Today on Darwin Does Dating. Love may be blind but it stills sees quite well. Surely that's a contradiction? How we evolved to doublethink about our partners. A thread! [1/15]

When judging the qualities of our partner, people tend to see the best in them, thinking of them as smarter, sexier, and funnier than they really are. Relationship psychologists call this “mean level bias”. We see our partner through rose tinted glasses.🌹👓[2/15]
At the same time, people tend to have a really accurate view of the relative strengths and weaknesses of their partner. They’re able to recognize when they are stronger than they are funnier, smarter than patient, and so on. This is often called “tracking accuracy”. [3/15]
So, there’s an elephant in the room here🐘. People appear to both hold accurate and inaccurate views of their significant other. A bit reminiscent of Orwell’s “doublethink” in 1984 - the idea that people can learn to sit comfortably with contradiction in their heads. [4/15]
Dig deeper and we find that these two judgments appear to have different functions in relationships. Let’s start with mean-level bias. First of all, it’s quite variable, and much larger among those satisfied with their relationships (at least in the early stages). [5/15]
Second, it can go in the other direction, people tend to *underestimate* their partners level of commitment to the relationship, for example. Third, people are able to overcome their mean-level bias. [6/15]
Ask them “how would your friends answer this question about your partner?” and they give more accurate answers. Finally, there’s a small sex difference, women appear *slightly* more biased than men. [7/15]
Tracking accuracy, in contrast, is consistent – people are great at tracking their partner’s strengths and weaknesses. But, it doesn’t seem to influence relationship satisfaction, there’s little sex difference, and doesn’t change when people adopt a different perspective. [8/15]
Mean-level bias is fluid and malleable🌊, while tracking accuracy seems solid 🪨. And importantly, the accuracy in one doesn’t relate to the other. Again, showing how these are two very different things. [9/15]
OK, so what gives? How to we reconcile the contradiction? An evolutionary perspective can help here by encouraging us to think about what the functions of mean-level bias and tracking accuracy might be in relationship formation and maintenance. [10/15]
Mean-level bias appears to help maintain relationships and signal commitment. Seeing your partner as the “bees knees” might make you feel like you have a good deal, want to maintain your relationships, and not be tempted by alternatives.🐝[11/15]
Tracking accuracy, in contrast, acts as a safety net🥅. Knowing someone’s strengths and weaknesses is important for choosing a partner who both complements you and will work will with you as part of a team.🤝[12/15]
In fact, we find that tracking accuracy is the *most* accurate for traits that have had the most impact on relationship functioning and success over the course of human history⌛. Things like kindness, physical attractiveness, and social status. [13/15]
Together, we have balance. One maintains and deepens relationships. The other guards us from poor mate choices. A potential implication: If in a new committed relationship with a partner who doesn’t seem to see you through “rose tinted lenses” – this might be a red flag.🚩[14/15]
If you’d like to know more about mean-level bias and tracking accuracy, there is an excellent meta-analysis by Fletcher and Kerr which inspired this thread. Link to that below. (Free through ResearchGate.) Until next time. [15/15] https://t.co/tpvEcmuw7H

More from Life

THREAD: 12 Things Everyone Should Know About IQ

1. IQ is one of the most heritable psychological traits – that is, individual differences in IQ are strongly associated with individual differences in genes (at least in fairly typical modern environments). https://t.co/3XxzW9bxLE


2. The heritability of IQ *increases* from childhood to adulthood. Meanwhile, the effect of the shared environment largely fades away. In other words, when it comes to IQ, nature becomes more important as we get older, nurture less.
https://t.co/UqtS1lpw3n


3. IQ scores have been increasing for the last century or so, a phenomenon known as the Flynn effect. https://t.co/sCZvCst3hw (N ≈ 4 million)

(Note that the Flynn effect shows that IQ isn't 100% genetic; it doesn't show that it's 100% environmental.)


4. IQ predicts many important real world outcomes.

For example, though far from perfect, IQ is the single-best predictor of job performance we have – much better than Emotional Intelligence, the Big Five, Grit, etc. https://t.co/rKUgKDAAVx https://t.co/DWbVI8QSU3


5. Higher IQ is associated with a lower risk of death from most causes, including cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, most forms of cancer, homicide, suicide, and accident. https://t.co/PJjGNyeQRA (N = 728,160)

You May Also Like

Хајде да направимо мали осврт на случај Мика Алексић .

Алексић је жртва енглеске освете преко Оливере Иванчић .
Мика је одбио да снима филм о блаћењу Срба и мењању историје Срба , иза целокупног пројекта стоји дипломатски кор Британаца у Београду и Оливера Иванчић


Оливера Илинчић је иначе мајка једне од његових ученица .
Која је претила да ће се осветити .

Мика се налази у притвору због наводних оптужби глумице Милене Радуловић да ју је наводно силовао човек од 70 година , са три бајпаса и извађеном простатом пре пет година

Иста персона је и обезбедила финансије за филм преко Беча а филм је требао да се бави животом Десанке Максимовић .
А сетите се и ко је иницирао да се Десанка Максимовић избаци из уџбеника и школства у Србији .

И тако уместо романсиране верзије Десанке Максимовић утицај Британаца

У Србији стави на пиједестал и да се Британци у Србији позитивно афирмишу како би се на тај начин усмерила будућност али и мењао ток историје .
Зато Мика са гнушањем и поносно одбија да снима такав филм тада и почиње хајка и претње која потиче из британских дипломатских кругова

Најгоре од свега што је то Мика Алексић изговорио у присуству високих дипломатских представника , а одговор је био да се све неће на томе завршити и да ће га то скупо коштати .
Нашта им је Мика рекао да је он свој живот проживео и да могу да му раде шта хоће и силно их извређао
शमशान में जब महर्षि दधीचि के मांसपिंड का दाह संस्कार हो रहा था तो उनकी पत्नी अपने पति का वियोग सहन नहीं कर पायी और पास में ही स्थित विशाल पीपल वृक्ष के कोटर में अपने तीन वर्ष के बालक को रख के स्वयं चिता पे बैठ कर सती हो गयी ।इस प्रकार ऋषी दधीचि और उनकी पत्नी की मुक्ति हो गयी।


परन्तु पीपल के कोटर में रखा बालक भूख प्यास से तड़पने लगा। जब कुछ नहीं मिला तो वो कोटर में पड़े पीपल के गोदों (फल) को खाकर बड़ा होने लगा। कालान्तर में पीपल के फलों और पत्तों को खाकर बालक का जीवन किसी प्रकार सुरक्षित रहा।

एक दिन देवर्षि नारद वहां से गुजर रहे थे ।नारद ने पीपल के कोटर में बालक को देख कर उसका परिचय मांगा -
नारद बोले - बालक तुम कौन हो?
बालक - यही तो मैं भी जानना चहता हूँ ।
नारद - तुम्हारे जनक कौन हैं?
बालक - यही तो मैं भी जानना चाहता हूँ ।

तब नारद ने आँखें बन्द कर ध्यान लगाया ।


तत्पश्चात आश्चर्यचकित हो कर बालक को बताया कि 'हे बालक! तुम महान दानी महर्षि दधीचि के पुत्र हो । तुम्हारे पिता की अस्थियों का वज्रास्त्र बनाकर ही देवताओं ने असुरों पर विजय पायी थी।तुम्हारे पिता की मृत्यु मात्र 31 वर्ष की वय में ही हो गयी थी'।

बालक - मेरे पिता की अकाल मृत्यु का क्या कारण था?
नारद - तुम्हारे पिता पर शनिदेव की महादशा थी।
बालक - मेरे उपर आयी विपत्ति का कारण क्या था?
नारद - शनिदेव की महादशा।
इतना बताकर देवर्षि नारद ने पीपल के पत्तों और गोदों को खाकर बड़े हुए उस बालक का नाम पिप्पलाद रखा और उसे दीक्षित किया।