@PugSlugger I already was

trying to read it

but its a lot of stuff

can you quote specific

stuff

or establish the point you wantto make

Overall, we found sex differences in trait perception, with female responders more often coming to an agreement in their perception of the male targets’ traits than male responders with female targets. However, there were strong halo effects in trait perception for women. A closer examination suggested that the female responders’ ratings of the targets’ Big-Five personality factors were mostly driven by their ratings of the targets’ mate value and slow life history strategy. Finally, we found that of all of the traits and score types assessed, romantic interest was only predicted by the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness, with no moderating effect of the responders’ sex. Specifically, responders’ were interested in targets’ who they perceived to be higher than themselves on physical attractiveness. Thus, we found partial support for the third hypothesis (high or higher values on socially desirable traits predicts attraction) and for the fifth hypothesis (readily perceived traits predict attraction) because these hypotheses were only supported for physical attractiveness. We found no support for the first hypothesis (similarity predicts attraction), for the second hypothesis (dissimilarity predicts attraction), or for the fourth hypothesis (sex moderates what predicts attraction). These effects will be discussed in turn in the next sections.

like "claim" heres my proof *posts link or quotes*

k

Wow. You can't even use your own words. I'm out.

Wasted time

Overall, we found sex differences in trait perception, with female responders more often coming to an agreement in their perception of the male targets’ traits than male responders with female targets. However, there were strong halo effects in trait perception for women. A closer examination suggested that the female responders’ ratings of the targets’ Big-Five personality factors were mostly driven by their ratings of the targets’ mate value and slow life history strategy. Finally, we found that of all of the traits and score types assessed, romantic interest was only predicted by the responders’ perception of the targets’ physical attractiveness, with no moderating effect of the responders’ sex. Specifically, responders’ were interested in targets’ who they perceived to be higher than themselves on physical attractiveness. Thus, we found partial support for the third hypothesis (high or higher values on socially desirable traits predicts attraction) and for the fifth hypothesis (readily perceived traits predict attraction) because these hypotheses were only supported for physical attractiveness. We found no support for the first hypothesis (similarity predicts attraction), for the second hypothesis (dissimilarity predicts attraction), or for the fourth hypothesis (sex moderates what predicts attraction). These effects will be discussed in turn in the next sections.

Only quoted paragraphs from other articles

@󠀀󠀀 you are the most obvious troll ive ever see lmao

you want proof

lmao

Give me specific evidence for a specific claim, not gonna read 10 articles m8

youre gonna get banned

SPECIFIC claims, not paragraphs

keep going

lmao

LOOKS

ARE

THE

MAIN

FACTOR

DATING

SUCCESS

in dating success

is that clear

?

incels are mad mainly about that

hey bro can you tell me more about the study? I dont understand what they mean by predicted the romantic interest? Did they ask the girls if theyd be interested in them, was it based on them meeting certain diff guys or what?

also that women are hypergamous

read the abstract

if i tell you then youll want scientific proof

if i give you proof youll want it summarized

if i summarize it youll want proof of what im saying

then youll ahhhhhh

its circular logic lol

"iecause of the sample collected, we only looked at the predictors of romantic interest for heterosexual participants. The extent to which these results would generalize to LGBT populations is unclear. Also, we looked at predictors of romantic interest for a relatively young sample, and it would be interesting to see whether results are different for older populations. Finally, we only examined predictors of self-reported romantic interest. It was clear to participants that we were not offering the opportunity to meet the targets, or go on a date with them. So we are uncertain about the extent to which our results generalize to actual dating behavior."