Sunday, October 04, 2009

The Internet: the modern matchmaker (Week 4)


Here's a screenshot of the SDU's website, which I thought to look up while thinking of something to write for interpersonal communication. It's mainly a networking/dating site with personal bios and notices for upcoming events. Not much to see or do if you're not a member, so I just took a few amusing minutes to read the Success Stories column, which had entries written by married couples who had met each other through the SDU.

Brief background info on the Social Development Unit: It was established in 1984 by the government as a means to promote marriage amongst single graduates, who, apparently at that time, were facing a low marriage rate due to certain factors such as their careers, certain cultural beliefs and such. Since then, it has merged with the Social Development Service, the SDU equivalent for non-graduates (one wonders why the government had to make that distinction in the first place) to form the SDU-SDS, in an effort to expand their database of singles.

The concept of matchmaking is not new, but it certainly has evolved. In the past, where arranged marriages and other cultural norms made marriage a formal and rigid institution, the opinions of the two parties hardly figured into the whole equation. Now, in today's significantly more individualistic society where emphasis is greatly placed on the self, it is the normal mindset that a relationship be all about the two people involved. Thus, the focus of matchmaking has changed to one based highly on interpersonal compatibility and communication.

Nowadays, matchmaking and online dating merely increases the opportunity for compatible single people to meet, but from there on, it is up to the individuals and how they interact. One of the SDU's primary activities is to hold regular social events, such as horseback riding classes and cruises and such, which gives strangers a reason to interact. The beauty of these events is that everyone there is single and is looking for a potential partner, so there is a reduced awkwardness when approaching a person. Chances are that people attending these events are at least mildly interested in the activity, and they are able to draw connections of similarity from there. The concept of similarity states that we tend to form relationships with those we perceive as similar to us, so these events would serve as a catalyst for potential relationships. Online matchmaking uses the concept of attitudinal similarity to put people together according to their attributes and beliefs, and occasionally people are paired by how they complement each other.

However, there are a great deal of people that disagree with the whole online matchmaking deal. They say that pairing people merely by their similarities is flawed, and that the supposed rationality of the matchmaking argument is disproven by the weak success rates. These people believe that a true connection can only be established by physical interpersonal communication; both parties have to communicate face to face in order for sparks to fly. They also disagree with the concept of speed dating, something highly endorsed by certain matchmaking groups, saying that it is impossible to ascertain if someone is compatible with oneself within the short amount of time given. People would then have to resort to nonverbal cues and attributes to figure out if that person is physically attractive, and base their judgement on that, and this practice can be very inaccurate or misleading.

So: is online matchmaking really ineffective, and the successes thus far mere coincidences? Or is there hard science behind it?

17 comments:

  1. Chanderman you've not been commenting on my blog eh? haha.

    Anyway I thought the whole social events was still a little awkward (and sad) thing. Reason is, when the people interact, it may boil down to a quickie-test of who's best, based on superficial reasons. I suppose real understanding of an individual would only take place in slow, steady bonding instead.

    Also, in regards to your question, since the government is quite hard-selling on increasing marriage rates and babies, I doubt there would be prominent sources that suggests online matchmaking as a ineffective avenue for singles. Simply put, the media may have obfuscated actual statistics to the extent where we cannot really put a finger on it and conclude confidently the effectiveness of such online services. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  2. some of my friends join online speed dating, but results are very little.
    i doubt that it is ineffective, but more so that we are not open to this idea. as Singaporeans, we're more of a low context culture. we tend not to disclose any of our information online, thinking it might be a fruad.
    i've seen successful cases from online dating, and they've been happily married for 5 years now. see, this also proves that online dating is not ineffective at all.
    that being said, it all boils down to individuals and how we perceive this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. i wouldn't say matchmaking is ineffective per se, but it does have its limitations.

    for one thing, the idea of disclosing information on the net doesnt' really give one much positive characteristics. sure, it might seem that the person is approachable, but on the other side of the coin, one might find it to be "cheap & easy" thus lowering the grade of a person.

    then again, you can reach a lot of people through the internet, thus upping the chances of finding a suitable partner

    isaac
    http://pitstophere.wordpress.com

    ReplyDelete
  4. i think barney stinson was the one who said that people who do online dating are either crazy or ugly or old or something to that effect. i cant imagine how i could hook up with someone online. its just weird and loserish.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To each his own, Nitroboy. Russ, didn't Dhana meet Malar on Friendster? They've been together for so long that they're as good as married I think. And Friendster isn't even an online dating site. This proves that there is nothing wrong with online dating. It's just like regular dating but with a different medium of communication. People have to get their heads around the image of the bespectacled nerd that's had more strikeouts than his SAT score looking online for a bride. It's just not fair, and it's really close-minded.

    ReplyDelete
  6. how can you douchebags ever trust anyone online? all they wan is sex, and the younger you are the better. everyone starts with intro and asking for measurements. disgusting pigs.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I personally believe that online dating is merely a new option to an old game. New possibilities are added and there are more opportunities to meet the right person for you, but the game remains the same. In the end, it is still about both parties liking each other, something that can only be found out through communication.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good God, Chander, you didn't try this online dating shit, did you?

    ReplyDelete
  9. F**K no. I'm just talking about it, and whether or not it helps.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, sure i helps. Helps those people too sad to actually get a real date the old fashioned way. It just isn't the same. So much of a first impression of someone comes from body language, confidence, presentation and all that jazz. How are you supposed to assess that online? The mechanics are all different, and losers and jerks can pretend to be suave, sophisticated men online. It's like cheating, even.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Think about it this way: how about those people who are nice, caring and sincere guys but are butt ugly? They wouldn't get a second look thanks to this first impression theory. However, when you're online, looks don't matter, and people are free to meet the real you, something that wouldn't have happened should your looks get in the way. It helps people get around their bias concerning looks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. People say that you meet the real person face to face and online, people are free to reinvent themselves. I feel that people who go chat other people up face to face usually put up some sort of act i oder to impress the other party and get their attention, mainly to hide their flaws and save face. You know what I mean, Russ, with your ex and all. Remember how nice she was and how she is now? Online, however, people aren't face to face and are spared the potential embarrassment, so they feel more free to be themselves, and if they get rejected, at least it's online and less emotionally scarring.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Can we please not bring my ex girlfriend into this?

    ReplyDelete
  14. IMHO, both methods have their pros and cons. Each person should develop his own preference for online dating vs. traditional dating. People fare differently with different methods, and its up to the person to decide which works best for him and make the most of it.

    ReplyDelete
  15. jimmy is right for one thing. rejection online is less scarring. so then pansies who cant take rejection go online to find so called love. so when you go online dating all youre gonna find are these pansy ass losers who cant suck it up to get real dates. you really want that? unless youre a loser yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  16. much like the pansy ass losers that anonymously leave notes?

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete