Comments on: Online Dating is All About The Data

By: Online Dating Insider Links: March-16-2009 â€” Online Dating Insider

Online Dating Insider Links: March-16-2009 â€” Online Dating Insider — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:48:24 +0000

[...] algorithms against its pool of users to match potential mates. If this sort of thing interests you, Online Dating is All About The Data goes into more [...]

By: David Evans

David Evans — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 14:50:34 +0000

Kerry, can you share additional insights gained from your Focus Group, I’d like to hear more.

Markus, good points. I find the discord between what psychologists say and what actually occurs on dating sites fascinating.

By: mauricev

mauricev — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 07:19:59 +0000

Why do you think people not looking for marriage are looking for incompatible people? This implies you know what makes people compatible and if personality tests are making this prediction better by 10%, then that seems to imply you are based this point on some other criteria. What is that, exactly?

Why did POF drop Myers-Briggs over what it has now?

A problem that makes filtering smokers from non-smokers and the like difficult is that some sites including POF allow indeterminate responses such “Prefer Not to Say” or even no answer at all.

By: Markus

Markus — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:57:16 +0000

1. On a free site you expect massive amounts of users and options. Giving users 10 matches a month would net you very little revenue/pageviews consumers wouldn’t take it seriously.

2. When users aren’t looking for marriage they purposely pick people they are not compatible with and all those compatibility tests end up being useless. Personality tests allow you to predict who will get together about 10% better than chance for the top 10% of matches… Just filtering out smokers from not seeing non smokers gives you far greater return.

By: kerry on

kerry on — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 00:40:42 +0000

Last month my colleagues and I organized a Focus Group in San Francisco to get candid comments and insights on impressions and opinions on 3 On Line Dating Sites ( Match.com, Yahoo Personals and E-Harmony).
While we failed to analyze algorithms – we did have an animated discussion regarding
results, cost effectiveness, customer service.
Unanimous – Eharmony was deemed to have zero customer service and great advertising and was the least desirable site.
Match – the monster- .com was rated highest on ease of use, cost, size of membership and Yahoo Personals was rated by several people as a good beginner site. JDate came up in frequent conversation as the most effective and aggressive site in attempts to link singles.

By: Anand

Anand — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:51:30 +0000

Hi David,
That in itself has so much of data that I hardly have to go anywhere else to check the authenticity of online dating, however, that does not restrain people like us to dat online. Well all good & evil together make this world existent & I choose to be good & daring.
Some real good elaborate information about some sites & this is another one to be amongst the great one’s.

Thanks for the info & have a nice day.

How to Get a Date – Jack Reed

By: Gary Stock

Gary Stock — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 14:52:18 +0000

I’m relieved to see that Chemistry.com — perhaps the most poorly designed of the dozen major services I’ve surveyed — is rarely mentioned in discussion of serious dating sites. I captured the frustrating experience of using Chemistry.com, hoping they’ll be motivated to correct some of the absurd problems… Enjoy!

By: How to Create an Online Dating Profile - Part II

How to Create an Online Dating Profile - Part II — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:34:17 +0000

[...] Online Dating is All About The Data [...]

By: Fernando Ardenghi

Fernando Ardenghi — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 18:14:34 +0000

Robert L. Mitchell from computerworld wrote the article.
“Dan Ariely, who researches ways to improve online dating, says matching algorithms are a placebo”
He is right because many actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods are only fueled by big marketing budgets and not by serious scientific evidence. No one had proved its method matches persons who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance, astrological destiny, personal preferences, searching on one’s own, or other technique as the control group.

Dan Ariely is wrong when he suggests virtual dating to improve online dating sites. Virtual dating is terrible slow and boring, looks like *SpeedDating with Joe 90 puppets*.

“Plentyoffish.com …. it does offer some matching capabilities if users want them, CEO Markus Frind says he doesn’t promote them — and he is disdainful of the complex matching algorithms offered by some competitors.”

Also its owner said “.. On a free site users expect unlimited choice. This is why things like personality testing work so well on paid sites and on free sites are considered more of a joke”

I think
PlentyOfFish tried to be the next ‘free eHarmony’ but made 3 mistakes.
1) PlentyofFish Relationship Chemistry Predictor based on a “46-item relationship test that assesses individuals’ standing on five broad dimensions of personality.”
2) failed on how to validate the test. “Validation of the POFCP was done using a national sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics as members of the PlentyofFish community” /// “the only tool of its kind to match you to people worldwide”
3) failed on how to calculate “similarity” between prospectives mates.

Regards,

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