Slashdot Mirror
Women "Advertise" Fertility
Dik Zak writes with word of a paper published in the journal Hormones and Behavior. A study found that women take greater care over their appearance when they are at peak levels of monthly fertility. The researchers took two photos of each of 30 women, one near ovulation and one at the other end of her cycle. They then showed the paired photos (with faces obscured) to a group of observers, who were asked to judge in which photo the women were trying to look more attractive. The observers chose the "high fertility" subject nearly 60% more of the time than would be expected by chance.
Looks like kdawson isn't too fertile right now.
46487 466780 252994 376409 96920 39622 205366 244315 622115 512361 668040 63608 259203 955314 811176 652718 166330 23922
Like you uhh know you we are (most of us) are at the 100% fertility rate most of the time and uhhh we don't care about advertising it. I am not sure where i am going with this. Oh snap, i need to shave the 4 month old beard. Wonder where dad keeps his razor...
There's a reason other than "randomness" that your wife bothers you more at times. It's not just because she thinks that you need "a break from your work". Open your eyes, men! She wants something from you!
My wife and I figured this out ages ago. She's all over me during ovulation. Anyone who's married and paying attention should also be able to notice this. But then again, how many guys know their wife's monthly schedule? Hmm.
--Posted as AC for privacy
Not 60% of the time, but 60% more than expected if it were chance alone. So more likely 1.6 * (30*.5) = 24/30, not 18/30.
But of course the actual number isn't in the article.
The enemies of Democracy are
When I'm at "the other end of my cycle" aka, my period, I'm bleeding and bloated and cramping and my face is breaking out, and looking pretty is not exactly high on my list. When I'm not, looking pretty is much less of a hassle. So, not exactly rocket science here.
"What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
The article and summary are in disagreement. Choosing to assume the article is more likely to be right, it is 60% right guesses vs expected 50% right guesses.
However, also omitted from the summary is 42 guessers guessing on the 30 dress-up-women in the study. That's 42x30 guesses, with a 60% correct guess rate overall. 60% with more than a thousand sample points is well within the usual scientific standard for statistically significant.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
google it. There are lots of web sites with pictures of them advertising their fertility.
So they'll advertise, but never actually have any for sale? It's like shopping at Best Buy.
I am a statistician, and reading through the comments hear, am saddened that many readers claim that "statistical significance" could not have been achieved in this study because of a sample size of 30 women. First, that's only part of the random sample in this study, the other part is men sampled to judge the pictures.
.01, which usually signifies statistical significance.
Second of all, I have looked up the actual publication in "Hormones and Behavior", and the p-value associated with their main test is
Ultimately, determining whether some difference in populations is due to chance depends on more than just sample size. It depends on how large of a difference you want to detect, and the variance of the measurements within a group. Of course, larger sample sizes help, but it ultimately depends on what you're studying, and the design of the experiment.
So while I definitely applaud being sceptical of all statistics, I urge you to look up the actual publications, read the methodology, and then decide if the results are something you believe. Kneejerk reactions to n = 30 don't really help anyone though.
I have not read through this publication in its entirety yet.
Doc: Thank you for volunteering for our experiment
Subject: That's fine. What's it about?
Doc: We can't tell you. But could you tell me what part of your menstrual cycle you're in?
Subject: So it's about menstrual cycles?
Doc: No. We ask everyone that quaestion.
Subject: I believe you.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
This is the one type of advertising where you don't want your pop-up to be blocked.
When you allow a plug-in root access, there's always risk of spawning child processes.