I suspect it leads to a market failure – but I agree that we need a fully funded study.

I suggest that a university pays us each $100,000 plus expenses to test the impact of alcohol on ourselves

Ahhh very true – asymmetric information. Maybe we need people to get an objective rating and wear it around their neck when they go into town to solve this issue …

Actually – that wouldn’t be in my interest 😛

“If you ask most people what it means, I’m guessing almost everyone will say it’s women looking better after a few drinks”

That is the kicker isn’t it – I would define it as “I would be more willing to sleep with X following alcohol”. Hence the different conclusions between the study and myself.

The fundamental difference then is how it influences peoples preferences – which in itself is another interesting and important issue.

“Perhaps men don’t want to admit that their judgement changes, so blame it on their visual perception?”

Indeed! I think the study proved that on average it would have to be the result of a change in preferences.

Indeed – that was the gist of the post. Hence why, given my definition of beer goggles, I felt they were being a bit hard on the hypothesis that beer goggles exist 🙂

What is “Coke dick” – and how would you study it?

It is definitely the way I would use beer goggles – I think definitional consistency is just so important when working with a major social issue such as this.

I’m not really sure what those shows are – but it sounds awesome

I think a full study is needed: until we get more complete data the best we can do is just attribute it all to animal spirits.

I believe that the reduction of inhibitions from alcohol is pretty well documented and proven. Thus after a few beers a guy may well be

a) more likely to express a previously unvoiced favourable opinion on someone (the barmaid),
b) more willing to act on that opinion; and
c) less concerned about the opinion of others.