(Closed) Study results – engagement ring expectations based on attractiveness

posted 1 year ago in Rings
  • poll: Are you surprised by the study results?



    See comments

  • Post # 19
    992 posts
    Busy bee
    • Wedding: August 2019

    Ha, mine was super cheap because he just got a family heirloom reset, so I guess I’m a cow (since he didn’t shell out $$) and he’s a hottie (since I’m willing to take a cheap ring from him). 

    Post # 20
    538 posts
    Busy bee

    I heard of this before and to be honest I didn’t take the time to read the entire article, but what about the women (or men) who simply like bigger rings for purely aesthetic reasons? What about small but meaningful heirlooms? Plus as some mentioned we have moissanites ans other stones that allow bigger center stones and have nothing to do with money (you can get a crazy big morganite for a very reasonable price).Maybe we focus too much on finding a meaning to everything for no reason. Statistics can be manipulated to make them say what you want. I don’t know, I feel like this isn’t very relevant. At least that’s my opinion. 

    Post # 23
    1344 posts
    Bumble bee
    • Wedding: July 2019

    I’m more taken aback by the claim that 0.5 carats is a “measly carat speck of grit” (wut) and 1.5 carats is apparently a “boulder”…

    Post # 25
    338 posts
    Helper bee

    View original reply
    downonmulberry :  

    I think its not a function of attractiveness but the gap in perceived attractiveness between partners that have a corresponding ring size. So if a person perceives themselves as a 10 marrying a 4 versus a person who perceives themselves as an 8 marrying an 8 versus a person who perceives themselves as a 4 marrying a 4.

    The topic ‘Study results – engagement ring expectations based on attractiveness’ is closed to new replies.

    Find Amazing Vendors