Ask Lemmy

32493 readers

1810 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

6) No US Politics.

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

What is the equivalent to women for compensating size of their dick for a man? Like someone buying expensive cars to compensate for their smaller dick. (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I’m curious what you identify as poorly made—I’m not a psychology researcher, but their methodology and statistical analysis seem basically credible.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm not at a computer rn, but to make it short:

The key experimental trial told participants that the average erect penis size of other men was either 18cm (small penis / low self-esteem) or 10cm (large penis / high self-esteem) and was always followed by rating of one of six sports cars. [...] After the experimental trials, participants were told that some of the facts that they had been told were incorrect, and they were asked to give their estimates of the true values of these facts, including the true average penis size.

So if someone told me the average penis size is 18 cm I would call that bullshit. But let us assume all the 195 participants fully believed these numbers. They need to know their own penis size to make a comparison. Then this is about if "I feel I am below average". Then they rated sport cars based on "how much they would like to have that product"

Sorry, but that does not sound very sound to me.

We increased our male participants’ desire for sports cars when we made them feel they had a relatively small penis. Why cars and why penises? These results raise intriguing questions for future research. Does penis size effect only ratings for sports cars, or other highly prized items as well? Does penis size have a connection to male self-esteem that just much stronger than the other factors we manipulated in this experiment. If we manipulated other equally strong factors – men’s beliefs about their intelligence or wealth perhaps - we would find a similar effect on product ratings? Or perhaps there is just something specific linking cars and penises in the male psyche. That hypothesis is supported by the data in this paper, and would explain the existence of the phallic car trope in everyday jokes, advertisements and academic discourse [...]

What kind of conclusion is that? This is written like a blog article, not like a scientific paper. The conclusion has only 3 references. In total the paper is pretty short, but to be fair I don't know what's common in psychology either.

However what is most suspicious - this is a non peer reviewed preprint from 2023 and I cannot find the publication. So I guess it was declined, if it was even sent in