Play Up That Ugly Trait

Data analysis from the popular online dating site OkCupid finds that the women who get the most attention from men are rated by many men as unattractive. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Two math nerds from Harvard got the brilliant idea to launch an online dating site that finds matches based on quizzes given to users. OkCupid now has 3.5 million users and billions of data points, which the co-founders use to uncover fascinating patterns about human behavior. 

Here’s one: They discovered that the more men disagree about a woman’s looks the more they end up liking her.

 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Take two random women, equally rated as good-looking. Well what they noticed is that one of these women might receive 90 messages in a month where as the other only receives 30. Why?

 

The math revealed that those women who received the most messages had more variation in individual ratings of her looks. Meaning, some men would rate her as ugly and other men would rate that same woman as super hot.

 

It is the wide variation in ratings that is correlated to receiving nearly triple the number of messages than a woman who is considered universally cute.  

 

OkCupid’s math lords theorize that maybe men think they have a better chance with the more extremely rated woman, since there is something about her that is only attractive to some men, hence less competition. Maybe. Whatever the reason, the ultimate advice to single women: Embrace that unique trait. It’s what is going to get you the attention.

 

—Christie Nicholson

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe