Studies

Our smartphones have changed the way we do...well, pretty much everything...and dating is no exception. Some people remain dating purists, committed to only communicating via phone call, abiding by the 3-day rule, and never, ever using an app to meet someone. Others have fully embraced the new technological era, and are probably swiping their way through matches on Tinder as we speak.

I have no doubt that both sides have valid points, but frankly I prefer to consult someone (or in this case, something) a little less biased: research. A new study examining mobile's impact on dating and relationships has shed a teeny bit of light on how our smartphones affect our love lives. Here's what the study found:

• To call or not to call? That is the question. When asked, women tend to say they prefer men to call before meeting face-to-face, while men say they feel a call is too forward. The data, however, tells a slightly different story. Around 1/3 of both sexes agree that it's less intimidating to ask someone out via text, although 68% of singles say they still want to chat on the phone or in person to schedule dates. We modern techies typically type, but seeing as confidence is widely considered to be the most attractive trait in a partner, maybe the text is doing us a disservice. Perhaps we should opt for the proactive approach and pick up the phone.
• Stop with the 3-day rule already. If things didn't go well on your date, put everyone out of their misery and end things sooner rather than later. Just do it like the nice, responsible adult you are, please - don't be one of the 50% of singles who said they would consider breaking up with someone they were casually dating with just a few swipes on screen, or the 24% who said they would end an exclusive relationship via text. On the other hand, if things went well, make your feelings clear in low-pressure way. A simple thank you text sent within 24 hours of a good first date keeps you on your date's radar and opens the door for further flirty conversation.
• Your smartphone speaks louder than words. The iPhone vs. Android battle is fierce, and it turns out which side you fall on reveals insights into your personality and behaviors. Android users are apparently the politer daters - more likely to pick you up at home, pay for the first date, and send a post-date text. They're also more trusting of their partners - nearly 50% said they would allow someone they're dating to look through their phones!

So are smartphones good or bad news for our love lives? It's hard to tell. But what we do know is that they aren't going anywhere any time soon, so we're far better off learning to love them as another tool in our dating arsenals.

Trust PlentyOfFish to come up with a headline as provocative as "New Research Study: The Most Desirable Singles Of 2014." They certainly have a flair for drama, I'll give them that. And I couldn't help taking the bait...I'll give them that, too.

POF wondered who was getting the most attention on the site, so they deployed their research team to analyze the messaging data from over 81,000 user profiles and 1.8 million messages among the 25 to 35 age group. Their mission was to uncover the leading indicators determine whether a user is more or less likely to receive a message. The good news is: the study actually has some good news.

"Women are no longer interested in the bad boy who doesn't want to settle down," the study reports, "and men are increasingly seeking out educated women who are financially independent." Good news, indeed. On the other hand, gender roles are still firmly intact: "women still place high importance on a man's income and men still give precedence to a woman's age and body size." Not such good news, but there's always hope for change.

Key findings from the study include:

• Women between the ages of 25 and 26, receive 14.4% more messages.
• Women who are 33 years old receive the fewest number of messages.
• Women who have a graduate degree receive 6.45% more messages.
• Women who are Catholic receive 20% more messages.
• Men who earn between $100,000 and $150,000/year receive 42% more messages.
• Men with doctorate degrees receive 33% more messages.
• Men who want children receive 23% more messages.
• Those who 'Prefer Not to Say' if they want children receive 21% fewer messages, and those who "Don't want children" receive 42% fewer messages.

Put it altogether, and you've got a pretty clear picture of the ideal man and woman for 2014. The ideal woman is Catholic, thin and 25 years old. She has earned a graduate degree of some kind. She is a dog owner who drinks often or socially. And she has been in a relationship for at least 3 years, but not longer than 8 years.

The ideal man for 2014 is Christian with brown hair and an athletic build. He has earned a doctorate degree and now makes between $100,000 and $150,000 per year. And, perhaps most importantly, he is actively looking for a relationship.

Much to my surprise, I'm finding myself unexpectedly un-offended by the findings. I was expecting completely unachievable standards...instead what I got was a bar that's set high, but doesn't feel completely impossible. Is the study crazy? Am I?

To find out more about this dating site you can read our Plenty of Fish review.

I dream of the day when I can stop writing about this.

I spent years hearing about the social stigma that surrounded online dating. Then it was "Hooray - the stigma is over!" And now media outlets are halfway back to where they started, pulling a massive "Just kidding!" on all of us. These days, the headlines proclaim that, although we are using dating sites and mobile apps to find partners more than ever before, we're still kinda embarrassed by it.

Good grief. Can't we just make up our minds already?

The latest to jump on the Just Kidding bandwagon is The Washington Post, which recently published an article that bluntly addressed the problem: "As dating apps grow in popularity, people still feel some stigma."

"More and more people are doing it," the article begins, "but no one wants to talk about it. On the record, that is." There's no doubt about the first half of that statement. The recent Pew study on online dating found that 11% of American adults have given it a try - a figure that shows a massive jump from the 3% it was at five years ago. Among Internet users who were currently single and looking for a partner, 38% had decided to give online dating or mobile apps a go.

Yet, according to the same study, 21% of Internet users also agree with the statement: "People who use online dating sites are desperate." That's an eight-percentage-point decline from the Pew study in 2005, but still...ouch. Why are we still so inclined to pass judgment on those who use their laptops and smartphones to find love? Especially when we've probably tried it ourselves (or at least been tempted)?

"I think people don't like to admit that they are having trouble in their romantic life," said Eli Finkel, a social psychology professor at Northwestern University. "That concern is misplaced. It is totally normal to figure out who is compatible for you." Finkel, who published a critical analysis of online dating last year, has seen everything online dating has to offer, from the highest highs to the lowest lows, but he remains a firm supporter. "In general," he said, "it is a great thing that exists."

On the ground, however, feelings are still mixed. The Washington Post spoke to one man who said that he and his friends consciously keep online dating out of most of their conversations and off their social media profiles. "We don't want to put something that is supposed to be like a dating, personal ad into our real world," he says. "I think that delineation, that separation from online-date persona and in-person social situations, is a real thing."

Another man praised the anonymity offered by dating services, because he doesn't think the world is ready for people like potential bosses to search his name and see it tied to the latest dating mobile app. "More and more people are having those conversations," he said. "But we're still not at the point where everyone is comfortable."

Online daters routinely choose matches based on criteria that are highly correlated with political preferences.

That sounds like a good thing, right? It seems only natural that we would gravitate to partners who share our political beliefs, and it stands to reason that relationships made up of partners with the same political leanings are more likely to last.

But social scientists fear that, where politics are concerned, our online dating habits are ultimately making us less tolerant citizens. A report in the journal Political Behavior suggests the increasing use of online dating and social media sites is preventing people from meeting potential partners who don't share their political preference, because it's easy to filter out potential partners with differing viewpoints. Once you move past the idea of improved compatibility, what you're left with is more couples that lean toward political extremism.

It doesn't stop there. Not only are such couples more likely to shift to the ideological extremes because they lack access to contradictory opinions, they are also more likely to have children who hold the same ideologically extreme positions. And what do you get when you put it all together? A more polarized America, where fewer and fewer people are able to understand how others could possibly think differently from themselves.

Now that's a scary thought. And possibly the plot to the next best-seller dystopian novel.

The importance of mixed political partnering cannot be understated. When political views in a relationship are mixed, the individuals involved tend to be moderated by their partners and less fixed in their ideas. One might even change their party identification in order to match the other's preferences, or because conversations with their partner have genuinely changed their beliefs. But even if no such change occurs, people tend to be far more tolerant of opposing views when they are exposed to divergent opinions from people they hold dear.

We all want to live in a world of more tolerance, don't we?

The report also notes that the demographic makeup of the people who are most likely to meet their partners online are upper income college graduates - a.k.a. the exact same people who are most likely to vote, contact their congressmen, and be members of the interest groups that influence Washington lawmaking.

What consequences will it mean for democracy, if online dating causes our political process to become even more divisive than it already is? And how can "opposites attract," if they're never given the chance to?

What does Netflix have to do with online dating?

No, it's not the fact that spending a lonely Saturday night solo with your Netflix queue makes you think "I should really give online dating another try."

Actually, that might be true too, but that's not the connection we're talking about here. What we're talking about is algorithms. In the same way that Netflix uses an algorithm to recommend movies a user might like by tracking that user's viewing history, online dating sites use a person's contact history to recommend partners with whom they might be more compatible.

Kang Zhao, assistant professor of management sciences in the Tippie College of Business at the University of Iowa, and doctoral student Xi Wang were part of a team that developed a more successful online dating formula. The team used data provided by a popular online dating service. They examined 475,000 initial contacts involving 47,000 users in two US cities over 196-day period.

Out the 28,000 men and 19,000 women studied, men were far more likely to initiate conversations. Men made 80% of the initial contacts, only 25% of which were actually reciprocated. To improve that rate, the researchers developed a model that recommended more suitable contacts based on two factors:

• A user's tastes (determined by the types of people the user contacted in the past)
• Attractiveness/unattractiveness (determined by how many of those contacts were returned and how many were not)

As it turns out, the combination of taste and attractiveness do a far better job of predicting the success of a connection than the self-reported information online daters enter into their profiles. Why is that? Some online daters are deliberately misleading while others, Zhao theorizes, simply might not know themselves well enough to identify their real tastes in a partner.

Zhao says the existing model for online dating algorithms leads to a return rate of about 25%, but claims that his team's model could boost that rate to 44%. According to the researchers, their model performs best for males with athletic body types connecting with females with athletic or fit body types. The model also works well for women who indicate they "want many kids" and for users who upload a large number of photos of themselves.

So it looks like you'll have no trouble finding a date for next Saturday night if you're an exercise enthusiast who looks forward to breeding and can't stop uploading selfies to Instagram.

A recent survey from Harris Interactive of 5,517 UK citizens found that one in 12 (8%) users of social media sites have been the victims of online abuse in some form or another. That part of the story won't surprise anyone who's spent even a marginal amount of time on the Internet. We've seen time and time again that when you put people behind a screen name, the anonymity creates a sense of invincibility and depersonalization that makes it easier to bully others.

The part of the story may be a surprise to some is the response we are taking to online abuse. Only a third (35%) of participants in the study said they reported their abuse to the social media platform on which it took place. Half said they would have reported it, if only they knew how. Another 12% said they chose to respond to the problem by turning the situation around and bullying their abusers.

"It's interesting to note the high percentage of people who say they would have reported the abuse had they known how to, or if the process was simpler," Lee Langford, research director for telecoms, media, technology and entertainment at Harris Interactive, said. "More steps need to be taken by networking sites, such as Facebook, Twitter and Ask.fm, to increase the effectiveness of reporting tools to prevent trolling."

Another survey, conducted by campaign group Bullies Out, found that 50% of their response pool had been victims of cyber bullies, some of whom were as young as seven years old. The CEO of BeatBullying, Emma-Jane Cross, believes both the problem and the solution lie with the social networking sites themselves. "Social networking sites need to take their users' safety seriously," she said, "which includes making reporting procedures much clearer and ensuring a swift response when abuse is recorded."

The difficulty in reporting abuse on websites is that it isn't just used for reporting abuse. Even the system for reporting abuse is abused. In many cases, a disgruntled user files an unwarranted abuse report simply to get another user in trouble and exact revenge. There is no system in place to distinguish malicious abuse reports from real abuse reports, meaning that many are never taken seriously.

So what can you do? We can't eradicate abuse from the Internet completely, but there are a few steps that can be taken to decrease the likelihood of bullying:

• Only post things you want the public to know. Once something is online, it is no longer under your control.
• Guard your personal information closely, and ask your friends to do the same. Request that they not post personal info, negative comments, check-ins, or any other information that you're not comfortable sharing.
• Don't say or do anything online you wouldn't in person. It may seem easier to express yourself when you are not face-to-face, but don't forget that online communication has real-life consequences.
• Always report inappropriate behavior, harassing messages, and abusive comments to the site administrators. Even a small amount of action is better than no action.