LA City Beat has a good cover story
on the science of matchmaking, the ethical questions and also does a pretty good job of taking it to eHarmony. It’s thorough with many not-read-before details, highly recommended.
Bullet points:
PerfectMatch matched 250 singles on an episode of Dr. Phil. They clearly understand get how to reach their audience. I’m enthusiastic in the hopes that this type of marketing and promotion will be embraced by other companies.
Ethical questions: Do these sites have an ethical obligation to guarantee that their tests are proven effective?
A full two screen are dedicated to discussing eHarmony, it’s Christian, anti-gay focus and links to Focus on the Family. I get lots of email from people pointing this out, perhaps it will force eHarmony to be more clear in their marketing about they types of people they want on their system. Certainly with all the hype behind the fundamentalist Christians, there won’t be any shortage of members for eHarmony.
Marylyn Warren, the company’s senior vice president, is careful to say that eHarmony is meant for everybody. We do not discriminate in any way. That’s not true and we all know it but that’s what marketing is for. They’ll spin this all day long if they have to until people walk away thinking eHarmony is all about lasting marriages.
PerfectMatch, True, and Yahoo! Personals all offer same-sex matching. And yet Dr. James Houran, chief psychologist of True, says his own research shows that gay couples are not seeking exactly the same things out of a relationship as straight couples.
It just so happens that heterosexual and homosexual couples … certainly agree on the recipe for compatibility, but they don’t agree on the relative amounts of those ingredients.
Houran is adamant that his test is the only truly scientific one on the net. True’s test measures 99 relationship factors to calculate an overall compatibility index score between two members, telling them the likelihood that they will get along. Angered by what he sees as his competitors’ lack of scientific discipline, he’s gone so far as to author an article in The North American Journal of Psychology detailing their failings.
Scroll down until you get to the major differences between the philosophies employed by PerfectMatch, True, and eHarmony. Interesting stuff.
Related posts:
{ 1 comment }
new on line dating and social networking method
Actually, many SAME online dating sites invented a proprietary test to measure personality and a way to compare and assign a compatibility percentage BETWEEN profiles.
I have invented a new on line dating and social networking method named LIFEPROJECT. This method uses a well know personality test instead, in DIFFERENT LANGUAGES, like 16PF5 (or similar). I have not invented a proprietary test, I have invented a HIGH PRECISION, HIGH RELIABILITY WAY TO COMPARE the report of the personality test of one client to others. (2 integers + 8 decimals)
LIKE THIS:
Name: Carol Doe, U.S. Citizen / sex: Female / age: 32 / test date: 25 October 2004
Norm: English US Combined 16PF5 Profile 16 personality factors
(A)Warmth : 6
(B)Reasoning : 7
(C)Emotional Stability : 6
(E)Dominance : 8
(F)Liveliness : 9
(G)Rule-Consciousness : 6
(H)Social Boldness : 7
(I)Sensitivity : 7
(L)Vigilance : 8
(M)Abstractedness: 7
(N)Privateness : 2
(O)Apprehension : 5
(Q1)Openness to Change : 8
(Q2)Self-Reliance : 7
(Q3)Perfectionism : 3
(Q4)Tension : 4
…………….
Name: André Montagn, French Citizen / sex: Male / age: 39 / test date: 29 December 2004
Norm: French Language 16PF5 Profile
(A)Warmth : 5
(B)Reasoning : 7
(C)Emotional Stability : 4
(E)Dominance : 8
(F)Liveliness : 7
(G)Rule-Consciousness : 4
(H)Social Boldness : 5
(I)Sensitivity : 6
(L)Vigilance : 4
(M)Abstractedness: 6
(N)Privateness : 8
(O)Apprehension : 9
(Q1)Openness to Change : 6
(Q2)Self-Reliance : 8
(Q3)Perfectionism : 4
(Q4)Tension : 4
…………….
Name: Helmut Fritz, German Citizen / sex: Male / age: 42 / test date: 07 January 2005
Norm: German Language 16PF5 Profile
(A)Warmth : 2
(B)Reasoning : 5
(C)Emotional Stability : 4
(E)Dominance : 6
(F)Liveliness : 3
(G)Rule-Consciousness : 8
(H)Social Boldness : 7
(I)Sensitivity : 6
(L)Vigilance : 3
(M)Abstractedness: 9
(N)Privateness : 9
(O)Apprehension : 8
(Q1)Openness to Change : 2
(Q2)Self-Reliance : 5
(Q3)Perfectionism : 5
(Q4)Tension : 6
…………….
Name: Carlo Giulio Mazzini, Italian Citizen / sex: Male / age: 35 / test date: 09 January 2005
Norm: Italian Language 16PF5 Profile
(A)Warmth : 7
(B)Reasoning : 7
(C)Emotional Stability : 6
(E)Dominance : 8
(F)Liveliness : 8
(G)Rule-Consciousness : 7
(H)Social Boldness : 6
(I)Sensitivity : 5
(L)Vigilance : 8
(M)Abstractedness: 7
(N)Privateness : 4
(O)Apprehension : 5
(Q1)Openness to Change : 7
(Q2)Self-Reliance : 7
(Q3)Perfectionism : 3
(Q4)Tension : 4
…………….
Name: Inacio Nascimento, Brazilian / sex: Male / age: 47 / test date: 15 January 2005
Norm: Portuguese Language 16PF5 Profile
(A)Warmth : 4
(B)Reasoning : 9
(C)Emotional Stability : 5
(E)Dominance : 4
(F)Liveliness : 1
(G)Rule-Consciousness : 3
(H)Social Boldness : 4
(I)Sensitivity : 9
(L)Vigilance : 7
(M)Abstractedness: 8
(N)Privateness : 7
(O)Apprehension : 5
(Q1)Openness to Change : 6
(Q2)Self-Reliance : 7
(Q3)Perfectionism : 9
(Q4)Tension : 10
COMPARISON
BETWEEN Carol Doe, U.S. Citizen (New York) AND André Montagn, French Citizen (Paris)
== 74.79865772% PROBABILITY OF BEING COMPATIBLE
BETWEEN Carol Doe, U.S. Citizen (New York) AND Helmut Fritz, German Citizen (Bonn)
== 54.09395973% PROBABILITY OF BEING COMPATIBLE
BETWEEN Carol Doe, U.S. Citizen (New York) AND Carlo Mazzini, Italian Citizen (Torino)
== 92.55033557% PROBABILITY OF BEING COMPATIBLE
BETWEEN Carol Doe, U.S. Citizen (New York) AND Inacio Nascimento, Brazilian (Brasilia)
== 57.71812081% PROBABILITY OF BEING COMPATIBLE
LIFEPROJECT method
A NEW WAY TO KNOW PEOPLE
A NEW WAY TO MEET PEOPLE
A NEW WAY TO MAKE FRIENDS (on line dating)
A NEW WAY TO MAKE A NET (social networking)
http://mb.internetdatingconference.com/viewtopic.php?t=30
http://mb.internetdatingconference.com/viewtopic.php?t=134
LIFEPROJECT method is really innovative, is a new way to codify the results, that are independent of the language, of well known psycho tests used to evaluate personality and a new way to compare the codification of one test to the codification of the others. In LIFEPROJECT a person only contacts other persons that have been selected by the algorithm.
LIFEPROJECT is like 4 pieces puzzle.
1 is the psycho tests.
2 is the supercomputer or high speed server arrangement.
3 is the algorithm I have invented.
4 is the marketing scheme.
(niche market :
- persons that have been hurt in their feelings by others in many on line dating sites.
- persons that are searching for a multicultural on line dating.
- persons that have time to wait. (a year, or more).
And all of them have the same reason to pay a fee: This fee will work as a barrier to avoid free users, who could hurt their feelings.)
ABOUT psycho tests: Multi-language tests (like 16PF5 or similar)
Danish, Dutch, English for Australia, English for Canada, English for the United Kingdom, English for the United States, French (European), German, Greek, Italian, Norwegian, Portuguese (European and New World), Portuguese of Brazil, Spanish (Castilian), Spanish-American, Swedish & Turkish. coming soon: Chinese, English for South Africa, Finnish, Japanese.
source: http://www.16pfworld.com/languages.html
16PF5 16 personality factors and 5 big five by Dr. Raymond Cattell invented in 1949. Proved, approved and actualized using census 2000 figures. Over 50 years of experience.
The same tests that are used to evaluate candidates applying for a job.
ABOUT the algorithm I have invented:
The core task: to mathematically codify the tests reports using adapted quantum mechanics math equations. This result is disposed in a matricial form. Only one matrix for a client. A high speed server arrangement or a supercomputer using adapted quantum mechanics math and statistical equations condensed in an ALGORITHM, compares the matrix of one client with the matrices of the other clients.
For 100,000 clients needs over 5,000,000,000 of matricial comparisons.
For 1,000,000 clients needs over 500,000,000,000 of matricial comparisons.
For this method; 100,000 clients is the “critical mass”, i.e. after 100,000 different persons were charged, some proofs will be done to adjust the several coefficients of quantum mechanics math equations in the algorithm and it is also possibly to generate a new pair of equations to compare and find not only 95% or over of coincidences, but also a combination of coincidences and mismatches (compatible&complementary items) like 80% compatible and 20% complementary and so on. A combination of compatible&complementary items can be tuned/synthesized for the average of the data base. It is very reliable, 1 person will “match” no more than 3 in 100,000 or 12 in 1,000,000. (OR the 3 most compatible in 100,000 or the 12 most compatible in 1,000,000). If two clients “match” (95% or more affinity), the system tries to contact them.
ABOUT marketing scheme:
In LIFEPROJECT method, the message for a new/potential client is like this:
“If you are very tired of lies, tired of other methods that use tests or formularies invented by them; if you are tired of chat sessions and emails; if you are tired of speed dating, why don’t you try this new method that uses the same tests that are used to evaluate candidates for a job. When 100,000 clients in the data base were charged, the super/high speed computer will run an algorithm and 3 persons will be 95% or more compatible with you (or the 3 most compatible in 100,000). These 3 persons have NEARLY THE SAME PERSONALITY that you, they are PREDICTABLE for you, because they will act like you; so why don’t you contact them?, These 3 persons of 100,000 evaluated are better than the 99,997 others. It will be a really fascinating experience at low cost.”
LIFEPROJECT method == a really fascinating experience at low cost.
The on line dating future: Quality like off line chains, perhaps less photos, less instant messages, less chat, less videos, less speed; high reliability and high precision in on line dating techniques, creating demand of the service.
LIFEPROJECT METHOD is a DISRUPTIVE ALGORITMH that will allow to build an online dating data base that NEVER EXPIRES, because the personality is like a fingerprint. In LIFEPROJECT a person only contacts other persons that have been selected by the algorithm.
Because homophily dominates human attraction == PREDICTABLE PEOPLE
A good article about this question:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~atf/papers/chi2004_personals_short.pdf
BACKGROUND
Psychologists for decades have studied what characteristics people notice and seek in potential mates. Brehm et al. and Fisher provide an overview of the following factors in attraction: Proximity and familiarity are two of the most powerful determinants of attraction — those whom we see more often, and whom it is logistically easier to see, tend to seem more attractive (physically and otherwise). Physical attractiveness also plays a prominent role. Almost all cultures consider facial symmetry beautiful in both men and women, but preferences for other characteristics, like waist-to-hip ratio in women, vary somewhat with culture. People also irrationally associate other good characteristics with beauty, presuming pretty people to be smart and socially capable even when this is not the case. People are generally attracted to others who have demographics, attitudes, values, and personality traits similar to their own. (Contrary to the adage that “opposites attract”, homophily dominates human attraction. Most people seek people like them.) Online dating systems provide tremendously powerful tools for identifying people who match you in these traits.
LIFEPROJECT method DOES NOT USE Myers-Briggs Type Indicators (MBTI) NOR Regression Weights Method NOR Band Method with optimal range of sten (standardized tens) scores.
LIFEPROJECT uses QUANTUM MECHANICS MATH and STATISTICAL EQUATIONS
Different personality possibilities 1 x 10^16 More than persons exist in the world, that are nearly 6 x 10^9
Kindest Regards,
Fernando Ardenghi.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@argentina.com
Comments on this entry are closed.