Women disproportionately experience gender based violence and aggression in the wild. Researchers wanted to see if the experience of men being harassed and catcalled in a woman's avatar could promote empathy and understanding. This experiment on 36 male students (average age of 23) was based on other studies that found similar results, including a study on male offenders of gender based violence — to test if first-person VR experiences as women could increase pro-social behaviors.
The students had "no prior experience" with interpersonal aggression or catcalling as victims or perpetrators, measured on a scale with a maximum threshold.
The scene began in a bedroom, where participants were able to move and see themselves as their avatar in a mirror.
In a control group, the participants were asked innocuous questions instead of being catcalled.
The study cited in the article is, in part, based on other research showing the pro-social, empathy-building outcomes using a similar system on people who commit gender-based violence. So, some hope there.
On the other hand, this is cross-posted to microblog memes where the incels have filed in to shout "bullshit" at peer-reviewed, published science.
The station in the study is modeled after the NYC subways. The platform is dimly lit, filled with virtual litter, with no barrier between the platform and tracks; it is an unsettling environment in its own right.
I wonder how much the environment imfluenced the results. I would imagine a test with a well lit, clean subway station with platform screen doors might lead to different results.
It would be interesting to test different environments.
Looks like the purpose of the study was to find out if people could empathize based on a virtual experience, so the scary vibes made sense. If they were measuring how much fear people experienced in different locations, that'd be a whole other thing.
That said, I've ridden rail transit in cities from Vancouver to London, I've never once seen barriers between the platform and the tracks.
They are called platform edge doors and they are common in Asia, and rare in Europe or the Americas. They make the platform a much more pleasant place. Full height walls and doors makes the platform be a normal interior space.
If you've travelled that far you have seen those doors. They are included on every automated people mover at airports. Securing the track area is required for driverless operation, so every automated people mover will have them The doors are seen as optional in most subways and light rail so they are often cut from the project.
Makes sense, I've never been to Asia and I was only in Europe for a couple weeks, so the only European airport I saw was Heathrow, where I took the metro.
I'm not disagreeing that it's safer to have a barrier, or saying that barriers aren't a thing, just that it's common enough not to have them to be used to it. I don't think about that danger. I haven't seen a space like that before, no.
I lived in Vancouver for almost a decade, where the trains are driverless and there aren't walls or barriers, even at the airport.
But I did just learn what an automated people mover is, and some of them are adorable.
just that it's common enough not to have them to be used to it
It's the difference between public transit as a public service vs. public transit as a profit-making venture (in some places) or at least as public service being "run like a business" (more common in the west).
As soon as "business" is uttered in the management of something, you get to cost minimization and life-saving measures tend to cost money. They're thus the first things cut unless forced otherwise by regulation.
Not always full height, but always high enough you can't easily go over them, yes. I'm actually shocked all the time now when I visit places like Toronto and Ottawa and see how unsafe the subways are.
20 Comments
Greercase@lemmus.org · 15 pts · 229d
This comment links to the article: https://lemmus.org/comment/15733715
Wren@lemmy.today · 13 pts · 229d
Reposting my comment here:
The article on Phys.org
The paper on Nature.com
Some very condensed info from the study:
Women disproportionately experience gender based violence and aggression in the wild. Researchers wanted to see if the experience of men being harassed and catcalled in a woman's avatar could promote empathy and understanding. This experiment on 36 male students (average age of 23) was based on other studies that found similar results, including a study on male offenders of gender based violence — to test if first-person VR experiences as women could increase pro-social behaviors.
The students had "no prior experience" with interpersonal aggression or catcalling as victims or perpetrators, measured on a scale with a maximum threshold.
The scene began in a bedroom, where participants were able to move and see themselves as their avatar in a mirror.
In a control group, the participants were asked innocuous questions instead of being catcalled.
LuckingFurker@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 229d
OK for real, is there some way we could crowdfund getting every cishet guy in the world into this? It feels like it would be a net positive
Sunshine@piefed.ca · 5 pts · 229d
Could be part of learning about consent.
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 229d
The problem is they wouldn't extend the awareness. That shit would be firewalled and they would complain to women about it.
Wren@lemmy.today · 7 pts · 229d
The study cited in the article is, in part, based on other research showing the pro-social, empathy-building outcomes using a similar system on people who commit gender-based violence. So, some hope there.
On the other hand, this is cross-posted to microblog memes where the incels have filed in to shout "bullshit" at peer-reviewed, published science.
hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 229d
The station in the study is modeled after the NYC subways. The platform is dimly lit, filled with virtual litter, with no barrier between the platform and tracks; it is an unsettling environment in its own right.
I wonder how much the environment imfluenced the results. I would imagine a test with a well lit, clean subway station with platform screen doors might lead to different results.
Wren@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 229d
It would be interesting to test different environments.
Looks like the purpose of the study was to find out if people could empathize based on a virtual experience, so the scary vibes made sense. If they were measuring how much fear people experienced in different locations, that'd be a whole other thing.
That said, I've ridden rail transit in cities from Vancouver to London, I've never once seen barriers between the platform and the tracks.
hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 228d
They are called platform edge doors and they are common in Asia, and rare in Europe or the Americas. They make the platform a much more pleasant place. Full height walls and doors makes the platform be a normal interior space.
If you've travelled that far you have seen those doors. They are included on every automated people mover at airports. Securing the track area is required for driverless operation, so every automated people mover will have them The doors are seen as optional in most subways and light rail so they are often cut from the project.
Wren@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 228d
Makes sense, I've never been to Asia and I was only in Europe for a couple weeks, so the only European airport I saw was Heathrow, where I took the metro.
I'm not disagreeing that it's safer to have a barrier, or saying that barriers aren't a thing, just that it's common enough not to have them to be used to it. I don't think about that danger. I haven't seen a space like that before, no.
I lived in Vancouver for almost a decade, where the trains are driverless and there aren't walls or barriers, even at the airport.
But I did just learn what an automated people mover is, and some of them are adorable.
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 2 pts · 228d
It's the difference between public transit as a public service vs. public transit as a profit-making venture (in some places) or at least as public service being "run like a business" (more common in the west).
As soon as "business" is uttered in the management of something, you get to cost minimization and life-saving measures tend to cost money. They're thus the first things cut unless forced otherwise by regulation.
Wren@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 227d
Yep. I agree. All I said was that it's common, not that it's correct.
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 1 pts · 228d
Not always full height, but always high enough you can't easily go over them, yes. I'm actually shocked all the time now when I visit places like Toronto and Ottawa and see how unsafe the subways are.
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 228d
Oh! Yeah Los Angeles is putting those in at a lot of stations (the entrance, nowhere near platforms, and you need to pay to exit)
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 227d
Wait, this was a test 'to see of video games are art'? For fucks sake what century is this?
Wren@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 227d
No?
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 228d
Isn't that what the yellow line is for? Where do they have more than this?
ZDL@lazysoci.al · 3 pts · 228d
Every subway in China. Like literally every one. Even the older ones like Beijing's and Shanghai's have been retrofitted with barriers.
cassandrafatigue@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 228d
Oh. Places with real transit. Okay.
hedge_lord@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 226d
Proposal: Any man who says "well I'd just take it as a compliment" or something like that gets to spend three days locked in the Simulator™