Social media is a likely cause of confusion in modern mate selection | Hacker News Reader

Social media is a likely cause of confusion in modern mate selection

phys.org

32 pointsgeox15 comments

The modern world is so far removed from the circumstances our species evolved into and existed in up until just a few hundred generations ago, that it is hard to make any strong claim as to what "normal" social behavior in humans is.

hundred? Even ten generations (300ish years).

Meta: is it common for "research foundations" in india to be organised as a PLC?

https://www.filesure.in/company/ethophilia-research-foundati...

(also, note that this is below even the usual standards of phys.org, in that there is no article, these are self-reported "preliminary results of this ongoing project")

"Our hypothesis strongly indicates that the 'pleasure index' or 'adrenaline rush' of relationships is taking more prime importance in the younger generation over long-term stability," he says. "It is alarming that impulsiveness or confusion can lead to instability in the human relation-maintaining behavior, which is actually affecting the normal social behavior in humans."

This is orthogonal from social media.

Social media and dating apps rely on the same reward centers (new relationship energy is a dopamine hit); think of what makes a long term, healthy emotional partnership. Is that what you're getting from a dating app profile and experience until the relationship is more solid? Or is it closer to OnlyFans? Are your partnering expectations being set by social media instead of reality? Relationships are work, they are not a fairy tale, social media is everyone's highlight reel and marketing/sales effort as a person.

Dating apps gave the illusion of a better partnering path, when really we lost in person avenues to much detriment [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Go meet people in person if you want success in this regard, optimize for opportunity and luck to come across another human you might fit with as inexpensively as possible. Try to be emotionally healthy and available, as well as empathetic as well. You'll be head and shoulders above other potential partners.

Lots of nuance as the topics of social and dating are deeply intertwined.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/02/02/key-findi...

[2] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/22442114/nancy-jo-sales-nothin...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2023/oct/28/its-qui...

[4] https://time.com/6836033/gen-z-ditching-dating-apps/

[5] https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/04/datin...

I don't think I ever met a single woman in person. Like literally a married woman asked me out at one point (though I had to figure the married part out on my own).

That may be an anecdotal point in agreement depending on your age.

> I don't think I ever met a single woman in person.

That's almost certainly not actually true unless you have some pretty bizarre personal circumstances. If you went to school, you've met single women in person.

But I could see how you might feel that way, given the scale/anonymity, the taboos, and pervasive atomization of modern society.

Yes, it's obviously a bit tounge-in-cheek (though if you add "attractive" it might not be). That said, I am not in school now, and it would probably be a bit impractical to go back for the dating scene for a few reasons.

The article does not define what "confusion" means in this context. Does it mean that people are confused about what their criteria for mate selection are? About who is available as a potential partner? About what kinds of relationships are desirable?

>The article does not define what "confusion" means in this context. Does it mean that people are confused about what their criteria for mate selection are? About who is available as a potential partner? About what kinds of relationships are desirable?

The article is confused. This isn't the first study on the subject.

Basically online dating data has come out and the vast majority of women are only dating the top 10% or so of men. The top 10% of men have tons of choice and are dating all women, but aren't getting serious with anyone. Why would they when they have so much choice. Back in the day they couldn't get this much interest at the bar.

This has led these men to represent all men to most women. These women are increasingly upset at these 10% of men because they wont settle down or are too much of a bad boy. These playboys leave a bad experience for women in general.

But the grand confusion is in the shift. If you assume the top 10% of men ultimately settle down with the top 10% of women; more or less. Then there's a 90% confusion rate. Women who aren't top 10%(not everyone can be) who have dated many top 10% men and think they deserve a top 10% but truly dont.

It sounds like you’re importing a lot of other information that the article simply doesn’t cover or even support.

A lot of dating research suffers from issues with status signals interfering with stated preference. Men overstate their number of sexual partners and women understate theirs because doing so affords them status. Reporting that you have very high standards for your mate is a higher status behaviour than reporting that you have low standards, so people who desire status will tend to overstate their requirements for sexual partners.

Social media probably exaggerates this effect somewhat, but it's hard to say how much it transfers.

This will probably get a lot of upvotes though because it appears to confirm common HN user priors.

That's a fair point. I know a lot of people are miserable with dating apps, but they don't exactly have a controlled parallel experience.

There are huge romanticizing and grass is always greener and roma biases when comparing to an unlived past.

That doesn't mean there aren't material differences, justs that comparison usually come from speculation opposed to data

It's more fun to date and enjoy life than slog through a hum drum relationship which will produce children and eventually lead to divorce.

News at 11.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com