Hey, eyes up here buddy!
April 19, 2006 11:25 AM Subscribe

British scientists discover men's decision making skills can be compromised by a beautiful woman. I suppose this isn't much of a surprise, since "The Cheerleader Effect" has been reported on before [NYT]. The study also showed that testosterone levels also played a part, the more testosterone, the more pronounced the effect was.
posted by SirOmega (59 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

HALT THE PRESSES
posted by Ryvar at 11:31 AM on April 19, 2006

I must have hella-high testosterone levels according to that article, because my ring fingers are long. That sounds slightly suspicious to me. But interesting link, thanks.

One of the funny things about being gay is that there are times when a beautiful woman addresses me seemingly expecting me to be slightly discombobulated or oversolicitous of her attention -- not that I mind -- but I just kinda sit there reacting normally, as if she is a powerful wizard in some online game but I'm carrying the secret amulet in my magic bag that makes me immune.

But certain handsome guys definitely have mojo over me.
posted by digaman at 11:33 AM on April 19, 2006

*sorry, I meant discumBOOBulated, of course.
posted by digaman at 11:34 AM on April 19, 2006

I didn't want to comment in this thread, but then I saw that picture in the first link.
posted by daksya at 11:37 AM on April 19, 2006

I'm sorry, what were we talking about?
posted by quite unimportant at 11:41 AM on April 19, 2006

For some reason, the study reminded me of this insightful point/counterpoint column.
posted by billysumday at 11:46 AM on April 19, 2006

It's not evolution! Jeebus wants us to be horny.
posted by tkchrist at 11:46 AM on April 19, 2006

I wouldn't say my ring fingers are especially long, but I am definitely distracted by beautiful women.
posted by schroedinger at 11:50 AM on April 19, 2006

There's no mystery about this; it's been known for a long time. It's the reason why drinks in a casino are invariably served by young, good looking women in revealing costumes: they make men gamble more heavily.
posted by Steven C. Den Beste at 11:51 AM on April 19, 2006

This is totally bogus, that stripper was just an amazing negotiator.
posted by mullacc at 11:55 AM on April 19, 2006

Clearly only castrated men can be trusted to hold powerful positions. Otherwise with the danger of testosterone poisoning, we could be subject to adverse decisionmaking.
posted by beth at 11:57 AM on April 19, 2006

Can I get a "duh" from the crowd?
posted by thekilgore at 11:58 AM on April 19, 2006

This is a pretty easy result to believe, but it irks me they tested it with a game where accepting an unfair offer is the rational move if you're maximizing your income.
posted by grobstein at 11:59 AM on April 19, 2006

mullacc, you two had a connection. She really liked you.
posted by Gamblor at 12:00 PM on April 19, 2006

Digaman: Excluding the ring finger bit, my reaction is usually the same as yours.

But instead of the Amulet of Gay, I have a Cloak of Hostility and Resentment.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:01 PM on April 19, 2006

In other breaking news: Tyra Banks hot, Trees made of wood.
posted by Gamblor at 12:01 PM on April 19, 2006

The whole ring finger/middle finger ratio made me do a doubletake. I didn't realize it had such a scientific acceptance. I had heard this referred to as an indicator of homosexuality before, which digiman's sample of one seems to confirm. Still, it's remenicent of Phrenology, which had the whole scientific community predicting criminal tendencies because of the bumps on people's heads. I'mstill a skeptic, and I worry about the possible spread of "fingerism."
posted by Blingo at 12:04 PM on April 19, 2006

I had a brilliant comment put together in my mind, but then this babe with great jahoobies walked by and I forgot it completely.
posted by jonmc at 12:09 PM on April 19, 2006

One of the funny things about being gay is that there are times when a beautiful woman addresses me seemingly expecting me to be slightly discombobulated or oversolicitous of her attention -- not that I mind -- but I just kinda sit there reacting normally, as if she is a powerful wizard in some online game but I'm carrying the secret amulet in my magic bag that makes me immune.

Hilarious imagery!

I'm straight and happily married (and had no shortage of women over the years) so beautiful women generally don't have as much of an impact on my decision-making as they should, despite normal testosterone levels (checked recently for just this thread -- heh). And so it's funny to me, too, when a beautiful woman asks me to do something without even trying to convince me that it's a good idea, as if her merely deigning to ask me is enough to make it happen.

mind you, when I was just entering puberty, I did everything the pretty ladies asked
posted by davejay at 12:09 PM on April 19, 2006

Um. What does it mean when your pinky finger is the longest one?
posted by tkchrist at 12:09 PM on April 19, 2006

Yet another argument for the burka.
posted by 517 at 12:14 PM on April 19, 2006

You know I was just thinking about the test they used:

Each group was then paired up to play a game where the men had $10, a proposer had to suggest a split, and the other man accepted or rejected the offer.

If the second man accepted the offer, the money was distributed in agreement with the offer. If he rejected it, neither partner got anything.

In the article, they say that the sexually-distracted men "did worse" -- but what, exactly, would "doing worse" entail here? I can see it both ways...if I only accept offers of 50% or higher, I could be doing "better" because I always got at least half (when I got any), or "worse" because I didn't always get anything -- conversely, if I accept all offers above 0%, I could be doig "better" because I almost always get something, or "worse" because I get less than 50% approximately half of the time.

Since the test is supposed to model hunting/food sharing, does anyone know if the success criteria was "you get to eat", or "you get to eat the most, more of the time"?
posted by davejay at 12:15 PM on April 19, 2006

Make that "you get to eat almost all of the time", or "you get to eat more at once, but less often"?
posted by davejay at 12:15 PM on April 19, 2006

Um. What does it mean when your pinky finger is the longest one?

Were you ever a high school shop teacher?
posted by beth at 12:15 PM on April 19, 2006

Um. What does it mean when your pinky finger is the longest one?

You're looking at the back of your hand, and think you're looking at the front?
posted by davejay at 12:16 PM on April 19, 2006

davejay, I think it was just demonstrating more impulsivity/less rational thought.
posted by 517 at 12:19 PM on April 19, 2006

That's why I've been a little disconcerted by the whole Viagra thing. In the back of my mind, I was looking forward to a time, later on in life, when I would finally be free from the power of the almighty boob.
posted by Gamblor at 12:19 PM on April 19, 2006

There is an option to get either 0 or some number of dollars between 1 and 10.

You should obviously always take the money.

So wouldn't a correlation between sexual imagery and accepting the offer, fair or not, indicate an improvement in decision making for this game?

Am I misunderstanding the game?
posted by sonofsamiam at 12:20 PM on April 19, 2006

Yeah, sonofsamiam, that's what I'm thinking too. 517, if rational thought == accept offer above 0% always, and impulsivity == accept only offers where you come out ahead of the offerer, even if the rejected offers ALL go to the offerer...well, then I guess that must have been what they do, right?

So, someone correct me if I've got this wrong: if you accept all offers above 0%, you're doing "better", and if you hold out for 50% or above, you're doing "worse".
posted by davejay at 12:26 PM on April 19, 2006

One of the funny things about being gay is that there are times when a beautiful woman addresses me seemingly expecting me to be slightly discombobulated or oversolicitous of her attention... ... but I just kinda sit there reacting normally

One of the funny things about about having a non-conventional sense of beauty is that there are times when a woman addresses me seemingly expecting me to be slightly discombobulated or oversolicitous of her attention -- but I just kinda sit there reacting normally. And then she decides I'm gay.
posted by dreamsign at 12:26 PM on April 19, 2006

if the scientists did not use this criteria, perhaps a beautiful woman was walking by when they wrong up their testing plans
posted by davejay at 12:26 PM on April 19, 2006

Or what Alvy Ampersand said.
posted by dreamsign at 12:27 PM on April 19, 2006

Yet another argument for the burka.
posted by 517

I was just thinking that it was another argument for mandatory blindfolds, myself.

Cover up, guys! You are obviously too irrational and hormonal to be making big decisions in public.

Yeah, I keed, whatever.
posted by jokeefe at 12:30 PM on April 19, 2006

You are obviously too irrational and hormonal to be making big decisions in public.

"We men are so driven by lust that we have a violent streak that comes along with it. If we can't fuck it, we'll kill it! A nuclear bomb is a man's way of saying 'I'm gonna fuck up the earth!'" - Robin Williams
posted by jonmc at 12:32 PM on April 19, 2006

What did the article say? I was too distraced by the Kelly Brook picture.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:42 PM on April 19, 2006

One of the funny things about about having a non-conventional sense of beauty

The other thing, of course, is that you get much, much more pussy.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 12:43 PM on April 19, 2006

davejay : "what, exactly, would 'doing worse' entail here?"

My assumption was "doing worse than the control group".

So, for example, you have a group of randomly selected people in Group 1. They all see pictures of vegetables.
Then you have a group of randomly selected people in Group 2. Half of them see tits, the other half see vegetables.

Then you pair one person from Group 1 with one person from Group 2 for the negotiation game.

The average income from Group 2 members who saw vegetables is $4, let's say.
The average income from Group 2 members who saw tits is $3, let's say.

In that case, it's valid to say people who saw tits did worse. It isn't that they took unfair offers, per se, because so did the Group 2 veggies. It's that they took worse offers.

I don't know if that's the way the study was done, but if these scientists had any common sense whatsover (if they were, in fact, scientists), that's probably how it would have been done (except with additional statistical standard deviation calculations, etc.)
posted by Bugbread at 12:59 PM on April 19, 2006

Somewhere, I read a story about a technique supposedly used by German interrogators during the war. They would tell the prisoner that he would be executed the next morning. When morning came, they'd tell him that the decision had suspended indefinitely. The next person to come and question him would be a sexy woman, who'd unmistakably indicate that he could have her if he gave up whatever he was supposed to know. Apparently the reprieve would make him almost demented with sexual desire, destroy his resistance and she'd be able to get anything she wanted out of him. I can recall nothing about where I read this, so I certainly can't vouch for it.
posted by George_Spiggott at 12:59 PM on April 19, 2006 [1 favorite]

So did he get to have sex with her or not? Finish the story!
posted by Gamblor at 1:04 PM on April 19, 2006

I can recall nothing about where I read this,

I think it was Penthouse Forum, August 1979, dude.
posted by jonmc at 1:13 PM on April 19, 2006

Forget your games you silly scientist! I want to go fuck. Since when is that poor decision making?
posted by srboisvert at 1:16 PM on April 19, 2006

Gamblor, I don't recall. But I do recall now that it was related by the "Quiller" character in one of Adam Hall (aka Elleston' Trevor's) spy novels. Which of course makes it folklore at best. Doesn't mean it's not true, but those novels generally were pretty thick with made-up facts, inaccurate descriptions of places the author obviously hadn't been and so forth.
posted by George_Spiggott at 1:18 PM on April 19, 2006

This must be why Condi Rice has been so successful with US foriegn policy...
posted by sfts2 at 1:21 PM on April 19, 2006

Man, just one more reason to hate the Nazis.
posted by Gamblor at 1:22 PM on April 19, 2006

duh.
posted by zach4000 at 1:33 PM on April 19, 2006

What does it mean when your pinky finger is the longest one?

You need to trim your coke nail.
posted by pineapple at 1:35 PM on April 19, 2006

This must be why Condi Rice...

The glasses don't help anymore, do they?
posted by 517 at 1:54 PM on April 19, 2006

Here's an article about the finger/testosterone correlation. Here is a summary quote: "Men with the shortest index fingers scored higher on measures of physical aggression than those with longer index fingers, but the study's findings did not apply to women". I have very short index fingers but no one has ever accused me of being aggressive.
posted by octothorpe at 2:08 PM on April 19, 2006

...men's decision making skills can be compromised by a beautiful woman...

So let's take advantage of the opportunity and present several dilemmas at the same time:

Fight or Buy Bonds - Third Liberty Loan
Howard Chandler Christy, 1917
posted by cenoxo at 2:22 PM on April 19, 2006

This is no doubt how Margaret Thatcher confounded the French.
posted by mono blanco at 2:46 PM on April 19, 2006

The claim from the article that "catching sight of a pretty woman really is enough to throw a man's decision-making skills into disarray" is entirely misleading.

After perusing the original article, men with higher testosterone levels are normally less likely to accept an unfair offer in the ultimatum game when compared to men with low testosterone, but are more likely to accept accept an unfair offer after viewing sexy images when compared to the low testosterone condition.

A person could just as easily interpret the exact same results as suggesting that men with high testosterone levels are more altruistic after viewing sexy images. Alternatively, it could be that the same group of men are economically more rational after viewing these images, because a low payout in the ultimatum game is still better than nothing. To say that this applies to decision-making in general is seriously overgeneralizing the results.
posted by Nquire at 3:16 PM on April 19, 2006

Yet another argument for the burka.

Actually, the only one.

One of the funny things about being gay is that there are times when a beautiful woman addresses me seemingly expecting me to be slightly discombobulated or oversolicitous of her attention... ... but I just kinda sit there reacting normally

Not normally by my standards.
posted by semmi at 3:49 PM on April 19, 2006

All's fair in love and war — Sex and Psychological Operations (historical, but definitely NSFW):

To the average person, the connotations of the word "Pornography" have always brought forth a mental picture of a depraved person leering at filthy pictures. To the scholar, the word meant simply "The description of prostitutes and their trade". Later other definitions were added, attempting to encompass the term "obscene". We now consider Webster's "Writing and pictures intended to arouse sexual desire" as an appropriate statement of meaning. Would it surprise you to know that all the major combatants involved in World War II used pornography as part of their psychological operations (PSYOP) strategy?
...
Both the Axis and the Allies printed aerial propaganda leaflets using sexual themes in an attempt to demoralize enemy soldiers at the front. Did these leaflets work? Did the finders become emotionally crippled and unable to carry on their duties and responsibilities? Just the opposite occurred. The "pin-up" pictures became collectors items sought after by the troops who greedily collected and swapped them. If anything, the leaflets raised morale. There is no doubt that they were the most heartily appreciated propaganda leaflets used in World War 2. We can probably state that they were the most widely read and circulated enemy documents of any war.

Maybe the effects were just delayed for a while...
posted by cenoxo at 3:54 PM on April 19, 2006

I see your amulet and cloak, and raise you a ring of +5 Marriage.
posted by nlindstrom at 4:13 PM on April 19, 2006

Oh please, you think women are completely immune to hot-looking guys in skimpy garb?
posted by rob511 at 4:42 PM on April 19, 2006

They're slightly better than mono blanco's...
posted by sfts2 at 6:03 PM on April 19, 2006

A person could just as easily interpret the exact same results as suggesting that men with high testosterone levels are more altruistic after viewing sexy images.

Easy way to find out. Rate attractiveness of strangers and then see whether willingness to be "altruistic" extends to any person after viewing such images or just the ones he finds attractive. Not very "altruistic" if it's the latter, and I have to say, that would accord with personal experience.
posted by dreamsign at 6:15 PM on April 19, 2006

Yeah, what nquire said.

In the ultimatum game, the economically rational choice is to accept any non-zero offer, no matter how low. In reality, people tend to reject offers lower than 3 dollars out of 10, though an economist would call this irrational (3 is still more than 0).

I can't get to the original article, so I don't know if the authors address this, but my feeling is that the men who just looked at the naked ladies are in a better mood, and thus more inclined to be generous.
posted by myeviltwin at 6:21 PM on April 19, 2006

« Older Carcass Cutting Tools:... | Oeil Public... Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments

Hey, eyes up here buddy! April 19, 2006 11:25 AM Subscribe

Hey, eyes up here buddy!
April 19, 2006 11:25 AM Subscribe