New to me: OKCupid compares two groups of girls who are both rated as the same level in attractiveness and their message contact rates:
(left) Traditional bell curve shape with average rating at curve peak
vs
(right) Inverse bell curve with emphasis on the extremes
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.html/the-ma...of-beauty/
![[Image: user1.png]](http://akcdn.okccdn.com/blog/math_of_beauty/user1.png)
![[Image: user2.png]](http://akcdn.okccdn.com/blog/math_of_beauty/user2.png)
The kicker is despite having the same average rating, the more polarized inverse bell curve on the right has 3x the message contact rate of the safer, more predictable traditional bell curve on the left.
This seems to have implications for opening game strategies vs middle game response rates: By being nice and all round appealing in your opening game, you'll be well thought of while they remember you, but the response rate on that middle game returned phone call will be low. While being cocky, edgy and more polarizing in the opening game will get an equally polarized response with more outright rejection up front in the opening stage --but such a much higher response rate from those that do get past and into middle game that it's worth it.
Playing the numbers in a pool of abundance, it appears it's you'll have much higher response rate success if you generate extreme emotions of both kinds, than by being blandly likeable without elevating anyone's pulse, either good or bad.
The downside is while we know the total increase in response rates, we don't know the ratings of the responders. Does this bias the response pool more towards 10s, 7s or 3s and 4s, or no bias at all? "Further research is necessary".
(left) Traditional bell curve shape with average rating at curve peak
vs
(right) Inverse bell curve with emphasis on the extremes
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.html/the-ma...of-beauty/
The kicker is despite having the same average rating, the more polarized inverse bell curve on the right has 3x the message contact rate of the safer, more predictable traditional bell curve on the left.
This seems to have implications for opening game strategies vs middle game response rates: By being nice and all round appealing in your opening game, you'll be well thought of while they remember you, but the response rate on that middle game returned phone call will be low. While being cocky, edgy and more polarizing in the opening game will get an equally polarized response with more outright rejection up front in the opening stage --but such a much higher response rate from those that do get past and into middle game that it's worth it.
Playing the numbers in a pool of abundance, it appears it's you'll have much higher response rate success if you generate extreme emotions of both kinds, than by being blandly likeable without elevating anyone's pulse, either good or bad.
The downside is while we know the total increase in response rates, we don't know the ratings of the responders. Does this bias the response pool more towards 10s, 7s or 3s and 4s, or no bias at all? "Further research is necessary".
"Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They're too stupid to be able to read or write. Besides they wear black, which is such a beastly color. I'm so glad I'm a Beta."
--Aldous Huxley, Brave New World