John, Nancy, you both share an interest in psychology, in critical thinking, as 
evidenced by your interest in tips....
maybe there is a match here?

;)

Annette

Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
619-260-4006
[email protected]


---- Original message ----
>Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 13:11:42 -0500 (EST)
>From: John Kulig <[email protected]>  
>Subject: Re: [tips] Matchmaker, Matchmaker, Make Me A Match!  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
><[email protected]>
>
>
>Great topic! I did it too, and quit for reasons similar to Nancy's. I believe 
>there is some literature out there documenting that men and women lie, or, 
>"exaggerate" the same things we exaggerate in old-fashoned dating. I view the 
>on-line dating scene as a new outlet for million year old dating strategies. 
>New technology but same old, same old. But I agree with Nancy that it's easier 
>to exaggerate on-line. 
>
>I did not use one of the more sophisticated "scientific" sites however, as I 
>decided "chemistry" is not predictable from their analyses of personality. I 
>may be wrong, but I noticed that, whether in bars or on-line, the best 
>predictor of chemistry was in the first hour of talking/emailing. If you have 
>to work hard to keep the conversation going, bad. If you talk, good. Maybe 
>that's the IQ factor coming out, as there is a correlation between couples 
>(I'd like to see data on the NEO "openness" trait, too, though that overlaps 
>with IQ). And I also noticed (consistent with the literature) that laughter 
>during conversations is very predictive. 
>
>And yes, I have had many a laugh with women trading horror stories about the 
>faded 10 year old pictures of men on Harleys, and 10 year old glamour pics of 
>women. Living in the "boonies" presents a problem for these sites imo because 
>local searches brings up a small number of hits and people you already know 
>... SO much more mysterious to fantasize about strangers. But they are usually 
>100 miles away. Remember the song "Pina Colada" in which a couple both took 
>out personal ads and ended up face-to-face in a bar? And there is a great old 
>Jimmy Stewart/Frank Morgan movie "Shop Around the Corner"? set in Budapest or 
>Prague in which a man and women hate each other at work but are unknowingly 
>exchanging romantic letters.
>
>-------------------------- 
>John W. Kulig 
>Professor of Psychology 
>Plymouth State University 
>Plymouth NH 03264 
>-------------------------- 
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: [email protected]
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
><[email protected]>
>Sent: Sunday, February 7, 2010 9:59:32 AM
>Subject: Re: [tips] Matchmaker, Matchmaker, Make Me A Match!
>
>
>
>
>As a battle scarred veteran of these sites (too many to count) I am sure they 
>probably are better than singles bars but not much. 
>
>For women, the main problem (besides the escalation of mispresentation - 
>certainly possible in "real world" dating; much more prevalent in online 
>dating) is that it appears that a fairly large number of males on these sites 
>are either married or living with someone. It appears that online dating gives 
>the male style of cheating a real helping hand - men sign up as "single" and 
>the pickings are fairly easy (women tend to cheat with familiar men, so it 
>doesn't work so well for them, although I have no doubt that there are a few 
>married or attached women on these sites also. 
>
>For men, a lot of the women seem to be looking for "free meals". They date 
>serially with no intention of being serious and reap those benefits. 
>
>For both sexes, the number of people posting pictures from 10 years or 50 
>pounds ago is disheartening. 
>
>And it's really disappointing to see what a sell out Fisher has become. I have 
>very little respect for her, although she has a right to get rich any 
>legitimate way she can. 
>
>I've not given up but am rapidly concluding that if I find a suitable partner, 
>it will most likely not be from an online dating or matchmaking site. 
>
>Just my hard-won .02 
>
>Nancy Melucci 
>Long Beach City College 
>Long Beach CA 
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message----- 
>From: Mike Palij <[email protected]> 
>To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) <[email protected]> 
>Cc: Mike Palij <[email protected]> 
>Sent: Sun, Feb 7, 2010 5:36 am 
>Subject: [tips] Matchmaker, Matchmaker, Make Me A Match! 
>
>
>There is an interesting little article in the NY Times about the "relationship"
>websites that have come into existence that try to match people on some
>criteria in the hopes that they form a long-lasting relationship.  See: 
>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/business/07stream.html?th&emc=th These 
>websites are not geared toward personal ads for people seeking 
>a date, rather, as might be expected, some of these websites use 
>psychological testing or even biological testing for match-making.  
>Consider:
>
>(1)  ScientificMatch.com matches people up on the basis of genetic
>analysis, such as markers for the immune system as well as some
>defintively non-biological markers (e.g., criminal and bankruptcy
>check, verificiation of age and marital status, etc.)
>
>(2)  Chemistry.com (a subsidiary of Match.com) has biological
>anthropologist Helen Fisher create a questionnaire about a person's
>traits and temperament.  A quote from Fisher provides some insight
>into her views:
>
>|“If Helen Fisher can give you right off the bat individuals that your 
>|brain is more likely to be attracted to,” she says, “so much the better.”
>
>Apparently, in matters of romance, one should focus on the brain
>and not the mind.  Also, beware of people who refer to themselves
>in the third person.
>
>(3) eHarmony.com was developed by a psychologist (his name is
>not given in the article but he has appeared and been identified on
>eHarmony's TV commercials -- I don't remember it though) whose
>experience is in marriage counseling and tries to match people on
>the basis of self-reproted values, family background, and social
>styles.
>
>How successful are these services?  That depends upon how one
>defines success.  It is unclear how many "successful" long-term
>relationships have been created by these services but they do 
>constitute about a $976 million annual industry, which many might 
>consider to be quite successful.
>
>The article asks the question "are these two techniques at matching
>people better than the old ones or are they essentially similar in
>function?"  Consider the following quote:
>
>|At the end of the day, however, it may be that the success of such 
>|sites is attributable not so much to their proprietary methods as to 
>|their choosy, self-selected members who don’t want to wink at and 
>|woo the first person whose profile they read online. The sites attract 
>|cohorts of people interested in slowing down the online dating and 
>|mating process, in finding out more information about potential 
>|partners — or in ruling out unlikely suitors — before they graduate 
>|to the meet-and-greet stage.
>|
>|THE more advanced the partner prediction sites, the more they may 
>|actually serve a more old-fashioned role. The sites provide background 
>|details on a person’s family, education, aspirations, character, genetic 
>|traits and general health of the type that was once public information 
>|in farming or immigrant communities or even in hunter-gatherer societies, 
>|Dr. Fisher says.
>|
>|Indeed, at least from the point of view of evolutionary science, you’d be 
>|better off spending $50 — and more likely to find a mate — by using a 
>|premium dating site than by dropping $50 on drinks in the uncertain 
>|waters of singles bars. 
>
>-Mike Palij
>New York University [email protected] ---
>You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] .
>To unsubscribe click here: 
>http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=12993.aba36cc3760e0b1c6a655f019a68b878&n=T&l=tips&o=382
> or send a blank email to 
>leave-382-12993.aba36cc3760e0b1c6a655f019a68b...@fsulist.frostburg.edu 
>
>--- 
>
>You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected] . 
>
>To unsubscribe click here: 
>http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=383
> 
>
>(It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) 
>
>or send a blank email to 
>leave-383-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
>
>---
>You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
>To unsubscribe click here: 
>http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a21b0&n=T&l=tips&o=392
>or send a blank email to 
>leave-392-13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a2...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=407
or send a blank email to 
leave-407-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to