you last had a full nights sleep, the baby is crying and your wive asks you to get out while she has been at home all day doing shit all and you been working hard to pay for that bloody nurse that costs a fortune and need to go to work again in 2 hours. Do you love your baby now (that probably ain't yours anyway because women like guys with manly faces not saps like you) sucker?".

    That would be a proper test. If women were capable of doing such a test we wouldn't have so many single mothers living of benefits. Social security is a good thing and I am willing to pay for it but only if I am allowed to think people who need it are a bunch of fuckwads.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  12. W....t..f? by Schraegstrichpunkt · · Score: 4, Funny
    From the article:
    About nine out of 10 men chose the baby picture, roughly 12 percent expressed no interest in the baby picture, and the remaining subjects had a range of interest.

    Words cannot express my bewilderment.

  13. If this was true ... by subStance · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... then why are we so often told the female initiated divorce rate is so high (over 50% when I heard last. sorry no sources). If they were *that* good at picking spouses, then you'd think that you'd see more guys initiating divorces than women, right ?

    Am I missing something ? (and please spare the "women don't know what they want" comments ... more than a little harsh in my view).

    --
    Servlet v2.4 container in a single 161KB jar file ? Try Winstone
    1. Re:If this was true ... by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      TFA mentions that women are attracted to different features (testosterone or fatherlyness) depending on where they are in their reproductive cycle. The divorce rate can easily be explained by either women deciding to marry their favorite fuck in the hopes that he will or can be changed when needed, or by women marrying the paternal types and missing their single sex life.

  14. In other news... by Khyber · · Score: 3, Funny

    69% of women were able to correctly identify their husbands purely by the sound and odor of their flatulence.

    More at 6...

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  15. Originally Read: Women Get Lots From Male Faces by TheBashar · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Sit on my face and tell me that you love me." --Monty Python

  16. Heh by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Of course, the study did not look at what men were able to tell about women by looking at photographs of their female body parts."

    Well, I can look at a chick's beard and tell she's got lotsa testosterone.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  17. Research abstract and article by FleaPlus · · Score: 5, Informative

    How about using a proper source for this study?

    The summary (and the linked articles) are so sensationalised it is ridiculous.

    The BBC have a slightly better written article


    Better yet, here's the actual research abstract and article published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B. The article seems to be accessible without an institutional subscription, but just in case, here's the abstract text:

    Reading men's faces: women's mate attractiveness judgments track men's testosterone and interest in infants

    James R. Roney, Katherine N. Hanson, Kristina M. Durante, Dario Maestripieri

    This study investigated whether women track possible cues of paternal and genetic quality in men's faces and then map perception of those cues onto mate attractiveness judgments. Men's testosterone concentrations served as a proxy for genetic quality given evidence that this hormone signals immunocompetence, and men's scores on an interest in infants test were chosen as prima facie markers of paternal quality. Women's perceptions of facial photographs of these men were in fact sensitive to these two variables: men's scores on the interest in infants test significantly predicted women's ratings of the photos for how much the men like children, and men's testosterone concentrations significantly predicted women's ratings of the men's faces for masculinity. Furthermore, men's actual and perceived affinity for children predicted women's long-term mate attractiveness judgments, while men's testosterone and perceived masculinity predicted women's short-term mate attractiveness judgments. These results suggest that women can detect facial cues of men's hormone concentrations and affinity for children, and that women use perception of these cues to form mate attractiveness judgments.


    On a related note, this reminds me of research previously done linking finger-length ratios with things like testosterone levels, sexual orientation, and male aggressiveness.

  18. Re:Slashdot using daily nexus as source? by node+3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is wrong with having a weekly sex column and how does having one make a paper untrustworthy?

  19. Simple Hack by s-gen · · Score: 2, Funny
    For example people with higher testosterone levels tend to have more square faces.
    Maybe you could hack womens testosterone detection algorithms simply by drawing a big square on your face - a far stronger signal than a 'real' square face could ever be.

    Worth a try?
  20. And another study by Aceticon · · Score: 3, Funny

    In another study it has been found that women are very able at reading a man's williness to have sex from his face.

    One participant in this study commented: "I just kept saying 'is willing' for each and every photo they showed me. In the end they told me i got every one of them right."

    Another participant said that "this was just too easy" and that "the hanging drewling tongues and the eager looks or their [the men in the photos] faces where dead giveways".

    Undisclousured sources told us of having overheard the main researcher on this study comment to his assistant that "this is our best scheme for getting girls phone numbers ever".

  21. Re:Slashdot using daily nexus as source? by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 4, Funny

    You're getting your news from a site that currently has a Pirate vs Ninja poll on the front page.

    --
    The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
  22. Control group by Serious+Simon · · Score: 2, Informative

    Which percentage of *men* were able to judge the men with the highest testosterone levels by looking at the photographs? I would not be surprised if guessing this by looking at someone's physical traits (jaw squareness, beard growth, ...) does not require some special capability specific to women.

  23. Don't get involved with single mothers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Old Slashdotter to young slashdotters: do not get saddled with a ready made family. Do not get in the situation of being financially responsible for an alpha's seed.

    When a single mother coworker hits on you ... then you not interested.
    When a female coworker tries to set you up with her single mother (friend/daughter/neighbor) ... then you not interested.

    Trust me and not your penis! Avoid these women like the avian flu. They'll stop f*cking you a month after the wedding. They will ruin your life and drain you financially.

    1. Re:Don't get involved with single mothers by quarterbrain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You poor naive soul. Every woman stops giving it up once you've gotten married.

      And while we're generalizing, every man that takes a wife or even a girlfriend has to divert energy away from what they want to attending to her needs seriously altering your life. There's also a vigorous sucking in the trouser area that occurs - unfortunately it quickly moves from where you want to somewhere in your wallet.

  24. Stupid and Fairly Insulting by kria · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As a woman, I am as insulted by the suggestion that I'm just out to find a man to be a good father as many men are at the suggestion that they just looks for big breasts and the like. This study wasn't looking at which men women would really date - it looked at their reaction to pictures. Whooptefreakingdo.

    Perhaps I'm spoiled by having a lot of intelligent female friends, but we're looking for someone to spend time with, not just someone to make a baby with.

    1. Re:Stupid and Fairly Insulting by Guppy06 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "This study wasn't looking at which men women would really date - it looked at their reaction to pictures. Whooptefreakingdo."

      Getting your foot into the door has nothing to do with dating?

      "Perhaps I'm spoiled by having a lot of intelligent female friends, but we're looking for someone to spend time with, not just someone to make a baby with."

      TFA says you're actually looking for both, someone "to spend time with" but then somebody else to make a baby with on the side. None of your friends have ever done anything that can be described as this?

      Even if not, I have my own anecdotal evidence to counter yours, a friend whose fiance cheated on him and got pregnant; he found out and yet she still managed to convince him to go through with the wedding.

      Of course, I also know another guy who went into a very bad marriage solely because of cleavage as well.

  25. The inverse is also true by billcopc · · Score: 2, Funny

    While our crack team of experts work to dig up the sketchy source of this disinformation, I would like to announce that researchers at U of Billco have discovered that men have a remarkable ability to assess a women's bitchiness levels and their interest in no-string-attached sex merely by looking at their facial features. 69 percent of men were able to correctly identify psychos based on early skin wrinkling and fake tans. Saliva samples were also taken from each woman in the study and tested for rabies with a $20-a-pop test. Of course, the study did not look at what women were able to tell about men by conniving with their exes.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  26. Then you picked the wrong woman by DG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously, if you have to make major alterations to your lifestyle in order to keep your wife/girfriend happy, then you chose the wrong wife/girlfriend.

    Your signifigant other and you should share goals and lifestyles; you should click into each other's lives with little to no behavioural modification for either party.

    Your primary disagreements should be about *timing*, not philosophy - ie, you both want to do X, and the only real question is "when?". If you want X and she wants Y... problem.

    Note that I'm talking in broad strokes here. Both of you will have to modifiy little bits of your behaviour as "social grease" to help make it easier to get along. There is plenty of give and take in a good marriage. But the give and take should be over small stuff, not major life issues & choices.

    I was one of those guys who tried to overhaul his personality to fit the needs and wants of the Girl of the Moment, and that only ever led to tears. Once I decided to be me, and to find a girl that fit me the way I was (and vice versa) I met my wife and I've been blissfully happy (on the marital front at least) ever since.

    I think a lot of guys, particularly technical, goal-oriented guys, get focussed on "making the relationship work" and start making these big personal sacrifices to that end, thinking that it gets them points. It doesn't. If you have to make radical alterations to who you are in order to keep your girlfriend, then let her go and find one who likes you as you are.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    1. Re:Then you picked the wrong woman by Alric · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This advice is fine but not necessarily true.

      Enjoying a spouse openly, comfortably, and even vulnerably is certainly a trait of a successful relationship. However, a successful marriage is not built on enjoying each other and "being who you really are." Those are effects, not causes of a happy relationship, IMO.

      Most couple don't truly realize marriage is (in theory) a lifetime commitment. Here's the big secret nobody tells young couples: people change. You and your spouse are going to change dramatically over the course of your marriage, and there's a likelihood that unless you are careful, you will end up disliking each other in 30 years. The best you can hope for is that as each of you changes, the other will adapt to your new personality or have ability to tell you calmly that you are changing for the worse. I won't go into a long tangent about the requisites for changing together successfully, but I basically think deep mutual respect and completely honest communication are the biggest ingredients.

      Here's the other part of your sentiment that is slightly flawed. Perhaps you really need to change. Maybe you are an inconsiderate, arrogant asshole, and the only person who would date you is a meek little insecure person who will let you walk all over him/her. Maybe a partner is trying to change you for the better.

      But yes, I absolutely agree with you: being comfortable and open with your partner is absolutely essential. If you don't have that, it seems that you're missing the fundamental point of dating and marriage (at least for secular humanists). The most you can hope for in this life is to understand yourself and this world around you. By loving, trusting, living with and focusing all of your powers of observation and appreciation on this one person, maybe -- just maybe -- you will understand humanity, yourself, and this whole absurd universe a tiny bit better.

      That's my current theory at least. It will probably change next year.

  27. "The Naked Face" by SpaceToast · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not to turn the snark abruptly off, but Malcolm Gladwell wrote a hella good article about facial cues a few years ago: http://www.gladwell.com/2002/2002_08_05_a_face.htm

    I don't find any of this hard to believe. If we didn't subconsciously give away cues to our personalities, how would animation work? Or for that matter, acting? I think it's easy to be scared at just how much we do give away.

  28. Agree on concepts, disagree on terminology by DG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think we are in perfect agreement on the core concepts, but we seem to differ on the terminology.

    And maybe on this - yes, maybe you really are an arrogant asshole who NEEDS to change in order to become a better person. But that is YOUR responsibility, and you will have to realize the necessity and then actualize the change more or less on your own, or it'll never take.

    Because if your girlfriend is attempting to change you away from that sort of behaviour... flip it around to her perspective. Now SHE is breaking the "I can change him!" rule and SHE is in danger of having it end in tears.

    You cannot force major changes in behavioral philosophy in the context of a relationship. You can help someone who *wants* to change themself, and you can make minor changes (for example, I'm a lot better about leaving dirty socks lying around than I once was :) but life is too short to try and make major changes to somebody else's personality, and the attempt almost NEVER works.

    You time is much better spent finding the person who is a match for your personality - or if it is YOU who are the problem, making the changes to your personality yourself.

    Big agreement on "deep mutual respect and completely honest communication" though. If that respect and honesty are not there, LEAVE.

    I know a lot of guys who got into horrible relationships because they convinced themselves that the girl was their last chance, and they made sacrifice after sacrifice after sacrifice to try and keep her around - and then one day the boom gets lowered and they are heartbroken ON TOP OF all those months/years of suffering. There's no such thing as a "last chance" or "only hope" - learn to walk away! It's not personal failure to realize that the relationship isn't working.

    While I'm at it, the phrase "she's out of my league" needs to be stricken from the language: the concept is fundamentally bogus. Why be self-limiting? Chase the one you want. And if she isn't interested, shrug and move on.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book