First, markus/plentyoffish is changing business strategies in some ways and so what?!!! Match did it, eHarmony did it, Yahoo Personals did it. What does it matter if markus has changed his mind about the value of compatibility tests. After all, the tagline to his blog is “adapt or die.”

Second, good questions, Fernando. now about you answering them about your own compatibility test idea. i have seen repeatedly rebukes of your notion that the 16PF will save the world of online daters. where’s your evidence that the 16PF predicts successful relationships and that your matching equation is superior?

also, your cries of “foul” that the pof test serves up generalizations is crazily off base. ALL personality tests and like minded ilk produce conclusions based on generalizations. there’s nothing “wrong” with that; in fact it is the norm. i actually applaud pof for admitting this fact and letting people know upfront or explaining why reports can contain information of varying levels of accuracy.

Third, i am not in a position to judge if one test is better scientifically than another, but i agree with Dave that it seems that pof addresses topics similar to other tests. maybe that’s because most love doctors draw from the same research!

the pof test is not pretty looking and the name sucks, but boy has it hit a nerve around here — again markus seems to be doing something right.

peace out

“the Plenty of Fish Compatibility Predictor (POFCP) – the only tool of its kind to match you to people worldwide. ”
They must be joking: “match you to people worldwide” I suppose it is only for USA and Canada, but they should use different test versions for different countries!

“non-native English speakers to understand” ???
Uhhhhh, see for example the 16PF5 Languages and Norms
English for Australia and the Norm for Australia.
English for Canada and the Norm for Canada.
English for India and the Norm for India.
English for South Africa and the Norm for South Africa.
English for the United Kingdom and the Norm for the United Kingdom.
English for the United States and the Norm for the United States.
Portuguese (European and New World) and the Norm for Portugal.
Portuguese of Brazil and the Norm for Brazil.

“Validation of the POFCP was done using a national sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics as members of the Plenty of Fish community.”
Uhhhhh, shouldn’t they had used a stratified random sampling procedure using sex, race, and age variables that reflect the 2000 U.S. Census figures for the U.S. test version?
and another stratified random sampling procedure using sex, race, and age variables that reflect the 2000 Canadian Census figures for the Canadian test version?
and so on, so on

“This is the only known relationship test where the test scoring and matching algorithm are based in the statistical gold standard of modern test theory”
????? and the test used by True ??

“4. Why is the feedback sometimes very different from how I see myself?
The feedback is not meant to suggest that that everyone who is high or low on a personality dimension is exactly the way described. Indeed, the feedback was based on AVERAGE scores for people high, moderate, and low on each personality dimension. This means that the feedback could be less accurate for individuals whose scores are in between the moderate and high, or moderate and low scores. If you feel the feedback did not match you very well, this could be one reason why.”
Oh!, what does that mean? They are saying the whole precision is less than you could had achieved searching by your own?.

“5. Why does the feedback sometimes give contradictory information?
Sometimes the feedback will give respondents apparently contradictory feedback. This is an unfortunate consequence of making generalizations. Quite often, individuals cannot be captured by the general trends derived from analyses of large numbers of people. Of course, while our generalizations do get it wrong sometimes they tend to get it right more often than not. ”
Oh! that is terrible

Who is/are the brain/s behin that compatibility test & algorithm?

Kindest Regards,

Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com

“the Plenty of Fish Compatibility Predictor (POFCP) – the only tool of its kind to match you to people worldwide. “
They must be joking: “match you to people worldwide” I suppose it is only for USA and Canada, but they should use different test versions for different countries!

“non-native English speakers to understand” ???
Uhhhhh, see for example http://www.16pfworld.com/languages.html
Languages and Norms
English for Australia and the Norm for Australia.
English for Canada and the Norm for Canada.
English for India and the Norm for India.
English for South Africa and the Norm for South Africa.
English for the United Kingdom and the Norm for the United Kingdom.
English for the United States and the Norm for the United States.
Portuguese (European and New World) and the Norm for Portugal.
Portuguese of Brazil and the Norm for Brazil.

“Validation of the POFCP was done using a national sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics as members of the Plenty of Fish community.”
Uhhhhh, shouldn’t they had used a stratified random sampling procedure using sex, race, and age variables that reflect the 2000 U.S. Census figures for the U.S. test version?
and another stratified random sampling procedure using sex, race, and age variables that reflect the 2000 Canadian Census figures for the Canadian test version?
and so on, so on
like http://www.16pfworld.com/keyinfo.html

“This is the only known relationship test where the test scoring and matching algorithm are based in the statistical gold standard of modern test theory”
????? and the test used by True.com ??

“4. Why is the feedback sometimes very different from how I see myself?
The feedback is not meant to suggest that that everyone who is high or low on a personality dimension is exactly the way described. Indeed, the feedback was based on AVERAGE scores for people high, moderate, and low on each personality dimension. This means that the feedback could be less accurate for individuals whose scores are in between the moderate and high, or moderate and low scores. If you feel the feedback did not match you very well, this could be one reason why.”
Oh!, what does that mean? They are saying the whole precision is less than you could had achieved searching by your own?.

“5. Why does the feedback sometimes give contradictory information?
Sometimes the feedback will give respondents apparently contradictory feedback. This is an unfortunate consequence of making generalizations. Quite often, individuals cannot be captured by the general trends derived from analyses of large numbers of people. Of course, while our generalizations do get it wrong sometimes they tend to get it right more often than not. “
Oh! that is terrible

Who is/are the brain/s behin that compatibility test & algorithm?

Kindest Regards,

Fernando Ardenghi.
Buenos Aires.
Argentina.
ardenghifer@gmail.com