[HN Gopher] Sex Differences in Friendship Preferences ___________________________________________________________________ Sex Differences in Friendship Preferences Author : steelstraw Score : 80 points Date : 2022-01-23 20:47 UTC (2 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.sciencedirect.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.sciencedirect.com) | jcims wrote: | It would be interesting to see what women want from male friends | and vice versa. | lolinder wrote: | You can follow a link here to get full access to the paper (the | HTML button): | | https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C45&q=Sex... | | ScienceDirect paywalls papers unless you arrive via Google | Scholar. | | Edit: this only works if you're logged in to a Google account. | nkmnz wrote: | > useful social information | | Academic language for gossip? | ncpa-cpl wrote: | I'll start using this phrase on my day to day. | bilbo0s wrote: | Academic language for "information leading to access to mates". | | Which is what most gossip is at root. It has always been useful | in that sense. It lets you know, at root, who to stay away | from, and who might be good to take a closer look at. | drewcoo wrote: | I flashed on Thermians from Galaxy Quest with their "historical | documents." | ethanbond wrote: | Where gossip is a lay term for "distributed trust-building." | strickman wrote: | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AP4IyBal1xg | insickness wrote: | My observation is that men tend more to form friendships around | activities such as sports, hobbies, etc., while women tend more | toward emotional support, as the article states. | karpierz wrote: | Issues: | | Study 1 is across college-aged kids who are willing to | participate in a psych study (in exchange for partial course | credit or a lottery entry for a $40 gift card, IE they're psych | students). Unclear why you'd generalize a study run across a | single college, within a group of students who self-selected into | your course, and draw conclusions about all men and women. In | addition, you're asking people what they prefer in their friends; | not measuring it. | | Study 2 isn't controlling for variance in the underlying traits | between the genders. All it shows is that if your best friend is | male, they're likely to have different traits than if they're | female. It does not show that you picked male/female friends | because of those traits. So for example, when they find "men's | same-sex best friends were more likely to possess qualities of | physical strength", what they've discovered is not that men look | for physically strong friends, but that men are usually stronger | than women. | | Study 3 is across people working on Mechanical Turk. That already | skews your sample. It asks participants to weight the relative | aspects of what they look for in a friend. But this relies on the | participant being aware of what they look for. If someone thinks | that they don't need emotional comfort from friends, they'll say | so, but it doesn't mean that it's true. | | tl;dr: This study is methodologically flawed, and the conclusions | it draws are mostly to be splashy and show up in random articles. | It'll be shared because people resonate with its conclusion and | not because it contains robust evidence of its conclusion. | d4nt wrote: | I'm a 42 year old male and have found it very hard, my whole | life, to establish meaningful friendships with other men. | | I have many acquaintances, I'm not shy or socially awkward. E.g. | When I was running a business I would often go to business | networking events alone, start conversations with people, | establish a rapport and spend hours chatting, but all those | interactions have essentially left me with one good friend. | | I've often found it easier to establish friendships with women, | but (being straight) they get complicated. Either I develop | feelings, or they do, or there's a suspicion from someone's | parter about the real nature of our relationship. It's just too | problematic. | | I think the female "model" of friendships outlined in the | abstract just makes more sense to me. "emotional support, | intimacy, and useful social information" is what I want from a | friendship. | | I suspect there are other men in this position and that the | dominant male "model" of friendship that we have (and which is | outlined in this article) is more cultural than biological. But I | have no proof. What do you think? | openknot wrote: | >I have many acquaintances, I'm not shy or socially awkward. | E.g. When I was running a business I would often go to business | networking events alone, start conversations with people, | establish a rapport and spend hours chatting, but all those | interactions have essentially left me with one good friend. | | I have a similar experience when attending more professional | environments. However, I think it's easier to create | relationships marked more by friendly intent -- rather than | professional advantages -- when working with people outside of | your industry, especially in non-profit contexts. In these | contexts, as there are less/no immediate professional | advantages, you are likely staying in touch due to liking their | personality. | | >I think the female "model" of friendships outlined in the | abstract just makes more sense to me. "emotional support, | intimacy, and useful social information" is what I want from a | friendship. I suspect there are other men in this position and | that the dominant male "model" of friendship that we have (and | which is outlined in this article) is more cultural than | biological. But I have no proof. | | I have no problems having a friendly but tactful relationship | with other men who are competitive, but I would idly prefer a | close friendship with a guy similar to the friendships I | experienced in elementary/middle/high school due to spending | lots of time with the same people. I really missed that kind of | relationship when I was in university. | | However, I've shifted expectations to only expect a "best | friend"-like relationship (where I can let my guard down and | act like myself) with a romantic partner. I just don't think | most people in my bubble are willing to set aside the time and | energy to nurture and maintain close friendships (e.g. meeting | up with someone just to hang out or grab dinner) in other | contexts. | h0l0cube wrote: | The problem with reading the results of broad statical analyses | like these is that it primes you to think about cohorts in a | homogenous way, whereas the individual differences, which are | often far greater, are underemphasized by the paper that's | motivated to establish its relevance | nicoburns wrote: | 28 year old male here, and I totally agree (although I've had | far less problems with female friendships than you). I have | some male friends, but far fewer, and I think it's because I'm | looking for this "emotional support, intimacy, and useful | social information" , and not that many men are open to that. | PKop wrote: | I think it is biological, and also that "culture" is generally | an expression of biology also. Why wouldn't biological factors | influence the collective expression of human nature? Culture | doesn't exist in a vacuum outside of these forces. | | There are probably some men like you describe but your lack of | success finding what you're looking for speaks to the | likelihood the standard model for male friendships closer to | accurate and more prevalent..and dare I say natural. | | Depending on what you actually mean by "intimacy", here's a | relevant comment I made on another thread about difficulty | finding friendships for men: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28969047 | | copying below: | | "True friendship comes mostly from shared struggle. Think | sports teams, military, small teams at work, even childhood | friends and the experience growing up. | | It is hard to establish anything meaningful of a connection | with casual interactions, and expecting to just "party/play | hard" with people you don't really know is putting the cart | before the horse. First you must work hard together. | | I'd suggest joining a Crossfit gym or similar. I've had great | success meeting people within the context of group workouts. It | has regular class schedules, and provides a way to ease into | social interactions at your own pace as you'll be around the | same people regularly. Often this leads to opportunities to do | things together outside of the classes. | | Additionally, there are likely individuals with similar | disinterest in the common activities you mentioned in you CS | classes. Finding opportunities to work with someone on class | assignments, studying or projects together would fall in the | "shared struggle" category." | k__ wrote: | Similar "problem" here. | | I got raised by my mother alone. My father left when I was 5 | and even before, he was at work all day anyway. Then I got a | step dad when I was 13, but most of my formative years I was | raised by my mother alone. I imagine that's one reason for this | problem. | | I only have interest in female friends and basically went all | polyamory because of that. This way the feelings problem isn't | a problem anymore. | | I had the experience that many people would somehow value me as | a good friend of them, but I only see them only as an | acquaintance. | ronnier wrote: | You are competition to other men. Why would they invite you | into their social group and then have to compete with you for | relationships with women (which are increasingly hard and | harder for men to secure). That's my crazy theory anyways. | Before we had hard social and religious contracts to pair one | man with one woman... so the threat was low. That's all thrown | out the window now, so there's a real threat that the man you | make friends with might actually be the person who ruins your | chance at a relationship -- I think that's in peoples mind. | Anyways, just a crazy theory. | pc86 wrote: | What evidence is there that finding a relationship is | "increasingly hard[er] and harder for men to secure" compared | to any other time in history? And what evidence is there that | monogomy is "thrown out the window now?" | dnautics wrote: | likely cultural. There are a lot of (possibly "extreme") male | environments where males DO provide emotional support to each | other, though probably at a lower throughput that the "typical | female" friendship, and where they don't, it's empirically | dysfunctional -- for example, groups of men living together in | submarines, deployed in the military/bootcamp, prison, but also | some less extreme stuff like fraternities. | | On the other hand, for men, finding yourself a "band of | brothers is "your job". If anything the cultural defect is not | telling men that it's up to you to create your own band. There | is a cottage industry of male support groups that is starting | to address this that's getting really popular, if you want a | rec, I'm doing one starting mid-next-month, I trust the pod | leader, he's my housemate, and _really_ good at this. Contact | info in my bio | marktangotango wrote: | > I'm a 42 year old male and have found it very hard, my whole | life, to establish meaningful friendships with other men. | | Same here. Maybe you, like me, have none of the characteristics | the fine article mentions? | | > (men) value same-sex friends who are physically formidable, | possess high status, possess wealth, and afford access to | potential mates. | bilbo0s wrote: | I think it may be even deeper. | | I have 3 male friends who are extremely close types. And | others I would say are very close types. However, they are | not particularly wealthy, afford me no access to potential | mates, and are definitely not what anyone would term | "physically formidable". (Maybe one is? If you only look at | his height and ignore his freakishly gangly frame.) Point is, | I was willing to initiate friendships with them 25 years ago | or whatever despite them checking none of the boxes I should | have been looking for. (According to the study). | | I wonder if most men are simply unwilling to do that? Maybe | most men actually do look for those things, and will never | consider friendships with any man who doesn't have them? | There is a concept in dating called "settling". I wonder if | most men are "unwilling to settle"? | | So, you're right, it is possible the commenter has none of | those things, but it's equally possible that the commenter | has all of those things, and simply wants to be around the | rest of the "cool kids"? | xapata wrote: | Interestingly, having female friends to fulfill the need for | emotional support will create the "access to potential mates" | characteristic that makes it easier to have male friends. | Madmallard wrote: | I don't really thinking feelings potentially throwing a wrench | in a male female friendship is actually a problem. It's not | like anything in life is permanent. | xapata wrote: | I have the same problem. Luckily, I do have male friends in the | emotional support category, but they are all old friends from | school and none live in the same city as me. | snarf21 wrote: | It is definitely hard to make friends as an adult male. Most of | mine at this point are ex-coworkers. I think the one under | appreciated place is in a hobby. I design and play board games. | There are lots of meaningful ways to build relationships around | that. Most other hobbies are the same, however you have to | really get into the hobby, not go once a month. Running clubs, | photography groups, cooking classes, hiking clubs.... just find | something and dive in until you find the right thing for you. | | Also, When Harry Met Sally was right. Men and women can't be | friends. _Eventually_ the sex gets in the way. Speaking for my | self, men tend to confuse all closeness with romantic intimacy. | I 've never seen even explicitly sex buddies work either, | sooner or later someone gets jealous or serious. | colmvp wrote: | > Men and women can't be friends. Eventually the sex gets in | the way. | | I have MANY female friends who have been in my life for | decades and I have zero sexual attraction to them (and | likewise they have zero sexual attraction to me). I have no | idea why people perpetuate this stereotype that women and men | cannot be friends. It's entirely possible to separate the | people who you want to be friends with and the people you are | sexually attracted to. Obviously, the women who I am sexually | attracted to I don't attempt to be good friends with for fear | of risking my long term relationship. | pdpi wrote: | I'm a straight man, one of my best friends is a straight | woman, and we've known each other for 20 years. By best | friend, I mean we talk almost daily, go to each other for | advice and emotional support, and are comfortable discussing | _very_ intimate details about our personal lives. | | The idea of a sexual relationship with her is just gross, | though, in the "I'm screwing my sister" sort of way. | edgyquant wrote: | I think this depends. I'm a male but my two best friends are | women who are in a relationship with each other. I think that | it's true that most straight people of the opposite sex can't | really be friends long term without one of them becoming | infatuated with the other. | johnny22 wrote: | it doesn't actually HAVE to be that way though. You can have | closeness without romantic interest if you realize that's | what's happening. It's a learnable skill. Having a nice | cuddle is good to recharge your batteries. | bigiain wrote: | And you can have romantic interest in someone, while at the | same time knowing that's just not going to happen and | behaving accordingly. | | I have at least half a dozen close woman friends, all of | whom I have or have had "romantic thoughts" about, but for | various reasons have either not tried, or tried and been | rebuffed but stayed close friends with. | | One example, a girl I met in '99 (I still remember the day) | and fell head over heels in lust with. She had a boyfriend, | so that was out of the question. In the next 15 or so years | we were never in a position where both of us were single at | the same time. That situation happened about 5 years back, | and we ended up in a drunken flirty conversation, where we | both agreed that we weren't going to do this, because we | both valued the friendship too highly to risk losing it | over a hookup. (Neither of us have great track records of | staying friends with exes...) | | Others had/got boyfriends/partners/spouses, and while all | of them involved awkwardness and sometimes outright | distrust, I totally understand and acknowledge that's a | normal human reaction to a girl having very close guy | friends they've known a lot longer than "new boyfriend". | You need to earn trust in those situations, and all you | have to do is behave like a rational and respectful human | being. It can take a long time though, the girl from the | example above got married, it took 3 or 4 years before her | husband go ok enough with our friendship that we can go out | together alone. And that's Ok, I reckon I'd have acted | exactly the same were the positions reversed. | syntheticnature wrote: | Poor bisexuals, no friends -- only prey. | yojo wrote: | I (straight male) have several close friends that are women, | some going back two decades. I've been happily married for 12 | years, they've all been in stable relationships, and our | partners get along. | | It is possible that _some_ men or women cannot be just | friends with the opposite sex, but I have at least one | counterfactual for the universal claim. | base698 wrote: | I always fall back on hobbies for friends. Certain times in | my life I've gotten the idea I should make friends the normal | way. This led to forced meetups and social gatherings I had | no real interest in. | | Obviously that wouldn't work And it always led me back to | things I had a general and natural interest. Which ultimately | led to more natural relationships. | scotty79 wrote: | > Eventually the sex gets in the way. | | It can be done if you just text, never meet, rarely speak. | bigiain wrote: | It can be done if you respect them and yourself. | | It's pretty rare for me to not know if I'm gonna hook up | with a woman in The first 6-12 months of knowing her. By | then I've either raised the idea, or at least had the "if | we were both single..." conversation and got a pretty good | idea if they're open to the idea of considering it later if | the situation allows. | | (Having said that, I'm in the older end of the demographic | here, and I know for sure I didn't have this worked out | when I was in my 20s and still had teenaged hormones | rushing around my brain...) | strickman wrote: | I think it's more biological than cultural. Men evolved with | preference for solving the production problem (are we creating | enough?), and women evolved with preference for solving the | distribution problem (does everyone have enough?). But as with | everything, the behaviors are described by a normal | distribution, and these two curves with offset means overlap. | xapata wrote: | What's the evidence for this evolution preference? I am | skeptical, because historically, women were substantially | involved in agriculture and textile production. | strickman wrote: | I think one piece of evidence would be the studies in | psychology on the "big five" personality characteristics | that show women scoring higher than men on agreeableness. | But this is more of my guess on how things work. | | And it's probably not a massive offset in the bell curves; | your examples would not be in conflict. | xapata wrote: | That's an observation of modern characteristics, not | evolutionary pressures. | strickman wrote: | It wasn't my intention to limit my comments on this to | statements for which I have links to supporting academic | studies. I wanted to propose my guesses, because it's fun | to see who else has arrived at the same spot. I was | careful to start with "I think it's" rather than "it is | true that" or "consensus exists that". | rajin444 wrote: | How can you say that for certain? We don't understand | genetics well enough yet (much less anything downstream | of that). | darod wrote: | it's actually very easy to make friends with other men but it | will typically be done around an activity. my mentor used to | categorize these activities as Tools, Toys, Tinkering and Ball | Handling (Sports). If you want to make friends join a club, | play a sport, etc. | oneoff786 wrote: | > I've often found it easier to establish friendships with | women, but (being straight) they get complicated. Either I | develop feelings, or they do, or there's a suspicion from | someone's parter about the real nature of our relationship. | It's just too problematic. | | I find it pretty weird to suggest you can't have an overtly | platonic relationship with someone. I'm a straight male, tall, | relatively attractive, and on the wealthier side of my social | circles. I'm married. | | It's very easy to behave in such a way that it's clear I have | no romantic interest in other women. I have never once felt | that a woman failed to understand this and behave in kind. | austhrow743 wrote: | Do you have a preference for female friendship for emotional | support and intimacy like the poster does? | oneoff786 wrote: | I don't think that's particularly salient. It's not | difficult to portray yourself as non romantically | interested. | | I'm not buying that the poster behaves in a way consistent | with just looking for friendship at all. Especially with | the comment that partners get suspicious. | austhrow743 wrote: | I would struggle greatly to portray myself as non- | romantically interested and still have the level of | intimacy many women have with their close friends. | They're real touchy and huggy. Resting heads on laps or | shoulders. | | My current partner regularly has sleep overs with her | best friend where they rug up on the couch and watch | movies late at night. They share the bed when my partner | hosts. And its not exactly something strange I haven't | seen before. | | Physical touch is huge to me when it comes to feeling | close to someone so when I think of women's more | emotionally supportive and intimate relationships these | are all the the things I think of. Maybe it's different | for you. But I've seen lesbians express frustration at | how it can be difficult to tell if someones interested | because of it, with some relationship origin stories | being that they were both having late night movie dates | with their 'straight' friend, wishing the other was gay | too. | Madmallard wrote: | Marriage specifically makes that easy I think. | guilhas wrote: | So man prefer men and women women. Or rather maybe the study is | just observing that men and women tend to friendship more between | themselves | | Friendship is quite complicated and high maintenance. You really | don't have the luxury to choose who to make friends with, their | attributes, whom to keep long term, and how responsive they'll | be. It mostly just happens based on those around you, | neighborhood, school, family friends, university, work... | brohoolio wrote: | This is too small a study to do this, but I'd be curious if the | observations would hold up across various gender identities and | the sexuality spectrum. | | What would gay men prefer? What about lesbians? What about non- | binary folks? | sdze wrote: | > Across three studies (N = 745) with U.S. participants | | This confirmed my assumption that Americans are very shallow | people. | polote wrote: | What is the point of posting a link to HN that nobody can read ? | makz wrote: | That's exactly the fun of HN. | lolinder wrote: | They may not have realized that no one can read it. | ScienceDirect silently lets you past the paywall if you arrive | from Google Scholar. I imagine that HN strips query parameters, | and even if it doesn't, the token is only usable by one person. | | You can access the full HTML by clicking the link here: | https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C45&q=Sex... | | Edit: this only works if you're logged in to a Google account. | momenti wrote: | This does not work here (Europe). | lolinder wrote: | That may be. I also just learned that you need to be logged | into a Google account. | | It's not a great solution anyway, a far cry from open | access. But I feel like any hole in a research paywall | should be public knowledge, however small and clunky it | maybe. | momenti wrote: | I am logged in. | 1123581321 wrote: | This isn't working in the US. I'm logged into Google. | brap wrote: | The conclusions really didn't resonate with me. Not the male or | female preferences. | | As a male in my 30s, I just realized that every single close | friend I had throughout my life is simply a person who made me | laugh, and I made them laugh. A shared sense of humor, that's | literally all it is. | | And it's not like my friendships are/were shallow or anything, I | have friends who I will gladly give a kidney to and I'm sure | they'll do the same for me. But I think humor was really the | foundation of it all. | sdze wrote: | Are you a US-American? | [deleted] | openknot wrote: | Important limitations of the study are hidden behind the paywall. | From the Methods section in the full paper: | | From Study 1: "Participants (N = 213, 109 women) were recruited | from a small Northeastern college in exchange for partial course | credit or a lottery entry for a $40 gift card. Of these | participants, 190 (95 women) completed all focal variables and | were included in further analyses. Sample size was determined by | the number of participants researchers were able to recruit over | the course of one semester. Sensitivity analyses indicated we | have 0.80 power to detect an effect size of partial e2 = 0.076 | for focal predictions. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 23 | (M = 19.82 years, SD = 1.31). The majority of participants | identified as White (75%), 14% identified as Asian, 4% as | Hispanic/Latino, and 3% as Black." | | From Study 2: "U.S. Participants (N = 306, 141 women) were | recruited through Amazon's Mechanical Turk and received $1.00 | compensation. Given our shift from 'ideal' to actual friends, we | anticipated a reduction in the effect size of our predicted sex | differences and aimed to recruit a 50% larger sample than that of | Study 1. Sensitivity analyses indicated that our sample size | allowed us to detect effect sizes of partial e2 = 0.003 with 0.80 | power. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 84 (M = 35.22, SD = | 11.29) and primarily identified as White (74%) or Black (9%)." | | From Study 3: "U.S. Participants (N = 250; 97 women) were | recruited through TurkPrime and received $1.00 for completing the | study. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 70 (M = 34.43, SD = | 9.88). Sensitivity analysis indicated that we were able to detect | small effects (f < 0.10) with 0.80 power assuming 0.5 correlation | between measures. The majority of participants identified as | White (70%), 11% identified as Black, 7% as Asian, 6% as | Hispanic/Latinx, 2% as multi-racial, 1% as American Indian, and | 1% as Pacific Islander." | | I hope that a user with more research experience than me can | chime in. In the meantime, it looks like the study's conclusions | mainly apply to: | | -Undergraduate students in a specific American university located | in the Northeast and | | -People accepting paid jobs on Mechanical Turk. | xapata wrote: | It's reasonable to worry about confounding factors, but one | should hypothesize what they are as part of the criticism. | openknot wrote: | To improve my criticism (open to correction, especially | because I don't have a background in academic psychology), I | hypothesize that the paper's results don't apply and can't be | generalized to the broader U.S. population. | | For Study 1, I specifically think that one's views on | friendship are shaped by the people around them (so the views | of undergraduates on friendship in a small Northeastern | college might be different than a large state school in Texas | or California). Views on friendship may also change after | graduating university (where it's harder to make friends), | and may also be different than views from people who have | never attended (e.g. people in small towns in a trade or who | have spent a career enlisted in the military). | | For Studies 2-3 (this is likely where my reasoning is | shakiest), I hypothesize that people on Mechanical Turk | represent a small subset of the U.S. population, and most | have specific shared beliefs (that motivate them to trade | time doing fairly simple tasks for money). It's possible that | some people are on Mechanical Turk for fun or specifically to | learn more about research by participating in online studies, | but I hypothesize that this is a negligible part of the | population. | | In short, I'm not convinced that the study's design makes its | conclusions applicable to most women and men in the United | States population. | aradox66 wrote: | kccqzy wrote: | > we find that men, compared to women, more highly value same-sex | friends who are physically formidable, possess high status, | possess wealth, and afford access to potential mates. In | contrast, women, compared to men, more highly value friends who | provide emotional support, intimacy, and useful social | information. | | This is exactly my experience here. This is the reason why as a | man, I instinctively find female friends more trustworthy. When I | experience a problem in life, female friends help me a lot more | than my male friends do. | | The retention rate is also different. A lot more of the female | friends I made earlier in my life remained as friends than male | friends I made. | mgh2 wrote: | It will be interesting to see if this affects the famous | "friend zone" https://quillette.com/2021/06/28/mate-selection- | for-modernit... | watwut wrote: | Friends zone otherwise known as "she does not want to date | me, but is polite to me, what a bi... | Ostrogodsky wrote: | Females prefer FEMALE friends with those traits. | djxfade wrote: | Maybe I'm the odd one out, but I'm a male, and my male | friendships are closer to the female ones. Me and my best | friend are very close. | edgyquant wrote: | I'm a man and I've had close female friends basically my | whole life. I have close male friends too, tho. | openknot wrote: | >A lot more of the female friends I made earlier in my life | remained as friends than male friends I made. | | Most of the people I bet I could rely on happen to be women | (met in writing/graphic design groups at university), but I | wonder if these will last as I get older and people get into | relationships. | | It's less easy to hang out with a woman one-on-one without it | seeming like a date (for a man who is heterosexual). It can | also cause jealousy on either side to stay close after pairing | up with a romantic partner. | | I suppose it depends on how one defines a "friend" based on | closeness. It's likely I'll keep in touch and maintain a | friendly relationship with these people as we all grow older | (as acquaintance-friends), though I doubt I'll ever reach the | level of "close friends," for any woman besides a romantic | partner. | 0xbadcafebee wrote: | The study shows that humans are susceptible to gender and | cultural stereotypes. Men want to be around the stereotypical | male, women want to be around the stereotypical woman - but only | in the culture that this study was taken in. | | > Across three studies (N = 745) with U.S. participants | | All this tells us is there's a trend in heterosexual friendships | in the US. If they ran this study in multiple countries with | different cultures they'd get different results. | | > Indeed, a fruitful avenue for future research would be to | examine friendship preferences across cultures. | foogazi wrote: | > The study shows that humans are susceptible to gender and | cultural stereotypes. | | Susceptible? Where do you think stereotypes come from ? | 0xbadcafebee wrote: | Biases, heuristics, group dynamics, social reinforcement. | kodah wrote: | The conclusion comes off as a trope and I can't access the paper | to see how this was concluded. | 2muchcoffeeman wrote: | Sometimes you do experiments to see if a trope is true or not | and it turns out to be true. | | With posts like these though, I don't think we should over | analyse the validity of the results. Instead we should ask | ourselves if it rings true for each of us personally and then | reconsider our friendships. Maybe we need to be better friends | to some people. | kodah wrote: | Except it's not. Among my male friends we have far closer | relationships and I wouldn't describe any of them as status | seeking. To quote someone with access to the paper: | | > From Study 1: "Participants (N = 213, 109 women) were | recruited from a small Northeastern college in exchange for | partial course credit or a lottery entry for a $40 gift card. | Of these participants, 190 (95 women) completed all focal | variables and were included in further analyses. Sample size | was determined by the number of participants researchers were | able to recruit over the course of one semester. Sensitivity | analyses indicated we have 0.80 power to detect an effect | size of partial e2 = 0.076 for focal predictions. | Participants ranged in age from 18 to 23 (M = 19.82 years, SD | = 1.31). The majority of participants identified as White | (75%), 14% identified as Asian, 4% as Hispanic/Latino, and 3% | as Black." | | > From Study 2: "U.S. Participants (N = 306, 141 women) were | recruited through Amazon's Mechanical Turk and received $1.00 | compensation. Given our shift from 'ideal' to actual friends, | we anticipated a reduction in the effect size of our | predicted sex differences and aimed to recruit a 50% larger | sample than that of Study 1. Sensitivity analyses indicated | that our sample size allowed us to detect effect sizes of | partial e2 = 0.003 with 0.80 power. Participants ranged in | age from 18 to 84 (M = 35.22, SD = 11.29) and primarily | identified as White (74%) or Black (9%)." | | > From Study 3: "U.S. Participants (N = 250; 97 women) were | recruited through TurkPrime and received $1.00 for completing | the study. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 70 (M = | 34.43, SD = 9.88). Sensitivity analysis indicated that we | were able to detect small effects (f < 0.10) with 0.80 power | assuming 0.5 correlation between measures. The majority of | participants identified as White (70%), 11% identified as | Black, 7% as Asian, 6% as Hispanic/Latinx, 2% as multi- | racial, 1% as American Indian, and 1% as Pacific Islander." | | The thing that stands out to me is that a group of people | thought it'd be appropriate to classify all or most men and | women based on a specific college and Amazon's Mechanical | Turk. | 2muchcoffeeman wrote: | > _The thing that stands out to me is that a group of | people thought it 'd be appropriate to classify all or most | men and women based on a specific college and Amazon's | Mechanical Turk._ | | Do you think this is the be all and end all of the topic? | Some researchers had an idea to test and did a study and | tried to get as random a sample of people as they could | that might be representative of the population. Or even a | sub group of people. They got some results and published. | If the results are interesting enough, they will try and do | a better study. | | The fact that your experience is different doesn't refute | the study either. It's statistical. They aren't saying the | 100% of all friendships are like X. I dare say it's also | obvious that a sociological study has limitations and | pointing them out isn't interesting. | openknot wrote: | From an academic perspective, it's no problem as the | primary audience are other researchers where the | limitations are a given. | | However, I posted the details from the study's design for | the readers of Hacker News, who might assume that the | study is generalizable to the broader U.S. population, | especially since only the abstract is available for most | users who see the link. | lolinder wrote: | You can access most ScienceDirect papers if you arrive via | Google Scholar: | | https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C45&q=Sex... | | Edit: this only works if you're logged in to a Google account. | kodah wrote: | Yeah, I saw your reply earlier and tried it. For some reason | it's not working that way. | lolinder wrote: | Oops, just checked, it only works if you're logged in to | Google. Editing my post now. | sneakymichael wrote: | This doesn't work for me FYI; I get the same paywalled | page. Fresh browsing session, logged in to Google | account. | joe_the_user wrote: | _Across evolutionary time, some of the many challenges that | friendships helped to solve may have differed between men and | women...._ | | This is just a "post child" for the replication crisis. | | It doesn't look at region, nation, socio-economic group, gender | identity and so forth. It also doesn't look at actual friendships | but friendship-preferences expressed on in survey (which I might | speculate would be more influenced by social expectations than | actual friendships but the point is "we don't know"). | | And then it add "evolutionary" to give a nice feel... ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-01-23 23:00 UTC)