You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Lumifer comments on Open thread, Oct. 5 - Oct. 11, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: MrMind 05 October 2015 06:50AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (346)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Lumifer 08 October 2015 03:16:51PM *  3 points [-]

Dum-dum-dum-DOOM

MALE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE (G) DOES NOT INCREASE FEMALE SEXUAL ATTRACTION

(all caps in the original X-D)

P.S. This is a Just Another Psych Study, so any resemblance between its conclusions and reality is merely coincidental. Good for lulz, not too good for serious consideration. But it's funny :-)

Comment author: OrphanWilde 08 October 2015 06:55:13PM *  3 points [-]

Guessing the distribution before I look: Small-ish penalty for below-average intelligence, a flat line through average into slightly above average, then a small-ish penalty for above-average intelligence.

ETA: Oh. No data provided. Pity.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 12 October 2015 10:45:14PM 1 point [-]

Well, it certainly agrees with the anecdotal evidence.

Comment author: Lumifer 12 October 2015 11:41:47PM 1 point [-]

Not with mine. My anecdotal evidence says that high IQ does NOT compensate for a variety of other deficiencies (from personal hygiene to self-confidence issues) but otherwise it's very useful :-)

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 13 October 2015 12:11:58AM 4 points [-]

In which case there's still the issue that it seems to correlate with said deficiencies.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 17 October 2015 07:42:02PM *  1 point [-]

I think it's more because of restriction-of-range effects (people who have both low IQ and said deficiencies are likely to be in their parents' basements so we don't usually see them, and people who have both are likely to be in places like DC so we don't usually see them either) than because they actually correlate in the whole population.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 18 October 2015 03:35:59AM 3 points [-]

Well, autism causes both for starters.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 18 October 2015 10:04:24AM *  0 points [-]

What?

EDIT: Do you mean the technical meaning or the colloquial meaning? The former aren't that smart in average...

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 18 October 2015 04:43:04PM *  2 points [-]

Autism is a spectrum. Here I mean the ones whose social skills aren't so ban its impossible to meaningfully interact with them.

EDIT: fixed typo.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 19 October 2015 06:49:14AM -1 points [-]

And having social skills so bad it's impossible to meaningfully interact with you causes high IQ? What?

Comment author: Lumifer 13 October 2015 02:37:34PM 0 points [-]

Citation needed.

A paper titled "High IQ is correlated with the inability to learn to use a shower" got to have a decent chance at getting an IgNobel X-)

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 08 October 2015 03:35:14PM 1 point [-]

The usual caveats about small and culturally limited studies apply, not to mention that it's a hypothetical behavior study.

This being said, it's worth noting that a lot of mating venues have so much background noise that conversation is discouraged.

Comment author: skeptical_lurker 09 October 2015 12:36:08PM 1 point [-]

Measured male g had no effect on female short-term attraction, but a small positive effect on long-term attraction

So male intelligence does increase romantic attraction, but if all you want is a shag then you don't care about intelligence.

This makes sense, and also makes the title a little misleading.

Wouldn't a better approach be to look at okcupid profile reading level (as in, does their profile use long words and correct grammar) or answers to match questions such as "which is bigger, the sun or the moon?" and correlate this with how many messages they get? I suppose this wouldn't be very academic, but you could get a sample size of millions.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 10 October 2015 10:40:36AM 1 point [-]

Wouldn't a better approach be to look at okcupid profile reading level (as in, does their profile use long words and correct grammar) or answers to match questions such as "which is bigger, the sun or the moon?" and correlate this with how many messages they get? I suppose this wouldn't be very academic, but you could get a sample size of millions.

Some of the posts on OkTrends, the official OkCupid blog, have studied similar things.

Comment author: ChristianKl 10 October 2015 11:12:53AM -1 points [-]

match questions such as "which is bigger, the sun or the moon?"

Why do you believe that correlates with intelligence? It might very well correlate with willingness to provide contrarian answers.

Comment author: ChristianKl 09 October 2015 08:46:52AM 0 points [-]

It's worth noting that it cites an existing study titled "Intelligence and mate choice: intelligent men are always appealing"

Comment author: MrMind 09 October 2015 07:02:58AM 0 points [-]

Wild hypothesis: it is possible that the Flynn effect has levelled out the range where intelligence was a factor of sexual attractiveness?

Maybe it's more important to mate with a 90 IQ rather than an 85 IQ, but after 100 IQ every male seems equal.

Comment author: Lumifer 09 October 2015 02:38:06PM 3 points [-]

but after 100 IQ every male seems equal

It's interesting how you are not conditioning this on the IQ of the girl...

Comment author: MrMind 12 October 2015 07:19:35AM -1 points [-]

Sure, you can always add a parameter to make the model more complex, if needed.

How is that interesting?

How would you have conditioned the preference on women's IQ?