Is eHarmony the secret to a happy marriage?

eHarmony certainly thinks so.

We've been hearing a lot lately about the 'landmark' new study that says marriages that begin online are longer and more fulfilling than marriages that begin offline. We've also heard plenty about the source of the study's funding: eHarmony.

And here's another crazy coincidence: the eHarmony-funded study also found that eHarmony is the best online dating site for long-term relationships. How unexpected!

Ok, all joking aside, eHarmony swears it wasn't involved in any of the data analysis and all the findings are completely objective. A study is a study, and the scientific side of my brain can't resist the urge to take a look at the research (biased though it may be). So let's dive in...

Where are couples meeting these days?

• 16% use online dating.
• 14% work together.
• 12% meet through friends.
• Others meet through social networking sites, school, and social gatherings (7% each).

Where else do people meet?

• Offline, couples meet in bars or clubs, through family members, at places of worship, and on blind dates.
• Online, couples meet in chat rooms, through other online communities, by instant messaging, and while playing multiplayer online games.

Where should you meet if you're looking for a long-term relationship?

• eHarmony, of course, ranks number one.
• "All other dating" comes in second, followed by "All other online."
• "All other" comes in last place.

Which dating site is responsible for the most happy marriages?

• Surprise, surprise - eHarmony is #1 again with 25.04% of marriages.
• Match.com is a close second with 24.34%.
• An assortment of small sites are responsible for 24.64% of online marriages.
• 13.09% are unspecified.
• 7.21% come from Yahoo! Personals.
• 5.71% start on Plenty of Fish.

On the flip side, what's the rate of break-up and divorce among recent marriages?

• 7.70% of recently-ended relationships began offline.
• 6.89% started on a dating site that isn't eHarmony.
• 6.23% began elsewhere online.
• And - naturally - only 3.86% of recent break-ups and divorces began on eHarmony.

Why do eHarmony couples have such a leg up on the competition? They say it's because:

• We're in love.
• We trust each other.
• We are happy.
• We are compatible.
• We have chemistry.

And it totally has nothing to do with the fact that eHarmony paid for the study. At all. What could possibly have put a wacky idea like that into your head?

See the infographic here and to find out more about this service you can read our eHarmony review.

Have you seen this video on what it will be like to date with Google Glass yet?

Yes, it's funny. Yes, it's over the top. But you've gotta admit that it makes you wonder...

Will the introduction of Google Glass actually have an impact on your love life? Would you be willing to date someone who wore Google Glass on a date? In a recent NBC News article, Rosa Golijan decided to give it a try.

First, the basics: Google Glass is a head-mounted computer with a camera, microphone, bone-conducting speaker, and a whole bunch of sensors. It connects to the Internet using a Wi-Fi network or by tethering to a smartphone. It's capable of pretty much everything your smartphone is: it can take pictures, record video, initiate video chats, send messages, search Google, and more.

Golijan jumped wholeheartedly into her experiment, wearing Google Glass for most of her waking hours. Her first impressions were positive. "It's difficult to imagine that bringing technology closer - to one's face - could actually help get it out of the way," she writes, "but that's what happens with Glass. It's tempered my smartphone addiction and reduced the amount of time I spend staring at a screen. I've even rediscovered the fine art of making eye contact with people."

So far, so good.

When she started wearing Google Glass in public, Golijan found that the attention it drew meant wider social possibilities. "Glass doesn't break the ice, it completely melts it," Juan Pablo Risso, a 32-year-old Glass owner, told NBC. At the moment, Google Glass is the ultimate conversation starter.

And that's where things got a little trickier for Golijan. One recent date took it well, but the interruptions from curious strangers could easily have sent the date south with a less understanding partner. Another date didn't enjoy the experience, demanding that she not start talking to anyone else until they'd gotten a drink.

Whitney Casey, a relationship expert for Match.com, says the one rule you need to follow when it comes to Glass and dates is simple: "Don't wear it." Sherrie Schneider, dating coach and co-author of "The Rules," agrees, at least on the first date. "You need to treat Google Glass like any special issue on a first date," she says. "You don't eat meat. You're a Republican. You had breast cancer. Google Glass."

Golijan isn't ready to give up on dating with Google Glass yet, though she does think it's important to follow a few guidelines:

• Don't be rude to strangers inquiring about Glass. It's just as bad as being rude to a server at a restaurant.
• Monitor your date's comfort level with Glass and adjust accordingly.
• Consider taking it off at some point - there's no reason to view your whole dating life through Google-colored glasses.

There are a lot of conflicting rules floating around about texting and dating - no wonder people find it so confusing. Do you text right away to show you're interested, or do you wait to show you're not so available? The answer is not always clear, so what should you do?

According to a recent study by Flirt.com, we shouldn't sweat it so much - and we shouldn't stick to the rules! Men and women view texting practices differently. And apparently, the men are much more open to the women they date reaching out to them.

Forty-nine percent of men and 39% of women will text a date the next day to let him/her know they had a nice time. However, 20% of women are still sticking to the old adage of waiting for him to text first (compared to only 5% of the guys).

Even though we don't have to worry about the three-day waiting period to call someone back, the study found it is good to be concerned about how frequently you're texting your date. Texting habits mean different things to each gender. For the women, if a guy sends more than ten texts a day she considers it to be creepy. Men on the other hand are more than happy to have her text - with almost half saying she should text as much as she wants.

Are you worried about looking too available? There's no need, ladies. A whopping 82% of men surveyed said they would be happy if after they suggested a date a woman let him know she was available to go out any night that week. Not so for the ladies. Thirty-eight percent of women said they'd be freaked out if a man made himself too available.

And how do you sign off? Is it too risky to add an "xo" to the end of a text, maybe as a flirtation? According to the study, 48% of men and 41% of women aren't afraid of signing off with a little kiss. But steer clear of being too "cutesy." Almost 25% of men think that smiley faces are childish.

And what about the biggest complication when it comes to texting - whether or not you should break up with someone over text? Apparently women are a little more cold-hearted. Seventeen percent of them would break up with someone over text, compared to just 13% of men.

Flirt.com surveyed over 2,000 of its members for the study.

Looking for new ways to attract men? Well, if you're inked (or thinking about it), a new study finds that men are more than twice as likely to approach a woman with tattoos.

A study from the Université de Bretagne-Sud found that men consider women with tattoos more approachable, but also more promiscuous. They admitted they would be more interested and likely to talk to her if they thought they could have sex with her right away.

For the study, researchers had 31 men identify the 11 "most attractive" participants from a pool of 58 candidates. The chosen participants would then visit area beaches - 10 trips each with a temporary tattoo and 10 without.

The tattoo the women used were the same, based on the typical tattoo of college-aged women: a butterfly on the small of the back.

The women with ink were solicited 23.67 percent of the time, but when the same women didn't have tattoos, that average dropped to 10 percent.

It turns out that how quickly a man approaches a woman was also affected by whether or not she was inked. For women with tattoos, the average time it took for a man to approach was 23 minutes compared to 35 minutes without a tattoo.

As part of the study, a male researcher at the same location would approach young men who were near the female participants in the study. The men were asked to rate the likelihood of the woman agreeing to a first date and having sex on a first date. Researchers agreed the evidence was clear after speaking with them: men see tattooed women as more promiscuous, which was a compelling reason they had to approach.

If you're already inked and aren't interested in hooking up with men, don't fret. While this study might point to potential problems with men hitting on you, you're the one in control here. You put boundaries in place on your dates, not the men you date.

And if you're not sporting any tattoos? Don't get one just so guys will be more willing to approach you.

We all make choices about how to present ourselves when we're dating, so be careful if you might be sending out the wrong message. In the same way tattoos might indicate promiscuity, so can revealing clothing, or being overly flirtatious. You'll have better success in the long run to be true to yourself and your own style, and own it.

If you've been on the Internet in the last week - and seeing as this is 2013, there's no way you haven't - you've probably come across an article proclaiming that online dating has scientifically been proven to be better than traditional dating.

Every feed I follow has been blowing up with the news that 1 in 3 Americans now meet their spouses online, and that a new study has found that marriages born out of online dating are more satisfying and less likely to end in divorce. The study's results were published in a paper called "Marital Satisfaction and Breakups Differ Across Online and Offline Meeting Venues" in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

"These data suggest that the Internet may be altering the dynamics and outcomes of marriage itself," said the study's lead author John Cacioppo, the Tiffany and Margaret Blake Distinguished Service Professor in Psychology at the University of Chicago.

Before you vow never to meet people in person again, it's important to note that the study was funded by eHarmony.com and Cacioppo is paid as a scientific advisor for eHarmony. Of course, everyone involved promises that eHarmony's backing did not affect the outcomes of the study in any way, but...

I know I'm not the only one looking at this new data with a healthy dose of skepticism.

I am, however, not so skeptical about a few of Cacioppo's claims. Online dating clearly has changed the face of relationships forever, and there's no going back. Cacioppo's research found that nearly 8% of marriages initiated offline end in breakups, while couples who meet online report divorce and separation rates of only 6%.

I'll be holding firmly onto my grains of salt until further studies - ones that aren't in any way connected to online dating sites - confirm his data, but I'm willing to admit that Cacioppo may have a point. Online dating may indeed lead to greater marriage satisfaction for a few key reasons:

1. The pool of prospective partners is significantly larger online, increasing the chance that you'll meet someone you're highly compatible with.
2. Singles who take the step of joining an online dating site may be more serious about finding a long-term partner than singles encountered offline.
3. Online daters may be more honest and up-front about who they are and what they're looking for (barring those infamous little white lies told in profiles), meaning that the connections they form are more genuine.

"It is possible that individuals who met their spouse online may be different in personality, motivation to form a long-term marital relationship, or some other factor," Cacioppo said in a press release.

That sounds like the perfect opportunity for another study - one that isn't funded by an online dating giant.

Related Article: The Secret To A Happy Marriage Is…Online Dating?

As if we don't hear enough about the perils of online dating already, this is the latest news about the potential dangers of looking for love online: your online dating site doesn't have to tell you that your date might be a murderer.

Eric Goldman, a Forbes contributor who also teaches Internet Law at Santa Clara University in California, cautions daters in a recent article on Forbes.com. He begins with the story of Mary Kay Beckman, who met a man named Wade Mitchell Ridley on Match.com in 2011. After dating briefly, Beckman broke it off.

Three months later, Ridley attacked Beckman in her home, repeatedly stabbing and kicking her. Later, it was revealed that Ridley already faced a murder charge in Arizona, where he was suspected of killing an ex-girlfriend with a butcher knife. Authorities also believe he robbed a pharmacy of painkillers earlier in the day. He was sentenced to 28-70 years in prison, where he died in May 2012.

Beckman survived the attack, and believes Match.com should take responsibility for the tragedy. She sued the dating site, but her suit was eventually dismissed.

Goldman thinks the outlook is bleak for suits like Beckman's. "Lawsuits against online dating sites tend to generate widespread press coverage going into detail about the victimization," he writes, "as stories like Beckman's prey on common fears about online dating." But although they generate outpourings of sympathy, they have historically been completely ineffective.

Beckman's suit was doomed from the start, says Goldman, because of a law that says websites aren't liable for user content. Plaintiffs have argued that they aren't suing dating sites over posts, but rather for failing to provide protection from dangerous users, but to date they've had zero success.

A similar case ruled that "all of Match.com's conduct must trace back to the publication of third-party user content or profiles. Match.com is a website that publishes dating profiles. There is nothing for Match.com to negligently misrepresent or negligently fail to warn about other than what a user of the website may find on another user's profile on the website."

Plaintiffs will no doubt continue their attempts to hold dating sites accountable for the actions of their members, and get increasingly creative in doing so, but Goldman believes their efforts are unlikely to be fruitful. "I've never seen a successful 'failure to warn' argument make any progress in working around" the law, he notes.

The best hope is that the websites will care enough about their reputation to voluntarily take measures to protect their members from harm.