This paper examines the role of student facial attractiveness on academic outcomes under various forms of instruction, using data from engineering students in Sweden. When education is in-person, attractive students receive higher grades in non-quantitative subjects, in which teachers tend to interact more with students compared to quantitative courses. This finding holds both for males and females. When instruction moved online during the COVID-19 pandemic, the grades of attractive female students deteriorated in non-quantitative subjects. However, the beauty premium persisted for males, suggesting that discrimination is a salient factor in explaining the grade beauty premium for females only.
This sounds like one of those BS studies to me. Why would good-looking men and not good-looking women retain the advantage that is supposedly only due to their good looks?
Because their premise is fundamentally flawed: "Attractive" men include the trait "intelligent" by female raters. "Attractive" women often don't, it's a neutral trait, by male raters.
Correct. It’s an indirect refutation of any claim that male and female attraction mechanisms are “the same”. Men view female attractiveness through the prism of fertility - youth, beauty, curves, submissiveness, femininity, etc. None of those traits correlate with performance in school lol
Abstract:
This sounds like one of those BS studies to me. Why would good-looking men and not good-looking women retain the advantage that is supposedly only due to their good looks?
Because their premise is fundamentally flawed: "Attractive" men include the trait "intelligent" by female raters. "Attractive" women often don't, it's a neutral trait, by male raters.
Correct. It’s an indirect refutation of any claim that male and female attraction mechanisms are “the same”. Men view female attractiveness through the prism of fertility - youth, beauty, curves, submissiveness, femininity, etc. None of those traits correlate with performance in school lol
the article has info on that