It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Finger length may predict financial success

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 01:57 AM
Well it's official. Those who have been giving us the finger have bigger fingers!

A new study released by The University of Cambridge, it has been found that men with disproportionately longer ring fingers are statistically more likely to achieve financial success.

The length of a man's ring finger may predict his success as a financial trader. Researchers at the University of Cambridge in England report that men with longer ring fingers, compared to their index fingers, tended to be more successful in the frantic high-frequency trading in the London financial district.

Indeed, the impact of biology on success was about equal to years of experience at the job, the team led by physiologist John M. Coates reports in Monday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The same ring-to-index finger ratio has previously been associated with success in competitive sports such as soccer and basketball, the researchers noted.

AP/Technology (

This apparently is due to increased fetal exposure to the Androgen hormone and to some degree a greater generation of testosterone.

Looking only at experienced traders, the long-ring-finger folks earned 5 times more than those with short ring fingers.

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:00 AM
You just beat me to it!

Need to get up earlier methinks!

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:21 AM
oooohhhhhh pleeeeeeeeeeeeeese...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this all they have to spend their money on at the University of Cambridge?

Oh ok, well I am financially screwed than....BTW, this theory is right up there with the size of a man's foot determines the size of his...well you get the idea lol

I have never heard of anything so ridiculous and NON scientific in my life - ppft!

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:28 AM
So big macho men tend to be richer and more successful?

So all the stereotypes are true?

That's all this skinny androgynous beanpole needed to hear this morning.

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:42 AM

Sorry for the one liner.

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:46 AM
reply to post by schrodingers dog

My apologies Shrodinger's, my diss is not to you, you found an article that is interesting, however, my response is to the headline, it was just the first thougt I had when I read the thead topic. So, now I have read the article, and I still say, whatever.

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 02:59 AM
reply to post by space cadet

No worries sc.

As WatchNLearn said I just find it interesting what universities are spending their money, time, and effort researching.

I am not qualified to make a determination as to the validity of their findings but they sure look to be taking this seriously enough.

I can just see the idiots at human resources of banks measuring finger size as part of applications. Like the old doctors who used to measure cranium size.

I wonder what part of women's bodies has to be larger to affect financial success?

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 03:13 AM
So that's what happened.
Damn my stubby digits!

posted on Jan, 13 2009 @ 01:57 PM
From the same article cited in the OP ...

In the new study, the researchers measured the right hands of 44 male stock traders who were engaged in a type of trade that involved rapid decision-making and quick physical reactions.

Over 20 months those with longer ring fingers compared to their index fingers made 11 times more money than those with the shortest ring fingers. Over the same time the most experienced traders made about 9 times more than the least experienced ones.

Looking only at experienced traders, the long-ring-finger folks earned 5 times more than those with short ring fingers.

OK, so comparing like for like, those with longer ring fingers are five time better at making money than those with shorter ring fingers.

You know what I said earlier is actually now beginning to seem like a real possibility. Imagine a new set of studies which attempt to associate physical traits with a range of "success" criteria culminating in identifying the physically "perfect" man/women for any specific task. So that in the end a set of measurements of one's physical traits can be used to "orient" that said person to a specific life/career path.

And once that ball gets rolling on the level of physical traits, how far behind are the same studies based on chromosomes or DNA?

To tell you the truth, what started as a thread questioning the wisdom and choices of some university studies has now taken me to a much more sinister realization.

[edit on 13 Jan 2009 by schrodingers dog]

new topics

top topics


log in