Prior research by Lenton and Francesconi provides some insight into why people might struggle with speed dating. They found that when the number of participants in a speed-dating event increases, people lean more heavily on innate guidelines, known as heuristics, in their decision making. In essence, heuristics are ingrained rules of thumb that allow us to save effort by ignoring some of the information available to us when we evaluate our options. For example, in those events with a relatively large number of participants, the researchers discovered that people attend predominantly to easily accessible features, such as age, height, physical attractiveness, and so forth, rather than clues that are harder to observe, for example, occupation and educational achievement.
These rules of thumb are evolutionarily adaptive, however, and not necessarily a bad thing. Millions of years of experimentation with different heuristics, conducted in a range of environments, have led us to learn which ones are most effective. Very generally speaking, good looks and youthful vigor are indeed useful metrics for mating because they signal health. Yet if lifelong love is what you are after, a smorgasbord of singles might propel you to make stereotypical selections.
Know Your Environment
One problem with both speed dating and online dating may arise from how we hunt for the things we want. Some items can be found with a simple search targeted at objective qualities. So-called search goods include laundry detergent and vitamins. Other desirables can be identified only through an interaction; these “experience goods” encompass movies and puppies.
In a study published in 2008 psychologist Dan Ariely of Duke University and his colleagues set out to demonstrate that when it comes to dating, people are the ultimate experience goods. They asked 47 single men and women to list the qualities they look for in people they would consider either marrying or dating. Independent evaluators then rated the characteristics as either searchable or experiential. In both conditions, men and women mentioned more experiential traits—nearly three times more for dating partners and almost five times more for spouses.
Ariely and his co-authors argue that criteria such as “the way someone makes you laugh” or “how your partner makes you feel good about yourself” are harder to define in an online profile than a fondness for kittens, baseball or crème brûlée, leading people to make judgments based on searchable characteristics. They note that using attributes such as weight and height to choose a partner is similar to trying to predict the taste of a food based on its fiber content and calories. A similar argument could be made for speed dating, in which the conversation can resemble an interview more than a fun experience.
In an upcoming book, Lenton, Fasolo and their colleagues summarize the key message of recent research: how we end up choosing our wives, husbands, boyfriends and girlfriends is a function of the social environment in which the decision is made. To conserve both mental exertion and time, we judge potential partners by comparing them with others we have encountered rather than by measuring them against some cognitive ideal. In a 2006 study, for example, Raymond Fisman of Columbia University and his colleagues showed that when participants in a speed-dating event were asked what they seek in a potential partner, their answers did not match what they ended up finding attractive during the event. What we select depends on what else is being offered.
Becoming aware of that malleability in our taste, and gaining control over our decision-making strategies in response, is known as ecological rationality. It is equally important when choosing between jams at the grocery store and partners to date; the only difference is the stakes.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentThe third word of the article explains the writer's problem. Any/everyone else's?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe barest inkling that you can develop LOVE in 180 seconds is beyond absurd.
[but you sure can get funding for a whole new set of idiotic questions]
It appears to be a scam on the women. Since men are perfectly ok with other less permanent outcomes, it is a great deal for them all they have to do is be interesting enough in 180 seconds and boom, he has at a minimum a short time of fun and who knows what else. The women on the other hand are probably really looking for more because so few men out there are actually useful, especially if a woman wants a male that thinks beyond his beer guzzling in a sports bar cro-magnon nature.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow finding a partner online has promise, not as a dating scene but finding someone because it opens up a much larger pool of potential mates and you can spend months vetting and asking questions before meeting. Choosing between online sites and speed dating, I think the months of vetting wins out.
As someone who went through this process several years ago, I can tell you that it's not about "love" at first sight; it's about meeting someone who you might be able to love in the future. Speed dating, like online matchmaking, eliminates one of the biggest problems in finding an available prospect. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Speed dating allows you to meet in-person, but severely limits the contact. Online dating services allow more advance communication, but the first face-to-face meeting is always a bit of a surprise. Unlike meeting in a bar or at work, speed dating and online services both require a positive response from each participant before things can move forward. It's a bit benefit; you're never faced with that awkward "You're just not my type" conversation. (In the end, I met someone online. We were married last April.)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see a few people touch on it now and again, including in the article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSpeed dating, internet dating, normal dating, all of that is pretty irrelevant.
This here paragraph is all you need. People are unsure of what type of person, hair, eyes, mood, career they are after in a partner so NEED to spend time talking to as many people as they can to identify what it is that they want. Once a person has identified this (or these things), it is really EASY for them to go through with a quick chat and identifying people of further interest.
Im not sure if speed dating helps people acquire this emotional knowledge, im going to go out on a limb and say 50/50.
Speed dating is great for Phase 2, you know what youre after, you just need to go through everyone in your area to find the closest equitable match.
Job done.
If you really want to help people you NEED to make a phase 1 dating opportunity, perhaps 10 minutes where people can really spend the time thinking, asking, delving, into psychies and philosophies of different types of people. These mental maps then set the ground work for Phase 2.
As a P.S if you will. Phase one for joe average can take 1-2 years and 300-500 different people involved.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom experience, all the Mr. Wonder-fulls I thought would work, failed in the long stretch. Almost 20 years with Mr. Opposite, yep I'm happy. Goes to show, what you think you want, may not be.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBob Hope said in a quote, "I have been married 34 years, and I have considered murder many times, but divorce never.
I think he's got it right.
The average person doesn't need more that a few dates.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSelf-aware types are always too selfish.
as per my experience speed dating in some of the way is better. if you are getting your true love in very short time period then all goes correct... read this blog to find true love... http://bit.ly/OcYKkv
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this