What? No way!

Neurontic skewers two studies leading to incredibly obvious conclusions:

Attractive young psychology professor is stunned to discover that “it sucks to be rejected based on how you look.”

Three new studies spearheaded by University of Buffalo Assistant Professor Lora Park provide the “first known evidence that some people anxiously expect that they will be rejected by others because of their physical appearance,” according to a January 27 article in Science Daily. But wait that’s not all: Park’s research also suggests that people who deem themselves unattractive are “preoccupied with their body and weight in unhealthy ways.”

In addition, a Swedish researcher discovered that some people are more prone to gain weight than others.

I actually thought (hoped?) this was Onion-style satire, until I clicked through the links. Absolutely terrifying!

This entry was posted in Frivolity, Science. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to What? No way!

  1. Sciencesque says:

    Unbelievable! At least we can hope that the incredibly obvious conclusions were arrived at in an unbiased and honourable fashion.

  2. pat donovan says:

    Since I wrote the news release on Lora Park’s work, I suggest that you consider what she set out to study and save your golden fleece award for someone else. There are many assumptions that we have, both true and false, that have never been validated scientifically. Although it has been established for some time that some people are preoccupied with their appearance because appearance is linked to self esteem, no one had studied another reason for that preoccupation — a form of personality system marked by neurosis that propels the individual into fabxiety and depression because they EXPECT to be rejected because they are not (in their own terms) perfect. Such a disorder is crippling and dangerous.

    Park identified the disorder, produced a scale to measure it and found that it is linked to eating disorders, suggesting new modalities of treatment. Her studies will be published in a highly reputable scientific journal, which would not have accepted it if the research were her findings as stupid, unnecessary and obvious as you so casually suggest. I would be happy to provide you with the study.

  3. cicada says:

    Pat, as much as I’d love to take the credit for handing out fleeces, I have to give the precedence to Neurontic on this one. I only linked to her.

    However, I would not have linked to her post if I did not agree with the gist. At least as stated in the Science Daily article, these findings really do sound obvious (although I did not say they were stupid or unnecessary). I personally anxiously expect to be rejected based on my physical appearance all the time, and have done so since high school. I thought this was fairly (sadly) normal.

    Perhaps there is a valuable quantitative nuance to the study which the Science Daily article did not address; I would be happy to read the study, if you email it to cicada at bioephemera.com. I certainly respect your eagerness to defend its relevance. Cheers.

Comments are closed.