"
Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."
First off, I would argue that this forum (myself included) represents a small subset of people who are extremely obsessed with the idea of "height" and potentially being "tall"; this does not just relate to one's own height, but also to the heights of others, and what the implications of height, being tall, and being short mean in general. People on this forum have used the words "height is all that matters to women" much to often. I am going to attempt to prove to you once and for all that this is not true.
I am going to show you guys some statistical findings related to height and physical attractiveness (the only real thing that matters to me), which shows that, while height matters significantly to women, it may not matter as much as you guys think (there are other things that matter as well). We get into this groupthink, that is self-reinforcing of our ideas and makes the whole LL community feel that height is SO important and that tall people are gods among men. Besides the fact that personality trumps height any day, height itself (as a physical feature) may not be as important as we think it is...
The Pubmed study (URL posted) is called
"Penis size interacts with body shape and height to influence male attractiveness".
Below, I present to you the study that was done to assess male attractiveness based on three criteria: Penis Size, Height, and Shoulder to Hip ratio: Here is an abstract from the study that might surprise you, and may slightly alter your overall perception of height, and why "the taller the better" is not necessarily true. Enjoy
RESULTS
Selection Analysis.
There were highly significant positive linear effects of height, penis size, and shoulder-to-hip ratio on male attractiveness (Table 1). Linear selection was very strong on the shoulder-to-hip ratio, with weaker selection on height and penis size (Table 1).
There were diminishing returns to increased height, penis size, and shoulder-to-hip ratio (quadratic selection: P = 0.010, 0.006 and < 0.0001) [“B” in Table 1] and, given the good fit of the linear and quadratic models, the optimum values appear to lie outside the tested range (i.e., maxima are >2 SD from the population mean for each trait) (Fig. 2). A model using only linear and quadratic selection on the shoulder-to-hip ratio accounted for 79.6% of variation in relative attractiveness scores (centered to remove differences among women in their average attractiveness scores).
The explanatory power of height and penis size when added separately to this model was almost identical. Both traits significantly improved the fit of the model (log-likelihood ratio tests: height: χ2 = 106.5, df = 3, P < 0.0001; penis: χ2 = 83.7, df = 3, P < 0.0001). Each trait, respectively, explained an extra 6.1% and 5.1% of the total variation in relative attractiveness.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3637716/#r15 
Author
Topic: Do we give height and "tall" too much credit? (groupthink phenomenon) (Read 2542 times)