Like the world's most expensive modern photo?
Posted on 01/15/2013 5:19:01 AM PST by rightwingintelligentsia
Male members of a jury are more likely to find a defendant guilty if the accused person is an overweight female.
According to a recent study by Yale University psychologists, male – and not female – jurors are also more inclined to believe that a fat woman is a repeat offender who had malicious intent.
The researchers gathered a group of 471 pretend peers of varying body sizes and described to them a case of check fraud. They also presented them with one of four images—either a large man, a lean man, a large woman, or a lean woman—and identified the person in the photograph as the defendant.
Participants rated the pretend-defendant’s guilt on a five-point scale. No fat bias was present when the female pretend peers evaluated the fake female defendants or when either men or women assessed the guilt of the men.
But when the male pretend peers pronounced judgment on the fake female defendants – physical bias weighed in on their decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at connecticut.cbslocal.com ...
This news flash brought to you courtesy of a hefty government grant.
A big leg woman ain’t got no soul.
No surprise on this forum.
As most of these “studies” it is a complete fraud. The “study” was not about court cases. No one was in a courtroom during a real trial.
Pictures were shown to men outside of a courtroom. Telling them that it was about a trial does not make it about a trial.
As with all these “studies” idiots will apply the false results to real life with stupid consequences.
LOL
... more likely to find overweight women guilty of ... what?
... more likely to find overweight women guilty of ... what?
I’m 100% certain that someone who would apply for a grant to determine whether men are sexist is going to find that the data shows that men are sexist.
This is what comes of results oriented studies in the humanities.
Has there ever been a hypothesis in the humanities that has not been supported by the grant funded research? I don’t think so.
Why even do the research (assuming that they actually do). Just write up your assumptions and publish it as fact.
You know I'm right.
(lol)
In a somewhat similar vein, Tom Wolfe wrote "The Painted Word" about modern art. I believe the point he made was that the stuff on the canvas had ceased to be very important -- it was all about the critics. A critic could "see" things other people did not see. A critic could find "meaning" where there was none. If a critic said you were a mere dauber, then it was over for you. If a critic said you were the next big thing, then you were.
The painting didn't matter -- the reviews were where the action was.
The research doesn't matter -- the published "findings" are what's important.
Can we get some “NOT GUILTY” pictures, please?
Can’t say that I blame them.
Casey Anthony wasn’t one ounce overweight, I did not attend the trial, but I would gladly drop a pellet on her.
Overweight females ARE guilty. Duh.
I’m pretty sure the fat bald guy did it. ; )
I couldn't get the past the "pretend peers" and "fake females" in this article. "Science," indeed.
>>This is what comes of results oriented studies in the humanities.
AKA “The Voodoo Sciences”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.