Comments on: Even Virtual Attractiveness Changes How People Treat You

By: Polenth

Polenth — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 21:44:45 +0000

There are a lot of other factors. The male might be more elaborate than the default, but the clothing is still very generic. It says the character isn’t a one hour old character, but isn’t anything special either.

My tiny mushroom avatar gets more attention than any other avatar I’ve used, and it’s not because people think it looks hot… it’s because it’s different. Being different and standing out of the crowd make a big difference in SL. An avatar that was designed to look stereotypically ugly might actually get more attention for being unique.

By: Doreen Garrigus

Doreen Garrigus — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:37:20 +0000

I have to second (or third?) what has already been said. The “unattractive” models chosen scream “NOOB!!!” which is a look that will get someone ignored.

By: Avatar Is Not Just a Movie « The Psychology of Beauty

Avatar Is Not Just a Movie « The Psychology of Beauty — Sun, 20 Jun 2010 19:04:03 +0000

[...] you can access the article here. Richard Landers has a nice summary and discussion of the article here – if you’d like a second [...]

By: Richard N. Landers

Richard N. Landers — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:42:10 +0000

@Pteryxx The study states “Most of them did not have previous experience with SL,” which somewhat addresses your point, but I suppose with N = 9, there could be up to 4 of them that did have previous SL experience – which is pretty substantial. I suppose, given that, it might indeed have had an impact on participant behavior – definitely worth follow-up, at the least.

@Rodney @Riven I certainly agree that multiple models and a larger sample are needed to draw many specific conclusions. Thus the one conclusion I feel safe making: “virtual appearance changes the way that people interact with you.” I wouldn’t feel safe being much more specific than that, at this point.

By: Rodney Daut

Rodney Daut — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:30:14 +0000

I agree with Riven Homewood. It seems that this study was not very well thought out.

By: Riven Homewood

Riven Homewood — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:57:11 +0000

It’s a shame that the researchers used SL default avatars for the “unattractive” subjects. Many experienced SecondLife residents tend to avoid conversations with “newbies” and this probably skewed the results.

By: Rodney Daut

Rodney Daut — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:01:45 +0000

I think this project would get much more useful results if they had multiple models of “unattractive” and multiple models of “attractive.” The woman was dressed in garb that many would consider sexy or slutty. It might be useful to have a woman who was beautiful without wearing such revealing clothing. And a much larger sample size is needed. How about n=50 for greater validity.

By: Pteryxx

Pteryxx — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 03:19:54 +0000

“Perhaps they (SL users) see a default avatar and assume this is not a “serious” SL user and thus not worth their time – not an effect of attractiveness at all. But this does not explain differences in study participant behavior.”

Absolutely it could also affect participant behavior, because if they’re familiar with SL at all, they will also be aware of the social status implied by their avatar. They’ll know when they’re likely to be perceived as a casual/throwaway contact and when they’re likely to be taken seriously. Wearing a default avatar in any MMO connotes temporary, disposable, anonymous, visitor, or complete rookie.

The avatars used, particularly the female set, conflate “attractive” with “sexy” and “unattractive” with “default”. A sexy female avatar basically flags the player for interaction with strangers. Avatars with matching levels of customization, either simple or complex, might help clear this up.