Online dating sites frequently claim that people will achieve better romantic outcomes when seeking partners through a website than through conventional offline dating. However, there is no compelling evidence for this. The studies that did study this were severely flawed.

Dating websites gives access to a the existence of a lot of potential partners. This might solve the problem of perceived lack of access to potential partners of conventional dating. It also bypasses the uncertainty about whether a partner is romantically available (1) and the need for courage to approach a stranger (2). The degree to which the access provided by online dating sites yields romantic outcomes depends on how effective the access is at facilitating face-to-face contact with potentially compatible partners.

Online dating websites typically offer profiles rather than face-to-face contact (1), offer more potential partners (2) and present users with a large variety of potential partners. Assumptions regarding the benefit of access are that people have good insight in what partner qualities presented in a profile will actually appeal to them when they meet face-to-face (1), the side-by-side comparisons of multiple partners allows for means of evaluating one’s potential attraction to a partner (2) and people make better decisions when they have more choice (3).

It appears as if people are able to deduct desirability of a person from a photograph but cannot accurately judge unique compatibility with oneself. People often lack insight into why they like things. People tend to exhibit a disconnect between idiographic self-reports of the traits they desire and the traits that actually predicted romantic attraction to and relationship well-being with real-life partners.

People’s preferences predict who appeals to them in a profile but not in person. People can accurately discern more appealing people from others, based on profiles but cannot discern which characteristics will inspire attraction after meeting the person. This leads to some people receiving a lot of messages, leading to these people not replying anymore, meaning that browsing profiles is not a good method of evaluating compatibility with a partner.

Browsing partners leads people to joint evaluate; comparing multiple partners simultaneously. Pursuing a relationship with a particular partner puts people in separate evaluation mode; evaluating one specific partner. People often make choices in joint evaluation mode but experience the consequences in separate evaluation mode. In addition to this, people often prioritize different characteristics in joint evaluation mode than when in separate evaluation mode.        

An assessment mindset emphasizes critical evaluation of entities, states or goals in comparison to available alternatives. It is associated with pursuing the optimal choice among an array of options (1), a less biased consideration of the pros and cons of alternatives (2) and more accurate forecasts about the future of a romantic relationship (3). However, it may not promote satisfying social interaction. This mindset may undermine relationship dynamics in relationships.

A locomotion mindset emphasizes committing psychological resources toward effective and pleasurable attainment of desired goals. Side-by-side comparison (e.g. browsing) leads to strengthening of the assessment mindset.

Browsing could lead to choice-overload in which people simply avoid making any decision rather than exerting the mental effort required to compare and contrast so many others.

Choice set size does not influences people’s subjective experience of the choice process. People tend to use more heuristics when the choice set increases. Larger choice sets cause people to make mating decisions that are less closely aligned with their idealized mating decisions. A larger choice set may lead to less satisfaction with the selected partners. A large choice set also makes people less likely to commit to one partner.

The benefits of online dating are a broad range of access in convenient (1) and flexible formats (2).

COMMUNICATION
In a computer-mediated environment, people are more likely to behave in task-oriented, impersonal manners (1) and exhibited more disinhibited and counter-normative behaviours (2).

Cues-filtered-out refers to the idea that the lack of personal cues makes a social connection not possible through online means. It suggests that a reduction in the number of available nonverbal and contextual cues will diminish people’s experience of social presence and hinder people’s ability and desire to form social connections.

The social information processing theory states that people communicate social information within the limitations of the medium. Online methods of communication permit a great deal of social information and allows for intimate relationships to be formed.

The hyperpersonal perspective states that online communication allows for opportunities to present oneself in a strategic manner to convey a highly socially desirable image (e.g. present oneself as one’s ideal self rather than the true self). This may also occur for the recipient as text messages often consist of limited information and the recipient may fill in the gaps. An ambiguous message by a liked other may be interpreted in the desired light.

People often quickly attempt to switch an online relationship to an offline relationship. Online dating communication services might be able to build a substantive foundation for a relationship. The initial ‘inner beauties’ of the online contact could outshine the flaws when meeting in real life (i.e. enhancing hypothesis) However, offline contact may also lead to a more negative image if one has created an overly positive image of someone (i.e. devaluing hypothesis).

Face-to-face interactions may produce increases in impression positivity following a brief period of CMC communication but these benefits disappear following a longer period of CMC communication. In order to reap the benefits of CMC, a modality switch should be quick.

There is heightened potential for deception online. Face-to-face interaction provides people with experiential information. This information may drive the relationship-initiation process. Gut-level feelings about a potential partner take on increased importance in face-to-face interaction compared to CMC.

SUMMARY
The perceived success of dating websites may be due to selection processes based upon branding (1), cognitive and social-psychological processes (e.g. confirmation bias) (2) and the inevitability that random pairings among highly motivated, pre-requisite meeting individuals would likely yield a number of successful relationships (3).