The 'Cheerleader Effect'; Group VS individual

     The "cheerleader effect", reffered to in the popular TV show how i met your mother, is a theory that being in a group gives the illusion of being more attractive. The author of the article Gauging the "Cheerleader Effect" discuses psychology, and what attracts us to particular people.The article suggests that walking in a group may actually be a good dating strategy. The text shows you how many people feel towards one another, and how we judge based on not only on physical appearance, but also the appearance of those around us. (hence the name; because cheerleaders often walk around in a group)

      The author proclaims that  "When shown in a group (whether big or small), the same person was rated as more attractive then when he or she appeared alone in a picture." This clearly shows that if you are alone in a photo, you will be judged more harshly than when you are with others. This seems rather unfair to me. Is it right that part of our initial assessment of a stranger is based on the looks of not only the appearance of the person him/herself, but of those AROUND HIM/HER? It seems that the author of the article is almost advising us to move around in, groups as to appear more attractive. I think that it is unfair, that we judge people in this way, and that it should not be encouraged.

    On their own, an observer is able to spot all our faults and physical shortcomings, however,  when in a group, the brain blurs each person together. "The researchers think that the brain is melding together the groups facial features into a composite average, mentally Photoshopping out all then idiosyncrasies that become obvious when examining just one persons face." We can conclude from this that the brain does not view each person as an individual, rather, it view each member of the group as only part of a whole. This is not at all a good thing, and not something that we should be taking advantage of. Instead of focussing on individual characteristics, we are only trying to see who looks better than those around them in a group. This is an instinct that, while natural, is not something we should use as a dating method. We should remember that everyone has their shortcomings, thats what makes us HUMAN. Perhaps this 'cheerleader effect' was once used to find the best available mate in a group of women, but today, in a more civilized age it is important to look at the individual.

edited Reading response

ELA    CTQ Number 5

Reading Response -Edited

 In life threatening situations, people show their true selves. The book 'No Safety in Numbers' by Daynba Lorentz is an exciting book, which takes place in a mall in the suburbs. On a busy Saturday a biological bomb in found in one of the mall's air ducts. The mall is locked down. Soon food and supplies begin to run out, and the people turn against one another. Although these people tend to form small, tightly knit groups, the groups themselves are in constant competition with everybody else in the mall.

     Early on in the book, when there is still food and the bomb isn’t such a huge problem, the people begin to form groups. For example, Ryan and his football team join up almost instantly. Mike says, " Stick with us!" and reassures Ryan that he will watch his back. This shows that even early on in the book, people begin to look out for one another and protect each other. These little groups are very tightly knit, and difficult to enter.

     However, these groups are ONLY looking out for themselves. When Ryan is beaten up by some boys (over some food), his group comes after the people who beat him up. Ryan's friend Mike says, "you mess with my family, you mess with me." Although this sounds endearing, this little vengeance fight results in one boy with a broken nose, and a few others unable to walk. This shows how the groups, although they watch out for each other, are in constant competition with everyone else in the mall.

The groups are also very distanced from other people. They are very unwilling to help others. When the flu breaks out in the mall, for example, Ryan saw a family being forcefully detained because they had some symptoms of the flu. When the little boy “began to sob uncontrollably,” Ryan wants to help. But Mike (the group ‘leader’) insists that they only watch out for themselves. Even though these people were in obvious need of help, Ryan’s group didn’t want to risk any confrontation. This seems incredibly selfish to me.

     In these types of situations, people show that deep down, they only care about themselves. All they want is their own survival. Although they may have formed small groups, they were in NO way united. In some cases, the groups fought against one another even if they needed to be working together. This book does not envision teamwork; rather, it shows how difficult it is for people to be selfless when their lives are in danger.