Aug
27
Il existe 3 catégories de sites de rencontres :
- Les sites de Flirting pour les rencontres légères ou sexuelles.
- Les sites de Dating pour les rencontres fondées sur les centres d’intérêts communs ou les critères physiques type Meetic. Le principe est le même que les rencontres lors d’une soirée (dîner), vacances, loisirs ou boîte de nuit.
- Les sites de MatchMaking pour les rencontres fondées sur les affinités psychologiques et culturelles type Meetic Affinity, Parship ou eHarmony. Le principe est proche des agences matrimoniales. Vous n’avez pas accès à tous les profils disponibles, on vous propose une liste de profils sensés être le plus compatible avec vous.
Des chercheurs de l’université de l’Arkansas invitent les utilisateurs de site de “MatchMaking” à faire preuve de prudence. Ils révèlent que les justifications scientifiques de ces sites serait plus de la “junk science” que de la science !
Voici un article qui explique pourquoi :
With an estimated 40 percent of the 100 million U.S. singles trying online dating, researchers at the University of Arkansas caution users that some Web sites’ claims of scientific justification may be “junk science.”
Lire la suite : http://www.physorg.com/news164292891.html
Voici quelques extraits :
“Consumers must be cautious of customer satisfaction testimonies in online dating advertisements because the matchmaking sites have most likely pre-selected only satisfied customers, rather than a representative sample, the team said.”
“eHarmony asserts that its matchmaking model is based upon measurement and compatibility. The eHarmony technique is the only one of the leading matchmaking sites that has a patent on its compatibility tests. Thus, eHarmony does not reveal to users the characteristics of their key attributes or the way in which those attributes are related to the people with whom they are matched.”
et dans les commentaires :
“Actual online dating sites offering compatibility matching methods are only fueled by big marketing budgets and not by serious scientific evidence. No one (nor eHarmony, nor Chemistry, nor PerfectMatch, nor PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor, nor Yahoo!Personals) can prove its matching algorithm can match prospective partners who will have more stable and satisfying relationships than couples matched by chance, astrological destiny, personal preferences, searching on one’s own, or other technique as the control group in a peer_reviewed Scientifc Paper.
They are all like placebo, because
* they have less or at least the same precision as searching on one’s own, in the range of 3 or 4 persons compatible per 1,000 persons screened, when calculating compatibility between prospective mates.
* That problem arises because they use:
a) simplified versions of personality traits, instead of the 16PF5 or similar with the complete inventory (16 variables)
b) inadequate quantitative methods to calculate compatibility between prospective mates, like eHarmony which uses Dyadic Adjustment Scale or other sites which use multivariate linear / logistic regression equations o other equations.”
Ce sont des constats similaires qui ont donné naissance aux questionnaires de Positive Coaching qui propose une démarche unique de “matching par le coaching” ! La junk science ne passera pas par nous… Si vous voulez faire une expérience différente, c’est par ici :
http://blog.positive-coaching.info/questionnaires-de-personnalite
No related posts.