↓ Skip to main content

Why Do the Karo Batak Prefer Women with Big Feet?

Overview of attention for article published in Human Nature, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 231)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Why Do the Karo Batak Prefer Women with Big Feet?
Published in
Human Nature, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12110-013-9171-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geoff Kushnick

Abstract

Men may find women with small feet relative to body size more attractive because foot size reliably indexes nubility-i.e., age and parity. I collected judgments of attractiveness in response to drawings of women with varying foot sizes from a sample of 159 Karo Batak respondents from North Sumatra, Indonesia, as part of a collaborative project on foot size and attractiveness. The data revealed a contrarian preference among the Karo Batak for women with big feet. The judgments were compared with the results of an existing cross-cultural study that found a preference for women with small feet in aggregate, but a mix of small- and large-foot preferences in the societies taken individually. Using contingency table analysis, I found that ecology and less exposure to Western media were associated with a preference for women with big feet; patriarchal values were not. The findings suggest that human mating preferences may arise in response to local ecological conditions, and may persist and spread via cultural transmission. This has implications for the concept of universality espoused in some versions of evolutionary psychology.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 15%
United Kingdom 1 5%
Luxembourg 1 5%
Unknown 15 75%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 25%
Student > Master 3 15%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 25%
Social Sciences 3 15%
Unspecified 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Other 2 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 107. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2014.
All research outputs
#36,013
of 5,041,086 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#7
of 231 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#989
of 93,964 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,041,086 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 231 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 93,964 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them