eHarmony.com vs. RewardingLove.com, An Honest Comparison

RewardingLoveMany of us who enjoy eHarmonyBlog are familiar with the great work of E. Foley, who has written articles about eHarmony in the past.  I enjoy her writing style very much, because she sticks to the facts.  So, when I saw her recent article about a matchmaking site I had never heard of before, it really caught my attention.  The site is called RewardingLove.com and I was very impressed with what I learned about it in the article.  So, naturally, I wanted to check it out to see how it might compare to our favorite site, eHarmony.  Since we’re all rather familiar with the eHarmony process, here is some of what I’ve learned about RewardingLove. 

The Science

It seems the science behind the site’s matching system is based on the work of psychologist/psychoanalyst/author Dr. Robert M. Gordon.   I did a little investigating of Dr. Robert M. Gordon’s credentials, and found that he has over 35 years of expertise and is clearly a leading authority on the science of love relationships.  You can read about his credentials on the site.  The site states that he and his wife, Dr. Alla Gordon, interact with members beyond the matching phase by answering member-submitted questions each month.

Unified Model of Love: Questionnaire

As stated on the site, the matching methodology is based on Dr. Robert M. Gordon’s Unified Model of Love Relations.   His concepts sounded intriguing and refreshing to me in the article, so I decided to take a look…  I visited the site, which looked great, and took the Unified Model of Love© questionnaire, which was divided into four sections.  It started out similar to other questionnaires, but then got really interesting, especially in the fourth section.  It took me about 30 minutes to complete it. 

After completing it, I was prompted to verify my email address…simple enough, and definitely important. I feel that eHarmony should implement email address verification… it’s simple to do and would stop people from being able to sign up using other people’s email addresses… Pretty basic, don’t you agree? 

Matching

We are all familiar with the eHarmony method of matching.  Subscribers and free members are often matched together, with no way for us to know whether a match is a subscriber who can communicate if interested, or a free member who cannot.  This has obviously caused much frustration to countless of us over the years.  A person’s time is very valuable, and basic information provided upfront would help us all to make the best use of our time.  Many of us have been requesting that eHarmony provide this basic information when sending matches, yet eHarmony still keeps members in the dark regarding various important details about their matches.

The RewardingLove matching system seems to avoid this type of frustration.  Now here’s the big news:  The site states that only subscribers who have logged in to the RewardingLove.com web site within the previous 7 days are included in the current day’s matching pool.  This is obviously a huge improvement over the eHarmony method.  Also, RewardingLove lets members know if a match has logged on to the site within the previous 14 days, by displaying the text ‘Active Member’ on their profile.  If a member has not logged on to the site within the previous 14 days, the date of their last log in is displayed. Well, imagine that… some integrity and transparency in a matchmaking site.  Such integrity is to be loudly applauded and certainly appreciated.  It seems they have been doing their homework and understanding that people’s time is valuable.  This certainly makes efficient use of a member’s time.   I don’t know about you, but I’m very excited about this…  RewardingLove also offers some type of incentive for reviewing your matches in a timely manner.  I’m still not sure how this works, but it sounds useful. 

Becoming a Member

Becoming a member of eHarmony is quite a different process than becoming a member of RewardingLove.

One glaring difference is that RewardingLove profiles require some text and at least one photo, and also go through an approval process. 

Below is the basic process for each, from registration to receiving your first matches, plus some important notes:  

For eHarmony (as we all know):

  1. Register at eHarmony.com
  2. Take the eHarmony questionnaire
  3. Receive a free ‘personality profile’
  4. Begin receiving your matches immediately – no searching

Member profiles don’t seem to be initially subjected to approval process.

Matches can be either free members or subscribers. 

No way of knowing if a match is a subscriber or free member

Not told the last time your matches actually logged in to eHarmony.com

For RewardingLove

  1. Register at RewardingLove.com
  2. Take the Unified Model of Love© Questionnaire
  3. Validate your email address
  4. Complete your RewardingLove Profile sections (required)
  5. Upload at least one photo (required)
  6. RewardingLove Profile is sent to Customer Care for approval (within 24 hours)
  7. Approved profile enters their matching database and is included in that day’s matching pool
  8. Begin receiving your matches after approval – no searching

Every match has logged in to RewardingLove.com within 7 days prior to the matched date.

Every match can connect and communicate with you if the interest is mutual

Every match has at least one approved photo, available to view.    

Every match has text sections completed and approved, available to read.

Incentive system for reviewing matches in a timely manner

Currently, receive a Free 100 match subscription with no time limit

I believe, on average, I receive six or seven matches per day from eHarmony. This number typically drops once you become a subscriber, but let’s say that in an average 30 day month, I can expect approximately 200 matches to be sent to me.  Now, let’s take into consideration the fact that eHarmony’s subscriber to free member ratio is about 20 to 1, and divide 200 by 20.  That leaves me with an average of only 10 matches received in a month which are likely to be subscribers.  Not to mention the frustration that comes from contacting so many free members and never getting a reply, for various reasons we’re all familiar with.  So, I’m basically looking for a needle in a haystack, which is quite frustrating.  RewardingLove matches, though likely fewer, are all approved subscribers.  So, there won’t be all of that frustrating wasted time. It’s nice that the there’s no time limit to the subscription, because it will likely take a while to be matched with 100 highly compatible approved subscribers.  E. Foley’s article and the RewardingLove.com web site both state that RewardingLove subscriptions are currently being offered free.

Free Promotions

All of us who have tried eHarmony have appreciated their “free communication weekends” but also realized its limitations. 

In contrast, as of the date of this article, RewardingLove is offering 100 free matches, with no time limit. I’m not using exclamation marks here because I’d have to use them everywhere.  It is simply amazing that a site is offering such a unique and free subscription, without placing ads on their web pages.  Obviously, I signed up and I’m currently waiting for my profile and photo to be approved. 

Advertising

We have seen advertisement space on eHarmony continually increase over time.  It seems eHarmony thinks members are being desensitized to it.  Just to let you know, eHarmony, I speak for countless members when I say that I despise being subjected to so much advertising, particularly on a rather expensive paid site.  Amazingly, I couldn’t find a shred of advertising on the entire RewardingLove.com site. It was such a joy to not be distracted by ads. 

Membership Base

We know that eHarmony has many millions of members.  However, what really matters is the number of subscribers who we can actually communicate with.  Having millions of unsubscribed members, any number of which may eventually be delivered to sincere subscribers as matches each day,  is not necessarily a positive thing.  I have not found any information about RewardingLove.com’s membership numbers.  I am assuming it can’t be a large number as of yet.  However, I’m certain people will appreciate knowing that all of their matches will be current and able to communicate.  Will eHarmony step up to the plate and provide us with this same level of confidence?  Only time will tell.

Pricing and billing practices

Yet another major difference between eHarmony and RewardingLove is their respective billing practices. 

As we all know, eHarmony offers 1, 3, 6 or 12 month subscriptions, and uses recurring billing.  Recurring billing, also known as “auto renewal”, has caused many people a lot of frustration.  I would wager that most of us would prefer to pay for a service when we want it, without have to worry about turning things on or off to guard against being automatically rebilled. 

While reviewing RewardingLove I noticed that they don’t use recurring billing.  There is no “auto renewal” to worry about, which is really comforting.  Actually, RewardingLove seems to be using an entirely different approach to billing.  Instead of monthly billing, they charge by the number of matches you would like to receive.  I found this to be quite interesting.  A RewardingLove subscription entitles the subscriber to receive a predetermined number of matches, no matter the time it takes to receive them.  These matches are created based on the subscriber’s questionnaire responses.  The subscription lasts until a member receives the total number of matches to which they are entitled, plus an additional 10 free days for communicating with matches before their subscription expires.  They state that you can purchase more matches anytime.   As noted above, what is really different and good about this is that they only match current subscribers.  Although it seems a bit strict, this is probably necessary to justify their “pay for a specific number of matches” concept.  

The Verdict

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

It’s still too early to tell, but it seems that RewardingLove has been listening to what people really want in a serious matchmaking site.  Their methods seem to solve a number of issues in useful ways, while those same issues have been generally ignored for so long by eHarmony.  Maybe some healthy competition is what eHarmony needs in order to give members more of what we’ve been requesting.  If not, other options such as RewardingLove will become increasingly enticing to unsatisfied eHarmony members.

RewardingLove.com is clearly a very serious relationship site.  It seems to have everything it takes to be very successful.  The best way for you to render your own judgment on eHarmony vs. RewardingLove is to try it out while it’s free and compare!

Do you like this article? Post a comment on Facebook

Comments 95

  1. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    The search feature was “days away” according to their e-mail I got on Dec 31st, 2009.

    SincerelyEthical reported on Jan 15, 2010:
    “I called their customer service center earlier this evening to ask when their search feature will be ready. The rep said he was “confident” it would be ready for members to use “by the end of this coming week.”

    Hopefully the quality of service offsets their multiple misses on feature delivery dates…

    Posted 24 Jan 2010 at 12:33 pm
  2. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    According to their customer service, there is news about the search feature…Valentine’s Day is the new target delivery date.

    I was impressed to find out that their customer service representative actually read my e-mail and addressed ALL concerns posed within and then some!

    I may not have any matches with them (it sounds like that won’t be a problem fairly soon) but their customer support gets an A++++ grade from me.

    I think that all of the dating services are going to be in for some trouble in 2010. :)

    Posted 10 Feb 2010 at 1:02 pm
  3. annoymous1 wrote:

    I hope that those of you who used Rewarding Love will keep us informed about how it goes. If I ever get on a service that is more parental I will avoid as much as possible dealing with their service reps. BTW I did read on Match communication t hat they can bump you if you argue with their reps. This just shows how how the power has shifted from the customer to the seller. I am still very leery of parental dating services. The less you deal with their customer service reps the less likely there will be a problem. It just makes sense they don’t know you are around.

    Posted 11 Feb 2010 at 7:33 am
  4. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    I have been checking the site periodically during the weekend and as promised, the search feature is here!

    e-mail has not gone out to members about it but there are already three women who have put their profiles up for searching.

    I am still figuring out the visualization they are using for the compatibility graph…

    Posted 14 Feb 2010 at 8:43 am
  5. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    …and since joining in September, I am still at zero matches. No interesting matches in the search feature, either.

    …and where is the big advertising campaign they were talking about?

    Posted 25 May 2010 at 11:29 pm
  6. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    …still zero matches…

    I think the lack of advertising campaign is their main problem.

    It looks like they are working on generating some PR:
    http://www.i-newswire.com/rewarding-love-announces-the-creation/46974
    http://www.theopenpress.com/index.php?a=press&id=79114

    Posted 23 Jul 2010 at 12:44 pm
  7. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    …and still zero matches…one YEAR later…

    Is RewardingLove a failure? Where IS the marketing campaign?

    Posted 25 Sep 2010 at 10:26 pm
  8. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    Still zero matches.

    I think it is time to face the reality that RewardingLove is pretty much dead in the water.

    Scratch that.

    A boat that never left the dock.

    Posted 05 Dec 2010 at 10:48 pm
  9. FaithfulWitness wrote:

    RewardingLove is really a joke. I enrolled to try the service over a week ago and my account is still pending. The website claims to check your notifications once logging back in within 48 hrs but I have had no luck with feedback from customer care or my complaints.

    I even called the RewardingLove Hotline and it seems to be disconnected or no longer in service. I’m wondering if this business has died behind the curtains and isn’t telling anybody?

    Posted 15 Dec 2010 at 11:06 pm
  10. FaithfulWitness wrote:

    RewardingLove is really a joke. I enrolled to try the service over a week ago and my account is still pending. The website claims to check your notifications once logging back in within 48 hrs but I have had no luck with feedback from customer care or my complaints.

    I even called the RewardingLove Hotline and it seems to be disconnected or no longer in service. I’m wondering if this business has died behind the curtains and isn’t telling anybody?

    Also too, under ‘Account Settings’ there is a tab to resign your subscription, but once you click the tab, RewardingLove only covers/displays its limited time offer. You can’t even cancel your account.

    I was hoping for better potential, unlike some of the cons about Eharmony. Oh well….

    Posted 15 Dec 2010 at 11:08 pm
  11. Fernando Ardenghi wrote:

    RewardingLove WAS a HOAX.

    ———————
    ——— Forwarded message ———-
    From:
    Date: Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 3:36 AM
    Subject: Hello Mr. Ardenghi, a new and superior matching system is about to be launched
    To: ardenghifer@gmail.com

    Hello Mr. Ardenghi, having recently read one of your postings regarding eHarmony and scientific matching systems in general, I felt compelled to write and offer you a glimpse of a truly revolutionary match-based relationship web site which will be launching in mid-May, 2009. The site has been created to provide the first truly comprehensive scientific matching system for all singles seeking a lasting and fulfilling romantic relationship, which targets the factors which truly matter in love relationships.

    The matching system is based upon a groundbreaking unified model of factors which contribute to lasting love relationships. By integrating the findings of evolutionary psychology, psychoanalysis, neuroscience, cognitive psychology, and social psychology, this unified model helps us to more accurately understand how and why we love. This scientific model was created and first published in a psychological publication in 2006 by the psychoanalyst who has been the driving force behind the creation of this superior matching system and who is also the web site’s onboard scientific advisor. The Ph.D. I am referring to is more highly accredited than any of the other popular sites’ scientific advisors… In addition, he shall be available to receive questions from members and anticipates answering a certain number of members’ questions each month. His multiple decades of experience have resulted in a system which moves away from the hackneyed Big Five or Myers-Briggs upon which other matching systems are based which, incidentally, have been proven to be very poor predictors of romantic love. This new comprehensive system is certainly expected to revolutionize the way romantic matching systems are created and utilized.

    t would be a pleasure to put you in contact with the site’s renowned scientific advisor as soon as you wish. The corporation’s name, management team and the site’s relevant url information is being kept private until the week before the site launches. Press releases will soon be prepared in anticipation of the site’s launch. The site is being offered completely for free through the end of 2009 to individuals who register before June 30. Also of note is the fact that the site is being provided without any advertising whatsoever… All costs are being absorbed in order to provide the highest quality and most enjoyable experience anywhere. If you enjoy such services, prepare to be amazed!

    I look forward to your reply…

    Sincerely,
    A friend of a friend of the management team :)

    Posted 16 Dec 2010 at 1:35 pm
  12. FaithfulWitness wrote:

    Hmmmm..I wonder if this may compromise SPI?

    Posted 17 Dec 2010 at 9:08 pm
  13. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    Fernando, I missed seeing your reply here. Did you follow up with this person that sent you that message to see what the story is?

    Posted 28 Apr 2011 at 2:56 pm
  14. FernandoArdenghi wrote:

    Sun, May 17, 2009

    Hi Fernando, it seems we enjoy to disagree! :)

    It is ok, we are friends… disagreeing is healthy and will bring a good and pleasant competition with success for everyone. :)

    Launch did not make the intended mid-May time. Phase I will take a couple more weeks. Just making sure that everything works properly across the various browsers… He doesn’t want people to have to deal with any annoying technical problems when they try it.

    Phase I will be without the extra programs.
    Phase II will introduce the special programs, probably by July 1.

    Regarding being “wrong” about things… It will be Very hard for people to disagree with him… Certainly he has the ability to win this debate against any opposition. I felt like a fool when I tried to defend my different viewpoints when I first met him… Also, he has so many credentials, so highly respected, and has been the president of multiple psychological associations. When he speaks, people listen… and, most importantly, he is a very nice person and cares about people… He wants people to know the truth.

    People will be able to read and learn about a variety of his concepts, from how the most primitive biology, childhood imprints, and the most current psychological condition form the basis of what people find attractive at any given point in time. I had a hard time understanding for quite a while… but eventually, I gained a better perspective and now I really believe he is correct.

    He has prepared many voice files which people may listen to for free, explaining why he decided to use mutual filtering over algorithms. He could have easily prepared a unique set of algorithms, but he vehemently defends his very strong belief in the superiority of mutual filtering, along with studies showing this.

    As for me, I am just an interested bystander… I am fortunate to be one of his friends, and I have been able to see it. He is in charge and it is my hope that people will love the site as much as I do. If they do, they will have just as good a chance or better on this site of finding their mate for a lifetime of love, and they won’t be ripped off month after month after month or be victimized by fraudulent marketing schemes…

    When the time comes for launch, you will be able to discuss these issues with him directly… Perhaps I am not doing a good job of conveying things… I cannot speak for his knowledge and he is much more persuasive than I am… :)

    For now, there is nothing more for me to say… You just have to try it out and comment after you have seen it in action. :) I will keep you informed.

    Bye for now,
    Your Friend. :)

    ————————————

    Sun, May 17, 2009

    Hi Fernando, I enjoy receiving your emails and I appreciate your words and data very much.

    Please remember, this site does Not use broad based personality tests…
    These may help select Friendships, but have little value in determining successful love relationships.
    This psychoanalyst’s assessment targets the characteristics which he has determined have the greatest impact on an individual’s ability to enter into and maintain a healthy romantic partnership, and assesses the existence of characteristics which destroy love relationships.

    Regarding the 16PF5 test, or any other test, it is all about obtaining the most valid data possible.
    Using your mathematical talent in narrowing down valid data is very useful, but in narrowing down invalid data it is not.

    To me, it makes the most sense to use subtle and targeted questioning, and get as close to the truth about a Particular individual as possible. But no method is proven to be on average over 30% effective.

    There is no way to assess the chemistry two individuals will have for one another until they meet in person. All the algorithms in the world cannot predict this for any two individuals.

    I am the type of person who trusts the highest proven and successful authority I am aware of, over a million lesser authorities.

    I am like a Christian preferring to listen to the Pope instead of listening to a million priests. :)

    Am I wrong? Maybe… Am I right? Maybe… Nothing is certain.

    But I believe in this psychoanalyst’s approach, and I feel millions of others will also.
    It will be exciting to see how things go…

    I am looking forward to you trying it, and getting your opinion on every aspect of the site.
    It won’t cost anyone anything in the beginning to give it a try.

    Wouldn’t it be nice to solve the Other issues which so many web sites suffer from?
    What do you think about the recurring billing scams?
    How do you think the heavy advertising on site pages negatively affects members?
    What is your opinion regarding how leading sites match paying members with non-paying members, trying to compel more people to spend so much money?
    Don’t you think it is better to have a ‘results-driven’ pricing plan like this site will incorporate?
    Don’t you think people will Love being able to pay a certain amount of money, and for this money, they will receive a specific amount of opportunities, no matter how long it takes?

    Your Friend :)

    ————————————

    Sun, May 17, 2009

    HI Fernando, of the examples you have given, the assessment is closest to this one:

    ***Also WeAttract.com’s tests [Match 2003-2004 Yahoo!Personals since 2004] have:
    great precision to measure what a person is looking for (a point in a scale in different factors of the desired partner)
    ****If you are talking about tapping essential relationship-specific domains via psychoanalytic questioning measured by points in a scale regarding desired partner’s responses, the this system is very similar. The same concept is also used to measure one’s own variables. There is also a “favorites” concept which allows an optionally listed primary preference among the acceptable characteristics selected by members in section 1.

    Importantly, the questions (especially in section 4) are mostly indirect and tap a specific set of domains such as egocentricity, defensiveness, propensity toward hostility, clear and sufficient insight, etc. which the psychoanalyst says are the most important in determining whether or not the individual has the capacity for a healthy love relationship.

    Ultimately, people will decide what they like in any site… If they try it and it works for them, they will like it… If they try it and don’t get the results they want, they will leave. As you mentioned, there are very many choices. I love this site, and I believe millions of people will love it also. :)

    I like the True.com methodology… I remember taking that test because of my curiosity years ago. Too bad corrupt management ruined their good idea.

    Regarding Markus, some of his ideas are good, but his test IS a joke… because he is definitely not a psychoanalyst. :)

    Also useless are the same old Big 5 and Myers-Briggs test that everyone uses, which can be added to any web site. :)

    Regarding free access, it is unethical to charge without a solid membership base of real, active users.
    Two months time for people to subscribe for free, and those who do so will enjoy free subscription and full access/usage as long as they remain active (checking matches within specific amount of time, replying to match’s emails, etc.)
    This site is based upon Integrity and Honesty…
    The psychoanalyst also debunks many fallacies regarding matching, in clear text for people to read, and provides studies which show the superiority of mutual filtering over algorithms when used in the matching of two individuals.

    Consider this project a “grass roots” movement. :)
    People are tired of paying too much and receiving too little.
    People want to be treated with respect, honesty, with no tricks and they want Results.

    On always free sites, people are tired of fake profiles, matching with non-responsive members, non-serious people, players, and sooo much distracting advertising.

    From private research, we have determined that the general individual is willing to pay between $10 and $20 per billing period for such a useful service, considering the current economic situation most people are enduring.

    *** There are a few very special features which I cannot mention at this moment, but which will be Very exciting for members. I think you will like them! :)

    Much attention has been given to even the simplest aspects… such as large photos, easy to use photo wizard, member-submitted text is put through spell-checker and filter, photos and text and created video must pass two levels of human approval, no matching without approved photo(s) and text, all communication options are separated into groups based upon the member’s assessment responses, members may change communication parameters without affecting matching, logical movement from matches to connections, psychoanalyst is onsite to answer member’s questions, members may search if they allow their profile to be searchable, or remain private for matching only, searched profiles contain instant compatibility calculator, precise mutual and complementary searching from itemized focus to all-inclusive, no recurring billing, lots more great stuff… Many, many other improvements over other sites, and the fairest payment method anywhere, once the site begins charging.

    Also, the site Looks Great! :)

    Your Friend :)
    ——————————————————

    ****************************************************
    Fri, May 15, 2009

    Fernando Ardenghi wrote:

    When you launch, experts will say: “Psychoanalysis as the crux of a matching system seems impractical at best and misguided and silly at worst.”

    How this PhD Psychologyst is going to prove his system can match persons who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance, astrological destiny, personal preferences, searching on one’s own, or other technique as the control group in a peer_reviewed Scientifc Paper?
    *********************************************************

    Fri, May 15, 2009

    Hi Fernando, I agree that there will be many, many critics to any new system which makes serious claims.

    There is no way to prove it without tons of data… He will need to gather and examine as much data as possible. This is one of the reasons why it is being offered completely free with no obligations for a limited time. I know for certain that his concepts have worked brilliantly for countless individuals and couples over the past 35 years. How that translates onto the Internet will be determined by data and comparison over a period of time.

    Over time, he and others will analyze the data and determine how the system is working; keeping the most predictive questions and eliminating the least predictive ones. It should be obvious that he has an advantage over the others by nature of his deeper understanding of the human mind. It is clear that psychoanalysis involves the deepest understanding of the mind, and how to extract the most valid information from individuals using the highest level of questioning skills. Remember, he worked on the MMPI. He really knows what he is doing.

    It doesn’t make sense for any ‘expert’ to say that psychoanalysis as the crux of a questioning system would be misguided. Who else can create a better set of probing questions than a leader in the profession which is recognized around the world as the highest form of psychological understanding?
    Consider this… If his methods were not correct, then how much worse would be the methods of the current sites’ psychologists who do not possess as much knowledge, experience, education, assessment creation, expertise in understanding, and overall capability? His expertise with the MMPI is researched by tens of thousands of psych students around the world every single day.

    We all know that many ‘scholars’ will attempt to discredit the system… there are many motives for this… such as someone from eHarmony trying to make people believe that their system works better when it Clearly does not. Look at the facts… eHarmony fails Miserably when you see how small the percentage of people who actually have benefited from their system, compared to the 20+ million who have taken their questionnaire. I think it is something like 0.001 % actually have found their partner on eHarmony. They show a few people who did on their commercials, but what about the other 20 million who didn’t??? This is likely a direct result of their naivete in asking questions directly. They don’t divulge their “research” because it is very likely completely bogus, and obviously invalid. Just going to the local bar and saying hello to a few people you find attractive would yield much better results than eHarmony. :)

    Also, many such ‘scholars’ realize that they do Not possess the education and experience which this psychoanalyst has accumulated over his many, many years of dedicated accomplishments. They only Wish they had his level of understanding, and so jealousy will also play a role in the attempts to discredit him. There is No substitute for experience, the deepest education, and clearest understanding. Importantly, he is held in the highest regard by his peers… these peers are also esteemed psychologists and psychoanalysts who participate in his workshops! :)

    Remember, this site also includes various exciting tools which are available for members to use for free. These have been created to assist people who are genuinely serious about finding the love of their lives on this site. These tools will make it much easier for members to discover the sincerity level of their matches.

    No tricks, no scams, no advertising, and free communication…. It is an Internet relationship paradise!! :)

    I can’t wait for you to see it!! You will love it!!

    Your Friend :)

    —————————————

    Thu, May 14, 2009

    Hi Fernando, thank you for the feedback regarding Parship… I appreciate it!

    This assessment created by the psychoanalyst has four sections. First part is about the basic tangible aspects of the person. Second part begins to subtly use some standard-looking questions to begin to probe some specific domains. Third part begins probing into physical and emotional intimacy issues. The fourth part is where the psychoanalyst shows his greatest brilliance… :) It is the main part and contains most of the very subtle, probing questions meant to minimize socially desirable responses and get closer to the truth about a person, and assesses the main domains which are most specifically harmful to love relationships such as egocentricity, defensiveness, hostility, and others. Of course, healthy domains are also assessed. :)

    The dual-response system avoids the use of algorithms and places all of the pressure of validity upon the questions themselves. This further sets the psychoanalyst apart from all of the other lesser psychologists. As more data is accumulated over time, the most highly predictive questions will remain and any which are ultimately shown to be of lesser predictive value will be removed, thereby shortening the assessment while increasing validity.

    It makes lots of sense to put the pressure of validity upon the questions, not upon algorithmic guessing. Importantly, with enough data, this allows the validation of the quality of the assessment questions, without the tarnishing of data by any kind of algorithmic manipulation. Algorithmic guessing can take poorly constructed questions (such as eHarmony’s direct questioning… the absolute worst and least predictive!) which result in poor self-descriptive data, and makes it even worse because it further tarnishes that invalid data with general assumptions!
    It is far more important to gain the best possible data from the members upfront, rather than to try to understand their unique reasoning for their answers in a general way, which is one of the main weaknesses of algorithms when applied to the practically unfathomable complexities of romantic love.

    Wouldn’t you prefer to utilize your strong mathematical skills upon the best data possible which is not tarnished by a generalized set of assumptions? Obviously, we all would. :)

    Now, this directly affects validation. Since the assessment is dual response and not algorithmic, the validation is all about the questions. So, only the predictive results of a massive amount of data, reviewed and reported upon by the renowned psychoanalyst himself (along with a few other professionals possessing many decades of insightful experience and understanding) can really result in a proper evaluation and validation of the system.

    The assessment takes approximately 30 minutes to complete; considerably longer if a person attempts to deeply understand the domains which are being assessed in section four. The person’s immediate reaction to the questions is closest to their actual reaction to issues and concepts within a real life love relationship, so that initial reaction is the most accurate one with which a member should answer the questions in order to receive their most compatible matches.

    To me, an analogy between the understanding of psychology and the understanding of chess can be made… I see a parallel there…
    If you are interested in chess and are aware of the attainable levels, you know what I mean. If not, then let me explain… Chess ELO ratings are very strong predictors of chess playing /understanding strength. Going up the chess ‘ladder’, there are the general ‘class’ players, then expert level, followed by a variety of master levels. The internationally recognized Grandmaster level is the highest formal level which can be achieved and, within that group of elite players, there are the ‘Super-Grandmasters’ which is not a formal title, but a generally used way to describe the very small group of best players in the world who have the greatest understanding of the complexities involved, and are therefore the highest authorities on the subject.

    So, this psychoanalyst is on a parallel with a chess ‘Super Grandmaster’ with regard to his profound understanding of his area of expertise. Specifically, it is the area of personality assessment, understanding the conscious and unconscious mind, and how this affects a person’s love relationships.
    I think this is an excellent analogy. :)

    As the day draws nearer for the launch, I am increasingly excited about seeing the psychoanalyst’s great insight soon coming onto the scene. I am excited to soon be able to see people using the system for free!

    Your Friend :)

    —————————————————————

    ****************************************************
    Wed, May 13, 2009
    Fernando Ardenghi wrote:
    I know all what you had written (about True), but Dr. Houran is honest.
    Do you know his research using IRT?

    ****************************************************

    ****************************************************
    Wed, May 13, 2009
    Fernando Ardenghi wrote:

    You did not mention Dr. James Houran, one of the brains behind True, before the test was cannibalized.

    ****************************************************
    Thu, May 14, 2009
    Yes, Dr. Houran seems to be ethical. However, since the corrupt management of True.com is suing him, we have to wonder what he did to deserve that… if anything at all. Maybe he found out that the management was corrupt and they are suing him for breaking a contract in leaving the company… Who knows… :)

    I once took the True.com questionnaire… I remember it being much better (and more fun) than the eharmony questionnaire.

    What do you think of the Parship questionnaire? It runs soooo slowly on my system that I got frustrated and stopped in the middle… But that is probably because they don’t have a server presence in the U.S., since it’s mostly targeted to U.K. users.

    Your friend…

    —————————
    fromHapp424@aol.com
    toardenghifer@gmail.com

    dateSat, May 2, 2009 at 3:00 AM
    subjectHello Fernando…
    mailed-byaol.com

    Hello Fernando, a couple of years ago I would have agreed with you completely…. However, since I have spent quite a lot of time working with a world-renowned psychoanalyst, I have learned so much that I had not realized before. Although I agree that paying members have a much greater incentive to take a matching process seriously, the desire to take it seriously does not solve the main problem of inaccurate self-assessment data. Regardless if they paid a million dollars, or take it for free, most people will portray themselves in a more positive light than reality, and are approaching things from a narrow perspective of self. They will ‘put their best foot forward’ and portray themselves the way they Wish they were, not the way that actually are, and they may not even realize they are doing it… This is why it is ALL about the questions.

    Getting the most valid data possible (30% validity is miraculous in large quantities) is all about the subtleties and indirectness of the way the questions are phrased. The 16PF, like the NEO 5, was not developed specifically for matching. Therefore, for such matching, they have little validity. Consider this… Those sites do not claim to have psychoanalysts involved in their testing… If they did, their methodologies would be very different. They are simply making tons of money while experimenting with mostly invalid data…and they know this is true. This is the reason why those sites don’t like transparency… It would show that their methods are nothing more than statistical guesses derived from mostly invalid data, and people would lose faith in their methodologies… and they would also stop paying all of those monthly subscription fees. They are profiting from public delusion and marketing. :)

    Dr. Helen Fisher’s anthropological approach is more credible than eHarmony’s approach, but relying primarily on biological factors also misses the mark, as it is too narrow an approach to have significant validity.

    I guarantee that any group of millions of people interacting in real life will create countless more love matches than those two tests ever will. :)

    By using 8 decimal places for variables that account for only 10-29% of the predictability variance, you are still only giving a particular order to invalid data. If the data was 100% valid, then your algorithm would have great usefulness! In reality, matchmaking web sites may see a marketing benefit from such mathematics, but it has no impact on two individuals’ chances of finding love together.

    Displayed as a heuristic pyramid, the psychoanalyst’s method takes into consideration 5-levels of factors, from the most basic biological triggers to the most current psychological context, taking into account both conscious and unconscious aspects, to provide the most comprehensive approach available. Even so, the filtering is in their hands, but his questions vary in subtle repetitiveness regarding the most important relationship-building as well as destructive characteristics, measuring consistency or lack thereof.

    I hope you are having a great day, and I look forward to further conversations with you. :)
    —————————
    fromHapp424@aol.com
    toardenghifer@gmail.com

    dateThu, Apr 30, 2009 at 9:02 PM
    subjectHello Mr. Ardenghi, thank you again for additional information…

    Hello again Mr. Ardenghi, thank you again for sharing more details regarding your algorithm. Your mathematical skills are brilliant, but the entire concept is only valid if the data input by users is valid. Obviously, the only way to maximize the effectiveness of your algorithm is to have it manipulate accurate data… This is much easier to accomplish with products than with love relationships. There is no doubt that your system can work more effectively than other existing algorithms, but the inaccurate data people input is the weakness of the entire concept when used for romantic relationship matching of people.

    For this reason, I believe our projects may work well together. The psychoanalytic knowledge of the leader of this project is world-recognized as authoritative. It is because of the weakness and assumptive nature of general algorithms that he prefers the mutual filtering method. However, it is possible that your algorithm together with our maximized accuracy of data can deliver the most accurate real-world results currently possible.

    Certainly it is something to consider. Perhaps in the near future we can discuss some type of mutually satisfying collaboration. :)

    What are your initial thoughts?

    —————————
    fromHapp424@aol.com
    toardenghifer@gmail.com

    dateThu, Apr 30, 2009 at 4:28 PM
    subjectHello Mr. Ardenghi, thank you for replying……
    mailed-byaol.com

    Hello Mr. Ardenghi, thank you for taking the time to reply and to share scientific information with me. I appreciate that greatly. However, my main point is being missed…

    Consider how the triggers of chemistry and this concept of “love” are mainly irrational and unconscious; the product of multiple psychological and biological factors held deep within the human mind. The psychoanalyst (a world-renowned authority on the science of love relations) delves into these factors via insightful audio clips provided for free within the web site. Questionnaires based primarily on the “Big 5″ or the Myers-Briggs may be somewhat useful in predicting consumer behavior, but fail miserably when attempting to ascertain these irrational and unconscious triggers of love. Beyond that, consider this… What good is the eighth decimal if the self-assessment data is invalid? It is naive to believe that asking direct questions within self-assessments will yield honest data. Even the most well-crafted and accurate predictive test of personality ever created, the MMPI, has At Best 30% validity.

    This new assessment is “comprehensive” in that it brings together all of the major theories of love from all of the major schools of psychology as well as biology, rather than just one theory or one test. Importantly, resulting matches are Not based on actuarial algorithms…but rather, mutual filtering… Research supports mutual filtering’s superiority over algorithms when applied to love relationships. After all, algorithms are nothing more than loosely statistically-based guesses/assumptions… and we all know what assuming does!

    The main objective of the psychoanalyst’s approach when creating this site’s assessment was to focus upon the questions asked, and the manner in which they are asked, in order to minimize socially desirable responses as much as possible while tapping specific domains relevant to romantic love relationships. The point has been to ascertain as well as possible the capacity for healthy passion, friendship, commitment, etc, as well as ascertaining the relationships killers, such as egocentricity, defensiveness, and hostility.

    The site will be offered completely free throughout 2009 to members who register before June 30, so that individuals may compare it to any other site which they may currently be using. Everyone involved is highly confident that its effectiveness and superiority will be proven over time.

    I will inform you of its availability and welcome you to review it…

    Appreciatively,

    A friend of a friend of the management team :)

    Posted 28 Apr 2011 at 4:22 pm
  15. SingleGuyInNC wrote:

    Wow. Interesting reading.

    It just seemed like it had such great potential. If they could get some venture capital and place some ads, they could easily topple eHarmony and Match, if for no other reason than for the fact that they go by the match and not by the month.

    Posted 28 Apr 2011 at 7:05 pm

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