eHarmony Blog.com

Do you like this article? Post a comment on Facebook

More on eHarmony Blog

What others are reading right now

Comments 5

1. Fernando Ardenghi. wrote:

   Match vs. eHarmony comparison?

   It is like to compare an apple with an orange.

   Match is an
   Online Dating 1.0: First Generation “Browsing/Searching Options, Powerful Searching Engine”
   or
   Online Dating 2.0: Second Generation “Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engine”
   Match is more suitable for fun dating, for instant gratification.

   eHarmony is an Online Dating 3.0: Third Generation “Compatibility Matching Algorithm”
   eHarmony, uses a normative version of the Big5 to assess personality and Dyadic Adjustment Scale to calculate compatibility.
   The score for the U.S. questionnaire is different from the UK site, Australian site, Canadian site, etc.
   eHarmony is intended for serious dating.

   Anyway, if they compare Match and eHarmony, [using Match for serious dating], my bet is they are going to find “the online dating sound barrier”.

   Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engines (Collaborative Filtering) will always be in the range of 3 or 4 persons “recommended” per 1,000 persons screened, in exactly the same range of searching on one’s own.

   Compatibility Matching Algorithms used by actual online dating sites (with Big-5 Model or a proprietary model like the ones used by Perfectmatch or Chemistry), are in the range of 3 or 4 persons “highly compatible” per 1,000 persons screened, in exactly the same range of searching on one’s own.

   Success Rates of those sites are less than 10%. The majority of their members are not going to achieve a long term relationship with commitment (or marriage).

   Regards.
   Fernando Ardenghi
   Buenos Aires.
   Argentina.
   ardenghifer@gmail.com

   Posted 01 Dec 2009 at 11:04 am ¶
2. annoymous wrote:

   A lot of this is over my head but I think it is overly simplistic. First even though you may be compatible with someone they may not be interested because they claim the chemistry isn’t there. Second, you have to have interests that are in common so you can enjoy doing the same things. Third the distance, some matches can not afford to be jet setters like Jason Mesnick and Molly Mckinnon. I think probably if all those conditions are met maybe. However, if you can not get up to bat you can not be in the game. I image though Chemistry has similar claims.

   Posted 02 Dec 2009 at 7:10 am ¶
3. annoymous wrote:

   I would be more interested in comparing eHarmony with Chemistry however, it is purely academic where I am concerned. I think and I am sure this argument has been made before it is good that some couples have benefited from this. However, where are the statistics for people who haven’t met anyone? I heard tales that some people have been on eharmony for seven may ten years. If I was a betting person, I would say that eharmony is probably going to become more elitist and have only higher income professionals. I could be wrong I don’t think so. However, if I ever try another dating agency it would probably be Chemistry. I am no hurry to do so.

   Posted 02 Dec 2009 at 10:51 am ¶
4. annoymous wrote:

   I am very reluctant however to deal with any cooperation that has in their terms and conditions that they can closed any out for “any or no reason” without due process. I will think long and hard and read the fine print before I get involved again. This reminds me of antedotes like being on an “enemy list” or something Nixonist. But cooperation have become more and more unaccountable. I will be interested to see how these lawsuit againsts Eharmony go.

   Posted 03 Dec 2009 at 6:41 am ¶
5. annoymous wrote:

   Correction concerning Jason Mesnick and the last name of his girl friend is Maloney. Anway, perhaps enemies list is not the best example, because Nixon enemies were well known and reasons pretty transparent. However they were originally compiled in secret and brought up at the Watergate trial. However, I have a friend when boarding a plane recently was stopped because he was on a list for reasons they wouldn’t revealed. He worked for the state just a progress liberal who later moved to France. When things are done in secret and there is no due process it is sinister to me.

   Posted 03 Dec 2009 at 8:32 am ¶

Post a Comment