The article makes it sound as if „200 question“ dating sited like eHarmony were any better, but it’s scientifically proven that there’s no correlation between such questionnaire matches and actual relationship compatibility
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42546586
[2] https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2007/may/22/no-love-lost...
I surmise that a big portion of people that hooked up via dating apps are incompatible at a fundamental level and they just don't know better.
Of course, just a list of profiles may not be helpful either e.g. I met my husband on Grindr but that required a lot of effort and enduring the emotional downsides of the experience. Dating online also deprives one of using all of one’s senses to “feel” if the person(s) in front are a good match.
PS: For some of us, online dating is not always a choice as you can imagine, so even with the downsides, these apps are needed still.
Citation?
1. The app algorithms are usually black boxes, so who knows whether they’re really using scientific methods
2. Apps often include questions such as height due to customer demand, which are known to be very bad predictors
3. The interaction between the factors is very significant and complicated/unknown
4. People don’t answer truthfully
5. People don’t know what they want
What is known however is that there’s a strong placebo effect initially, i.e. the mere suggestion that somebody is a good match although they aren’t increases the success of first dates, but not in the long term. There’s also research on how these systems can be designed to be addicting, which is surely being done.
One of the strongest known predictors instead is “shared emotional experiences”, e.g. a study about making people walk over a wobbly bridge together. Hence why “running groups” and so on are popular nowadays among people disillusioned by algorithms