All of us, at least once, no matter how much we profess to love dating, have wished we could just snap our fingers and magically make the perfect partner appear.

Well…I have good news and I have bad news. The good news is that researchers at the University of Iowa believe they may have found the secret to online dating success. The bad news is that no magic is involved, and snapping your fingers probably won’t help.

The key, says the University of Iowa team, is for online dating sites to match users based on their past interests and actions, rather than on what they say they’re interested in. Think about your Netflix account. Netflix recommends movies based on what you’ve watched and the amount of time you spent watching it – so even if you profess to be a documentary lover, if all you watch is Gossip Girl, Netflix is probably going to suggest more CW-style teen dramedies.

Love and attraction are about as inexplicable as it gets, but that doesn’t mean scientists aren’t determined to try. More and more studies are attempting to uncover the secrets of attraction, especially when it comes to dating online, the big question being: if we figure out how the process works, can we learn to hack it?

Eli Finkel and Paul Eastwick of Northwestern University are two of the researchers studying online dating. In a breakthrough 2008 study, the duo found that, although men and women say they look for different things in a mate (men tend to prioritize looks, while women prioritize money), there’s no difference in the types of partners the two sexes actually choose in real life.

Finkel and Eastwick took their research farther, finding that there’s little association between the traits people claim that want in a partner and what they are actually attracted to when they meet potential dates face to face. In other words, that laundry list of must-haves and dealbreakers you’ve created is probably useless. At the end of the day, attraction and compatibility just don’t work like that.

In part, Finkel and Eastwick say, this is because the way we pair up on online dating sites is different from the way we evaluate our relationships later on. When we search through profiles on an online dating site, we’re in “joint evaluation mode,” in which we compare multiple potential dates against one another based on factors like income and attractiveness. On the other hand, when we make relationship decisions, we’re in “separate evaluation mode,” in which we judge only one person against the question “Are they right for me?”

In joint evaluation mode, we are likely to focus on the qualities we think are important rather than the qualities that are actually predictive of a healthy relationship. A profile on a computer screen is unable to convey the information we really need to know – hence the importance of in-person meetings, where the real work of assessing compatibility can begin. So although online dating sites do a great job of expanding the dating pool for users, they “do not always improve romantic outcomes; indeed, they sometimes undermine such outcomes.”

Still, despite their limitations, Finkel and Eastwick aren’t totally down on online dating services. When asked if he would use them, Finkel responded enthusiastically:

“Hell yes. It’s probably a bit worse than meeting people organically through one’s existing social network, but, outside of that option, it’s probably as good an approach as any. But it’s important to realize what online dating can and can’t do. It can expand the pool of potential partners, making available a whole slew of people who otherwise would have been unavailable. That’s a huge, huge benefit. But, at least thus far, it can’t figure out who’s compatible with you. That’s your job.”

Related Article: How To Date Like A Social Scientist: Part I

Like with online dating, Tinder seems to give females the advantage over males, at least in terms of your chances for getting a date.

Many guys complain that women have it better in the dating world because women can choose who they want to date, while guys are left saying "yes" to every woman's profile they view online or on an app like Tinder, just to improve their chances of meeting someone. (Women tend to be more picky, and say "no" to most men, probably because so many men just swipe right to everyone.) While online dating does seem skewed, apparently some tech geniuses have decided to make the odds work in the guys' favor.

Instead of manually going through all the matches Tinder sends his way, one techie decided that he could automate responses. According to website ValleyWag, former Microsoft developer Yuri de Souza details "how he reverse engineered Tinder to mass-like every girl on the network." He was sitting around one Sunday afternoon mindlessly swiping right on all of his female matches, hoping that one would swipe right back, when the idea struck him.

" [I] recalled my friend telling me how he would spend hours swiping right on Tinder just to accumulate as may matches as possible," de Souza told ValleyWag. "This had me thinking, why can't I reverse engineer Tinder and automate the swipes? After all, I'm pretty darn good at taking things apart!"

He was successful, and went to share his idea with other guys, only to find he wasn't the only one or even the first to try to game the system.

While it seems counter-intuitive to accept matches that you don't even see in the hopes of having more choice in who you want to date, this is the thinking behind guys looking to game the dating app system. (An article in New York Magazine last year naming the most successful online daters included a guy who admitted to saying "yes" to all women on Tinder to improve his chances, so this might have inspired a lot of guys to follow his lead.)

Other tech-savvy users have created shortcuts and automation to help them (and other guys) avoid the challenging task of looking through so many women's profiles. It turns out, people aren't even willing to spend the time to look at photos anymore, let alone read words in a profile.

What does this mean for dating? While it's understandable that guys are frustrated with their lack of choice (and womens' general avoidance of swiping right unless a man really intrigues her), is reverse-engineering the best way to meet a woman? Maybe apps like Tinder, fun and game-like as they are, are not the best avenue for many people. Instead of casting a large net and hoping to catch someone - anyone - why not try to focus on what you want? If you're putting it out there that you can't seem to meet a woman, then likely creating an automated way to say yes to everyone on Tinder isn't going to improve your game.

Maybe it's time to try another site or app that is more conducive to your search. Better yet, try something more old-fashioned. How about you approach a woman in person and ask her out? That will make you stand out from the Tinder crowd.

For more on this dating app please read our Tinder review.

Ashley Madison, the infamous dating website that makes its revenue from matching married people looking for affairs, has now admitted to spying on its own users.

A recent study published by the company was gathered from emails the sites’ users sent to each other under what they assumed was a condition of anonymity. According to a recent article in Time Magazine, Eric Anderson, a professor at the University of Winchester in England who conducted the study, claims that “women who seek extra-marital affairs usually still love their husbands and are cheating instead of divorcing, because they need more passion.”

“It is very clear that our model of having sex and love with just one other person for life has failed— and it has failed massively,” Anderson tells Time.

As it turns out, Ashlay Madison seems to have commissioned this study to boost its membership numbers - that is, to prove that almost every person in a monogomous relationship is looking to cheat, (and therefore should join their website). But for those who join the site on a strict condition of anonymity because they don’t want their partners to find out, this study is a direct infringement on their right to privacy.

So Ashley Madison is now in a tricky spot. Has it alienated its members, since now they know their emails are no longer strictly confidential, but subject to studies and read by a third party? Perhaps it was in the fine print when they joined the site, as most dating sites collect user information for the purposes of research. But most don’t analyze individual emails being sent back and forth between individual users.

As Time Magazine also points out, because of the nature of the dating site, and the fact that most of its members are being dishonest or lying by the mere fact that they are using the site for an extramarital affair, it calls into question the integrity of the data itself. Who knows what is true and what isn’t in each email? Who can say that anyone on the site is honest in any email they send to another site user?

According to Anderson, his data “included profile information that the women supplied when they signed up for the site (information not made available to other Ashley Madison users),” as well as information other users could see. “We also acquired all private message conversations that [users] had with men on the website for one month,” Anderson told Time.

The results of the study are still somewhat questionable. Anderson claims that in our sexualized culture, married folks could feel as if they are missing out when they are only having sex with one partner.

While this might be true for the users of Ashley Madison, it doesn't mean that it's applicable to the majority of married couples in the U.S.

Dating is a mystery, even for those who have been doing it for a while. Men and women misunderstand each other all the time when they are in relationships, so it’s only natural that communication problems would occur while you are just getting to know each other. Even before the first date!

Texting is a great tool to help us keep in touch, but it’s also created a whole new level of second-guessing and misunderstanding when it comes to dating. How many times have you stared at a text, trying to interpret it – even if it’s only “hey, what’s up?” We might think – is he asking me because he wants to see if I’m busy, or is he just being casual and reaching out to say hello? Then we might wonder: when should I text him back? Should I wait another five minutes, another hour, another day??

We drive ourselves nuts sometimes trying to figure out what’s going on in someone else’s head. But the truth is very simple: we don’t know. We can’t make assumptions. But we should also listen to our intuitions. If we find ourselves wondering too much about his motivations but afraid to ask, we should probably take that as a hint that you're not on the same page romantically speaking.

Following are some typical texts that men send, and what they really mean:

Hey, want to meet for a drink in an hour? [It’s 9:00pm.]

We might think he’s interested in us after all, but chances are, he’s not looking for anything serious and is seeing what you might be up for. Know what you want before agreeing or getting excited about seeing him again - the ball is in your court, so don't settle for less than the relationship you want.

It’s been fun hanging out, but I’m really busy right now with work. Maybe I’ll call you when I’m back in a couple of weeks.

Translation: I’m not really interested, but if I haven’t met anyone else I find attractive in the next two weeks I want to leave my options open. Time to date other people.

I don’t know…where do you want to go tonight?

This might be frustrating if you feel you are always planning the dates, but probably the guy hasn’t put much thought into where to go or what to do. He might spend a few minutes on Yelp before the date, or he might just want you to pick a place because he doesn’t want to take you somewhere you’ll hate. If you feel strongly about planning, then pick the place. If not, just leave it open and see what happens.

I had a nice time with you tonight.

This is a good thing – even if he doesn’t make plans right away for a second date, he’s letting you know he had a good time. Don’t get anxious about the timing, just let him know you had a good time, too. Then if you’re feeling motivated, ask him out instead of waiting for him to make the next move. It’s liberating.

There is quite possibly nothing in this world that perplexes us more than that strange collection of physical and emotional responses we call love. Humans have been trying to understand it since the dawn of…well…humans, in poetry, in art, in music, and in laboratories.

Writer Olga Khazan, in an article for The Atlantic, explores recent research being done into the murky, inexplicable world of online dating. These studies are designed to determine “what makes people desire each other digitally,” she writes, “as well as whether our first impressions of online photos ultimately matter.”

What do social scientists know that you don’t?

First, your face plays an important role in your romantic fate – which means yes, your photos matter. Some evidence suggests that qualities like extraversion, emotional stability, and self-esteem can be read in a person’s physical appearance. For example, writes Khazan, “Hockey players with wider faces, considered a sign of aggression, spend more time in the penalty box.” On a basic level, then, strangers viewing your dating profile may be making judgements about your personality on a subconscious level, solely from your photos.

But pictures are not the end of the process. Nuances of personality are only revealed through interaction, and looks can be deceiving. Personality may supersede looks as we get to know someone – or, explains Khazan, “at the very least, we tend to find people more attractive when we think they have good personalities.”

Frequently, we end up pairing off with partners who match us in level of attractiveness. Which brings up another question: should you date someone who looks like you? Psychologists say the answer is no. Khazan describes another experiment, in which “subjects who thought they were similar to one another were more likely to be attracted to each other, but that wasn’t the case for those who were actually similar to one another.” Where speech is concerned, however, couples with similar speech styles are more likely to remain in a relationship than couples with differing speech styles.

Then there’s the question on everyone’s mind: will online dating actually lead to a relationship? A 2008 study by Eli Finkel and Paul Eastwick at Northwestern University attempted to uncover the answer, and found it to be much more complicated than a simple yes or no. Online dating does give us more options than ever before but, as Finkel and Eastwick discovered, that isn’t necessarily a good thing.

Stay tuned for their discoveries in Part II.