3 ms·

Posted this in reply to a different comment, but wanted to post it here too for visibility. Please let me know if you disagree with my interpretation of how to

Posted this in reply to a different comment, but wanted to post it here too for visibility. Please let me know if you disagree with my interpretation of how to read the data from the graphs. ___ You have to look at it on the Economist and not the archive.vn mirror. Y axis is Height (or whatever you've set in the "Show by drop down" and X axis is the title of the graph, "Share of possible matches removed via filters, %". Hover over a point and the graph becomes much easier to understand. E.g. one point shows > Hispanic men, 25-29 years old, 6'0"-6'1". Filtered out by 9% of possible matches Each of the circles represents a group that is defined by a permutation of Race/Gender/Age/Height. I think size of circle represents size of that population in the dataset. In the case of my example, the circle for "Hispanic men, 25-20 years old, 6ft-6ft1in" was small, so there probably aren't many men fitting that specific combination in the data set. You also see intuitively that the circles for men 5'5" or shorter are small and the circles for women 6'0" or taller are smaller, corresponding to our intuitions that men that short or women that tall are less common in the overall population.

drabbiticus 4y ago
Huh. Messing with the first graph again. Change the "Show by" filter and make sure the second option changes to the corresponding Age/Height/Race filter Observations ============ 1. First option Age: If you are 29 or younger, you are more likely to be filtered out if you are a man than a woman. If you are 30 or older, you are more likely to be filtered out if you are a woman than a man. This corresponds to my expectations. 2. First option Height: Similar, with the cutoff being 5'5" or 5'6". This roughly makes sense I guess, but I would have thought that women 5'8"-5'9" would be less prone to being filtered out on the first pass. 3. First option Race: For every race but one, you are more likely to be filtered out as a woman than as a man. This was surprising to me. Unsurprising is that the one category this flips is Asian - Asian women are less likely to be filtered out, Asian men are more likely to be filtered out. "Everyone" is open to dating White, Other, Hispanic, None Given, with relative penalties for being Black, Indian, Asian. [edited for clarity and to better reflect the graphs I was looking at]
- drabbiticus 4y ago
  Huh. Yet another test with the first graph with all filters. Make sure to apply "All Filters". Observations ============ 1. filter out rates rise significantly compared to just looking at a single Age Filter/Race Filter/Height filter. This makes sense and the change between "[specific] filter" and "all filters" is most apparent for height and race. My intuition is that people are more likely to set up age filters than other types of filters. 2. Show by Race: Men are filtered out less frequently than women for every race. There are way more white users of the app than any other ethnic group. 3. Show by Height: Men don't get filtered out more than women until they are 5'1" and under. Apparently, as a 5'3" man you are less likely to be filtered out than a 5'3" woman. This is very surprising to me. 4. Show by Age: Men from 35-49 are the least likely overall to be filtered out. For every age group, you are more likely to be filtered out as a woman than as a man. This is again surprising to me, especially in the younger brackets. [edit:formatting/linebreaks]
  - drabbiticus 4y ago
    So awkwardly, you should ignore the above observations due to a misreading of the site. I also can't go back and add an edit applying a warning to them, I guess because of a time limitation on edits? > Hispanic men, 25-29 years old, 6'0"-6'1". Filtered out by 9% of possible matches This was a misquote. Actually instead of saying "Filtered out by 9%", the article says "Filtered out 9%". So Hispanic men in this age and height bracket created height filters that reduced the size of the overall candidates available to them by 9% of the population. It is NOT that they are rejected by 9% of the population. Correcting the above 2 posts based on this new understanding: ============================================================ "[Specific Filter]" Observations ============ 1. First option Age: Among those aged 30 or older, age filters are more restrictive among women than men. Men aged 35-49 have the most permissive age filters, with my guess being because they are more willing to see matches from younger women. Among those aged 20-24, men set up age filters that reduce the candidate pool more than the age filters set up by women in the same age bracket. 2. First option Height: Among those 5'6" or higher, women set up much more restrictive height filters than do men. This is not surprising and corresponds to the observation that women often want a man who is not a lot shorter than they are. Among those 5'5" and shorter, men set up more restrictive height filters than do women. This makes sense under a general understanding that short men may feel emasculated by dating a much taller woman, or alternatively that they would be comfortable in such a relationship but are trying to improve the success rate of their matches since their experience is they will be rejected by much taller women. 3. First option Race: For every race but one, women set up more restrictive racial dating filters than do men. I was somewhat surprised about this, and that black women apparently set up comparatively restrictive racial filters when compared to any other racial/gender demographic. Note that this restrictiveness reduces when you look at "All filters", suggesting that black women are therefore comparatively less restrictive in their filters with respect to age/height. The one place where this flips is Asians, which has a completely different implication than what I had thought under the old misunderstanding of the data. This means that Asian men set up more restrictive race filters than do Asian women. Perhaps this is a strategy to attempt to increase their successes with people who do get shown their profile? I.e. a similar approach to that taken by men 5'5" and shorter? ============================================================ "All Filters" Observations ============ 1. filter out rates rise significantly compared to just looking at a single Age Filter/Race Filter/Height filter. As before, this makes sense but the implications are different following my updated understanding of the graphs. If you add the effect of more filters, of course you reject more of the potential population. What changes is the implication of the observation that the change between "[specific] filter" and "all filters" is most apparent for height and race. This means that actually people do not set up very restrictive age filters, but do set up more restrictive height/race filters. The "restrictiveness" of the age filters may have more to do with the age demographics of the population using League. 2. Show by Race: Race does not have a very strong effect on the distribution of filter restrictiveness, but there are some exceptions. For example, among men, Indian men appear to set up the most restrictive filters and Hispanic men appear to set up the least restrictive filters. 3. Show by Height: This basically shows the same relationship as for the "Height Filter" graph. Comparing the "Height Filter" and the "All Filters" version, two interesting results stand out. Men from 5'2"-5'5" have overall filters set up that produce similar levels of restriction as taller men. This suggests that men in this height range are attempting to broaden their dating parameters in race/age to "make up" for their height disadvantage. Men 5'1" and under may be doing the same thing, but still cut out a much larger portion of the population than their taller peers. Women 6'2" move very little on this graph when you switch "Height Filter" and "All Filter". This means that most of their "filtering power" can be accounted for by their height filter and they may have relatively broader race/age filters. 4. Show by Age: Men from 35-49 have the least restrictive filters overall. This isn't that surprising. Among women, those aged from 25-34 have the least restrictive filters. Also not very surprising.

drabbiticus 4y ago

Huh. Messing with the first graph again. Change the "Show by" filter and make sure the second option changes to the corresponding Age/Height/Race filter Observations ============ 1. First option Age: If you are 29 or younger, you are more likely to be filtered out if you are a man than a woman. If you are 30 or older, you are more likely to be filtered out if you are a woman than a man. This corresponds to my expectations. 2. First option Height: Similar, with the cutoff being 5'5" or 5'6". This roughly makes sense I guess, but I would have thought that women 5'8"-5'9" would be less prone to being filtered out on the first pass. 3. First option Race: For every race but one, you are more likely to be filtered out as a woman than as a man. This was surprising to me. Unsurprising is that the one category this flips is Asian - Asian women are less likely to be filtered out, Asian men are more likely to be filtered out. "Everyone" is open to dating White, Other, Hispanic, None Given, with relative penalties for being Black, Indian, Asian. [edited for clarity and to better reflect the graphs I was looking at]

drabbiticus 4y ago
Huh. Yet another test with the first graph with all filters. Make sure to apply "All Filters". Observations ============ 1. filter out rates rise significantly compared to just looking at a single Age Filter/Race Filter/Height filter. This makes sense and the change between "[specific] filter" and "all filters" is most apparent for height and race. My intuition is that people are more likely to set up age filters than other types of filters. 2. Show by Race: Men are filtered out less frequently than women for every race. There are way more white users of the app than any other ethnic group. 3. Show by Height: Men don't get filtered out more than women until they are 5'1" and under. Apparently, as a 5'3" man you are less likely to be filtered out than a 5'3" woman. This is very surprising to me. 4. Show by Age: Men from 35-49 are the least likely overall to be filtered out. For every age group, you are more likely to be filtered out as a woman than as a man. This is again surprising to me, especially in the younger brackets. [edit:formatting/linebreaks]
- drabbiticus 4y ago
  So awkwardly, you should ignore the above observations due to a misreading of the site. I also can't go back and add an edit applying a warning to them, I guess because of a time limitation on edits? > Hispanic men, 25-29 years old, 6'0"-6'1". Filtered out by 9% of possible matches This was a misquote. Actually instead of saying "Filtered out by 9%", the article says "Filtered out 9%". So Hispanic men in this age and height bracket created height filters that reduced the size of the overall candidates available to them by 9% of the population. It is NOT that they are rejected by 9% of the population. Correcting the above 2 posts based on this new understanding: ============================================================ "[Specific Filter]" Observations ============ 1. First option Age: Among those aged 30 or older, age filters are more restrictive among women than men. Men aged 35-49 have the most permissive age filters, with my guess being because they are more willing to see matches from younger women. Among those aged 20-24, men set up age filters that reduce the candidate pool more than the age filters set up by women in the same age bracket. 2. First option Height: Among those 5'6" or higher, women set up much more restrictive height filters than do men. This is not surprising and corresponds to the observation that women often want a man who is not a lot shorter than they are. Among those 5'5" and shorter, men set up more restrictive height filters than do women. This makes sense under a general understanding that short men may feel emasculated by dating a much taller woman, or alternatively that they would be comfortable in such a relationship but are trying to improve the success rate of their matches since their experience is they will be rejected by much taller women. 3. First option Race: For every race but one, women set up more restrictive racial dating filters than do men. I was somewhat surprised about this, and that black women apparently set up comparatively restrictive racial filters when compared to any other racial/gender demographic. Note that this restrictiveness reduces when you look at "All filters", suggesting that black women are therefore comparatively less restrictive in their filters with respect to age/height. The one place where this flips is Asians, which has a completely different implication than what I had thought under the old misunderstanding of the data. This means that Asian men set up more restrictive race filters than do Asian women. Perhaps this is a strategy to attempt to increase their successes with people who do get shown their profile? I.e. a similar approach to that taken by men 5'5" and shorter? ============================================================ "All Filters" Observations ============ 1. filter out rates rise significantly compared to just looking at a single Age Filter/Race Filter/Height filter. As before, this makes sense but the implications are different following my updated understanding of the graphs. If you add the effect of more filters, of course you reject more of the potential population. What changes is the implication of the observation that the change between "[specific] filter" and "all filters" is most apparent for height and race. This means that actually people do not set up very restrictive age filters, but do set up more restrictive height/race filters. The "restrictiveness" of the age filters may have more to do with the age demographics of the population using League. 2. Show by Race: Race does not have a very strong effect on the distribution of filter restrictiveness, but there are some exceptions. For example, among men, Indian men appear to set up the most restrictive filters and Hispanic men appear to set up the least restrictive filters. 3. Show by Height: This basically shows the same relationship as for the "Height Filter" graph. Comparing the "Height Filter" and the "All Filters" version, two interesting results stand out. Men from 5'2"-5'5" have overall filters set up that produce similar levels of restriction as taller men. This suggests that men in this height range are attempting to broaden their dating parameters in race/age to "make up" for their height disadvantage. Men 5'1" and under may be doing the same thing, but still cut out a much larger portion of the population than their taller peers. Women 6'2" move very little on this graph when you switch "Height Filter" and "All Filter". This means that most of their "filtering power" can be accounted for by their height filter and they may have relatively broader race/age filters. 4. Show by Age: Men from 35-49 have the least restrictive filters overall. This isn't that surprising. Among women, those aged from 25-34 have the least restrictive filters. Also not very surprising.