Como Ser Alpha?

[Bigvitinho 39]

1 hora atrás, Fabricius disse:

Coroa de 29 anos. Então sou idoso.

 

Por isso coloquei entre aspa ZzZzZzZzZzZzZz

1 hora atrás, lukao1993 disse:

Do jeito que ele fala parece que ele é o pica das galáxias e que aos 16 anos de idade tem a experiência de 300 idosos transantes

''Alguem tem alguma Dica?'' Se eu fosse o Fodão nao teria pedindo uma ajuda não acha? Alias, eu perguntei sobre isso para ser um pouco mais humilde com voces é ver oque vcs ia falar, mais pelo visto falta humildade com vcs, isso eu tenho de sobra, se quiserem eu ensino a vcs.

 

2 horas atrás, Bright13 disse:

 

Véi, começa a escrever um livro pq vc é criativo, todo post é uma pérola.

Larga mão de mentir num fórum, namoralzinha, vc é carente?

Porra, vir querer crescer num fórum de internet vei, num forum...

Se eu quisesse invetar algo eu teria ido em um site de contos eroticos.

45 minutos atrás, Marlon Paradise disse:

Nas primeiras postagens aqui no tópico passou uma certa confiança. Mas agora ta indo longe demais..

longe de mais pq? Apenas disse vrdd, não tem um A meu nesse topico que seja mentira!

[C.Golden 1622]

13 horas atrás, Bigvitinho disse:

Relato de um macho Alpha:

 

As minas vem ate Ti!

 

Em 02/01/2012, meu irmão me levou para rua para ver o show do Tiaguinho e me amostrar como e a vida na madruga, ele tinha uns 18 ou 19 anos, Ele abordou 3 garotas, e pegou 1 no show, sendo que uma das garotas que ele abordou, ele so nao pegou pq ele nao quis, pq conversando com ela, ele descobriu que ela tinha namorado, e que o namorado dela era um amigo de escola dele (O cara tem bom coração!), quando deu umas 4h da madruga, agnt foi pra um lugar onde fica um conjunto de bares, (fica um bar do lado do outro), ai agnt ficou la, ele colocou 2 minas para rebolar no pau dele e pá, mais ele nao pegou nenhuma (ate hj nao sei o pq!)... Ai quando agnt estava indo embora pra casa, no caminho uma morena super gata mandou Tchau pra ele '-', do nada, essa morena estava acompanhada com 4 cara de uns 2 metros de altura meio gordo os cara (tipo jogador de futebol americano), meu irmão andou uns 10 metros e depois voltou para puxar assunto com a mina, msm ela estando com 4 cara junto dela, e outra, esses cara que estavam com ela, tinha muito dinheiro, eles estavam com uma picape e uns 2 baldes de bebidas... Papo vai, papo vem, e um dos cara percebeu que meu irmão estava conversando com a mina dele, o cara jogou o copo de cerveja no chão e falou:Mano mete o pé daqui ou eu te meto a porrada! Meu irmão so foi embora pq era 4x1, os amigos dele estava longe, se nao ele metia a porrada nos cara, fdp e brigao e vive metendo a porrada nos cara! suhauaahsauhsauhsuahsauhshus

No outro dia ele achou o Facebook da mina, e foi comer ela no meio da Favela! suashuaashausahushashuauauhshausuah

 

Eu tinha 11 anos na epoca...

 

Coloca até a data pra ninguém desconfiar que é mentira!

Manda um abraço pro teu irmão Jeff Seid, fala pra ele criar uma conta aqui no fórum pra dar consultoria pra gente, principalmente pro Almeida.

 

[lukao1993 1329]

14 horas atrás, Bigvitinho disse:

 

Namoral, pra mim tanto faz se é verdade ou não.

 

Abraço!

Editado Março 19, 2016 às 17:49 por lukao1993

[VinixD 563]

[planeta 5553]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[planeta 5553]

[planeta 5553]

legal esse teste, façam pra saber comportamentos errados

 

 

Dating Market Value Test For Men

Here is a system for determining your dating market value if you are a man.  Dating market value is a measurement of how you stack up against other men in the competition for attracting female interest.  Be honest with yourself taking this survey.  It will give you a fairly accurate assessment of the quality and number of women you are capable of attracting for a sexual relationship.  Girls, you may take this quiz for your boyfriends to see if you are slumming it or about to be cheated on.

1.  How old are you?

under 25 years old:  0 points
26-34 years old:  +1 point
35-45 years old:  0 points
45+ years old:  -1 point

2.  How tall are you?

under 5’9″:  -1 point
5’9″ to 5’11”:  0 points
6′ to 6’4″:  +1 point
over 6’4″:  0 points

3.  What is your BMI?

(Go here to calculate your BMI.  I know BMI doesn’t account for very muscular physiques, but since most men are not Lee Haney, it is adequate for this survey’s purposes.)

under 20.0:  -1 point
20.0 to 24.0:  +1 point
24.1 to 27.0:  0 points
over 27.0:  -1 point

4.  How much do you bench press?

60% or less of your body weight:  -1 point
61% to 80% of your body weight:  0 points
81% to 170% of your body weight:  +1 point
over 170% of your body weight:  0 points

5.  What does your hairline look like?

Full head of hair if you are over 35:  +1 point
Full head of hair if you are under 35:  0 points
Receding hairline if you are over 35:  0 points
Receding hairline if you are under 35:  -1 point
Bald (age irrelevant):  -1 point
Bald but you are dark-skinned:  0 points

6.  How much money do you make?

under $40K and you are out of college:  -1 point
$40K to $70K out of college and under 40 years old:  0 points
over $70K out of college and under 40 years old:  +1 point
under $40K and you are college age or younger:  0 points
$40K to $55K and over 40 years old:  -1 point
$55K to $90K and over 40 years old:  0 points
over $90K and 40 to 55 years old:  +1 point
over $200K (age irrelevant):  +1 point

7.  Do you have a car?

No (under 21yo):  0 points
No (over 21yo):  -1 point
Yes (under 21yo):  +1 point
Yes (over 21yo):  0 points
No, but you have a motorcycle (age irrelevant):  +1 point

8.  Are you good-looking?

(Self-assessment is somewhat unreliable, so if you are uncertain of your looks post your pic on hotornot and wait a week for your score.  Or get opinions from unbiased and blunt friends.  Hashing out the biometric details of what makes a male face attractive would require another lengthy post, so for now these two methods are acceptable substitutes.)

On a 1 – 10 scale:

0 – 4:  -1 point
5 – 7:  0 points
8 – 10:  +1 point

9.  Have you ever played a leading role in a team sport?

No:  0 points
Yes:  +1 point

10.  What is your occupation?

(Since I won’t list every single high status job in the Department of Labor’s Occupational Handbook, you’ll have to make a judgment call on your own job.  It’s a safe assumption that most people know a high status job when they see it.)

High status (doctor, lawyer, stockbroker, executive, professor, business owner, successful artist or musician or writer, professional athlete, etc.):  +1 point
Neutral status (engineer, programmer, accountant, salesman, mid level manager, scientist, military officer, well-paid tradesman, etc.):  0 points
Low status (low paid blue collar, admin, construction, janitor, struggling web designer, help desk, etc.):  -1 point

11.  How many friends do you have?

0 to 3:  -1 point
4 to 20:  0 points
over 20:  +1 point

12.  How many friends have you met through the internet that you have never seen in person?

0 to 2:  0 points
over 2:  -1 point

13.  When was the last time you went to a house party?

Within the past month:  +1 point
Between one month and one year ago:  0 points
Over one year ago:  -1 point

14.  Have people besides your family called you funny?

None:  -1 point
A few have:  0 points
Nearly everyone who knows me:  +1 point

15.  What is your IQ?

Under 85:  -1 point
85 to 110:  0 points
110 to 130:  +1 point
130 to 145:  0 points
over 145:  -1 point

16.  At a party, which happens first – you approach someone or someone approaches you?

I approach someone first almost every time:  +1 point
I occasionally approach first:  0 points
Someone normally approaches me first:  -1 point

17.  Have you ever been in a serious fight where real punches were thrown and you felt like you wanted to kill your opponent(s)?

No:  0 points
Yes:  +1 point
Yes, with a girl:  -1 point

18.  Have you ever been arrested?

No:  0 points
Yes:  +1 point
Yes, for child pornography or public exposure:  -1 point

****

It’s best to answer the following four questions based on your past experience with similar scenarios.  Who we really are is not what we wish we were but what we have always been.

19.  You are on a second date with a girl.  You go to kiss her.  She turns her cheek to you and says “Slow down, I’m not that kind of girl.”  You reply:

(A) “Sorry.”
(B) “Yeah, well, no prob.”
(C) “This could be trouble ’cause I’m that kind of guy.” *smirk*

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

20.  You’re chatting up a pretty girl you just met in a bar.  After a few minutes she asks you to buy her a drink.  You reply:

(A) “Sure.”
(B) “I’m not an ATM.”
(C) “No, but you can buy me one.”

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

21.  You’ve just met a cute girl in a club and have been talking with her for five minutes when she abruptly changes the topic to a raunchy conversation about her multiorgasmic ability.  You respond with:

(A) a huge grin and an eager “Damn! That is HOT!”
(B) a look of mild disdain.
(C) a raised eyebrow while saying “Hey, thanks for the medical report.”

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

22.  The pickup has been going well.  Later in the night she leans in and begins making out with you passionately.  You feel like a king and your jeans suddenly feel much tighter.  Do you:

(A) immediately grope her boob in return.
(B) continue making out with her for as long as she wishes.
(C) kiss for a little bit then push her gently away and look distracted for a second.

If you answered (A), subtract a point.
If (B), no points.
If (C), add a point.

And finally, the critical thinking portion of the quiz.  The following questions are based on the progression of a single pickup attempt.

23.  You go to a bar.  Twenty feet away are a pretty girl, a fat girl, and an average guy talking amongst themselves.  The pretty girl briefly eye flirts with you.  In reponse, you:

(A) eye flirt back and forth a few times before approaching 20 minutes later.
(B) immediately approach in a direct fashion maintaining strong eye contact with your target.
(C) immediately approach but from an indirect angle, looking around the room distractedly on the way over to your target as if you might see an even prettier girl somewhere else, and finally delivering your opener from over your shoulder.

(A):  -1 point
(B):  0 points
(C):  +1 point

24.  Who do you address first?

(A) the pretty girl.
(B) the fat girl.
(C) everyone.

(A):  -1 point
(B):  0 points
(C):  +1 point

25.  After getting the whole group engaged in conversation and having a good time, your target blurts out “Hey nice pink shirt! Are you gay?”  You:

(A) say “No, I’m not gay!”
(B) ignore her.
(C) say “OK, who brought their little sister to the bar!”

(A):  -1 point
(B):  0 points
(C):  +1 point

26.  In the middle of the conversation you have to pee.  You say:

(A) “I have to go to the bathroom. I’ll be right back.”
(B) “Excuse me.”
(C) nothing.  Just go.

(A):  -1 point
(B):  0 points
(C):  +1 point

27.  You’ve managed to get her outside your front door.  There is obvious sexual tension.  You want to close this deal.  You say:

(A) “So, um, ah, see you around.”
(B) “Why don’t you come inside?”
(C) “I’m thirsty.  Are you thirsty?  Let’s go inside and taste DC’s finest tap water.  But you can only stay for a minute, I have to get up early.”

(A):  -1 point
(B):  0 points
(C):  +1 point

****

SCORES

There are 26 points to earn or lose based on the questions asked.  The scoring breaks down as follows:

-26:  Why are you still alive?
-25 to -20:  You’re an omega.  Celibacy has its charms.
-19 to -15:  You actively repulse girls.  Your kind will usher forth the sexbot revolution.
-14 to -10:  You’re always getted foisted onto the warpigs.
-9 to 0:  Lesser beta.  You don’t immediately disgust girls; they just don’t notice you.  With much painful effort you can redeem yourself.
1 to 9:  Classic beta.  You catch some girls’ eyes, usually the ones you don’t want.  Try not to make fatty fucking a lifestyle.
10 to 14:  A few attractive girls in the bar will be intrigued by your presence.  But you need game to close the deal.
15 to 19:  Congrats, you have crossed the alpha Rubicon.  A lot of cute girls will be pleased when you hit on them.  But you can still fuck up by being yourself.
20 to 25:  You’re a natural.  Many hot girls check you out and forgive your occasional pickup blunders.  You always have a look of sexual satisfaction on your face.
26:  Super Alpha.  Booty sticks to you like bird shit on car roofs.

[planeta 5553]

Halo effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

 

For other uses, see Halo effect (disambiguation).

The halo effect is a cognitive bias in which an observer's overall impression of a person, company, brand, or product influences the observer's feelings and thoughts about that entity's character or properties.^[1][2] It was named by psychologist Edward Thorndike in reference to a person being perceived as having a halo. Subsequent researchers have studied it in relation to attractiveness and its bearing on the judicial and educational systems. The halo effect is a specific type ofconfirmation bias, wherein positive feelings in one area cause ambiguous or neutral traits to be viewed positively. Edward Thorndike originally coined the term referring only to people; however, its use has been greatly expanded especially in the area of brand marketing.

The term "halo" is used in analogy with the religious concept: a glowing circle that can be seen floating about the heads of saints in countless medieval and Renaissance paintings. The saint's face seems bathed in heavenly light from his or her halo. Thus, by seeing that somebody was painted with a halo, the observer can tell that this must have been a good and worthy person. In other words, the observer is transferring their judgment from one easily observed characteristic of the person (painted with a halo) to a judgment of that person's character.

The halo effect works in both positive and negative directions (the horns effect): If the observer likes one aspect of something, they will have a positive predisposition toward everything about it. If the observer dislikes one aspect of something, they will have a negative predisposition toward everything about it.^[3]

 

Contents

  [hide] 

• 1History
  • 1.1Supporting evidence
• 2Role of attractiveness
  • 2.1On personality
  • 2.2Academics and intelligence
  • 2.3Political effects
  • 2.4The judicial context
  • 2.5Reverse-halo effect
• 3Education
• 4Branding
• 5Gender differences
• 6Possible cause
• 7Further research findings
• 8See also
• 9References
• 10Bibliography
• 11Further reading

 

History[edit]

Edward Thorndike, known for his contributions to educational psychology, coined the phrase "halo effect" and was the first to support it with empirical research. He gave the phenomenon its name in his 1920 article “A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings”. He had noted in a previous study made in 1915 that estimates of traits in the same person were very highly and evenly correlated. In “Constant Error”, Thorndike set out to replicate the study in hopes of pinning down the bias that he thought was present in these ratings.

Supporting evidence[edit]

In "A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings", Thorndike asked two commanding officers to evaluate their soldiers in terms of physical qualities (neatness, voice,physique, bearing, and energy), intellect, leadership skills, and personal qualities (including dependability, loyalty, responsibility, selflessness, and cooperation). His goal was to see how the ratings of one characteristic affected other characteristics.

Thorndike's experiment showed how there was too great a correlation in the commanding officers' responses. In his review he stated: "The correlations are too high and too even. For example, for the three raters next studied[,] the average correlation for physique with intelligence is .31; for physique with leadership, .39; and for physique with character, .28".^[4] The ratings of one of the special qualities of an officer often started a trend in the rating results. If an officer had a particular "negative" attribute given off to the commanding officer, it would correlate in the rest of that soldier's results.

Role of attractiveness[edit]

A person’s attractiveness has also been found to produce a halo effect. Attractiveness provides a valuable aspect of the halo effect to consider because of its multifaceted nature; attractiveness may be influenced by several specific traits. These perceptions of attractiveness may affect judgments tied to personality traits. Physical attributes contribute to perceptions of attractiveness (i.e. weight, hair, eye color). For example, someone who is perceived as attractive, due in part to physical traits, may be more likely to be perceived as kind or intelligent. The role of attractiveness in producing the halo effect has been illustrated through a number of studies. Recent research, for example, has revealed that attractiveness may affect perceptions tied to life success and personality.^[5] In this study, attractiveness was correlated with weight, indicating that attractiveness itself may be influenced by various specific traits. Included in the personality variables were trustworthiness and friendliness. People perceived as being more attractive were more likely to be perceived as trustworthy and friendly. What this suggests is that perceptions of attractiveness may influence a variety of other traits, which supports the concept of the halo effect.

On personality[edit]

Dion, Berscheid & Walster (1972) conducted a study on the relationship between attractiveness and the halo effect. Sixty students from University of Minnesota took part in the experiment, half being male and half being female. Each subject was given three different photos to examine: one of an attractive individual, one of an individual of average attractiveness, and one of an unattractive individual.

The participants judged the photos’ subjects along 27 different personality traits (including altruism, conventionality, self-assertiveness, stability, emotionality,trustworthiness, extraversion, kindness, and sexual promiscuity). Participants were then asked to predict the overall happiness the photos' subjects would feel for the rest of their lives, including marital happiness (least likely to get divorced), parental happiness (most likely to be a good parent), social and professional happiness (most likely to experience life fulfillment), and overall happiness. Finally, participants were asked if the subjects would hold a job of high status, medium status, or low status.

Results showed that participants overwhelmingly believed more attractive subjects have more socially desirable personality traits than either averagely attractive or unattractive subjects. Participants also believed that attractive individuals would lead happier lives in general, have happier marriages, be better parents, and have more career success than the others. Also, results showed that attractive people were believed to be more likely to hold secure, prestigious jobs compared to unattractive individuals.

Academics and intelligence[edit]

A study by Landy & Sigall (1974) demonstrated the halo effect on judgments of intelligence and competence on academic tasks. Sixty male undergraduate students rated the quality of essays which included both well and poorly written samples. One third were presented with a photo of an attractive female as author, another third with that of an unattractive female as author, and the last third were shown neither.

Participants gave significantly better writing evaluations for the more attractive author. On a scale of 1 to 9, the well-written essay by the attractive author received an average of 6.7 while the unattractive author received a 5.9 (with a 6.6 as a control). The gap was larger on the poor essay: the attractive author received an average of 5.2, the control a 4.7, and the unattractive a 2.7, suggesting readers are generally more willing to give physically attractive people the benefit of the doubt when performance is below standard than others.

In a study conducted by Moore, Filippou & Perrett (2011), researchers sought to determine if residual cues to intelligence and personality existed in male and female faces by attempting to control for the attractiveness halo effect. They manipulated the perceived intelligence of photographs of individuals, finding that faces manipulated to look high in perceived intelligences were also rated as more attractive. It was also found that the faces high in perceived intelligence were also rated highly on perceived friendliness and sense of humor.

Political effects[edit]

A study by Verhulst, Lodge & Lavine (2010) found that attractiveness and familiarity are strong predictors of decisions regarding who is put in a position of leadership. Judgements made following one second exposures to side by side photos of two US congressional candidates were reasonably predictive of election outcomes. Attractiveness and familiarity were correlated with competence in this study. Candidates who appeared more attractive and familiar were also seen as more competent and were found more likely to be elected. Similar studies (Palmer & Peterson 2012) found that even when taking factual knowledge into account, candidates who were rated as more attractive were still perceived as more knowledgeable. These results suggest that the halo effect greatly impacts how individuals perceive political knowledge and it demonstrates the powerful influence of the halo effect in politics.

The judicial context[edit]

This section requires expansion.(April 2014)

Study results showing the influence of the halo effect in the judicial context exist:

• Efran (1974) found subjects were more lenient when sentencing attractive individuals than unattractive ones, even though exactly the same crime was committed. The researchers attributed the result to a societal perception that people with a high level of attractiveness are seen as more likely to have successful futures due to corresponding socially desirable traits.
• Monahan (1941) studied social workers who were accustomed to interacting with a diverse range of people and found that the majority experienced difficulty when asked to consider that a beautiful person was guilty of a crime.

Reverse-halo effect[edit]

The devil effect, also known as the reverse halo effect, is when people allow an undesirable trait to influence their evaluation of other traits.^[6] The Guardian wrote of the devil effect in relation to Hugo Chavez: "Some leaders can become so demonised that it's impossible to assess their achievements and failures in a balanced way."^[7]

The relation of a crime to attractiveness is also subject to the halo effect. A study presented two hypothetical crimes: a burglary and a swindle. The burglary involved a woman illegally obtaining a key and stealing $2,200; the swindle involved a woman manipulating a man to invest $2,200 in a nonexistent corporation. The results showed that when the offense was not related to attractiveness (as in the burglary) the unattractive defendant was punished more severely than the attractive one. However, when the offense was related to attractiveness (the swindle), the attractive defendant was punished more severely than the unattractive one. The study imputes that the usual leniency given to the attractive woman (as a result of the halo effect) was negated or reversed when the nature of the crime involved her looks.^[8]

Education[edit]

Abikoff et al. (1993) found the halo effect is also present in the classroom. In this study, both regular and special education elementary school teachers watched videotapes of what they believed to be children in regular 4th-grade classrooms. In reality, the children were actors, depicting behaviors present in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), oppositional defiant disorder (ODD), or standard behavior. The teachers were asked to rate the frequency of hyperactive behaviors observed in the children. Teachers rated hyperactive behaviors accurately for children with ADHD; however, the ratings of hyperactivity and other behaviors associated with ADHD were rated much higher for the children with ODD-like behaviors, showing a halo effect for children with ODD.

Foster & Ysseldyke (1976) also found the halo effect present in teachers’ evaluations of children. Regular and special education elementary school teachers watched videos of a normal child whom they were told was either emotionally disturbed, possessing a learning disorder, mentally retarded, or "normal". The teachers then completed referral forms based on the child's behavior. The results showed that teachers held negative expectancies toward emotionally disturbed children, maintaining these expectancies even when presented with normal behavior. In addition, the mentally retarded label showed a greater degree of negative bias than the emotionally disturbed or learning disabled.

Observations

"In the classroom, teachers are subject to the halo effect rating error when evaluating their students. For example, a teacher who sees a well-behaved student might tend to assume this student is also bright, diligent, and engaged before that teacher has objectively evaluated the student's capacity in these areas. When these types of halo effects occur, they can affect students' approval ratings in certain areas of functioning and can even affect students' grades." (Rasmussen, Encyclopedia of Educational Psychology, Volume 1, 2008)

"In the work setting, the halo effect is most likely to show up in a supervisor's appraisal of a subordinate's job performance. In fact, the halo effect is probably the most common bias in performance appraisal. Think about what happens when a supervisor evaluates the performance of a subordinate. The supervisor may give prominence to a single characteristic of the employee, such as enthusiasm, and allow the entire evaluation to be colored by how he or she judges the employee on that one characteristic. Even though the employee may lack the requisite knowledge or ability to perform the job successfully, if the employee's work shows enthusiasm, the supervisor may very well give him or her a higher performance rating than is justified by knowledge or ability." (Schneider, F.W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M., Applied Social Psychology, 2012)

Branding[edit]

The halo effect is also present in the field of brand marketing. One common halo effect is when the perceived positive features of a particular item extend to a broader brand. A notable example is the manner in which the popularity of Apple’s iPod generated enthusiasm for the corporation's other products.^[9] Another example is Subway's brand image as a "healthy" variety of fast food. The perception of a restaurant as "healthy" causes consumers to underestimate the caloriccontent of its dishes.^[10] Marketers take advantage of the halo effect to sell products and services. When a celebrity spokesperson endorses a particular item, targeted people's positive evaluation of that individual can influence their perception of the product itself. Job applicants are also likely to feel the impact of the halo effect. If a prospective employer views the applicant as attractive or likeable, they are more likely to also rate the individual as intelligent, competent, and qualified.

The term "halo effect" has also been applied to human rights organizations that have used their status to move away from their stated goals. Political scientistGerald Steinberg has claimed that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) take advantage of the "halo effect" and are "given the status of impartial moral watchdogs" by governments and the news media.^[11][12]

The Ronald McDonald House, a widely known NGO, openly celebrates the positive outcomes it receives from the halo effect. The web page for the Ronald McDonald House in Durham, North Carolina, states that 95% of survey participants were aware of Ronald McDonald House Charities. This awareness is attributed to the halo effect, as employees, customers, and stakeholders are more likely to be involved in a charity that they recognize and trust, with a name and logo that are familiar.^[13]

A brand's halo effect can protect its reputation in the event of a crisis. An event that is detrimental to a brand that is viewed unfavorably would not be as threatening or damaging to a brand that consumers view favorably.^[14][15]

Gender differences[edit]

A study by Kaplan (1978) yielded much of the same results as are seen in other studies focusing on the halo effect—attractive individuals were rated more highly in qualities such as creativity, intelligence, and sensitivity than unattractive individuals. However, in addition to these results Kaplan found that some women were influenced by the halo effect on attractiveness only when presented with members of the opposite sex. When presented with an attractive member of the same sex, the effect was attenuated for some women. Dermer & Thiel (1975) continue this line of research, going on to demonstrate that jealousy of an attractive individual has slight effect in evaluation of that person. Their work shows this to be more prevalent among females than males, with some females being less influenced by the halo effect.

Possible cause[edit]

Kanazawa & Kovarb (2004) have reasoned that if the following four assumptions were true, beautiful people are indeed likely to be more intelligent and provided empirical evidence for these assumptions.

1. More intelligent men are more likely to attain higher status.
2. Higher-status men are more likely to mate with more beautiful women.
3. Intelligence is heritable.
4. Beauty is heritable.

Further research findings[edit]

Murphy, Jako & Anhalt (1993) argue: "Since 1980, there have been a large number of studies dealing directly or indirectly with halo error in rating. Taken together, these studies suggest that all seven of the characteristics that have defined halo error for much of its history are problematic and that the assumptions that underlie some of them are demonstrably wrong." Their work claims that the assumption that the halo effect is always detrimental is incorrect, with some halo effects resulting in an increase in the accuracy of the rating, in their opinion. Additionally, they discuss the idea of "true halo"—the actual correlation between, for example, attractiveness and performance as an instructor—and "illusory halo" that refers to cognitive distortions, errors in observation and judgement, and the rating tendencies of the individual rater. They claim that any true differentiation between true and illusory halos is impossible in a real-world setting, because the different ratings are strongly influenced by the specific behaviors of the person observed by the raters.

A study by Forgas (2011) states that one's mood can affect the degree of the halo effect's influence. When someone is in a favorable mood, the halo effect is more likely to be influential—this was demonstrated by study participants choosing between pictures of an elderly man with a beard and a young woman, and deciding which subject possessed more philosophical attributes. Additionally, when asked to list the happy times in their life, the halo effect was more evident in the perceptions of the participants. Forgas's study suggests that when one is gauging the extent of the halo effect in a situation, one must consider the emotional state of the person making the judgment.

[planeta 5553]

pega ela com barba e regata no periodo fertil dela,

 e depois bonitinho na outra fase

 

 

muito bom isso viu

 

Your Friend Menstruation

 

 

 

From Schedules of Mating:

There are methods and social contrivances women have used for centuries to ensure that the best male’s genes are selected and secured with the best male provisioning she’s capable of attracting. Ideally the best Man should exemplify both, but rarely do the two exist in the same male (particularly these days) so in the interest of achieving her biological imperative, and prompted by an innate need for security, the feminine as a whole had to develop social conventions and methodologies (which change as her environment and personal conditions do) to effect this.

Years ago, when I was writing this post, my emphasis was on how an evolved dynamic (female pluralistic sexual strategy) translated into evolved social dynamics (feminine primary social conventions). My focus then was on how the feminine creates and normalizes social conditions that favor hypergamy by covertly manipulating social expectations – not only of the men who would facilitate that hypergamy, but also for women themselves in how their own self-rationalizations (hindbrain, hamsters) can be socially justified (i.e the myth of  the feminine mystique).

I wrote Schedules of Mating in 2005 (on SoSuave) in an effort to explain the rudiments of hypergamy in a more accessible way for guys who were still struggling with understanding why women would say they wanted “a Nice guy with a good heart” yet would behaviorally opt for Bad Boy-Jerks as their sexual partners of choice. I still think it’s a pretty good essay, which is why I revised and included it in the earliest posts at Rational Male. However, even at the time I was writing, I knew that the concept of an evolved hypergamy and its social implication still had a lot more under the hood to explore.

Biological Hypergamy

My point of departure for today’s post is this study on hormones and brain activity from the Kinsey Institute. I’ll be quoting the 2008 study, but do read it, it’s fairly brief.

“One area of the brain in which we observed a difference in activation in response to masculinized versus feminized faces — specifically during the follicular phase — was the anterior cingulate cortex, which is a region involved in decision-making and the evaluation of potential reward and risk,” said neuroscientist Heather Rupp, research fellow at the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction. “Activation in this region has been previously reported to correlate with ‘high risk’ nonsocial choices, specifically monetary risk, so it is interesting that it is observed to be more active in response to masculinized male faces, who may be both riskier but more rewarding to women.”

Previous studies have shown that women’s sexual preference for facial characteristics vary depending on their menstrual phase. These fluctuating preferences are thought to reflect evolutionarily founded changes in women’s reproductive priorities. Around the time of ovulation women prefer more masculinized faces — faces with features that indicate high levels of testosterone. These facial cues predict high genetic quality in the male because only such males can afford the immune-compromising effects of testosterone. Testosterone may be costly for the males’ mates as well because high testosterone levels also are associated with high rates of offspring abandonment.

Around the time of ovulation, a female’s preference apparently shifts from avoiding negligent parenting to acquiring the best genes for her offspring. At other points during the cycle, women will prefer more feminized male faces, as they might signal a higher willingness of the males to invest in offspring.

Alpha fucks and beta bucks is a biologically hard-wired feature of the female mind. Studies like this aren’t unknown to the manosphere, and even the early PUA teachers had an almost instinctual(?) understanding of how a woman’s ovulatory cycle could affect a guy’s odds of a successful hookup without ever having read them. There’s a plethora of practical applications a man might use with a firm knowledge of how a woman’s cycle affects her mood, her susceptibility to his influence and how her rationalization will be altered as a result of the particular phase she happens to be in.

In his blue pill years, I think a lot of what accounts for a guy’s sporadic successes with women can be attributed to the woman’s ovulatory phase and favorable circumstance. Right phase, right place, right time and a guy who gave off just enough subconscious Alpha cues to get the lay – or the brief girlfriend status until her subsequent follicular phase peaked and he wasn’t the Alpha she thought he was 3 weeks prior.

Alpha Phase

From a Game perspective, using the this illustration as a guide, the latter half of the folicular (proliferative) phase – the period between day 7 to about day 14 – might be called the Alpha Phase for Men. The Kinsey study (and many similar ones) would indicate that this 7 (maybe 10) day window predisposes women to (Alpha) sexual influence and would be the optimal period for a man to make a lasting Alpha impression. ‘Gina tingles are most commonly born in the proliferative phase.

I’ve caught a lot of grief in the past from angry women for suggesting that all women have an ‘inner slut’ and that all a guy need do is be the right man at the right time to bring this out in them. I think understanding a woman’s cycle kind of puts a punctuation on this. The hot coed on spring break in Cancun who fucks the hot guy in the foam cannon party is probably in her proliferative phase. Add alcohol and you’ve got the chemical formula for sexual urgency – even from the ‘good girl‘. When she thinks or says “I don’t know what came over me, I’m not usually like that.” she’s observing her behavior from luteal phase perspective. She really isn’t “like that” the other 21 days of her cycle.

As the Kinsey study reports, it’s during this part of a woman’s cycle that she become subconsciously attuned to masculinized traits and makes subliminal efforts to capitalize on her concurrent ovulation. In other words, this is the period in which hypergamy doesn’t care the most. It’s “fuck me now, I’ll rationalize it out later.”

About now you’re probably wondering, “That’s all well and good Rollo, but how the fuck do I determine what cycle phase a woman is in?” If all a guy were doing was cold approaches I could understand the confusion. There are countless ‘tells’ women will display when they are in their proliferative phase. Dr. Martie Hasselton has done some excellent studies on female ornamentation coinciding with ovulation and also how women’s vocal pitch shifts lower (sultry voice) during this phase, but if you’re still unconvinced, listen to your gut – men instinctually know when women are in the pro phase of ovulation. If you have the patience to learn, pay better attention to the behaviors of the women in your immediate social circle, or to the behaviors of the girl you think you may want to target at some point. Since women living in close proximity tend to synchronize their menstrual cycles, more likely than not they’ll covertly infer when it’s ‘rag week’.

Beta Phase

If the proliferate phase is the Alpha Phase for Men, then the luteal phase could be considered the Beta Phase. Again using the Kinsey study as our guide we can infer that women become drawn to more feminine features in men during the 14 day down side of their cycle. The attributes of attraction (not arousal) that define this stage are associated with comfort, familiarity, empathy, etc. meant to reinforce the perception that a man is a good choice for parental investment.

Again, this is nothing novel in the manosphere. Even Roissy has written posts regarding the applied use of beta-side Game – in context. Far too many men believe the WYSIWYG myth about women and their advertised attraction requisites as being predominantly beta-associative. As I illustrated in Wait for It?, the girl who spontaneously banged the hot guy in the foam cannon party is the same girl who’ll tell you you need to earn her trust because she needs to be comfortable with you before you have sex. Betas believe this at face value and don’t strike while the iron’s hot (the proliferate phase), wait her out and wonder why they get LJBF’d at the end of her luteal phase.

I think where most beta men lose the trail is in the belief that Beta attraction is (or should be) synonymous with Alpha arousal. Each of these concepts is representative of a different facet of women’s pluralistic sexual strategy – Alpha seed, Beta need. Women’s sexual imperatives can be defined by the degree to which her short term mating strategy can be justified, or offset, by her long term mating strategy.

Nowhere is this disparity more obviously manifested than in the biological reality of a woman’s menstrual cycle which creates it.

The Hypergamy Link

One aspect of hypergamy that I’m not certain most men really understand is that hypergamy is a biological phenomenon in origin. I sometimes wonder if Game-aware men confuse hypergamy with being a social construct. Women almost certainly do, but more from a need to protect the rationalizations that result from confronting the uncomfortable internal conflict that hypergamy causes for them – “why am I not hot for the sweet beta who’d give me the world, but am tingly all over for the hot guy who’s casually indifferent to me?”

The base truth of hypergamy as a dynamic is that it is the logical result of women’s innate, hormonal and neural condition. This root-level disparity of a plural sexual strategy led to the evolution of the feminine psyche – to be covert, to be excusably duplicitous, to be better communicators on more varied levels, but also to be the nurturers and empathizers.

Since the sexual revolution began, the biological rationale for social feminization has been men’s biological proclivity for violence and aggression. We were told that we’re poisoned by our testosterone; we’re controlled from youth to repress that in school to the point where teachers expect boys to ‘act out‘, so we drug them. Yet, the biological rationale for hypergamy could also be said to lie in women’s biological (menstrual) impetus that motivates their sexual pluralism.

Editado Março 19, 2016 às 18:10 por planeta

[Bigvitinho 39]

7 horas atrás, CassioGolden disse:

Coloca até a data pra ninguém desconfiar que é mentira!

Manda um abraço pro teu irmão Jeff Seid, fala pra ele criar uma conta aqui no fórum pra dar consultoria pra gente, principalmente pro Almeida.

 

Eu lembro da data por que foi 1 dia depois do Réveillon, e na epoca ele nem malhava ainda, mais ele ja tinha um shape atletico!