NationStates Jolt Archive


Ugly children get less attention and care?

Eutrusca
04-05-2005, 14:45
NOTE: This may go a long way toward explaining why my mother left my father and me right after I was born. But I grew up pretty! :D


Ugly Children May Get Parental Short Shrift (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/03/health/03ugly.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1115211995-S5xyj2jPnRq6Xf5PZ6oUnw)

By NICHOLAS BAKALAR
Published: May 3, 2005

Parents would certainly deny it, but Canadian researchers have made a startling assertion: parents take better care of pretty children than they do ugly ones.

Researchers at the University of Alberta carefully observed how parents treated their children during trips to the supermarket. They found that physical attractiveness made a big difference.

The researchers noted if the parents belted their youngsters into the grocery cart seat, how often the parents' attention lapsed and the number of times the children were allowed to engage in potentially dangerous activities like standing up in the shopping cart. They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.

The findings, not yet published, were presented at the Warren E. Kalbach Population Conference in Edmonton, Alberta.

When it came to buckling up, pretty and ugly children were treated in starkly different ways, with seat belt use increasing in direct proportion to attractiveness. When a woman was in charge, 4 percent of the homeliest children were strapped in compared with 13.3 percent of the most attractive children. The difference was even more acute when fathers led the shopping expedition - in those cases, none of the least attractive children were secured with seat belts, while 12.5 percent of the prettiest children were.

Homely children were also more often out of sight of their parents, and they were more often allowed to wander more than 10 feet away.

Age - of parent and child - also played a role. Younger adults were more likely to buckle their children into the seat, and younger children were more often buckled in. Older adults, in contrast, were inclined to let children wander out of sight and more likely to allow them to engage in physically dangerous activities.

Although the researchers were unsure why, good-looking boys were usually kept in closer proximity to the adults taking care of them than were pretty girls. The researchers speculated that girls might be considered more competent and better able to act independently than boys of the same age. The researchers made more than 400 observations of child-parent interactions in 14 supermarkets.

Dr. W. Andrew Harrell, executive director of the Population Research Laboratory at the University of Alberta and the leader of the research team, sees an evolutionary reason for the findings: pretty children, he says, represent the best genetic legacy, and therefore they get more care.

Not all experts agree. Dr. Frans de Waal, a professor of psychology at Emory University, said he was skeptical.

"The question," he said, "is whether ugly people have fewer offspring than handsome people. I doubt it very much. If the number of offspring are the same for these two categories, there's absolutely no evolutionary reason for parents to invest less in ugly kids."

Dr. Robert Sternberg, professor of psychology and education at Yale, said he saw problems in Dr. Harrell's method and conclusions, for example, not considering socioeconomic status.

"Wealthier parents can feed, clothe and take care of their children better due to greater resources," Dr. Sternberg said, possibly making them more attractive. "The link to evolutionary theory is speculative."

But Dr. Harrell said the importance of physical attractiveness "cuts across social class, income and education."

"Like lots of animals, we tend to parcel out our resources on the basis of value," he said. "Maybe we can't always articulate that, but in fact we do it. There are a lot of things that make a person more valuable, and physical attractiveness may be one of them."
Ikitiok
04-05-2005, 14:46
Yikes!
Fass
04-05-2005, 14:47
They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.

Ugh, eeew!
Legless Pirates
04-05-2005, 14:48
That may be so, but people with a beautiful partner live shorter
Demented Hamsters
04-05-2005, 14:50
Makes sense to me. If I had an ugly kid, I wouldn't want it hanging around all the time. Especially at dinner times. Would spoil my appetite, it would.

Of course, it's a bit subjective - how exactly did they rate ugliness according to their ten-point scale? And how many people rated the kids? Also, how many children did they observe?
Too many questions for me to feel comfortable about the outcome of this experiment.
Eutrusca
04-05-2005, 14:51
They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.

Ugh, eeew!
I know. This is probably one of the few areas where I agree with you Fass! :)
Mykonians
04-05-2005, 14:52
"The question," he said, "is whether ugly people have fewer offspring than handsome people. I doubt it very much.

Maybe not, but they will find it harder to actually find someone to produce offspring with in the first place. I would have thought that a scientist of all people would know that :D.

Now more importantly, I'm surprised that men in anoraks rating how attractive children were in a supermarket weren't arrested quite quickly...
FairyTInkArisen
04-05-2005, 14:53
and here was me thinking it was just because i was the oldest :(
Riconiaa
04-05-2005, 14:55
That may be so, but people with a beautiful partner live shorter

Why is that?
Legless Pirates
04-05-2005, 14:56
Why is that?
Jealousy, causing stress, causing loads of things
Mykonians
04-05-2005, 14:56
Why is that?

Can you say 'heart attack'? :p
New Sancrosanctia
04-05-2005, 14:56
Now more importantly, I'm surprised that men in anoraks rating how attractive children were in a supermarket weren't arrested quite quickly...
i fyou go to the source on this, one of their basis of criteria was how much the parent react when said creepy men in anoraks started hitting on thier children. it seems parents of ugly children really don't care.
The Chocolate Goddess
04-05-2005, 14:57
Wether we admit it or not, we are all influenced by physical attractiveness. The problem is that it's subjective. We don't all have the same definition.

That being said, don't they have anything better to do in Alberta? Like look at the Rockies, or count cows, or something?

Sheesh! What a waste of time and money!
Naturality
04-05-2005, 14:58
Have seen what you're speaking of with my great-neices and nephews from their grandparents. The grandson gets cared for, bought for and treated better then all the grand daughters.. but this seems to have been the case in my family always. Both my grandmothers favoured their sons over their daughters. Have heard from a couple of my friends mothers say that their mother favoured their brothers over them as well. This might just be the "norm" from moms?

A friend of mine favored his cute blonde haired blue eyed son over his regular looking brown haired brown eyed son and admitted to it. That was strickly based on looks it seems.

Majority of people are superficial ( we all are to a certain extent I suppose). I call people out when they are talking about someone dieing or that was in a bad incident when they add "and she was so pretty" or "he was so handsome". Would it had been less a tragedy if they weren't so pleasing to the eyes?
Mykonians
04-05-2005, 14:59
i fyou go to the source on this, one of their basis of criteria was how much the parent react when said creepy men in anoraks started hitting on thier children. it seems parents of ugly children really don't care.

Excellent! Mystery solved. The parents were making sure creepy men in anoraks didn't steal their attractive children.
Burgman-Allen
04-05-2005, 15:00
Yeah, it's actually not just parents who treat prettier children better...it's in the schools too. Teachers are more receptive and responsive to prettier children. (I learned this in a psych. class) Apperently when the prettier children are treated so much better they actually learn better too. So, they end up being both pretty and smart.
Ekland
04-05-2005, 15:03
They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.


Alright, I want to know who the FUCK the Canuck was they got to "rate" the physical attractiveness of children. o.0
Fass
04-05-2005, 15:04
I know. This is probably one of the few areas where I agree with you Fass! :)

Well, as long as you agree that puppies and kittens are cute, we should be able to get along.
The Chocolate Goddess
04-05-2005, 15:11
Have seen what you're speaking of with my great-neices and nephews from their grandparents and also from a friend of mine who favored his cute blonde haired blue eyed son to/over his regular looking brown haired brown eyed son and admitted to it.

Majority of people are superficial ( we all are to a certain extent I suppose). I call people out out when they are talking about someone dieing or that was in a bad incident when they add "and she was so pretty" or "he was so handsome". Would it had been less a tragedy if they weren't so pleasing to the eyes?

I know exactly what you mean. That bothers me quite a bit. Those words have an effect on the person they are referring to, as well as the person who is listening. I caught myself one or twice modifying my opinion because of someone else's comment on their physical attractiveness, and then wondering waht the hell i was doing. I was shocked by my response and I can just imagine that this happens very frequently and people just don't notice.
Eutrusca
04-05-2005, 16:16
I know exactly what you mean. That bothers me quite a bit. Those words have an effect on the person they are referring to, as well as the person who is listening. I caught myself one or twice modifying my opinion because of someone else's comment on their physical attractiveness, and then wondering waht the hell i was doing. I was shocked by my response and I can just imagine that this happens very frequently and people just don't notice.
Happens all the time. I was a very skinny and rather unattractive child and teenager ( I know. Hard to believe, ain't it! ;) ), which was partially to blame for my being such a recluse. Fortunately, things improved as I entered college and learned that some of us are what they use to call "late bloomers."
Chicken pi
04-05-2005, 16:21
They also rated each child's physical attractiveness on a 10-point scale.

Did they rate the childrens attractiveness from photos or in person?
Eutrusca
04-05-2005, 16:23
Did they rate the childrens attractiveness from photos or in person?
The article doesn't state explicitly, but I suspect it was in person since they were observing how parents in a supermarket reacted to their children.
Chicken pi
04-05-2005, 16:31
The article doesn't state explicitly, but I suspect it was in person since they were observing how parents in a supermarket reacted to their children.

That's another way in which the study could be biased. If it's in person, the kid's personality is probably taken into account (whether the researcher intends it to or not). A friendly, active kid is likely to be rated higher than an average child.
Eutrusca
04-05-2005, 16:47
That's another way in which the study could be biased. If it's in person, the kid's personality is probably taken into account (whether the researcher intends it to or not). A friendly, active kid is likely to be rated higher than an average child.
This is true. The consensus seems to be that the study was rather subjective, but then so are the concepts it was attempting to measure: "pretty," "ugly," and "attention."
Botswombata
04-05-2005, 16:53
I really question the validity of this study. Since attractiveness is in the eyes of the beholder how can you base this on a scale of 0-10 for attractiveness. Also, did the childrens bad behavior effect the test. Are people more likely to see a child as ugly when they misbehave? How did they go about this scale in the forst place when good looks are so subjective a 5 to one person coud be a 2 to another or a 8 to a different person. I find this whole study to be flawed for that reason.
Jupan
04-05-2005, 16:58
now I know why people treat me that way!!! :headbang:
Chicken pi
04-05-2005, 16:58
I really question the validity of this study. Since attractiveness is in the eyes of the beholder how can you base this on a scale of 0-10 for attractiveness. Also, did the childrens bad behavior effect the test. Are people more likely to see a child as ugly when they misbehave? How did they go about this scale in the forst place when good looks are so subjective a 5 to one person coud be a 2 to another or a 8 to a different person. I find this whole study to be flawed for that reason.

It doesn't seem to mention the size of their sample group either. If they've only studied five people, their results are unlikely to be representative of the general population.
UpwardThrust
04-05-2005, 19:12
It doesn't seem to mention the size of their sample group either. If they've only studied five people, their results are unlikely to be representative of the general population.
At a population of all children generaly you can go with the standard 40 total for large population groups (though it would have to be random ... one supermarket seems hardly random)
Kryozerkia
04-05-2005, 19:20
What was the point of this study?
Greedy Pig
04-05-2005, 19:29
Bring back infanticide! Don't let the children suffer anymore than they need to! :p

Aihz. Reading articles like these, make me feel that parents who treat their children differently because their uglier or prettier shouldn't have kids.
Dakini
04-05-2005, 19:48
Yeah, fucking right.

If I had a pic of one of my sisters compared to me I coudl demonstrate this with visuals.

At any rate, one of my sisters appears to have fallen from the ugly tree and hit every single branch on the way down. This isn't just appearancewise either, she's quite a mean bitch most of the time. She gets everything she wants from my parents, she's always got so much more attention from my parents than I have. So I say bullshit, the ugly ones get more attention.