Your question answered: Why eHarmony rejected you

A search for the phrase “eHarmony is based upon a complex matching system” (an excerpt of eHarmony’s rejection notice) in Technorati, a blog search engine, gives 50 hits in the last 45 days — This means that, once a day, someone is blogging that eH rejected them — that they flunked a personality test. At the same time, searching for “eHarmony reject” in Google gives 39,000 hits.

There really is something irksome about being promised “someone who will love you for who you are” and then getting a boilerplate rejection notice.

“Unable to match you at this time” — so what does this mean?

What irritates us about the boilerplate reason, which has been unchanged since 2000 when eH launched, is that it loves to be vague. We at eHarmony Blog hate vagueness, so, for you, we did some research.

Here is the most complete checklist of reasons why eHarmony rejected you:

Reason #1. You said you are separated or married on page 1. 30% of eHarmony rejects fall into this category, according to a May 2007 article in the Washington Post.

Reason #2. You said you are below 20 on page 1. 27% percent fall into this category.

Reason #3. You said you were married more than twice on page 1.1 “EHarmony also rejects anyone younger than 60 who’s been married more than four times,” according to the Washington Post article.

The cursed test still lets you go through all questions even if it knows on page 1 that it will reject you. And, look, it even has the irony to say, “If we find that we will not be able to match a user using these profiles, we feel it is only fair to inform them early in the process.”

Reason #4. Your answers don’t tally, i.e., (a) you clicked randomly or (b) for example, you put “1″ under Aloof on page 1, but checked “Outgoing” on page 6. 9% of rejects fall into this category.

Reason #5. You scored low on the following traits — eHarmony calls them dimensions:

  • Self-Concept (how you perceive yourself)
  • Emotional Status (feeling happy, fulfilled and hopeful)
  • Character (honesty and trustworthiness)
  • Obstreperousness (the black hole dimension)
  • Character (honesty and trustworthiness)2
  • Emotion Management: Anger (expressing negative emotions constructively)
  • Conflict Resolution (resolving issues).
  • Family Background (happy childhood and supportiveness of your parents)

If you remember, there are entire SECTIONS in the test exactly to ask if you have ill feelings in the last month, how you handle arguments and how good your relationship is with your parents. If a registrant just left an abusive relationship and she revealed her feelings in the test, well, instead of saying, “Sorry but you’re not emotionally ready to get married. We’d like to tell you what you need to work on, but we’re not your therapist,” eH rejects the registrant.

So what do I do next?

We want to tell you to open another yahoo or hotmail account today and retake the test, but we can’t. Instead we offer a gentle suggestion. May we suggest that you take a break first from seeking committed relationships. We mean, enjoy being single again (or for now).

[added after RG's comment below] Or we could be wrong. It’s possible that eHarmony is not for you. There’s nothing wrong with you; it’s just that the eH system was designed for a certain profile of people and match them for marriage — it isn’t ready for someone like you yet.

DO NOT read this as a judgement that there is no one out there for you. You know best what is best for you. DO NOT let the above generalisations discourage you from desiring and working towards a lifetime loving commitment with another person. If the above reasons do not apply, then we invite you to retake the test, now or after a few weeks or months. [/added]

Without sounding “holier than thou”, try this idea for size: If you’ve joined an matrimonial matchmaking site, would you want matches who are emotionally ready to be married? Would you like to be matched to someone who reveals psychological or emotional problems?

What do you think?

Check out our May 2007 poll: Do you agree with eHarmony rejecting people?

Do you like this article? Post a comment on Facebook

What others are reading right now

    Trackbacks & Pingbacks 4

    1. From The 29 Dimensions of Bunk: Part 2 – A Skeptic was Rejected « Gotham Skeptic on 26 Mar 2010 at 4:06 am

      [...] for rejection are varied. A general list of such reasons include  testing low in self-concept, emotional status (happiness), character [...]

    2. From eHarmony failure - PriusChat Forums on 30 Jun 2010 at 8:57 am

      [...] Re: eHarmony failure eHarmony is famous for rejecting people (especially if you hint at being a little sad on the questionnaire). Only annoyingly-obliviously happy people need apply. For what it's worth, there are other reasons here: Your question answered: Why eHarmony rejected you • eHarmony Blog [...]

    3. From But you might soil yourself from all the excitement « Phantom Mattress on 11 Apr 2011 at 3:18 pm

      [...] in addition to discouraging gays and lesbians, atheists, depression sufferers and the divorced, eHarm also advises women that it’s possible to be too independent. You could be sabotaging [...]

    4. From “Guess what? I have flaws.” | She Sings at the Table on 14 Jun 2011 at 7:13 pm

      [...] on eHarmony and they told me I was un-matchable. (Really! Some follow-up googling revealed this interesting explanation. [...]

    Comments 124

    1. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

      Those who have been rejected can get an explanation as to why they were if they read Dr. Warren’s books (Date or Soulmate and Falling in Love for the Right Reasons). Having read both, I have seen examples of the qualities they don’t want in a member in people that I know (where member is defined as someone they plan to try to match for life). You probably won’t like what you read and you probably won’t believe that it is true because it is hard to take a good look at yourself and see what characteristics the personality test that may have eliminated you. I doubt that those who were rejected will have the desire to do this, though.

      I’m having what I would call fairly lousy luck with the service but the psychological advice does make sense if you are honest with yourself and are capable of understanding it and is transfers to dating/life in general. I think that if you read enough psychology books and research, you would find that there isn’t anything particularly unique about what eHarmony is doing or what is written in his books, just that it is all in one place and easily tied together for normal non-psychiatrist human consumption.

      Posted 08 Jan 2008 at 8:52 pm
    2. eHarmony Blog wrote:

      I got a short note today from Leslie Rupiper, television news anchor and reporter of Station KSFY, Sioux Falls, South Dakota. She wrote,

      I am working on a television news story about people who have been rejected by eHarmony. I live in South Dakota and would love to find someone from this state, but would also be interested in talking with someone from Nebraska, Iowa or Minnesota. Can anyone help me?

      Can you? Respond here or respond directly to her email.

      Posted 31 Jan 2008 at 8:35 pm
    3. Lena wrote:

      Could also be age or education. I’m 40, never married, stable, travel a lot, volunteer lots, but also have a PhD. EHarmony wouldn’t touch that!

      Posted 06 Feb 2008 at 9:29 pm
    4. jennab wrote:

      I wasn’t rejected by e-harmony, either was my bi-polar terribly angry friend. I have depression at times, and am not perfect and am older and never married. I don’t know why this would be happening to people. I do know that in an article about e-harmony the creator said that he wouldn’t accept depressed people because you want as healthy a person as possible. Then he says that he is Christian and wants to help marriage minded people find a mate. He also speaks highly of Jesus. I wonder if jesus would weed out the sad people. Anyway, if my friend wasn’t rejected this screening process is clearly not working.

      My friend, let’s just call him that, is verbally and somewhat physically abusive and meets lots of women on e-harmony who later tell him that they never want to see him again for “no apparent reason.” Also, the people that I’ve been matched with on this service have nothing in common with me and vice versa. It’s crazy how different these people are from me. I’m not a big fan of e-harmony. I canceled my subscription.

      Posted 04 Mar 2008 at 12:48 am
    5. Alysia wrote:

      Thanks for visiting mine. About the profile, my bad — the results of my personality profile were actually inconclusive.

      I get that eHarmony is trying to weed out the crazies to establish a legit community for people to find their soulmates. When I talk about the rejections I’m not so much talking about myself because as you point out I was not in need of their services and I am well aware of the fact that I have some maturing or ‘finding myself’ to do. But what about people who reach a certain age and find that they are just inconsistent people. To me there’s nothing wrong with that. So yeah, no harm, no foul on my part.

      But my contention is that eHarmony rejects people who deserve to find soulmates just as much as the next person.

      Like Emerson says: “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” Not to call consistent people who “know themselves” to be simple necessarily, but variety is the spice of life.

      As far as personality goes, I think if they used something like the Myers-Briggs everyone would get a shot at love. Maybe instead of saying “Everyone deserves love” it should be “Only people we deem fit to be in successful relationships deserve love.” Where do they get off determiniing that for themselves? Crazy folk need love too — just as long as it’s nowhere near eHarmony’s site. There’s something fundamentally hypocritical about that to me.

      Posted 15 Mar 2008 at 11:40 pm
    6. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

      “As far as personality goes, I think if they used something like the Myers-Briggs everyone would get a shot at love.”

      Interesting that you mention MBTI.

      Whatever they have developed is pretty close to it / seems to follow it. A match and I took the MBTI and while we were not the same types, we were two compatible types according to one of the reference books (which has a section on relationships) on the MBTI.

      If you weren’t ready for a relationship and answered the questions as such, then you have your answer as to why you were rejected. If you read Dr. Warren’s books, you get a better idea of why the “rejects” are rejected and why not everyone should be in a relationship if they aren’t willing to make some changes in their perspective. Dr. Warren’s personal goal is to promote long-lasting marriages and eliminating divorce, so it makes sense for the service to operate as it does.

      Posted 16 Mar 2008 at 11:01 am
    7. Alysia wrote:

      Hey singleguy, I appreciate your points.

      “If you weren’t ready for a relationship and answered the questions as such, then you have your answer as to why you were rejected.”

      I get it, eHarmony found that I was too all over the place for a stable relationship. But I am who I am regardless of whether I’m ready for a relationship or not. I don’t think that has any bearing on my personality or how I should the answer questions. I’d like to think that I’d retain my personality in a serious relationship… maybe?

      My point in mentioning the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is that it accounts for many aspects of one’s personality and though it may suggest that some types are more compatible in relationships than others, the MBTI doesn’t presume to judge whether or not individuals are doomed to hopeless relationships due to their instability or whatever.

      I think that the whole thing is a very cookie-cutter approach to love and life. Life is about balance, but its also about unpredictability, flexibility; rolling with the punches. Maybe eHarmony (or internet dating in general) just isn’t for people like me– which is fine. My post was just promoting discussion about the ideology behind the rejections. Now that you suggest it, I may read one of Dr. Warren’s books. Until something changes though, I’ll remain skeptical of eHarmony’s presumptuous claim to know definitively what can work in love and what can’t.

      Posted 16 Mar 2008 at 5:19 pm
    8. Kala wrote:

      I’m married (happily) and filled out the eHarmony survey out of curiosity, using the information that would have been accurate before I met my husband – single, never married, no kids, college education, don’t smoke or drink, attend church, etc. I got in with no problem. I went back and used a different e-mail address, tweaked my answers a bit to reflect a slightly less stable individual, and up popped the rejection letter.

      Personally, I’m not sure I think much of the whole eHarmony shtick. I didn’t need a computer program to choose a husband for me. If someone is at a basically stable and rational point in their life where they’re ready for a long-term relationship, they should be capable of making their own decisions regarding a potential mate.

      Me, I plug Match.com. I met my husband within 3 weeks of paying for the service. We were married less than a year later, and we now have a gorgeous baby boy. I know, these “success stories” don’t come along that often, and people are tempted to think they’re fake. Mine is real, and I base the success on both my readiness and my husband’s for marriage, plus our own abilities to use our own personal discrimination when choosing a partner.

      My opinion: eHarmony is a computerized arranged marriage service. To those for whom it worked, I am very happy for you. To those who were rejected, screw it. Rejoice in your uniqueness and trust that you’ll find a partner just as unique. Match does “suggest” matches for its members, and my husband was NOT one of the people suggested for me. I picked him out all by myself and he’s my perfect match.

      Posted 27 Mar 2008 at 6:16 pm
    9. Anonymous wrote:

      I am: divorced, well over 20 (indeed over two times 20), married just once and pretty tidy about taking multiple-choice tests in a non-random, careful and consistent manner (indeed it may be my single greatest talent, and I’ve got the SAT scores to prove it).

      So, I turn to your “What next?” suggestion: “May we suggest that you take a break first from seeking committed relationships. We mean, enjoy being single again (or for now).”

      Unfortunately, I’m having a little difficulty determining exactly what it really means. Rather than making a suggestion, it starts with an anti-suggestion (“take a break”), then moves off in some different and quite vague direction: “enjoy being single.” This strikes me as similar to advising a job-hunter to take a break from looking for work, and enjoy being unemployed.

      Is that what you really mean? Essentially: give up and get used to being alone? Okay, yes: while hanging on to the unlikely hope that the situation is temporary (“for now”), and my personality will somehow mutate, though after middle-age the possibility of significant personality change is probably limited to the onset of Alzheimer’s or something of that nature.

      Then there’s that little “we mean …” interjection in the middle, which sounds like it’s suggesting something with the verbal equivalent of a raised eyebrow. Ah: and now I notice the word “committed” in the first sentence.

      So, I take it that the advice maybe isn’t quite as dire as it first seems, and perhaps the suggestion is to seek uncommitted relationships, which puts the raised eyebrow (maybe even a nudge and a wink) in the “enjoy being single.” So: I suppose the idea is singles bars and online personals looking for one-night stands, or perhaps escort services? Or what?

      Posted 31 Mar 2008 at 4:20 pm
    10. Rob wrote:

      Now the responses on this page reveal more about why eharmony would reject some of us than any number of questions asked on the site.

      Posted 01 Apr 2008 at 10:14 pm
    11. Anonymous wrote:

      The biggest irony of the thing is that — at least if we’re talking about people in, say, their forties — we’re not exactly dealing with the cream of the crop to start with here. We’re talking about people who:

      A – Either have made it past 40 without getting married (weird or commitmentphobic) or have been dumped by or dumped a spouse.

      B – Either lack enough of a social/family/professional network to generate dates, or are sufficiently unattractive that they fail to appeal to anyone who knows them.

      Posted 03 Apr 2008 at 8:34 am
    12. eHarmony Blog wrote:

      Anonymous, your comment is unkind. How about widows? How about newcomers to a city? Each person has his or her unique circumstance, regardless of age.

      Posted 03 Apr 2008 at 12:01 pm
    13. Some Guy wrote:

      This is simple ladies and gents. I am an IT Admin for a large enterprise and have the answer to this whole rejection letter\$40 free value thing…

      eHarmony gives you a supposedly free initiation questionnaire to extract marketable demographic data that is sold to others for a much greater fee than $40. If it takes an hour to complete the initial questionnaire, at a $40 value, it IS a ripoff as my time is worth more than $40 an hour anyway. Then, if they don’t think your information can be further sold to their current user base, they reject you and leave you to scratch your head.

      Anyone who cannot see this service is a big data collector for people with low self-esteem have just that.

      Posted 06 Apr 2008 at 5:49 am
    14. Scot McKay wrote:

      Apparently, eHarmony also pronounces men shorter than a certain height “unmatchable”.

      Read this, third paragraph after where the heading “The Chemistry Factor” is.

      http://www.eharmony.com/singles/servlet/press/articles?id=15

      Note that it’s NCW’s own quote and the article sits on eHarmony’s own server.

      Posted 06 Apr 2008 at 11:51 pm
    15. Lilly wrote:

      Scot,
      They’ve changed their policy since that 2004 article was written. The majority of my matches are my height or taller, but I’ve been matched with plenty of guys 1-3 inches shorter. The greatest difference was 9 inches shorter; had it not been for his picture I would have thought he’d miss-typed.
      My 6 foot tall friend is mostly matched with shorter men.

      Posted 07 Apr 2008 at 7:07 pm
    16. Scot McKay wrote:

      Lilly, I’d love to see where the reference for that policy change is.

      I always thought that one particularly incongruent with their policy of “not legislating attraction”.

      Posted 07 Apr 2008 at 7:45 pm
    17. eHarmony Blog wrote:

      As a long-time subscriber of the service who has received thousands of matches, I can attest that eHarmony matches women with shorter men, despite the 2004 article.

      Ask any present eHarmony member (except really really short women or really really tall men, that is) and I would bet they would say the same.

      Posted 07 Apr 2008 at 7:55 pm
    18. Pamela wrote:

      I’d just like to respond to the people who claim that being a non-Christian and/or non-Religious is a reason for being rejected. I was not rejected, I am not religious in any way and my compatibility profile from taking the personality test states the following:

      Some additional details about your ideal mate:

      Spirituality: Your ideal mate isn’t the kind of person who gets involved with a faith community. Others see him as someone who generally only attends religious services for weddings and funerals, and even then he’s uncomfortable with organized religion. He isn’t interested in seeking out a partner who will insist on regular involvement in a religious community.

      Posted 07 Apr 2008 at 9:32 pm
    19. Shar wrote:

      “Scot McKay wrote:
      Apparently, eHarmony also pronounces men shorter than a certain height “unmatchable”.”

      I’m 5′ 4″ and female.

      Art least once I week, I am matched with a man who is shorter than I am. Last week one of these men was 4′ 10″ tall.

      They have a match flexibilty question that asks “How important is your match’s height to you”, and I have selected “not at all”.

      Are these men you speak of shorter than 4′ 10″ ?

      Posted 20 Jun 2008 at 7:04 am
    20. Scot McKay wrote:

      @Shar

      If you look at the comments following mine, apparently the policy has changed since 2004.

      Still, you’ve got to wonder what other policies they’re working from.

      My biggest question WRT matching someone on 29 dimensions has always been, “Do opposites attract or do people who are similar?” E-harmony’s answer to that may be the ultimate “assumption” in and of itself.

      I remain convinced that if we get the hang of online dating we do a MUCH better job selecting our own partners online, thank you.

      Posted 20 Jun 2008 at 9:55 am

    Post a Comment

    Your email is never published, shown nor shared.

    Your message appears after two to five seconds for the world to see. In case it isn’t obvious, we are not eHarmony. Your message will not be sent to them, and no, we cannot help you with your account.

    Have your own topic? Start a new discussion. XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

    Subscribe without commenting

    Geo Visitors Map