We Experiment On Human Beings!

July 28th, 2014 by Christian Rudder

I’m the first to admit it: we might be popular, we might create a lot of great relationships, we might blah blah blah. But OkCupid doesn’t really know what it’s doing. Neither does any other website. It’s not like people have been building these things for very long, or you can go look up a blueprint or something. Most ideas are bad. Even good ideas could be better. Experiments are how you sort all this out. Like this young buck, trying to get a potato to cry.


We noticed recently that people didn’t like it when Facebook “experimented” with their news feed. Even the FTC is getting involved. But guess what, everybody: if you use the Internet, you’re the subject of hundreds of experiments at any given time, on every site. That’s how websites work.

Here are a few of the more interesting experiments OkCupid has run.

Experiment 1: LOVE IS BLIND, OR SHOULD BE

OkCupid’s ten-year history has been the epitome of the old saying: two steps forward, one total fiasco. A while ago, we had the genius idea of an app that set up blind dates; we spent a year and a half on it, and it was gone from the app store in six months.

Of course, being geniuses, we chose to celebrate the app’s release by removing all the pictures from OkCupid on launch day. “Love Is Blind Day” on OkCupid—January 15, 2013.

All our site metrics were way down during the “celebration”, for example:



But by comparing Love Is Blind Day to a normal Tuesday, we learned some very interesting things. In those 7 hours without photos:

And it wasn’t that “looks weren’t important” to the users who’d chosen to stick around. When the photos were restored at 4PM, 2,200 people were in the middle of conversations that had started “blind”. Those conversations melted away. The goodness was gone, in fact worse than gone. It was like we’d turned on the bright lights at the bar at midnight.



This whole episode made me curious, so I went and looked up the data for the people who had actually used the blind date app. I found a similar thing: once they got to the date, they had a good time more or less regardless of how good-looking their partner was. Here’s the female side of the experience (the male is very similar).



Oddly, it appears that having a better-looking blind date made women slightly less happy—my operating theory is that hotter guys were assholes more often. Anyhow, the fascinating thing is the online reaction of those exact same women was just as judgmental as everyone else’s:



Basically, people are exactly as shallow as their technology allows them to be.

Experiment 2: SO WHAT’S A PICTURE WORTH?

All dating sites let users rate profiles, and OkCupid’s original system gave people two separate scales for judging each other, “personality” and “looks.”
I found this old screenshot. The “loading” icon over the picture pretty much sums up our first four years. Anyhow, here’s the vote system:



Our thinking was that a person might not be classically gorgeous or handsome but could still be cool, and we wanted to recognize that, which just goes to show that when OkCupid started out, the only thing with more bugs than our HTML was our understanding of human nature.

Here’s some data I dug up from the backup tapes. Each dot here is a person. The two scores are within a half point of each other for 92% of the sample after just 25 votes (and that percentage approaches 100% as vote totals get higher).

In short, according to our users, “looks” and “personality” were the same thing, which of course makes perfect sense because, you know, this young female account holder, with a 99th percentile personality:



…and whose profile, by the way, contained no text, is just so obviously a really cool person to hang out and talk to and clutch driftwood with.

After we got rid of the two scales, and replaced it with just one, we ran a direct experiment to confirm our hunch—that people just look at the picture. We took a small sample of users and half the time we showed them, we hid their profile text. That generated two independent sets of scores for each profile, one score for “the picture and the text together” and one for “the picture alone.” Here’s how they compare. Again, each dot is a user. Essentially, the text is less than 10% of what people think of you.



So, your picture is worth that fabled thousand words, but your actual words are worth…almost nothing.

Experiment 3: THE POWER OF SUGGESTION

The ultimate question at OkCupid is, does this thing even work? By all our internal measures, the “match percentage” we calculate for users is very good at predicting relationships. It correlates with message success, conversation length, whether people actually exchange contact information, and so on. But in the back of our minds, there’s always been the possibility: maybe it works just because we tell people it does. Maybe people just like each other because they think they’re supposed to? Like how Jay-Z still sells albums?

† Once the experiment was concluded, the users were notified of the correct match percentage.

To test this, we took pairs of bad matches (actual 30% match) and told them they were exceptionally good for each other (displaying a 90% match.)† Not surprisingly, the users sent more first messages when we said they were compatible. After all, that’s what the site teaches you to do.



But we took the analysis one step deeper. We asked: does the displayed match percentage cause more than just that first message—does the mere suggestion cause people to actually like each other? As far as we can measure, yes, it does.

When we tell people they are a good match, they act as if they are. Even when they should be wrong for each other.



The four-message threshold is our internal measure for a real conversation. And though the data is noisier, this same “higher display means more success” pattern seems to hold when you look at contact information exchanges, too.

This got us worried—maybe our matching algorithm was just garbage and it’s only the power of suggestion that brings people together. So we tested things the other way, too: we told people who were actually good for each other, that they were bad, and watched what happened.

Here’s the whole scope of results (I’m using the odds of exchanging four messages number here):



As you can see, the ideal situation is the lower right: to both be told you’re a good match, and at the same time actually be one. OkCupid definitely works, but that’s not the whole story. And if you have to choose only one or the other, the mere myth of compatibility works just as well as the truth. Thus the career of someone like Doctor Oz, in a nutshell. And, of course, to some degree, mine.

1,220 Responses to “We Experiment On Human Beings!”

  1. Peter says:

    I’m glad OkTrends is back. Always loved hearing about your data analysis. Great post and hope to see more in the future.

  2. BetweenWorlds on OKC says:

    Bold of OKC to admit this; it’s far from self-promoting. But really, how significant is it that people were 20% more likely to write to someone if notified that they had a high compatibility score with them? All that shows is that people pay attention to those alerts, and that sometimes when you take a closer look at a profile you see more encouraging things than when you glance at the score. Neither is surprising.

    Another thing that muddies the water is that while compatibility scores CAN be significant, they only are so if people do a good job filling out their questions and assessments of answers. There are a LOT of people on this site who either answer very few questions, answer questions compulsively or at random rather than picking ones that are actually important to them, or give inappropriate assessments of answers (I am amazed how many times I find people marking “Unacceptable” the SAME ANSWER they themselves gave to the same question.)

    If OKCupid could eliminate these people from their data, I would take their data analysis more seriously.

  3. Rebecca says:

    These ‘expiremebrs’ are completely unethical. It’s ine think to watch people’s reactions, it is is another to manipulate things without their consent, and I don’t mean a small blurb in the Terms of service. It may be legal, but it is not ethical. (Pardon typos…using phone)

  4. Marilyn Slade says:

    I enjoyed reading all this data! I think your experiments are reasonable and show you and us a lot about ourselves and the patterns that emerge using your website.

  5. Ihadthisfiguredoutalongtimeago says:

    I’ve been on the site a few months and to no surprise, the women reacted the exact same way as every other site regardless of ‘match rating’.

    I was surprised to read the article about OKCupid’s testing on us, and laughed my butt off when I read this blog.

    I thank you for putting the ‘superficiality pie’ in the face of those that disregard the important qualities of people that don’t have a perfect photo.

    In the few months I’ve been on here I’ve wasted hours reading and writing about 50 thoughtful and unique first messages. I read any profile, whether it’s a 10% match or a 95% match. I make my own judgement based on what the woman writes, not her looks. As every guy knows, the ‘hot’ ones are either fake or high maintenance and shallow. But just like you’ve discovered, people just don’t get it in their heads that looks fade, chemistry develops over time and is not an instant orgasm from a photo, and the online aspect is only a TOOL to replace going to a thousand stupid bars and nightclubs…not a replacement for actually meeting a person.

    Wake up everyone.

  6. Fuck u says:

    Bullshit!

  7. Disenchanted says:

    Call it what you want, an experiment, an exercise in futility! At the end of the day is any of this really helping to bring people together. Sure, I guess. What else do we have? Personally being in my late 50’s it’s a lot to do with age if you ask me. My 19 year old son spends countless hours connecting and reconnecting with dozens of people on facebook every day and for the most part just to hang out with! Girls, guys, mall people, car enthusiasts, you name it. He’s doing via the internet kinda what we did when we were in school or at work. Meet, talk, be attracted to people for one reason or another. Think about it, where did you meet your spouse, at school or work no doubt. Come on, you know you did!!!! You physically SAW them, watched their mannerism’s and how they interacted with others, heard their voice, did they have good grammar! All those things you’ll only find out by seeing and being around the other person which brings up “dating sites” in general. What’s the biggie! Do they really work at all or do the people that do finally come together and that actually accomplish more than a “one-and-done” end up staying together because they found their “soulmate”, really, or because they’re tired of doing this crap anymore? Makes you wonder!
    It’s sad that this is all we have. That our lives are so so busy that all we have is an hour or so per day behind our laptop to devote to finding the one person that we want to spend the rest of our lives with. Seems pretty important to me!!!
    For young people it’s fun, for us a bit older we’re looking for something lasting. I think that’s why it’s do hard. This isn’t a world of lasting, it’s a world of fear…………….

    Sorry folks, hate to say it but it IS all about the picture and you know it!

  8. rmsgrey says:

    To the people upset about OKC running experiments this way, I hope you’re also upset about your local supermarket – any time they rearrange their shelves or change prices of things, and then continue to keep track of their profits, they’re running an experiment on their customers without consent. If you’re okay with Microsoft dropping the price of the XBox One in response to sales figures (which will happen eventually) then why are you upset about OKC sometimes using a different algorithm to calculate match percentages? How many users actually check the details of the site’s algorithm in the first place?

    Personally, I don’t have a problem with a site like OKC experimenting in order to improve their algorithms – there’s a clear benefit to all users in discovering whether the match percentage is actually in any way meaningful.

    My problem with the Facebook experiments is not that FB users were experimented on, but that there was no benefit to FB users from the experiments – showing that you can depress people by selectively giving them depressing stories rather than optimistic ones has no interaction with the quality of FB’s news feed in future, while showing that the calculated match percentage has no relevance to relationship success would have had a huge impact on OKC’s quality of service.

  9. Bonn01 says:

    What about us that ignored the percentages? Yes, some of us ran our own experiment.
    A picture just shows if they are likely lying about their info in the profile. Those without picture I either ignored, or if there were a good profile I would ask for a picture. I found that the majority lied about their age and what they were looking for.
    I found many, especially if they were from another town or state, lied. They ended up asking for money. When this happened I reported it to you. Often it would take a few months and a story line before they asked. Others said they were looking for a relationship, but only wanted online sex. I blocked them. I found about one in ten was serious about looking for someone.

  10. Joseph says:

    If I buy a ladder and expect it to hold me up I’m being pretty reasonable. If I go on the web and expect a social media site to provide the same sort of security and trustworthiness I’m definitely not being smart or reasonable.

    OkC makes no claims to transparency. As described above, it was created as something new in the universe and has been a work in progress ever since.

    If it disgusts or disappoints someone, let them move on. I will stick around because I found that this site serves me quite well for what I ask of it.

  11. Benjamin Sorensen says:

    Wow, I find that all so very interesting. I’m a data hog.

  12. Rich Turner says:

    If there was ever a reason why nobody should PAY for this site, you have just delivered it – brilliantly. However, if OKCupid has intentions of being a social commerce site, i.e. lots of people paying lots of $$ for your services, then this behavior is damning.

    Likely won’t matter anyway – the FTC will tie IAC up in knots for months as it investigates, and while lawsuits will be difficult – no $$ was exchanged – the outcome will be like Google’s blog experiments: lots of negative publicity, a few key folks fired, and a strong unlikelihood that they will ever engage in such behavior again.

    Very disappointed in OKCupid. I’ll still use the free site – in fact, the dating scammers operate more on Match.com and Chemistry.com (i.e., the know the members are more serious) but I’ll put a lot less stock in whatever OKCupid has to say going forward. Shame, the site had some promise.

  13. aida says:

    I met obe person in 3 weeks n he was nothing like his picture…..n what dirty car he had… .when home totally dessapoibted….what a dessater that was… so I dobt think this thing help……you people match me with the wrong guys every time.

  14. Mark says:

    So during the “love is blind” days, how many people (like myself) just reassembled the scrambled pictures to see who it was, then used the location data to find their actual profiles? :)

    Didn’t make me any more or less apt to message someone (especially since the number of women actually using the app was tiny), but it was a fun diversion.

  15. rmsgrey says:

    @BetweenWorlds on OKC: “I am amazed how many times I find people marking “Unacceptable” the SAME ANSWER they themselves gave to the same question.”

    Not everyone is looking for a clone of themselves. And there are questions where you’d question the sanity of someone who wanted their partner to give the same answer as them- for example: “Are you the dominant one in your relationships?” (disclaimer: may not be an actual question, but there are questions along those lines) – someone who likes to be the one in charge should be looking for someone who likes their partner to be the one in charge rather than someone who’d always be butting heads with them.

    There are lots of areas where it makes sense to be attracted to someone complementary rather than someone identical – you can’t both sleep on the left side of the bed…

  16. mary anne says:

    hey hi what if i compare dating sites? are they better or worse if one pays to use it, which site has better looking people, should incomes be matched for true companionship, what if staff robot never tells the truth, how can a computer have a fairer sense of emotions based only on logistics that are probably untruths made up by a machine? argh.
    i guess there is hardly a way to see who’s telling tales..either reading, seeing photos, speaking or what to do when that ‘single’ guy shows up with a wedding ring on, 15 yrs older than stated and way more than heavy, due to being scammed by the match maker who is there to ‘introduce’ you.

  17. barb says:

    I read all of the data in these experiments and i must be one of the odd ones cause i look at all of the profile not just the picture

  18. dusdusdus says:

    No, I’m sorry, this is not how “websites work”. People do not sign up for websites to have their data used however the proprietors of the website see fit, or be manipulated nonconsensually. This “experimental” was unethical. It would not have passed any IRB standards at a university, it would not meet the criteria for ethical conduct in any academic journal. Changing aspects of the website in order to change features, match new expectations, etc. is what people should expect in a website. Interfering with people’s personal lives isn’t.

    Seriously, OKCupid, you should be ashamed of yourself, and your cavalier attitude towards the people who use your website. I have been a paying A-List member, but you won’t get a cent out of me again.

  19. RE says:

    Genius. We can’t help it…we’re shallow fools playing out our fantasy of finding someone who will love us WHILE putting up with our shallower faults. Thanks for the info and for possibly making me a hare.

  20. Rebecca says:

    I don’t like the fact that I am sent people’s pictures from everywhere else versus the actual state I live in! I live in Roanoke, VA…so I am looking for men in my state, NOT South Carolina, North Carolina, etc. No one wants a LONG DISTANCE relationship! Get with the program, please!

  21. Cecilia says:

    I think it’s cool that you do experiments. It is by trial and error that makes one a expert.

  22. longtime user says:

    Personally, I like that you do stuff like this. If you were toying with every person who used the site, that probably wouldn’t be good, but I assume the sample was relatively small.

    I know some people are complaining, but I don’t see any actual harm done. If a person didn’t go over someone’s profile or Q&A themselves, and let a match percentage change their decision, that’s their own fault.

    I’ve used the site for awhile, and am pretty selective about who I pursue – but the sad truth is that the bread and butter is all the random people who look at a profile, think that person is hot, and then want to marry them.

    ==Note to the developers==
    That’s sort of OkCupid’s niche, though. There are sites like eHarmony that evaluate the entirety of a person’s life and try to come up with some deep match; there are sites like plentyoffish that are pretty much all based on pictures and looks. OkCupid, on the other hand, it’s the middle ground, where you get the best of both worlds. You have lots of access to browse around and look at pictures, but also some deeper information about how compatible you are. It’s not a site to arrange marriage, and it’s not a hookup site – it’s the nice middle ground. People aren’t always going to use the information you give, but you provide the tools, and it’s up to them how well they want to use them. I’m perfectly fine with the study and the results.

  23. Patricia says:

    I personally think that website dating does not truly work more times than not because it is easier to communicate and befriend someone through email and picture view only but in reality once you meet the chemistry is the only real factor that makes a relationship spark and if the chemistry is not there regardless of how long you have communicated or how handsome or beautiful you are it will not happen but what will happen is a different kind of bond which actually is a platonic friendship which oddly enough no-one of the opposite sex is interested in following through with because it is not within our society because pressune is on both sexes that a friendship without sex is an impossible thing to occur and this is truly a shame because many great friendship can occur trough friendship regardless of what sexes they are a friend is always a friend and is able to share good and bad times together and make life a better place to be in.
    As far as love and dissapointment goes the only dissapointment I have been a part of is not feeling comfortable with the first time dating scene, although it might be exciting in the beginning I have come to the understanding that it is much nicer to do things with people you get to know really well verses constantly meeting someone for an hour or two and never seeing them again. Some people do come within our lives and leave an imprint within our hearts forever we may get an opportunity to come across their path and we may not but consider yourself lucky to have experienced those wonderful moments and cherish the friendships along the way that do last and always follow your heart and be true to what it tells you and where it directs you to sometimes the heart may know more than your brain.
    As far as website dating although I honestly believe it truly is a great way to create your own personal business venture I still believe that there is nothing better than coming across an individual in the street, at a store on the boardwalk or any place else for that matter and all it takes is a funny or smart remark to capture their attention and you will get their response one way or another. If it is meant to be you will know and if it is not do not fret it has nothing to do with your looks, your personality or even your pocket it does have everything to do with chemistry and this is something that not even the best scientist of the universe have gotten a hold of or can actually say they understand why it happens or why it does not. This is my own experiment and my own understanding of the dating scene of course.

  24. Looks aren't everything says:

    Experiment versus Study, in my opinion the mere word experiment gets people to think all the time they have wasted was nothing more than experiment at their cost. On the other hand if they areYour nickname should be

    Red

    Even if you don’t have red hair (and you just might) you have a ginger’s personality. Lively and quick-witted, you keep everyone laughing. It’s likely you have a quick temper to match that quick wit. You are highly intelligent, though, so if you ever commit a crime you’ll probably get away with it. Remember to wear sunscreen!
    part of a study they tend to except that as a more positive light. Personally when shuffling through the quick match I disregard those that I would not want to look at first thing in the morning, why because a

  25. Bon_NY says:

    “Remember: the initial trigger for the outrage over the Facebook study was that it manipulated the emotions of users. But we are being manipulated without our knowledge or consent all the time – by advertisers, marketers, politicians – and we all just accept that as a part of life. The only difference between the Facebook study and everyday life is that the researchers were trying to understand the >effect< of that manipulation."

    -Duncan Watts, Researcher at Microsoft

    Great Post: funny, data-candy = sexy, honest, smart. Anyone outraged over how websites grow and improve (especially complex systems like OKQ) really needs to take a step back and rethink whether they want to participate in any form of online media. If you're still feeling used, there are many wonderful traditional methods of finding a date.

  26. Sylvanwing says:

    OKCupid it’s very much based on photos. Especially in the mobile app. Would be nice if profiles could also display some sort of title or tagline that could be clever or profound. Sometimes the user name is showing, sometimes not depending on where you are in the mobile app. Otherwise the only thing that entices you to open a profile is that photo.

    I anyways liked reading OKTrends hope there will be more of these.

  27. david says:

    “…just because every jumps into hell, you’re doing it, too?”

    It’s STILL not right, it’s not fair and it WILL lose people for you.

  28. Samoht says:

    HEY ! EXPERIMENT! After all, we’re all a bunch of white mice for all you big corporations. HEY!, It’s how things are done these days. Ya can’t escape it. And those disclaimers you see about PRIVACY POLICIES attached to adds and application forms, what a JOKE! As long as a person has nothing to hide, Hey. I joined your quaint little site (Ok Cupid) a couple of years ago and I pretty much used it as entertainment, and self amusement. NOT to be taken seriously. Oh Yeah!, l have been trying to get off the damn thing for a while now, and it looks like I’m an experiment that you folks just won’t let out of the maze. Hopefully someone at Ok Cupid reads this and assists me with an exit from this site. You folks at Ok Stupid- “OOPS!” I mean Cupid truely do have your site members at best interest. THANKS!

  29. Charles Bowser says:

    I was one of the people who you used the suggestion experiment on.

    I pay for the first class service you loathsome piece of garbage.

    I trusted you and you betrayed me.

    And if I can be part of a class action to sue your ass I will be first in line!!!!

  30. harry balls says:

    so basically only 20% of people actually respond. Nice to know.

  31. Reepicheepssword says:

    Fascinating! Loved the frankness and information in this blog! So many other dating sites purport not to experiment on human beings, post saccharine sweet, meaningless fluff, and charge you tremendous amounts of money for the privilege of spinning on your gerbil wheel to make them even more money.

    Experiments like this show an excellent analysis of what people are really like today, and I have done a few experiments myself (on other topics) with social media on my own face book page with similar results. It is an as of yet, hardly tapped source for revealing the truth of today’s culture.

  32. t says:

    Fuck you! I’m canceling my account.

  33. Heather says:

    This is so well written! Funny, absolutely entertaining & INTERESTING too! Thank you for sharing & going public with the info! I love it!!

  34. Lawrence says:

    I honestly, did not have a problem with it. It caused a lot more people to have conversations. I can speak from experience, women won’t talk with you on that site if you weren’t matched well, so the experiment worked in my opinion.

  35. red says:

    After finally deciding to “step out” of my shell and try online dating, I can’t tell you how overjoyed i am to learn that okcupid thought it a good time to joke around. (KMA) At one point, I replied to the site that I was totally dismayed as to how some mismatches could ever in up in my cue. I challenged their “great” mathematical techniques. I do read, and had a few wtf reactions to a few men listed as matches. Anyway, at some point i found it a wasteful time and effort to relied on any referrals of okcupid. . Presently, I am establishing a promising relationship with someone with only a 70 percentile match but it was initiated by random written stuff in the activities sections. As for us, we didn’t play by the site’s “rules” and made our own. Something which is beyond shallow and eludes the working expertise of the site. I have no knowledge whether I was included in this thing but it seems that it continues.

  36. db says:

    Cling to that driftwood, hon. I’ll just be in the kitchen working on my spreadsheets.

  37. Richard says:

    It’s valid to think that being untrue about one’s age or posting “deceptive” photos is not the way to treat others you are interested in getting to know.

    This new trend in sites experimenting with those who sign-on in good faith is disturbing and, at the most basic level, reprehensible.

    There’s no great revelation here. If you want to collect data, collect away. Anyone who agrees to being on here tacitly agrees to your collection methods. Don’t; however, present your “statistics” falsely.

    If you think you’ve learned something essential, then implement it. Tell the members that you won’t allow photos, or that you won’t present the percentages in the same way as in the past.

    I’ve lost respect for and interest in this site.

  38. victor says:

    You people do anything to make money, its all about the got-damm money, I wouldn’t pay you sob’s a dime for what you offer, I’d rather pay a hooker 1k than give you slimes .50 cents, and by the way, whats free about your bullshit.

  39. Gmenforlife says:

    I thought it was a great analysis. Anything to help improve the site and help improve the probability of meeting new and interesting people will certainly help.

  40. len tomaine says:

    Fucking assholes! We are putting our faith in your site and your now telling us it is garbage. You really are geniuses.

  41. Adriana, Clutcher of OKCupid says:

    TO CLUTCH DRIFTWOOD WITH LMFASAAOOOOAOSDIFHAD:FKGDFK:HJTJKFBVBDG:LKSGFNHK

  42. Ruby Mull says:

    Experiments like this, when false info is directed to the user as truth, promotes only distrust. I will never again trust the “compatability” percentage element.

  43. laverne says:

    So why the fuck you kick me off the site for? If all you’re doing is running scam tests! As other users told me afterwards, you were asking sexually explicit questions that you wanted sexually implicit responses too. Which is how I answered YOUR questions. One attorney friend says it was entrapment.

    So you got the guts, or balls to REPLY??

  44. Peggy schuth says:

    I don’t like when you respond on my page to another member that I have no interest in I don’t think you should do that. and also there’s people that you say like me and then you going and respond to them and then they turn around tell you I’m not interested in you that doesn’t go over too well it kinda hurt your feelings.

  45. JP says:

    I’m all for this sort of experimentation! You gotta think out of the box… try some things… fail at some things… if you want to improve things.

    One major flaw I see in the Match % is based on the way people answer questions, and what they themselves select as an acceptable answer from their match. I often see questions that we have given the same answer from, but my answer is highlighted in red because she doesn’t want her match to give the same answer? Or something completely silly.

    EX:
    “Do you like horror movies?”

    HER: No. [“They scare me too much!”]
    ME: Yes. [“I love them!”]
    ———————–

    Really? My Match % is going to get knocked down because she doesn’t want to talk to someone who likes horror movies?

    I have an experiment idea. You guys should create an app that is simply a MIRROR of OKC, but this app does not allow the guys to send the first message. It relies 100% on the woman to initiate contact. I’ve heard a lot of complaints from all types of women saying that they hate all the messages they get from “creeps” that they have no interest in talking to, let alone dating. This app would show everyone’s profiles and pictures just how they are on the regular OKC app. I would even keep the Quickmatch feature… allowing men to anonymously “like” women, but the women are not notified in any way unless they also “like” the guy, then they will both be sent a message and either of them could send a first message at that point.

    What do you think?

  46. Marilyn Glasser says:

    We are all flying blind initially anyway. Experiment away and you just nevrr know where it all could lead for the better. We all need to exercise sound judgement no matter what the method of introduction so no worries here. Best, Marilyn

  47. Zoe says:

    Wow this pisses me off. Why are you telling people you unethically experimented on them without any shame or apology? There is something wrong with this picture.

  48. Rob says:

    Card carrying scientist here,
    and minor world expert on using newspaper personals (back then) and Internet for the last 15+ years.

    Two points/ questions:

    If you adjust for respondant’s age, are the results vis–a-vis the importance of a profile picture versus its words the same? I would predict that the older folks might assign more importance to the words.

    What do the personality labels mean? In reference to my own ‘portrait’, what the hell does more ‘scientific’ mean? More ‘literary’? More ‘friendly to strangers’? Odd that one!

    What ‘data’ are you actually analyzing? I notice there is a correlation between the number of questions a profile has answered and the number of personality categories assigned, so I’m assuming responses to certain questions suggest these descriptors, but the descriptors themselves need better definitions.

    All in all, OKC has the best ‘product’ I’ve tried. Keep up the good work!

  49. Tangie chop says:

    I must confess to a little manipulation myself. I put up my profilewith a few everyday pics. I got very little response from men and none from women which is what I was looking for. Okay surfed some profiles. Added a little mystery ambiguity to it a few more racy pictures. Bam men started , with women really had to contact them first. With that being said, I love okc. I have met some interesting people, that I know I wouldn’t have met in my everyday life. And that’s what I am really looking for. I do read people’s questions btw always and their profile, and I think they might be cool I’ll contact regardless of looks, when it comes to men. I have to admit tho with women they have to be attractive to me, cause for real women are catty jealous and down right mean and I am one I know. If I’m going to deal with all that you gotta be attractive, so why should men be different?

  50. Andreea says:

    I kinda disagree with the “personality vs looks” experiment.

    While I truly do understand the conception and stereotype, that ( I’m a girl so I will talk about men) most men just go for the picture , the “looks” , ignoring the text , the story that comes with somebody’s profile, I gladly can say that from my own experience with OkCupid, 90% of the men who have contacted me, had as a first message, a long, genuine interest and complimenting the description I’ve added in my profile, and just after 3 or 4 messages, comments and compliments about my looks came in play.

    Now it’s true, I can also agree with the fact that one’s picture might also affect the overall perception of somebody and make them either more interested or less interested in what one has to say about themselfs , how they describe themselfs and all of that.

    In my opinion, OkCupid team should conduct more experiments and strive to improve their “match-making” service, thru experiments of course, so that in this era of virtual & internet, people could count on a good service that might…just might, get them to know another person from this world with whom they click.

    So umm yeah, go ahead, run your experiments, do whatever it takes to increase the chances of “virtual match-making” because the situation in real life doesn’t look like it’s going to change for better and sadly, more & more people will be depending on this.