Literature DB >> 28853645

Is Romantic Desire Predictable? Machine Learning Applied to Initial Romantic Attraction.

Samantha Joel1, Paul W Eastwick2, Eli J Finkel3,4.   

Abstract

Matchmaking companies and theoretical perspectives on close relationships suggest that initial attraction is, to some extent, a product of two people's self-reported traits and preferences. We used machine learning to test how well such measures predict people's overall tendencies to romantically desire other people (actor variance) and to be desired by other people (partner variance), as well as people's desire for specific partners above and beyond actor and partner variance (relationship variance). In two speed-dating studies, romantically unattached individuals completed more than 100 self-report measures about traits and preferences that past researchers have identified as being relevant to mate selection. Each participant met each opposite-sex participant attending a speed-dating event for a 4-min speed date. Random forests models predicted 4% to 18% of actor variance and 7% to 27% of partner variance; crucially, however, they were unable to predict relationship variance using any combination of traits and preferences reported before the dates. These results suggest that compatibility elements of human mating are challenging to predict before two people meet.

Entities:  

Keywords:  attraction; dating; ensemble methods; machine learning; open data; open materials; random forests; romantic desire; romantic relationships; speed dating; statistical learning

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28853645     DOI: 10.1177/0956797617714580

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Sci        ISSN: 0956-7976


  13 in total

1.  Machine learning uncovers the most robust self-report predictors of relationship quality across 43 longitudinal couples studies.

Authors:  Samantha Joel; Paul W Eastwick; Colleen J Allison; Ximena B Arriaga; Zachary G Baker; Eran Bar-Kalifa; Sophie Bergeron; Gurit E Birnbaum; Rebecca L Brock; Claudia C Brumbaugh; Cheryl L Carmichael; Serena Chen; Jennifer Clarke; Rebecca J Cobb; Michael K Coolsen; Jody Davis; David C de Jong; Anik Debrot; Eva C DeHaas; Jaye L Derrick; Jami Eller; Marie-Joelle Estrada; Ruddy Faure; Eli J Finkel; R Chris Fraley; Shelly L Gable; Reuma Gadassi-Polack; Yuthika U Girme; Amie M Gordon; Courtney L Gosnell; Matthew D Hammond; Peggy A Hannon; Cheryl Harasymchuk; Wilhelm Hofmann; Andrea B Horn; Emily A Impett; Jeremy P Jamieson; Dacher Keltner; James J Kim; Jeffrey L Kirchner; Esther S Kluwer; Madoka Kumashiro; Grace Larson; Gal Lazarus; Jill M Logan; Laura B Luchies; Geoff MacDonald; Laura V Machia; Michael R Maniaci; Jessica A Maxwell; Moran Mizrahi; Amy Muise; Sylvia Niehuis; Brian G Ogolsky; C Rebecca Oldham; Nickola C Overall; Meinrad Perrez; Brett J Peters; Paula R Pietromonaco; Sally I Powers; Thery Prok; Rony Pshedetzky-Shochat; Eshkol Rafaeli; Erin L Ramsdell; Maija Reblin; Michael Reicherts; Alan Reifman; Harry T Reis; Galena K Rhoades; William S Rholes; Francesca Righetti; Lindsey M Rodriguez; Ron Rogge; Natalie O Rosen; Darby Saxbe; Haran Sened; Jeffry A Simpson; Erica B Slotter; Scott M Stanley; Shevaun Stocker; Cathy Surra; Hagar Ter Kuile; Allison A Vaughn; Amanda M Vicary; Mariko L Visserman; Scott Wolf
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-07-27       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Consistency between individuals' past and current romantic partners' own reports of their personalities.

Authors:  Yoobin Park; Geoff MacDonald
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Simultaneous clustering and variable selection: A novel algorithm and model selection procedure.

Authors:  Shuai Yuan; Kim De Roover; Katrijn Van Deun
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2022-09-09

Review 4.  Neural Processing of Facial Attractiveness and Romantic Love: An Overview and Suggestions for Future Empirical Studies.

Authors:  Ryuhei Ueda
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-06-14

5.  Machine learning meets partner matching: Predicting the future relationship quality based on personality traits.

Authors:  Inga Großmann; André Hottung; Artus Krohn-Grimberghe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Efficacy of the web-based PaarBalance program on relationship satisfaction, depression and anxiety - A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Alina Keller; Anna Babl; Thomas Berger; Ludwig Schindler
Journal:  Internet Interv       Date:  2020-12-29

7.  Body sway predicts romantic interest in speed dating.

Authors:  Andrew Chang; Haley E Kragness; Wei Tsou; Dan J Bosnyak; Anja Thiede; Laurel J Trainor
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 3.436

8.  Brain Knows Who Is on the Same Wavelength: Resting-State Connectivity Can Predict Compatibility of a Female-Male Relationship.

Authors:  Shogo Kajimura; Ayahito Ito; Keise Izuma
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2021-10-01       Impact factor: 4.861

9.  Speech Is Silver, Nonverbal Behavior Is Gold: How Implicit Partner Evaluations Affect Dyadic Interactions in Close Relationships.

Authors:  Ruddy Faure; Francesca Righetti; Magdalena Seibel; Wilhelm Hofmann
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2018-09-18

10.  We're Not That Choosy: Emerging Evidence of a Progression Bias in Romantic Relationships.

Authors:  Samantha Joel; Geoff MacDonald
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Rev       Date:  2021-07-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.