>> Student beauty and grades under in-person and remote teaching
It considers the effect of attractiveness on male and female students. In fact, it finds the beauty premium persists in online learning for male students but not for female students. I won't speculate as to why the title has been so heavily editorialized, but it seems to have significantly lowered the quality of discussion.
Edit: This'll teach me to read the whole study. The conclusion has this to say:
>This finding implies that the female beauty premium observed when education is in-person is likely to be chiefly a consequence of discrimination. On the contrary, for male students, there was still a significant beauty premium even after the introduction of online teaching. The latter finding suggests that for males in particular, beauty can be a productivity-enhancing attribute.
This isn't what people aren't usually interested in. Saving time by providing interesting conclusions at-a-glance is sensible.
I do see how the conclusions have been editorialized away from the actual findings, for no apparent reason.
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
Most people think this is obvious. I'm still wondering why it hasn't been corrected. Instead, it got yanked.