You've just been on a first date with a woman you find attractive and intelligent, and things went well -- at least from your point of view. The conversation was comfortable, and you have the same taste in books and politics. You're still savoring the pleasure of the experience when you run into a mutual friend, who reports some good news: Your date really had a good time, too, and is looking forward to seeing you again soon.
But what if, instead, your mutual friend hems and haws and finally shares that the woman liked you "well enough," which anyone can translate as "bored to tears"? Or what if (yet another scenario) your mutual friend leaves you dangling? Your friend has indeed talked to the woman since your date but is uncertain of her feelings. She didn't really say how she felt about the evening -- or you.
Which of these hypothetical women do you find most attractive? Classical psychological theory says that you will be most drawn to the woman who finds you attractive. Being liked is rewarding, and social rewards create positive emotions -- including feelings of comfort and safety. This social phenomenon is so well documented that scientists even have a jargony name for it: the reciprocity principle.
But what ever happened to "playing hard to get"? Aren't we most drawn to what we can't have? Or at least to what we have to win? Aren't courtship and romance and love more complex than simple reciprocation? A team of psychological scientists decided to explore these questions in the laboratory, and -- since this is the 21st century -- they adapted the three scenarios for Facebook.
Erin Whitchurch and Timothy Wilson of the University of Virginia and Daniel Gilbert of Harvard recruited a group of women, all students at UVA, who agreed to supply their Facebook profiles. They thought they were taking part in a study of online dating and were told that male students from other universities had looked at their profiles -- along with those of 15 to 20 other women -- and had rated each woman according to how well they thought they would get along with her.
This was just a fiction; there were no men involved in the study at all. Even so, the women subsequently viewed Facebook profiles of four men -- all likeable, attractive college students. Some heard that these were the men who liked them the most, while others believed these men had given them a so-so rating. Still others were told that these four men's feelings about them were unknown -- they might have been very attracted, or they might have been indifferent.
The scientists asked the women to rate the four men on various measures of attraction: how much they liked the men; how much they'd like to collaborate on a project; how much they'd like the men as friends, casual acquaintances or as potential boyfriends. These ratings were all combined into a single attraction index.
The idea was to see if indeed women reciprocate when men find them attractive -- or when they find them unattractive. The scientists also wanted to see if uncertainty is attractive. That is, would the woman be disenchanted or intrigued by men whose feelings were unclear?
The results were clear, and a bit surprising. As described in the online version of the journal Psychological Science, the women were more attracted to the men who liked them a lot -- much more attracted than they were to men who were lukewarm in their feelings. This isn't all that surprising, and it lends support to the reciprocity principle. But -- and it's a big "but" -- the women were most attracted to the men whose feelings remained unknown. They found these mystery men even more attractive than men who openly declared their attraction.
The scientists call this the "pleasure of uncertainty," and they also uncovered a hint as to why this dynamic works. The researchers asked the women how often they thought about the different men -- how frequently they "popped into their head" -- during the time before they made their ratings. The women spent more time musing about the uncertain men than the others, suggesting that having a man in one's thoughts can increase attractiveness. These women -- the ones contemplating a mystery man -- were also in a better mood than the women who had been flattered or deflated.
The women in this study had no information about the men's choosiness in general. That is, they didn't know if the men were uniformly "hard to get" or "easy to get." So this may be a new version of the "playing hard to get" scenario -- creating uncertainty to pique interest. And it may be a version especially suited to the 21st century, simulating the kind of information people often get when they meet online. At the very start of the e-dating process, mystery may have some benefits.
Julie Spira: Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder? OkCupid Study Reveals Interesting Statistics
Jessica Massa: Billy Baldwin, Skype Sex, and Why Technology Is Saving Long-Distance Romance
Jessica Massa: 5 New Year's Resolutions For The Post-Dating World
Internet Dating Much More Successful Than Thought
5 Ways Facebook Changed Dating (For the Worse)
New dating app for Facebook promises most compatible matches ever ...
We are exposed to this new form of communication on a daily basis.. so its natural our minds adapt to this. Online dating will also be a big part of it. They way that men and women "court" each other will change.. its all about creating a profile for you to post on a site.. and see who you can attract. I dont find this is wrong.. because we cant resist change. but we do have to be aware where this will bring us.. and or if this will be a positive or negative on our lives.
Thanks
Mark
My girlfriend once asked me "does this skirt make me look fat?"
I said "I think it's unfair to blame the skirt"
She loved it.
I used to be young, and gorgeous, and dated (and married) guys who were brilliant and funny and crazy.
Now I am just retired from male-female relationships, though still working..
Clearly I did not know how to do relationships in a way that worked in the long run.
As for social media stuff... all I can say is that I had a bad physical accident a year and a half ago and one of the people who tended to me did deep tissue massage.
He is also at least 20 years younger than me.
We are facebook pals.
He suggested we have a beer together sometime soon.
What is the meaning of that, says I to me.
He is HOT!!! And I am OLD!!!
And then be sure to keep us updated;
we'll be cheering for you.
I do have my daring side.
He is from another country. I replied (perhaps playing hard-to-get, or just hedging my bets that he does not think of me in Betty White [much as I adore her] terms)...that it would be delightful to have a beer, in a few weeks, and perhaps he could also teach me his country's language... LOLOL!
OH MY GOD!
When I was dating, I always had a simple approach, if she said "Yes" when I asked her out, we were good to go. "No" and I moved on to someone else, at least for that evening. I would try again another time. After three refusals, I gave up. No embarrassment, no worries.
(Sorry, that was mean. I apologize -- tho you'll notice I'm not deleting it.)
I know it's a terrible cliché -- but many clichés are actually true (that's why they're clichés):
Nobody else can ever "make" you happy.
Only you can do that.
You can share your happiness with someone else, and they theirs with you.
Being in a great relationship can greatly heighten happiness.
But it can't create it, if it isn't already there.
And because of this, if you can't be happy alone, you won't be happy with someone else either.
In all seriousness, I beg you to do a lot of research on this: talk to lots of people, friends, family, strangers, ex's; read widely, broadly, and deeply; consider getting some help (of the pro kind), if it won't make you feel self-stigmatized or shamed.
I guarantee the majority will agree with this to at least some extent, and if you come to accept it, it will open up a lot of doors for you, both within yourself, and with others.
I wish you the very best success in all this.
You deserve your happiness, and the chance to share it with someone you love.
But it's a lot harder to find it, if where you're looking isn't where it's to be found.
The set-up, as I understand the article, was that the college-age women who were tested for uncertainty were kept in the dark as to the rating the (fictional) men had, in fact, given them.
For the sake of argument, if I'm dating a woman I've made up my mind about and somehow she knows I've made up my mind but doesn't know if it's 'yeah' or 'nay', her feeling of 'uncertainty' is markedly different to the 'uncertainty' she would have if she was with me and didn't know if I had made up my mind and was not forthcoming in expressing myself about it.
In the first instance, the woman will find out as soon as she corners me and I have occasion to spill the love beans. In the second instance, she will not know until I've made up my mind (immature; inexperience doesn't preclude having strong feelings one way or another) AND decide to tell her (if I don't then I'm playing games to either forestall making up my mind or to torment someone on purpose).
Therefore, I think the experiment this article references is flawed, except as a marketing position paper on how to set on-line dating websites' likability indicators ("he likes you" - "he doesn't like you" - and - "for an additional payment of $9.95, you could find out what he's decided").
For example, I was introduced to my now wife through a mutual (now ex) friend about 10 years ago. We started dating, then she fell for him. He was the classic non-commital type guy who went out every night and talked only to hear himself pontificate. Apparently she found that more attractive at the time. They dated for a few months but he clearly was just having her on.
Then, eventually she realized it was ME who she really wanted. Now we have three beautiful daughters 5, 3 & 7mos.
Incidentally, we recently saw him in a magazine (he's an artist) and he's still out and about in his lonely world of mono-conversations and art openings. I think some people just aren't meant for intimate relationships.