RESEARCH ARTICLE
An investigation on the specific causes which weaken online dating websites’ efficiency
Weiyi Zhang
University Bridge Writing

Introduction
Since online dating started 20 years ago, it has developed into a mature industry. In the U.S, over forty million citizens have memberships to online dating websites; however, less than half of online dating users have turned virtual dates into real ones. Even more surprisingly, after the last decade’s rapid growth, the proportion still is not as high as people imagine. In 2005, two-thirds of online dating website members never had a face-to-face date with their virtual romantic interests. Moreover, some experimenters from Stanford University and Michigan State University conducted research about online dating with a sample including 5,000 couples, which were separated into 2,500 online couples and 2,500 offline couples. The observation showed that couples who met each other online have a higher possibility to break up than those who met each other offline, which is 47 percent versus 29 percent.
According to the mentioned data, online dating might be less efficient than offline dating. However, just as the old saying goes, “What is rational is actual and what is actual is rational.” Online dating does accord with the trend of the times. Therefore, this article will try to discuss some potential specific causes which weaken online dating websites’ efficiency. As a result, some readers or online dating websites users might obtain a better knowledge about those websites and know how to use them more efficiently. Additionally, being aware of some disadvantages and avoiding them, online dating websites users might obtain a better user experience. In this article, online safety, “overmuch” dating options and “over detailed” profiles will be discussed.
A history and genealogy of mediated relationship management
Since the early Internet, online relationships management has become a crucial part of internet using, and rapidly increased with the improvement of the internet technique. Basically, any romantic relationship mediated by the internet can be named online dating. However, with the technological capabilities of the internet becoming more diverse, more kinds of online dating have been provided, with their own specific purposes, users and sociological characters. Since this article only focuses on one form, which is called online dating website, it is very significant to distinguish the definition of online dating websites from other models of mediated relationship management. Based on the timeline of technology and transition of dating strategies, according to Kirsty Best and Sharon Delmege (2009), online dating sites can be defined with four different dimensions, which are immersion, dating specificity, interactants and interaction. Since online dating sites first appeared in 1995 with the technology of web browsers, they can be defined as some advertising dating specific sites with unknown interactants and high-interaction, using technologies which are more advanced than Web browsers.
Literature review
Literature regarding online dating stems from psychology, sociology and marketing theory. Literature reviewing specifically at online dating websites tends to follow theories which investigate the relationship between some specific factors and online dating efficiency. Summed up from some previous articles, three main causes present themselves: online safety, “overmuch” dating options and “over detailed” profiles.
According to professor Kirsty Best and doctor Sharon Delmege (2009), the “overmuch” options have two-sided potential social impact. They can not only accelerate the process that users try to meet their Mr. or Mrs. Right, but also elicit some ramifications, such as users might being annoyed by the shopping culture which is created by those options. Additionally,
Pai-Lu Wu and Wen-Bin Chiou (2009) claimed:
However, this research demonstrated that more options triggered more searching and decreased choice quality. More options triggered additional searches, thus partially undoing the effort-saving benefit of search tools. This finding was congruent with those in prior research. As already argued, large consideration sets lead to less selective processing and reduce searchers’ ability to screen out inferior options. From the perspective of cognitive processing, considering a large set of options may increase cognitive load, leading individuals to make mistakes. (p.318)
Finally, some other articles talked about online dating safety, such as that “The responsibility to date safely falls on the dater, not the dating site. Your safety is not a top priority for dating websites” (Baker, 2002).
Discussion
User experiences of online dating websites are always considered mixed. Some users claim that they have wonderful experiences with online dating which end in satisfactory marriages. Others’ experiences are somehow filled with frustration and depression. Therefore, like any other dating rituals, online dating has both advantages and disadvantages. Based on previous articles and rational analysis, what prevents online dating websites’ efficiency turns out to be safety, time and matching.
Safety.
Concerning the safety of online dating, it is the daters who have the responsibility to ensure date safety, rather than the dating sites. Unfortunately, daters’ safety has never been a main consideration for dating websites. The element they care most about might be making more money by attracting more memberships. If there are several fake dating profiles which have to be removed, profits will substantially suffer. Thus, online dating sites tend to let the users screen out the inferior options by themselves. Obviously, in that situation, date safety cannot be guaranteed, both physically and mentally. Many people have claimed that they had some unpleasant experiences about dating safety. To illustrate, Carole Markin was an experienced online dater, having been on Match.com for many years. In 2010, she decided to meet a man who had contacted her through the website for a long time, but “[At] the end of the second date, he overpowered [her] and sexually assaulted [her]” (Markin, 2015). In addition, an anonymous woman left her comments about Match.com on Yelp that “[She] had interacted with a guy through the website for about two years, and [they] both feel (sic) a thing [for] each other...but when it was time to meet, he disappeared and [she] never heard from him again.” She claimed that the horrible experience made her depressed and disappointed with romance relationships for about 3 years. However, if people choose offline dating, they will be able to have some actual dating without the pressure of wondering whether their safety can be guaranteed. Then they can determine if it is safe enough to date with the partner. Therefore, the concern about whether they are safe is one of the main resistances of online dating website efficiency.
Time
In terms of time, online dating users are most likely deceiving themselves and others by implying that they are too busy to meet potential partners offline. According to Pew Internet Spring Tracking Survey, “[The] average time people spend in crafting a perfect OkCupid Profile or filling out [those] insanely long eHarmony questionnaires is 1 to 1.5 hours” (Miller, 2015). Not to mention that all the time and energy are spent on online correspondence even before the users meet each other in person. To save time, most users are attracted by filtering tools that online dating websites provide; they are willing to use a lot of filtering strategies: filtering in, filtering out, and time management. However, the users’ attitudes toward all these strategies is quite negative. Being aware of the fact that while they are filtering other daters, they are being filtered at the same time, some users might feel a contradiction between honesty and impression. Choosing what information to provide on a profile has become a main concern of every dater and costs a significant amount of time. Filtering techniques also give users the pressure that they have to lie sometimes and the doubt about whether other users’ profiles are true. A researcher from the University of Wisconsin-Madison said: 81 percent of people lie about their height, weight, or age in their online dating profile (Danko, 2014). Certainly, it costs even more time to tell which profile or which part of a profile is true. In contrast, if people choose offline dating, all requisite information will likely be acquired just by several conversations.
In contrast, many individuals have argued that they are provided with ways to more potential partners than they can meet in their real life by online dating websites. However, making decisions is said to be more difficult for users if they have too many choices (Miller, 2015). According to Pai-Lu Wu and Wen-Bin Chiou (2009), “More search options lead to less selective processing by reducing users’ cognitive resources, distracting them with irrelevant information, and reducing their ability to screen out inferior options.” To avoid the mentioned disadvantage, users usually try to use filtering tools to narrow down the number of options. However, the situation that users filter each other created a shopping culture in online dating. The awareness that they may be treated as commodities to filter makes most users uncomfortable. Additionally, they are sometimes looking forward to a better someone next time instead of deeply knowing the present partner. Moreover, they also claimed that filtering techniques made them only know what they don’t want and caused a deviation between what they think they want and what is really integral. Therefore, the more options that online dating provides might not be able to benefit the matching process and even may prevent it. As a result, the impatience caused by “overmuch” time using and dating options is the second resistance of online dating websites’ maximum efficiency.
Matching
Regarding matching, many online dating website users claim that they can hardly find their Mr. or Mrs. Right from those sites. According to the Pew Research Center, only 30 percent of women and 16 percent of men are satisfied with their online partners. However, as an observation of the feedback from 2,500 couples who met each other offline, over 50 percent of them said that their lovers are ideal. Online dating is less efficient than offline dating simply because matching is a complicated process and online questionnaires are not always accurate for every user. In addition, individuals probably present themselves differently online or change their online test answers over time. Therefore, online matching might neglect some potentially ideal partners. Moreover, online tests not only cannot tell people their perfect match but also narrow down the options and make users keep looking for partners who are similar to them. Certainly, it is significant for people to find someone who shares passions and beliefs with them. However, ignoring the importance of interacting with someone who has some different interests or comes from a different culture background is inadvisable. Additionally, online dating profiles may not provide really important information. In face-to-face dates, people can concentrate on asking their partners some designed questions which are clearly not superficial and can grasp some facets of a person in some answers. For instance, people can ask their partners about what kind of person their friends are or why some past romantic relationships didn’t work. Last but not least, statistically, most online dating sites attract more male users than females, and user records among most of those sites showed that “Of the more than 35 million records released, only 5 million---a mere 15 percent---actually belonged to women” (Dewey, 2015). The present situation makes female users pickier and male users needier, which is clearly not an advantage for finding “perfect” matches. All in all, online dating is much less efficient than offline dating.
However, many people also argue that another advantage of online dating is that users do not have to guess anything about the partner they will date. In other words, the specific online testing leaves no guesswork to them because they can clear any doubts up easily before the first date, which makes their dating more comfortable. However, guesswork is not always unsatisfactory. Mostly, no guesswork is equal to no surprises, no excitement and no mystery. Actually, the spark of attraction that is kindled by the unknown is never lit because of a complete, honest and detailed profile (Pamer, n.d., p.2). Therefore, the emotion elicited by consideration and comparison mostly cannot be regarded as love, which is also one of the most important reasons why the success rate of online dating is lower than offline dating. In conclusion, all the information that is provided by those “over detailed” profiles can be considered as the third resistance of online dating websites’ efficiency.
Conclusion and limitation
As an online relationships management tool, a user strategy and a form of communication, online dating websites are real and powerful elements in people’s daily lives. Compared with previous forms of dating, online dating sites provide some efficient ways to find individuals’ virtual romantic interests. Because of being virtual, online dating websites hold some disadvantages, including unsure safety, time wasting, and poor matching. To avoid those disadvantages, users should use online dating websites more cleverly. First of all, to protect themselves, users shouldn’t disclose too much information at once and need to guard their privacy. They should gradually reveal some details about themselves during they deepen their knowledge of their partners. When necessary, they can even Google their potential dates to guarantee their safety. Unless they have gotten to know their partners very well, they shouldn’t give their full name or personal details to their partners (Yu, n.d.). Secondly, to save more time, they need to know how to narrow their focus by using some appropriate filtering strategies. However, only if they know exactly what they indeed need can online dating be a real time-saver. Thus, firstly, they need to figure out their ideal type that complement and match them, physically and mentally. For example, if they are allergic to animal fur, they can simply remove someone with pets from their consideration lists. Last but not least, to avoid being “over rational” and losing all excitement, they should be able to create a compelling but not specific profile.
One of the limitations of this article is that it only consists of qualitative analysis but fails to mention any experiment data to support conclusions. Another limitation is derived from the possibility that there may be some other crucial factors which have not discovered yet. A third limitation is that none of the moderators, which are very important in any correlation analysis, have been considered in this article, such as gender, age, and culture background. Future researchers may undertake a real experiment with questionnaires and regression analysis to figure out the specific mechanism of weakening the efficiency, try to find more potential causes, and discuss the influences of some main moderators.

References
Miller, L. (2015, November). 4 Reasons to Ditch Online Dating and Seek Out Romance the Old-School Way. Retrieved from http://www.popsugar.com/love/Online-Dating-Pros-Cons-36775562 Pamer, G. (N.D.). 10 Pros & Cons of Online Dating. Retrieved from http://www.yourtango.com/experts/mrs-grace-pamer/10-ways-internet-has-changed-datin g-scene-expert/
Nicholson, J. (2014, April). Pros and Cons of Online Dating. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-attraction-doctor/201404/pros-and-cons-onli ne-dating
Markin, C. (2015, March). Online Dating. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com.ezproxy.depaul.edu/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre20 15032006
Danko, M. (2014, October). 11 Results from Studies About Online Dating. Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/59509/11-results-studies-about-online-dating Dewey, C. (2015, August). Ashley Madison faked female profiles to lure men in, hacked data suggest. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/08/25/ashley-madison-fak ed-female-profiles-to-lure-men-in-hacked-data-suggest
Yu, W. (N.D.). 11 Insider Tips to Finding Love Online. Retrieved from http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/features/online-dating-tips Baker, A. (2002). What makes an online relationship successful? Clues from couples who met in cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(6), 363-375. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2008.0182
Wu, P., & Chiou, W. (2009). More Options Lead to More Searching and Worse Choices in Finding Partners for Romantic Relationships Online: An Experimental Study. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(3), 315-318. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2008.0182
Best, K., & Delmege, S. (2012). The filtered encounter: online dating and the problem of filtering through excessive information. Social Semiotics, 22(3), 237-258. doi:10.1080/10350330.2011.648405

Original Sentence 1: Several studies about life have shown that having too many choices and options at our fingertips can actually prevent us from making decisions.
Original Sentence 2: On the other hand, an online dating profile may be so complete, honest and detailed that there is no mystery left.
Original Sentence 3: Use your first name only and give personal details only after you’ve gotten to know each other well.