By Jennifer Litz
Editor
August 5, 2007

Google bought YouTube last fall for 1.65 billion, according to its press center; Time magazine’s last person of the year was “You,” for all “your” participation in online communities—from the MySpace juggernaut, to its many niche offspin communities, like the new “Eons” community targeted to 50-plus-somethings.

People are spending a lot of time online. But more specifically, people aren’t just paying bills, researching papers, and buying books or clothes there. People spend a lot of time as online voyeurs, looking, laughing at, and talking to people they may or may not even know.

Online dating is a natural in this sociological climate. According to a March 2006 report on Online Dating from the Pew Internet and American Life Project in 2004, “dating Web sites created more revenue than any other paid online content category, as they netted roughly $470 million in consumer spending, up from about $40 million in 2001.”A flurry of institute research confirms that online dating emerged as a viable dating alternative several years ago.

In full disclosure, I will tell you that I have had a taste of online dating, but it took me a while to accept the “online dater” label. (A Pew report has spelled out the criteria of an online dater: “Looking at the total Internet population, 11 percent of all American Internet-using adults—about 16 million people—say they have gone to an online dating Web site or [a site] where they can meet people online. We call them online daters in this report.”) As the former resident blogger for an online dating site who met a guy by perusing user profiles, even I am considered an online dater—even though my examination of his user profile was part of my research to write those blogs.

Who Dates Online?

A majority of online daters is younger, employed and slightly more liberal than the rest of the population, but older people are online daters too. A February 2006 paper from the MIT Sloan School of Management called “What Makes You Click? – Mate Preferences and Matching Outcomes in Online Dating” surveyed 22,000 users of an unnamed “major” online dating service; users were located in the Boston and San Diego areas. The study involved observing the daters’ activities for three months, including introductory “profiling” information the users supplied to the sites, such as age, height, income, and other demographic and physical characteristics.

The MIT report found that online daters tended to be younger than their “general population” counterparts; the median age for a site user was 26-35, while the general populations of Boston and San Diego’s median age ranges were in the 36-45 range. The study also found that site users tended to be more educated and have slightly higher incomes than the general population and online users who did not go on dating sites.

The Pew study confirms these findings—to an extent. Surveying a “representative sample” of 3,215 phone-owning Americans in the continental United States, among the results found was that the online daters tended to be younger and employed. No reports of higher education or income levels were reported. Rather, since the largest segment—18 percent—of online daters were determined to be in the 18 – 29 range, those earning slightly lower incomes were determined to be online daters. Age breakdowns for the rest of site users were as follows: 11 percent in the 30–49 year age-range, and nine percent in the 50- plus range.

That study also found online daters were more likely than the general population to support gay marriage and women’s rights; less likely than the general population to be religious.

As mentioned earlier, about one in 10 Internet users have gone to a dating Web site; more specifically, 37 percent of a group who said they were single and looking to “meet a romantic partner” claimed having gone to a dating Web site, which represents about four million people.

But what is the perception among Internet users about those who used online dating services?

According to the Pew study, 61 percent of adults online do not think that online daters are “desperate”; 29 percent believe that online daters are in “dire straits,” and 20 percent think that online daters are “losers.” The Pew study says that the latter group has less experience online and tends to be less trusting of people in general.

What about the physical characteristics of online daters? It’s hard to ascertain physical attractiveness of online daters, as not everyone posts the optional picture with their profiles—though according to practically every “how-to” online dater’s guide, those with pictures posted get more messages and responses than those who don’t. Liz Edelbrock, a spokesperson for Match.com, says that Match.com members who post pictures get 15 times more attention, in the form of views, correspondence, or “winks,” an acknowledgment feature their site has.

There is, however, the “Reported Physical Characteristics of the Users.” According to the MIT report, 27.5 percent of assessed online daters posted their pictures. For the rest of the non-picture posting users, a survey was used for online daters to rate their own looks. According to the report, 19 percent of men and 24 percent of women reported possessing “very good looks,” while 49 percent of men and 48 percent of women reported having “above average looks.” Those who selected “looking like anyone else walking down the street” included 29 percent of men and 26 percent of women. Less than one percent of users claimed “less than average looks”; a few joked, “bring your bag in case mine tears.”

But are they being honest? According to the MIT report, there is a discrepancy between certain physical characteristics survey respondents supplied and those corresponding to national averages. For example, the average survey-stated weight of women tends to be six pounds less than the national average, while the stated height of men is 1.3 inches taller in the online survey than in national averages. Either online daters are a skinnier, taller, more attractive bunch than the rest of us, or they may be stretching the truth.

One thing certainly rings true in both real and online dating, according to the MIT report: physical attraction is the biggest predictor of dating proliferation.

What do Online Daters Want?

Much like the real world, physical attraction is the biggest predictor of having a prolific online dating experience. Those men and women in the lowest “looks” decile, according to the MIT report, received only half as many e-mails from other online daters as members whose rating were in the fourth decile; users in the top decile were contacted twice as often. Echoing what Edelbrock said about pictureposting daters being more active, the MIT study showed that women with photos received at least twice as many e-mails as those without, and men received 60 percent more e-mails than those without who described themselves as having “average looks.”

The data goes on to confirm that men in the 6'3" – 6'4" range receive more messages from users than those in the 5'7" – 5'8" range, while women from 5'3" – 5'8" fare better than their counterparts. The report even pinpoints the optimal BMI for men and women to receive optimal email messages from online daters: for men, it’s the slightly overweight BMI of 27; for women, it’s the underweight BMI of 17. That latter figure corresponds with that of a supermodel. According to the report, a woman with a BMI of 17 received 90 percent more first-contact emails than a woman with a BMI of 25, which is considered healthy by the American Heart Association. These sorts of physical preferences bear themselves out even in hair length; men with long, curly hair and red hair fared worse than their counterparts with “medium straight hair”; women with long, straight hair faired better than their shorter-hair contemporaries.

Conclusion? Online daters are a picky bunch. What they are, according to many, is serious about finding a mate. “I think Match.com is generally for the serious dater,” Edelbrock says. “We have 400,000 people a year resigning, saying they met the person they were seeking on Match; once they find that person they’re not staying online. People who put themselves ‘out there’ online are saying, ‘I really want to meet someone’—if not for marriage, then at least a serious or long-term commitment.” The MIT’s study corroborates that statement.

How Does Online Dating Work?

Usually, there’s a physical/demographic portion to fill out, followed by a variety of “compatibility tests” to help with member pair-ups. And there’s usually a charge, too—with a cheaper monthly rate afforded to those who sign up for multiple months.

According to comScore Media Metrix, Match.com was only second to Yahoo! Personals as of January 2006 in attracting the most users. It won that distinction with 3,893 unique users that month. Match.com capitalized on its popularity last February by launching Chemistry.com.

According to Chemistry.com press releases, this site is for serious daters who want to be matched with someone compatible, instead of having to search for matches. The “Chemistry Profile,” a lengthy survey the potential site member fills out about his or her personality, likes and dislikes, is common among online dating sign-up protocol. It may be different from other online dating surveys in that “renowned biological anthropologist, author and expert in the science of human attraction” Helen Fisher, PhD, created this particular survey.

Who else but such an “expert” could compile dating questions dealing with the comparative lengths of one’s ring and index fingers? Or have a “sensory perception” interlude that has respondents match figure shapes and sizes…

Then there’s the question in which survey takers are asked, after seeing a book cover with a man and woman— one backgrounded, one in the foreground, and both looking off over the sea—to label it with one of the following titles: “Adventures on the Rhein”; “Anatomy of Friendship”; “Power Plays”; or “Things Left Unsaid.”

Despite questions like this—which some men and women may find off-putting—many people who sign up to find love on the Web do get their wish. According to the people polled for the Pew study, “Three percent of the Internet users who are married or in long-term committed relationships say they met their partners online. That represents about three million people.”

If three percent sounds small, realize that in the Pew’s “representative” study of thousands of Americans, less people reported having met their spouses at church, at a “recreational facility” like a gym, or through a blind date or dating service, to name a few traditional meeting venues.

Of course, online dating is not for everyone. Three years ago, Christine, a Texas-based art director, logged onto eHarmony®. She had just broken up with her off-and-on boyfriend of six years, and was ready to meet the “love of her life” the Web site promised to find. She completed the elaborate entry questionnaire that had asked about her beliefs, ideals, characteristics and upbringing. She then pressed the button that asked if she was ready to find her ideal mate, and waited patiently for twenty minutes while the site combed through its thousands of user profiles to deliver her perfect match.

“We have no matches for you. Try expanding your search area,” the result said. She had already put the whole world. She married her ex-boyfriend.