4 ms·

The title is incredibly editorialized. The title of the paper is: >> Student beauty and grades under in-person and remote teaching It considers the effect of

The title is incredibly editorialized. The title of the paper is: >> Student beauty and grades under in-person and remote teaching It considers the effect of attractiveness on male and female students. In fact, it finds the beauty premium persists in online learning for male students but not for female students. I won't speculate as to why the title has been so heavily editorialized, but it seems to have significantly lowered the quality of discussion.

Supermancho 4y ago
> The title of the paper is: This isn't what people aren't usually interested in. Saving time by providing interesting conclusions at-a-glance is sensible. I do see how the conclusions have been editorialized away from the actual findings, for no apparent reason.
- walrus01 4y ago
  It's almost as if we've become socially accustomed to editorialized social media shared headlines that are intentionally crafted as rage bait to drive clicks and engagement for advertising revenue. Gee, I sure do wonder how and where that might have happened...
  - antegamisou 4y ago
    I've been saying for the past year, sensationalist submissions like the OP to the front-page are the norm on "H"N. Quite disappointing, considering I believed this website was once a source for high-quality information, but now it's almost as if I'm logging in on my LinkedIn home page.
- scott_s 4y ago
  From the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html): > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
- koheripbal 4y ago
  OP's title highlights women - when the effect is for all people. It's heavily misleading.
  - Supermancho 4y ago
    > It's heavily misleading. Most people think this is obvious. I'm still wondering why it hasn't been corrected. Instead, it got yanked.
rgblambda 4y ago
"A" beauty premium persists not "the" premium. I've only read the highlights but that reads like there's a dropoff for men, but not as steep a one as for women. Edit: This'll teach me to read the whole study. The conclusion has this to say: >This finding implies that the female beauty premium observed when education is in-person is likely to be chiefly a consequence of discrimination. On the contrary, for male students, there was still a significant beauty premium even after the introduction of online teaching. The latter finding suggests that for males in particular, beauty can be a productivity-enhancing attribute.

Supermancho 4y ago

> The title of the paper is: This isn't what people aren't usually interested in. Saving time by providing interesting conclusions at-a-glance is sensible. I do see how the conclusions have been editorialized away from the actual findings, for no apparent reason.

walrus01 4y ago
It's almost as if we've become socially accustomed to editorialized social media shared headlines that are intentionally crafted as rage bait to drive clicks and engagement for advertising revenue. Gee, I sure do wonder how and where that might have happened...
- antegamisou 4y ago
  I've been saying for the past year, sensationalist submissions like the OP to the front-page are the norm on "H"N. Quite disappointing, considering I believed this website was once a source for high-quality information, but now it's almost as if I'm logging in on my LinkedIn home page.
scott_s 4y ago
From the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html): > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
koheripbal 4y ago
OP's title highlights women - when the effect is for all people. It's heavily misleading.
- Supermancho 4y ago
  > It's heavily misleading. Most people think this is obvious. I'm still wondering why it hasn't been corrected. Instead, it got yanked.

rgblambda 4y ago

"A" beauty premium persists not "the" premium. I've only read the highlights but that reads like there's a dropoff for men, but not as steep a one as for women. Edit: This'll teach me to read the whole study. The conclusion has this to say: >This finding implies that the female beauty premium observed when education is in-person is likely to be chiefly a consequence of discrimination. On the contrary, for male students, there was still a significant beauty premium even after the introduction of online teaching. The latter finding suggests that for males in particular, beauty can be a productivity-enhancing attribute.