Michael Norton, Assistant Professor At Harvard Business School - Online Personals Watch: News on the Online Dating Industry and Business

« Thanks To Our Sponsors | Main | Cosmopolitan Pairs Up With Men’s Health For User Dating »

Comments

Fernando Ardenghi


Mr. Brooks, please do not forget those Researchers [Ariely, Norton, Frost, etc] suggested how to IMPROVE Online Dating Sites 1.0 / 1.5 and 2.0 [with virtual dates] and NOT how to INNOVATE in the Online Dating Industry 3.0!!!

Online Dating 1.0: First Generation "Browsing/Searching Options, Powerful Searching Engine"

Online Dating 1.5: Hybrid; "Unidirectional Recommendation Engine"

Online Dating 2.0: Second Generation "Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engine"

Online Dating 3.0: Third Generation "Compatibility Matching Algorithms"


Other Researchers also suggested other proposals to IMPROVE Online Dating Sites 1.0 / 1.5 and 2.0

Choo, Hortacsu, Hitsch, also Ariely (2006), suggested Gale_Shapley algorithm, General Equilibrium Theory and Non_cooperative Game Theory to explain stable marriage as an economic function (as a complex mental process).

papers:
* "What Makes You Click? — Mate Preferences and Matching Outcomes in Online Dating"
* "Matching and Sorting in Online Dating"
* "Who Marries Whom and Why"
* "Lifecycle marriage matching: Theory and evidence"
* "What matchings can be stable? The refutability of matching theory"
* "Equilibrium matching with ageing and uncertain careers: who marries whom and when?"

Gale_Shapley algorithm, General Equilibrium Theory and Non_cooperative Game Theory do not take into account temporal patterns of romantic relationship development nor personality traits.

Brozovsky & Petricek suggested Recommendation Engines based on the User-User and Item-Item collaborative filtering algorithms.

paper:
* "Recommender System for Online Dating Service"
"User-User and Item-Item collaborative filtering recommenders significantly outperform global algorithms that are currently used by dating sites [offering only Browsing / Searching Options, Powerful Searching Engine].
A blind experiment with real users [at a proprietary site named ColFi - exclusively designed for the experiment - where 111 users rated 150 photo-profiles, then two recommendation lists of top 10 profiles were generated] also confirmed that users prefer collaborative filtering based recommendations to global popularity recommendations [of 2 Czech online dating sites: ChceteMe (no longer exists now in 2009) and LibimSeTi]."

-------------------------------------


How to INNOVATE in the Online Dating Industry 3.0 ?


Interested readers should see these NEW & FRESH Scientific Papers:


PAPERS FOR 2009 at the 2009 biannual mini-Conference of the International Association
for Relationships Research (IARR), hosted by the Kansas University Close Relationships Interest Group (CRIG).

New Directions in Research on Close Relationships: Integrating Across Disciplines and
Theoretical Approaches, with a particular emphasis on cultural, neuroscientific, evolutionary, and health perspectives.

* "Comparing Assortative Mating and Life History Strategy as Predictors of Relationship Outcomes"
Sally Olderbak

".... When tested together in the same model, the couple's life history strategy not only predicted their level of assortative mating, indicating couples with a slower life history strategy are more assortatively mated, but was also the strongest predictor of relationship outcomes, indicating a couple's life history strategy may be more important
than their level of assortatively mating."

* "Relationship Science and Internet Matching Services"
Sue Sprecher

"Millions of single adults go to dating websites to search for partners. Although there are many types of Internet dating sites, some use a scientific approach to matching (e.g., eHarmony). These sites require members to complete lengthy questionnaires that were developed based on insights from the field of relationship science. Members are then matched based on what has been referred to as love or matching algorithms. Such matching formulas claim to be based on scientific principles and are translated into computer programs that can sift through the volumes of data. Although Internet dating sites have brought greater public awareness to the science of relationships, questions that need to be addressed include: What is the science that is being used and how effectively is it being used? How can we forge more connections between commercial dating websites and relationship science so that both benefit, as well as the singles who are seeking a compatible match?"

* "Personality, similarity, and marital satisfaction: Assessing a new tool.***"
Roberto Nihil et al.

"..... Results show that similarity in other-reported data predicts a better satisfaction. Finally, we suggest that conceiving personality in a less fragmentary way than it has been made over the past century could offer new ways to explore partner's similarity."

***"L.A.B.E.L. (List of adjectives in binomial form or as Likert scales): an assessment model of personality with universal aims"

* "The Role of Personality Similarity on the Dating Relationship Quality of Americans and Taiwanese"

Tsui-Feng Wu and Susan E. Cross, Yun-He Chou, Arnold Kong and Wen-Hua Hsieh.

"Personality similarity between couples is a very popular topic, which has been shown to positively associate with Americans' dating relationship quality (dating satisfaction and commitment). Personality similarity, however, may play a less important role in the relationship quality of Taiwanese than of Americans, because Taiwanese may motivate to adjust themselves to their partners and have less need to find similar partners (Heine & Renshaw, 2002).To estimate personality, we used both Western and Chinese indigenous scales: Big-Five Scale and Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory. Data were collected from 195 American and 184 Taiwanese college students who were in a romantic relationship. Results of simultaneous multiple regression analyses indicated that personality similarity significantly predicted Americans' dating relationship quality. However, personality similarity did not predict relationship quality of Taiwanese. Those results were confirmed by two moderating analyses in which culture moderated the relation between personality similarity and dating relationship quality."


* "The Relationships Between Love Style Similarity, Conflict Management and Relationship Satisfaction"

Cheng Wei Chuan, Jeaw Mei Chen

"... dissimilar couples had worse relationship satisfaction and adopted less compromising or integrating strategies and more avoiding than similar couples. ..."

-------------------------------------------------


PAPERS FOR 2010

Society for Personality and Social Psychology Conference in January 2010

2,043 posters/papers to analyze.

Here the ones I recommend to read!


"Relationship Quality and Personality Similarity: Differentiating Distinctiveness and Normativeness"
Madison Barfield

"Relationship Quality, Personality, and Response to Relationship Transgressions"
Yanna J. Weisberg

"Personality correlates of different romantic intentions in speed daters"
Ashley M. Vivlamore

"Using MySpace increases the endorsement of narcissistic personality traits"
Elise Freeman

"Who are you on Facebook? The role of personality and gender in online social networking sites"
Nicole Muscanell


"ePersonality: Differential perceptions of personality during online and real-world social interactions"
Oshrat A. Hodara

"Creating Shorter Personality Measures: Incorporating Item-Level Validity Diagnostics"
Fred Oswald

"Workers Behaving Badly: Personality at Age 18 Predicts Workplace Deviance at Age 32"
Kimdy Le

"If It Walks Like a Duck and Talks Like a Duck: Replication and Construct Validation of Proverb-Based Personality Dimensions"
Heather A. Haas


"The Positive and Negative Marital Qualities Scales and Relationship Satisfaction in Newlywed Couples"
Matthew Shaffer


Kindest Regards.
Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
[email protected]

David Evans

Fernando chill out already. I hope you realize that your repetitive comments are scaring off most of the online dating industry. Make your point in a sentence or three and move on.

Who in the world spend 7 hours a week writing dating emails? They need a dating coach.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Research

  • Dig Deeper - Research Categories

We're Social

  • Facebook  X   Youtube Linkedin