Dating apps make dating even harder

The year is 2017, and human beings are connected to each other in more ways than ever. The information age has changed every aspect of life from the way we buy groceries to the way we date. Today we can share data, ideas and dating profiles at lightning speed with a few clicks. When it comes to love however, I fear that in our attempt to make our world more connected- we have made a Faustian compromise.

In my years of working with people in their dating lives as a matchmaker and dating coach, I have seen so many burned out by online dating. It got me thinking: do dating sites and apps actually hurt us when it comes to making romantic connections? If so, what have they gotten wrong?

But the world doesn’t need another dating app!

Do a quick search and you will find hundreds if not thousands of dating apps and sites ranging from the legacy-monster Match.com to the ultra-niche- farmersonly.com, to the sexually specific threesome app. There seems to be something for everyone- no matter what their tastes or proclivities. Online dating is not new- in fact, it was one of the earliest use cases for personal internet use. Match.com launched in 1995- well before many American households even had a PC, let alone a dial-up connection.

What this means is that In the tech industry people say the dating space is both “saturated” (many companies competing) and “mature” (been around for a long time). These are not complimentary terms when it comes to evaluating opportunities. Entering a saturated and mature market is a typically looked upon as a non starter. So why am I here? Ruling out the most obvious (and perhaps likely) answer of insanity- let me explain.

More options do not equate more success

Dating tech companies exist because users have an unfulfilled need for human connection. As social animals- it is surprising so many of us are seemingly unable to form romantic connections. Because of this; the real question any company attempting to deliver a solution is: why is romantic chemistry so elusive?

If having access to huge databases of profiles made finding love easier then people wouldn’t be struggling so much- and they are struggling.  It seems fairly obvious when looking at the problem in this way- current solutions are not solutions at all. In fact, having endless perceived choices makes the task of finding true connections more daunting than ever.

More choices do not make our lives easier. More choices do not increase our odds at fulfillment. This is the so-called “Paradox of Choice” as coined by American psychologist Barry Schwartz. His research showed that  the more choices consumers have, the more trouble they have making a selection and the less satisfied they are with what they choose. Choosing a human mate is much different than choosing a jelly flavor (what Schwartz used in his experiment, link below), but the psychology is very similar.

When you see a person in the flesh- you see a human being. When you see a profile in a group of 1,000 profiles- you see a commodity. Commodities are bought and sold based on the value determined by market fluctuations. Dating sites and apps have greatly contributed to creating a society where people look at each other this way. As a result, many users aren’t keen on choosing one option because they aren’t sure what the “market” will look like in the future.

The technology that was supposed to make connections easier has ended up making them much more difficult to hold down. When Someone believes there are always more viable options a few clicks away, it decreases the value they place on the relationship they are currently in. (Rowland S. Miller; Link below)

Dating apps and sites define success incorrectly

OKCupid, Tinder and other dating sites determine a “match” successful by two users mutually exchanging at least 3 messages back and forth. Ask any single person if they would define their dating success this way, and the answer you will get it NO. Users define success by meeting and connecting with someone in person. These apps are supposed to be means toward that end but instead have largely become an end in and of themselves. Anybody who has spent days and even weeks chatting with someone they never met can affirm this.

I am telling you something you may already know: users spend hours and hours swiping and messaging without yielding great results. People often tell me that online dating is like a “full-time job” and I understand why they feel that way.

The greatest predictor of success in dating is how many in-person interactions a person can get with people who might be options for them. We use apps and sites to do this, but in reality- it would be a much greater return on time investment just to get ourselves in close proximity these people and let human nature take over from there.

Dating apps do not help us do this. They replace dating as we once knew it  (meeting and connecting with people in person) with something much more shallow and unfulfilling (swiping and texting with people we will probably never meet in person). I am not claiming that nobody meets in person from dating sites- of course they do. It just takes an incredible amount of work to get there, thus making dating harder instead of easier.

There is hope- because there are people everywhere

“If dating apps aren’t helping, why are they so popular?” You might ask. Well, that’s simple: because there are no alternatives, and making a database of profiles was easier than solving the true problem. The true problem is: meeting people in person is actually challenging. The problem was never a lack of options to sort through, it was that people struggle in meeting each other face-to-face in the real world. Lucky for you, this is a problem I am working on as we speak with my app called Paper Airplane. Stay tuned!
In the meantime, go outside of your comfort zone. Get off your dating apps and go places where there are other humans. Say hello to someone, smile at someone. Be a person, not a profile- it’s much more fun!


Links:
“More Isn’t Always Better” By Barry Shwartz. Harvard Business Review, June 2006
“Inattentive and Contented: Relationship Commitment and Attention to Alternatives” by Rowland S. Miller. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1997