What is my ratio? Photocopy

Braemar on Wed Jun 24, 2015 1:24 pm

Hello people,

I have been measuring my 2d and 4d of my right hand multiple times, but I never get the same outcome. What do you think, is my 2D-4D? I'm male. Is it high?

**Martijn (admin)** on Wed Jun 24, 2015 11:06 pm

Hi Braemar,

Thank you for your effort, but this type of photo is not equal to a 'photocopy'.
Why not measure your digit lengths yourself?

(The picture below describes how to do it)

PS. At first sight your 2d:4d digit ratio appears within the upper side of the normal range of a white male, but I am not sure... because the angle of the camera could generate an effect that is not really there.

Braemar on Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:51 pm

Hello Martijn,

Measured according to your picture, these are my results:

Right hand: around the 0.97 mark
Left hand: around 0.95

What does upper side of the normal range mean according to you?

**Martijn (admin)** on Thu Jun 25, 2015 2:34 pm

Braemar wrote:Hello Martijn,

Measured according to your picture, these are my results:

Right hand: around the 0.97 mark
Left hand: around 0.95

What does upper side of the normal range mean according to you?

Thanks for sharing your measurements Braemar.

An average 2d:4d digit ratio of 0.96 is just perfectly normal (I have to withdraw the aspect of the 'upper side' which I mentioned earlier), I don't think that one can attribute much meaning to this - though in a way one could describe this to be a positive sign (without any specified meaning).

I hope this is helpful?

wave

Braemar on Thu Jun 25, 2015 6:13 pm

I agree!

This was helpful, thanks.

Further: I read that self-measured 2D-4D is often higher than with more precise/digital methodies.
So I think there is some confusion about what is average, depending on the methode a research is using.

**Martijn (admin)** on Thu Jun 25, 2015 7:11 pm

Braemar wrote:I agree!

This was helpful, thanks.

Further: I read that self-measured 2D-4D is often higher than with more precise/digital methodies.
So I think there is some confusion about what is average, depending on the methode a research is using.

Well... yes, internet studies involving large populations have suggested that 'self-reported digit ratios' tend to produced higher values in large groups; however, one can wonder regarding the cause of this effect - I don't think that one should translate those results into the conclusion that (non-expert) self-reports are always higher than measurements made by (expert) researchers.

thinking

...I suspect this effect might be partly explained as follows: non-experts might be inclined to make less precise measurement, which could more easily lead to concluding that the length of the both fingers is close to equal - which might lead to 1.0 measurements in hands where the ratio is actually 0.99 or 0.98 ... or 1.01 or 1.02 - but the amount of people falling in the 1.01 & 1.02 category is much smaller than the 0.98 & 0.99 category (see picture below).

What is my ratio? Photocopy

What is my ratio? Photocopy

Re: What is my ratio? Photocopy

Re: What is my ratio? Photocopy

Re: What is my ratio? Photocopy

Re: What is my ratio? Photocopy

Re: What is my ratio? Photocopy