Face preference test
- Thread starter Adaryn
- Start date
Hehe, that was my thought while doing it. If you look like a pushover, you're probably gonna have a harder time getting someone else to cooperate with you if they aren't all that interested.
Face Preference Test
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 66.7
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 33.3
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 50
Unlike most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle internal matters.
Unlike most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically right-wing.
Beyond the initial dominant/cooperative aspect, maybe depending on the shading or something, I saw what looked like a difference in understandingness that was sometimes one or the other. I chose mostly based on that, except for the obvious ones like "Maurading killers = meaner guy".
For instance, for the one about someone of the tribe eating up all the food, I picked the stern but understanding looking guy. And for the wolves around the village I picked the guy who looked nice but a little more intelligent (you're not going to go and beat up all the wolves, you have to outsmart them!)
For me, they all appeared as male until it was suggested otherwise! Now, I can see that several look feminine.
Not sure how much any of it means anyway. Neither Lavrov nor Putin look dominant from just a picture, but we know that they can be.
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 66.7
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 33.3
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 50
Unlike most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle internal matters.
Unlike most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically right-wing.
Beyond the initial dominant/cooperative aspect, maybe depending on the shading or something, I saw what looked like a difference in understandingness that was sometimes one or the other. I chose mostly based on that, except for the obvious ones like "Maurading killers = meaner guy".
For instance, for the one about someone of the tribe eating up all the food, I picked the stern but understanding looking guy. And for the wolves around the village I picked the guy who looked nice but a little more intelligent (you're not going to go and beat up all the wolves, you have to outsmart them!)
For me, they all appeared as male until it was suggested otherwise! Now, I can see that several look feminine.
Not sure how much any of it means anyway. Neither Lavrov nor Putin look dominant from just a picture, but we know that they can be.
mrtn
Dagobah Resident
I mostly chose depending on the eyes and chose the firm/normal/unfazed ones, avoiding the wider open eyes (fear/overwhelmed) and in some cases avoiding the sleepy/flirting eyes as well.
If 2 weird static faces is all the information you have to decide about a situation then your decision basically has nothing to do with the situation. What they divided in ingroup and outgroup situations might just be different levels severity. I found their outgroup problems more severe than their ingroup problems.
If you have ingroup situations like someone might be a murderer or has a serious contagious illness then that might give more points to firmness even ingroup. If the group has to decide how to deal with the fairies (
) then the softer faces might make it even for the outgroup situations.right-wing, left-wing? Well..
Interesting. I actually was able to see the "female" vs "male" faces clearly. Or they looked "clearly" to me, and that's how I made my decision. And made the choices based on what gender and approach (again, based on the gender) were more appropriate to handle the situation. That's why I was surprised that I got "liberal" after all this gender discrimination.
Interesting results.
I think it would be fair to say that, historically at least, I have tended toward the left end of the political spectrum. In recent years, with new information that has come to light, I think I have adopted many more stances which would be traditionally classified at right-wing or conservative.
Like Joe said, the pictures appeared to basically show two genders : male and female. So in answering the questions, I pretty much chose male in relation to violence/protection, and female for internal relations/disputes and diplomacy.
I think it would be fair to say that, historically at least, I have tended toward the left end of the political spectrum. In recent years, with new information that has come to light, I think I have adopted many more stances which would be traditionally classified at right-wing or conservative.
Like Joe said, the pictures appeared to basically show two genders : male and female. So in answering the questions, I pretty much chose male in relation to violence/protection, and female for internal relations/disputes and diplomacy.
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 16.7
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 41.7
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 29.2
Like most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle internal matters.
Unlike most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically left-wing.
For me, most them were a pretty clear choice between a male or female face. Sure, you could then analyze the face for other characteristics like 'friendly' or 'not friendly' or 'intelligent' or 'dopey' or whatever, but for the me the 'top level' impression was gender and then from there my choice was 'skewed' because of that.
I'm wondering what the goal of the people who created this is. If it's to determine what percentage of people prefer dominance to cooperation as related to in-groups and out-groups, why use faces that just muddy the water because interpretation of them is going to be subjective? Instead of faces that force us to extract these characteristics ourselves (which involves subjectivity) why not just have a description of character traits and then ask the person to choose which character traits they would choose to handle a given situation? Although even that would likely involve some subjectivity, but less.
Also, the scenarios given seem entirely unrelated to reality. The test is telling you you're a member of a tribe, that you presumably grew up in or have spent a long time in. Presumably therefore, you know most of the tribe members pretty well in terms of temperament, character, personality etc. So when would you ever decide on which member of your tribe should deal with a specific situation based only on their facial structure and inferred traits from that facial structure? Has anyone here ever done that? Decided which friend or family member should undertake a task based on what their facial structure tells you rather than what you know about their personality?
The only thing that that kind of analysis serves is to give data on racial or gender bias, i.e. racism and sexism. So it seems to me that these people are also (or primarily) looking for data on 'unconscious bias' related to gender and race.
Adaryn
The Living Force
I didn't exactly see half of the faces as female, I saw (or chose to see) all of them as male, some of whom had more feminine/ambiguous features, which somewhat put me off even though I felt I had to choose them (albeit a bit reluctantly) to handle certain situations/crises because choosing the other face "wouldn't do". Very distinctive womanly faces wouldn't have repelled me as much.
Anyway, I think that I would tend to want to choose a male leader in all cases (ingroup / outgroup), someone with both cooperative and authoritative traits that he would choose to manifest - whether in an ingroup or an outgroup situation - depending on the context. In short, someone who knows what is good and what is bad, is able to determine which is which in any given situation, and act accordingly.
Ocean
The Living Force
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 66.7
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 75
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 70.8
Unlike most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle internal matters.
Like most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically right-wing.
I was surprised by the results - according to the test results I'm left wing. Thanks for sharing.
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 8.3
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 75
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 41.7
Like most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle internal matters.
Like most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically left-wing.
Your INGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 8.3
Your OUTGROUP DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 75
Your TOTAL DOMINANCE PERCENTAGE is: 41.7
Like most people, you prefer a Cooperative leader to handle internal matters.
Like most people, you prefer a Dominant leader to handle external threats.
Overall, your choice of leaders suggests that you are politically left-wing.
Attachments
I noticed that male/female issue as well, in fact for me in many question, the sex difference was pretty obvious, even some face looked more like a black man and other like a white one. It is also interesting that there isn't eastern or asian faces for example. Really the test do not seem serious and look more like a funny game than a scientifically rigorous study.
When I took my choice in general I look for faces that reflect maturity, self-confidence and wisdom in dealing with the internal affairs of the tribe, and faces that reflect intelligence, security and firmness in facing external problems. Also, I did not choose any female faces to deal with situations that might involve some kind of physical violence.
It seems quite clear that the choice based only on the face is seriously biased and has a very high dose of subjectivity. For me, for example, faces with abundant beards often seem more reliable and wise, as do the faces of older Oriental men (yes, I think I've seen many martial arts movies with the classic stereotype of the wise Oriental master
).Yes, I can think of at least three options: they are looking at something very different from what they say, they are very bad scientists, or they simply have to invent these kinds of silly studies to have something to publish and keep the funding wheel well oiled...
