While the results of the activity might prove otherwise, I think it’s important to note that participants in the activity who have experience with anthropological studies might have had an idea of what might be coming. This could have skewed some results. My answers might say differently, I cannot remember how I rated each individual, but I know I tried to rate the individuals moderately even after seeing the photos of rashes and diseases. This may not have helped me to stay neutral, but I recall actively trying to push the photo of the previous rash out of my mind before rating whatever individual was on the screen each time. Maybe a point can be drawn from that though, that I was actively trying to ignore what would be considered an “unattractive” image in order to be unbiased concerning the next. This in itself is proof that the photos are disturbing and skew the vision of participants with any photos following. I wonder how different the ratings would be if time differences were added in to the mix (i.e. looking at nasty photos, taking different increments of breaks, then rating the individuals). There are so many variables in this project, too, that can change the outcome of the survey. The rater could be in a bad mood or a good mood, and their ratings could change dramatically. I myself realized that I was also a lot stricter in rating on the second day of ratings.
I thought the disgust study was an interesting exercise. The first round, I had no clue what the study was about, because we were just looking at furniture and then random people. However, after the second round it started to make sense. I think I kept my ratings of the people about the same though. It was interesting to see how everyone rated it though. I was surprised at some of the ones that were rated more attractive by a large increase. I think the guys changed their opinions more than the girls did, especially when it came to other guys. Are we nicer to our own sex after we’ve been disgusted? I don’t know, but I think many cool conclusions could be made from this study. In class we discussed how to make the study even more efficient, which is something I would not have thought about. We talked about how some people were in class for the first round, but not for the second. Things like that. I never realized how much went into a study. There is a lot to factor in.
I think that this experiment is an effective way to see how people rate attractiveness differently after being disgusted; but I think that there are many factors that influenced us when we were rating the subjects, and that might have affected the results. An example of this is that all the subjects have different ethnicities; and since we do not know what the experiment is about, we might try to rate them in a way that we do not seem racist. The second time we rated the people, it was different, not only because of the disgust part, but because we were already familiar with the pictures, and we remember more or less our first impressions and how we rated them the first time.
The disgust assignment allowed me zoom in and pay further attention to the way in which we think about/perceive things or people after exposure to different things. Being a guy, I really didn’t think much of the whole disgust part of the activity as factors of that kind provide little factors in my perception of others. I pretty much rated the people the same way as I did before. However, it’s interesting to see how others respond in similar situations, noting that a few of the results changed drastically and surprisingly in my opinion. The biggest take away in the activity for me is that when we expose ourselves to certain things, we often tend to display it by finding comfort in other things that we thought were bad at first, but evidently not as bad as it could be.