POSTER "How Personality Influences Users' Needs for Recommendation Diversity? "

Interesting papers and poster about the Personality Based Recommender Systems Arena.

Using Personality to Adjust Diversity in Recommender Systems
POSTER
How Personality Influences Users' Needs for Recommendation Diversity?

Remember: Personality Based Recommender Systems are like compatibility matching engines.
Which is the RIGHT approach to innovate in the Personality Based Recommender Systems Arena?
The same approach to innovate in the Online Dating Industry == 16PF5 test or similar to assess personality traits and a new method to calculate similarity between quantized patterns.

-----------------------------------------------------
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 (five thousand) online dating sites they can be classified as:
1.0: "Browsing/Searching Options, Powerful Searching Engines"  "You can fastly search for the person you want, but most probably that person does not exist or does not want to meet you because you are not compatible with him/her."
1.5: "Unidirectional Recommendation Engines"
2.0: "Matching based on Self-Reported Data / Bidirectional Recommendation Engines"
3.0: "Compatibility Matching Algorithms"
Compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.
STRICT PERSONALITY SIMILARITY and not "meet other people with similar interests"
The 3 milestone discoveries of the 2001 - 2010 decade for Theories of Romantic Relationships Development are: 
I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. "Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle" 
II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences are useless)
III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
Also there is a similarity trilogy between genetic, mate choice and personality based recommender systems.
Personality Based Recommender Systems are the next generation of recommender systems because they perform FAR better than Behavioural ones (past actions and pattern of personal preferences)
That is the only way to improve recommender systems, to include the personality traits of their users. They need to calculate personality similarity between users but  there are different formulas to calculate similarity.
In case you did not notice, recommender systems are morphing to .......... compatibility matching engines, as the same used in the Online Dating Industry since years, with low success rates!!! because they mostly use the Big5 to assess personality and the Pearson correlation coefficient to calculate similarity.
Please remember: Personality traits are highly stable in persons over 25 years old to 45 years old.
 
In compatibility matching methods there are 2 steps:
1) to objectively measure personality traits or other human variables (with the 16PF5 test) without distortion.
2) to calculate compatibility between prospective mates

IPSATIVE personality tests are OBSOLETE (self-descriptive questionnaires) and should be discarded: MBTI (PerfectMatch), DISC (ThomasKnowsPeople), Enneagram (Dopasowani) or other proprietary ipsative tests like the ones used at Chemistry, ButterfliesAgain, Doskonalapara, PembePanjur, LittleHint, oneGoodLove and others.

NORMATIVE personality tests like Big5 versions used at PlentyOfFish, eHarmony , Meetic Affinity, Parship, Be2, True are good for guidance (orientation) purposes but not good enough for predictive purposes.
"Because the Big Five groups the more specific primary-level factors, feedback organized around the five Global Factor scales is more easily understood. For detailed feedback or predictive purposes, one should assess the more specific primary factors. Research has shown that more specific factors like the primary scales of the 16PF Questionnaire predict actual behavior better than the Big 5 Global Factors. For example, one extravert (a bold, fearless, high-energy type) may differ considerably from another (a sweet, warm, sensitive type), depending on the extraversion-related primary scale score patterns, so deeper analysis is typically warranted." Extracted from the 16PF5 Manual
Normative tests can not simply be translated, because you need the norm for that test, and that norm is actualized each and every time Census Figures are released
The 16PF5 test is available in
- English for the United States and the Norm for the United States (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United States).
- English for Canada and the Norm for Canada (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Canada)
- English for the United Kingdom and the Norm for the United Kingdom (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of the United Kingdom).
- English for Australia and the Norm for Australia (sample of individuals with the same demographic characteristics of Australia).
- French for France and the Norm for France.
- German for Germany and the Norm for Germany.
- Spanish for Spain and the Norm for Spain.
- Italian for Italy and the Norm for Italy.
and many more "With over 60 years of research and application behind it, the 16PF5 has become internationally well known and respected, with over 20 different translated versions."

The output of the 16PF5 test are 16 variables STens (Standard Tens) taking integer values from 1 to 10. STens divide the score scale into ten units.
STens have the advantage that they enable results to be thought of in terms of bands of scores, rather than absolute raw scores. These bands are narrow enough to distinguish statistically significant differences between candidates, but wide enough not to over emphasize minor differences between candidates.

WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)
High precision in matching algorithms is precisely the key to open the door and leave the infancy of compatibility testing.
It is all about achieving the eighth decimal!
With 8 decimals, you have more precision than any person could achieve by searching on one's own, but the only way to achieve the eighth decimal is using analysis and correlation with quantized patterns.
Without offering the NORMATIVE16PF5 (or similar test measuring exactly the 16 personality factors) for serious dating, it will be impossible to innovate and revolutionize the Online Dating Industry All other proposals are NOISE and perform as placebo.

What comes after Social Networking?
My bet: The Next Big Investment Opportunity on the Internet will be …. Personalization!
Personality Based Recommender Systems and Strict Personality Based Compatibility Matching Engines for serious Online Dating with the normative 16PF5 personality test. The market remains enormous!! 

More posters from EHBEA 2013 Conference

Assortative mating for weight is not due to assortative preferences.

Men's, but not women's, sociosexual orientation predicts couples' perceptions of sexually dimorphic cues in own-sex faces.

The human body odour composites are not more attractive than individual samples.

Aggression, mate value and the preference for faces of fertile females.

The Evolutionary Psychology of Romantic Love: Cross-cultural study.

Experimental tests of mate preferences predict real-world mate choice.

Please remember:
The 3 milestone discoveries of the 2001 - 2010 decade for Theories of Romantic Relationships Development are:
I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. "Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle"
II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences are useless)
III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.

Also there is a similarity trilogy between genetic, mate choice and personality based recommender systems.
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)

EHBEA 2013 Conference

Three interesting posters from the EHBEA 2013 Conference. (European Human Behaviour & Evolution Association)

Maintenance of genetic variation in human personality.

MENSTRUAL CYCLE EFFECTS ON ATTITUDES TOWARDS KISSING ROMANTIC PARTNERS.

To friend zone or start dating – what makes a perfect partner?
People choose not only their partners but all their close ones according to similarity to themselves and a "good personality" is valued in everyone, but it is still high reproductive potential that makes a perfect partner.


Please remember: The 3 milestone discoveries of the 2001 - 2010 decade for Theories of Romantic Relationships Development are:

I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. "Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle"
  II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences are useless)
  III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.

Also there is a similarity trilogy between genetic, mate choice and personality based recommender systems.
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! The only way to revolutionize the Online Dating Industry is using the 16PF5 normative personality test, available in different languages to assess personality of members, or a proprietary test with exactly the same traits of the 16PF5 and expressing compatibility with eight decimals (needs a quantized pattern comparison method, part of pattern recognition by cross-correlation, to calculate similarity between prospective mates.)

International Association for Relationship Research Conference

Some fresh & new papers/posters from the latest International Association for Relationship Research Conference
(July 12-16 2012 - Chicago, Illinois)

"Personality Similarities Predict Relationship Satisfaction in 23 Countries"
Erina Lee, Gian Gonzaga, and Emily M. Maywood (from eHarmony Labs)
Studies show that similarity between couples is positively related to relationship quality.  The purpose of the current study is to fully investigate personality similarity in close relationships using 3 types of similarity (couple similarity – similarity between partners only, cultural similarity – similarity between others only, and shared similarity – similarity with both partners and others).  Being uniquely similar to one's partner was expected to increase satisfaction especially in countries valuing similarity amongst ingroup members (e.g., collectivistic countries); while being similar to one's partner and others in society was thought to ease relationship functioning across all countries. To fully investigate these types of similarity, we studied 16,393 heterosexual, romantic couples across 23 countries.  Similarities were estimated using profile correlations. Then principle components analysis and residuals were computed as percentages of variance explained by the three similarity types. Across all countries, positive assortment was found with couples being more similar to one another than to other people. Three-level HLM analyses revealed, as expected, that couple similarity predicted relationship satisfaction more powerfully in countries that were collectivistic.  Additionally, cultural similarity predicted relationship satisfaction better in more individualistic countries. Shared similarity was equally important in predicting satisfaction independent of individualism/collectivism. This study lends further support for personality similarity as a predictor of relationship satisfaction showing that similarity has far reaching but differential impact for couples around the world.  It also demonstrates that multiple components of similarity benefit relationships. The methodological and psychological impacts of these results are discussed.


"Couple Similarity in Attachment Style and its Association with Relationship Satisfaction"
Fay Julal, Jodie Bellchambers, Katie O'Shea, and Lara Webber
Compared to other personality constructs, attachment style similarity is a strong predictor of relationship quality (Luo & Klohnen, 2005). Preference for similarity in attachment style may be more salient at different points in a relationship (e.g., initial attraction vs. longer term; Holmes & Johnson, 2009). In the present study, we used a couple-centred approach to examine the extent to which actor (own) and partner's attachment style (avoidance, anxiety) and similarity in attachment style within couples (assessed with profile similarity correlations; PSC) predicted actor's relationship satisfaction. Further, we examined whether relationship length moderated the association between similarity in attachment style and relationship satisfaction. Each member of a heterosexual couple (N = 105 couples; M relationship length
= 46.08-months) completed the ECR-Short Form and the PRQC relationship satisfaction scale. For actors (male and female couple members, separately) low avoidance and high PSC–anxiety predicted relationship satisfaction. Partner's attachment style did not predict actor's satisfaction. Relationship length did not moderate the attachment similarity-satisfaction relationship. The extent to which couple members were similar in attachment anxiety predicted relationship satisfaction. Actor's avoidance predicted relationship satisfaction. These findings suggest that each attachment dimension contributes to relationship functioning in distinct ways (e.g., intra- and interpersonal processes). Findings are discussed in terms of the salience of attachment anxiety and avoidance beyond initial attraction in predicting relationship quality.


"What Leads to Romantic Attraction: Similarity, Reciprocity, Security, or Beauty? Evidence from a Speed-Dating Study"
Shanhong Luo
Years of attraction research has established several "principles" of attraction with robust evidence. However, a major limitation of previous attraction studies is that they have almost exclusively relied on well-controlled experiments, which are often criticized for lacking ecological validity. This study was designed to test the evidence for four attraction principles in a real-life setting—speed-dating. Social Relations Model analyses showed strong evidence for the beauty principle; that is, partners' physical attractiveness (i.e., beauty) was the best predictor of initial romantic attraction for both sexes. There was partial support for the reciprocity and security principles; that is, people were more attracted to partners who also liked them (reciprocity) and who were emotionally secure (security). Surprisingly, there was no evidence for similarity—people were not particularly attracted to those who were similar to themselves.

(REMEMBER 
 "Perceptions of Ideal and Former Partners' Personality and Similarity"
Pieternel Dijkstra / Dick P. H. Barelds / University of Groningen, The Netherlands
she had written "our study showed that individuals did not rate similarity in personality as very important when seeking a mate. Our findings may help understand why so many relationships end in divorce due to mismatches in personality."
"The present study's results, as well as the results found in previous studies (e.g., Eastwick & Finkel, 2008), may be used to educate people, especially singles, about what really matters in long-term relationships, for instance, similarity in personality, instead of complementarity."

The Online Dating Industry needs innovations but they will come from only one source: the latest discoveries in theories of romantic relationships development with commitment.
Only 3 major discoveries can help to revolutionize the online dating industry.
I) Several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users. “Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle”
II) People often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life. (FORGET Behavioural recommender systems or other system that learns your preferences because they are useless at all!)
III) What is important in attracting people to one another may not be important in making couples happy. Compatibility is all about a high level on personality similarity between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.       )


"Upon Further Review, (Actual) Similarity is a Poor Predictor of Interpersonal Attraction: Theoretical Review, Empirical Evidence, and Implications for Commercial Matching Algorithms"
Eli Finkel, Paul Eastwick, and Natasha Tidwell
The similarity–attraction effect stands as one of the most well-known findings in social psychology; indeed, it is sufficiently entrenched that textbook authors frequently adopt Byrne's phrase "law of attraction" to describe the positive linear association of similarity with interpersonal attraction. Despite the widespread view that similarity predicts attraction, however, evidence is emerging that this effect is robust for perceived similarity, but sporadic and weak for actual similarity. This presentation reports the results of the first-ever study to examine the effects of actual and perceived similarity simultaneously during a face-to-face initial romantic encounter. Lending particularly strong support to the emerging view that (actual) similarity is much less relevant to interpersonal attraction than long assumed, results revealed that perceived, but not actual, similarity significantly predicted romantic liking. These results have important implications for commercial dating services (e.g., eHarmony) that depend upon actual similarity as a crucial predictor of both attraction and long-term relationship well-being: If there is compelling reason to doubt whether there is a robust association of actual similarity with relationship outcomes, then using the principle of similarity as the foundation for a matching algorithm may be ill- advised.

(REMEMBER  An exercise of similarity. and How LIFEPROJECT METHOD calculates similarity  
WorldWide, there are over 5,000 -five thousand- online dating sites
but no one is using the 16PF5 (or similar) to assess personality of its members!
but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
but no one can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
but no one is scientifically proven! )


"The Long-term Effects of Your Own and Your Romantic Partner's Personality on Relationship Satisfaction and Dissolution"
Brittany C. Solomon and Joshua J. Jackson
Attaining a romantic relationship is an important goal for most adults, with significant implications, given that romantic relationships are associated with wellbeing and physical health (Reis, Collins, & Berscheid, 2000). Consequentially, it is important to know what sustains healthy and satisfied relationships and the factors that lead to relationship dissolution. An important predictor of relationship satisfaction is the personality traits of each person in the relationship (Dyrenforth, Kashy, Donnellan, & Lucas, 2010). In other words, beyond a person's own personality, his/her partner's personality also influences their relationship satisfaction. However, little is known about the long-term effects of partner personality, as most research is cross-sectional. In the current study we used data collected over 4 years from a sample of 3,198 married (or defacto) couples (6,396 individuals) to investigate several questions. For instance, we find that actor and partner personality traits predict relationship satisfaction across four years. Moreover, actor and partner personality were also used to predict relationship dissolution. In addition we examined how changes in personality across four years may influence relationship satisfaction and if these changes in personality precede a break up. Overall, we found evidence that one's own personality and their partner's personality play a significant role in relationship satisfaction and dissolution. Interestingly, these findings suggest that both stability and change in personality traits influence important relationship outcomes. Further investigation of personality and relationship satisfaction over time may shed more light on the extent to which these dyadic factors influence long-term life outcomes (e.g., wellbeing and physical health).
(REMEMBER
Stability and change of personality across the life course
 Personality traits are highly stable in persons over 25 years old to 45 years old (the group of persons who could be most interested in serious online dating) They have only minor changes in personality (less than 1 interval in a normative test) and the 16PF5 test will not "see" them because the output of the 16PF5 test are 16 variables STens (Standard Tens) taking integer values from 1 to 10. STens divide the score scale into ten units. STens have the advantage that they enable results to be thought of in terms of bands of scores, rather than absolute raw scores. These bands are narrow enough to distinguish statistically significant differences between candidates, but wide enough not to over emphasize minor differences between candidates.
)

 
"Facebook Relationship Status: It's Complicated"
Camilla Overup, Mai-Ly Nguyen, Julie Brunson, and Linda K Acitelli
... individuals in good relationships are generally honest about their relationship status on Facebook and that this association occurs because people in good relationships generally have positive reasons for being truthful about their relationships.   Negative reasons (e.g. "keep others from knowing") were not significant as a mediator, but predicted failure to reveal actual relationship status independently of relationship quality. Although positive relationship quality predicts displaying one's relationship status publically, it may not be the only reason why people post as they do. For some, making one's commitment public interferes with other needs.  External concerns, such as the desire for privacy, may determine whether one chooses to reveal one’s relationship status.

"Why Time Spent on Facebook is Linked to Depression"
Mai-Ly Nguyen, Robert E Wickham, and Linda K. Acitelli
... Facebook may serve as a platform for men to engage in intrasexual competitive social comparisons such that, the more time men spend on Facebook the more likely they are to compete with other males and feel inadequate when comparing their accomplishments to those of their peers. Time spent on Facebook did not predict women's outcomes in the same way. Perhaps women use Facebook as a way to maintain connections with their friends rather than compete with them.

------------------------------


What comes after Social Networking?
My bet: The Next Big Investment Opportunity on the Internet will be .... Personalization!
Personality Based Recommender Systems and Strict Personality Based Compatibility Matching Engines for serious Online Dating with the normative 16PF5 personality test. The market remain enormous!!

2012 Eastern Psychological Association (EPA) Meeting Abstracts and Schedule

2012 Eastern Psychological Association (EPA)  Meeting Abstracts and Schedule
2012 Westin Convention Center Pittsburgh, PA
Thursday March 1 - Sunday March 4, 2012

MatchWise, Chemistry, PlentyOfFish Chemistry Predictor, eVow  and other sites use/used the Birth Order Item, but it is useless at all for Serious Online Dating!
ARE YOU THE FAMILY OVERACHIEVER? THE RELATIONSHIP OF BIRTH ORDER TO PERSONALITY
Abstract In this study the relationship between birth order and personality was examined. Participants were college students (n=72) and professors (n=26) who completed questionnaires assessing responsibility, authority, and fear of negative evaluation. As predicted, more than half of the students and more than half of the professors were first-borns. However, first-borns were not different from later-borns on the measures of personality. The results provide partial support for birth order effects on personality.

ONLINE DATING AND THE PARADOX OF SO MANY POTENTIAL PARTNERS
Unlimited options can impair decision-making in certain situations. This study examined how number of options, decision-making style (maximizing v. satisficing), and gender affect choice in online date selection. Extended options were preferred over limited options, but were associated with greater difficulty and lower confidence. Females experienced these effects more than males, also reporting less satisfaction and more regret.  Decision-making style differences were not significant. The data better fit a cognitive overload than anticipatory regret model.

EMERGING ADULTS RETROSPECTIONS OF ADOLESCENT ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS AND SUBSEQUENT PARTNER CHOICE
This study examined ratings of how initial serious romantic relationships (SRR) influence current romantic perspectives. In comparison to other relationships typologies, first SRR were endorsed as the most influential relationship in determining current relationship perspectives. Compared to men, women rated their first SRR as more influential on their current relationship perspectives and their first SRR as more similar in personality to their current partner. Personality factors were not associated with SRR endorsements.

MY PARTNER IS BETTER THAN YOURS: THE MERE OWNERSHIP EFFECT IN  RELATIONSHIPS
The present study examines the mere ownership effect (i.e. the preference for objects primarily because one owns them) within the context of romantic relationships. Participants viewed personality profiles and were told that it was their romantic partner or that it was someone else’s partner. Consistent with mere ownership, those evaluating their own romantic partner provided superior ratings on attractiveness, commitment, and investment compared to those evaluating another’s partner.

ONLINE SPEED-DATING: VERBAL BEHAVIOR CHARACTERISTIC OF “YES” RATINGS
An online speed-dating experiment manipulated verbal behavior and physical attractiveness of confederate “matches.” In particular, autoclitics as verbal operants, which modify the response of the listener, were investigated. Specifically, valence of statements and differing frames of reference were varied across dates. Data were analyzed to determine relationships between these variables and a survival analysis was performed to identify verbal behavior likely to result in use of the full chat time allotted.

ABUSE IN DATING RELATIONSHIPS: PERSONALITY, DATING PREFERENCES, AND ATTRACTION IN COLLEGE STUDENTS
The present study investigated the relationship between personality traits, prior childhood abuse, abuse within the family of origin, and gender on abuse within college student relationships. Fifty-nine college aged subjects participated. The results suggest that there needs to be a re-evaluation of current victim support programs to include males and to include polyvictim relationships. Psychologists need to place emphasis on gender, personality traits, and history of abuse in predicting and treating dating violence.

NARCISSISM IN RELATION TO PERSONALITY, ATHLETICISM, LEADERSHIP, AND ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS
This study explored the relationship of subclinical narcissism to the five-factor model of personality and the constructs of leadership, athleticism, and romantic relationships. Narcissism correlated positively with leadership, numbers of romantic relationships and sexual partners, Extraversion, Openness, and Conscientiousness, and negatively with athleticism, romantic relationship length, Neuroticism, and Agreeableness.

HOW MARITAL STATUS AFFECTS SOCIAL PERCEPTIONS OF MEN VERSUS WOMEN
This study explores assumptions made about unmarried persons. After reading fictional vignettes, participants reported their impressions of an actor. I hypothesized that married individuals would be perceived more positively and happier than single individuals and that males would be perceived more positively than females. My hypothesis was partially confirmed; single individuals were rated more negatively and as less happy, but the only gender difference was in the assumption of personality characteristics for males and females.

DO ROMANTIC PARTNERS' CURIOSITY SCORES CONTRIBUTE TO RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION, INVESTMENT, AND COMMITMENT?
Does curiosity play a role in the success of romantic relationships? Is partner similarity in curiosity more predictive of relationship outcomes than the total level of curiosity in the couple? 124 heterosexual couples completed measures of trait curiosity and relationship quality. Couple’s score totals and differences were correlated with ratings of satisfaction, investment, and commitment. Though correlations between curiosity and relationship outcomes were not significant, some minimal relationships emerged. Future questions and directions are discussed.

THE EFFECTS OF PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS AND ACADEMIC STATUS ON SOCIAL NETWORKING USE
Many people are using social networking sites, yet there is little research about the effect use on psychological factors. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of academic status and personality type of social networking use. Participants consisted of 142 undergraduates who completed an online survey. Although there were no differences with regard to academic status and use, there were personality differences with extraverts using social.

ASSOCIATION for RESEARCH in PERSONALITY

ASSOCIATION for RESEARCH in PERSONALITY
2nd Biennial Conference / Riverside, California / June 16-18, 2011


Featured posters
Poster 1.02
"Regional stereotypes do not reflect personality traits of real people"
Martina Hřebíčková / Institute of Psychology Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic


Poster 1.05
"Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together? A Differential Approach to Similarity Effects in the Association Between Personality Traits and Life Satisfaction in Intimate Relationships"
Katrin Furler & Veronica Gomez / University of Basel
In the past years personality psychology started to shift from a focus on the individual to a dyadic approach emphasizing the importance of the social context. In this vein, expressions such as 'birds of a feather flock together' have received special empirical attention in studies investigating whether romantic partners have similar personalities and whether personality similarity in couples is associated with higher levels of well-being.
The aim of this contribution is to generate knowledge on similarity effects in couples' personality. We adopt Furr's (2010) differential approach in the study of profile similarity effects and compute three similarity indices, i.e., shape, elevation, and scatter similarity, to test how profile similarity indices are related to life satisfaction of both partners. Additionally, we examine the association between personality similarity on a trait level and life satisfaction of both partners. Data came from the last wave of the Swiss Household Panel, which contains measures of the Big Five and life satisfaction for 1,608 couples living in the same household.


Poster 2.06
"Personality similarity between self, partner and parents"
Dick P. H. Barelds & Pieternel Dijkstra / University of Groningen, The Netherlands
Personality characteristics and similarity with regard to personality characteristics have been found to be important factors in both forming and maintaining intimate relationships.
As a result of sexual imprinting, it can be expected that individuals tend to select mates that, with regard to their personality, resemble their opposite sex parent. This study examines this issue by studying similarity with regard to personality (in terms of the Five-Factor Model of personality) of individuals, their partners, their fathers, and their mothers. Ratings are currently available from 354 participants. Preliminary analyses show several significant positive relations for self-partner similarity, selfmother and self-father similarity (regardless of participant sex), and partner-mother and partner-father similarity (also regardless of participant sex). Our study suggests that previous study's findings on the tendency to search for a similar partner are not only the result of a need for harmony (as assumed by, for instance, the similarity attraction hypothesis), but may also be attributed to sexual imprinting. Parent and partner self-ratings are currently being processed, and will be used to examine the effects of potential biases in the ratings, and the childparent relationship.


Poster 2.46
"Goal Complementarity in Intimate Relationships: Is Couples' Perception of Acting in Concert Positively Related to Subjective Well-Being?"
Karin Stadler & Veronica Gomez / University of Basel
Previous evidence suggests that goal similarity in intimate relationships is positively related to relationship outcomes. However, little is known on the association between goal complementarity (i.e., the subjective perception of having goals that are in congruence with the partner's goals) and subjective well-being. We address this issue with data from 153 couples within the ongoing 'Co-Development in Personality Across the Life Span' study. Preliminary results suggest a positive association between goal complementarity and relationship as well as life satisfaction. We will further analyze these associations from a dyadic perspective and present results based on Actor-Partner Interdependence Models in order to elucidate actor and partner effects of goal complementarity on subjective well-being of both partners.


Poster 2.56
"The Relations Between Actual and Perceived Similarity in Personality"
Jessica Wortan1 & Dustin Wood2 / 1Michigan State University 2Wake Forest University
Similarity has been frequently studied in psychology, especially in how it relates to various outcomes (e.g., Levinger & Breedlove, 1966). The purpose of this project is to better understand perceptions of similarity to another person and its links to personality similarity. What does it mean when two people say they perceive themselves as similar? We used several measures of mathematical similarity in personality (Furr, 2008, 2010; Wood, 2008). Overall similarity in self-ratings was related to perceptions of similarity, but having self-perceptions that were more similar than chance showed only negligible associations with perceived similarity. There were strong relationships between perceived similarity and similarity in how individuals rated their own characteristics and the characteristics of a target, particularly for the trait of extraversion.
Raters perceived targets as more similar when they rated that target as more average. Finally, it was demonstrated that the normative and desirable profile were strongly correlated. This suggests that what is most important to feelings of similarity is not having similarity in selfratings, but perceiving the other person as having desirable characteristics. Perceptions of similarity do seem to be predicted by personality, but only a small portion of this prediction is based on actual similarity in personality.


Do you see how Latest Research in Theories of Romantic Relationships Development shows: compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment?
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.

Also Personality Based Recommender Systems are the next generation of recommender systems because they perform FAR better than Behavioural ones (past actions and pattern of personal preferences)
That is the only way to improve recommender systems, to include the personality traits
of their users and they need to calculate personality similarity between them.


WorldWide, there are 5,000 -over five thousand- online dating sites
 but no one
is using the 16PF5 to assess personality of its members!
 but no one
calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
 but no one
can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
 but no one
is scientifically proven!

attraction–similarity model and dating couples PAPER

"The attraction–similarity model and dating couples: Projection, perceived similarity, and psychological benefits" March 2011
Marian M. Morry, Mie Kito and Lindsey Ortiz.
University of Manitoba, Canada
Abstract
According to the attraction–similarity model, relationship quality leads to perceptions of partner–self similarity. Relationship quality and perceived similarity then provide psychological benefits for the perceiver. Across 3 studies, relationship quality positively predicted perceptions of similarity. Study 1 indicated that for moderate, but not low, relationship-relevant traits, individuals projected the self onto the dating partner as a way of perceiving similarities.
In Study 2, priming high, as opposed to low, relationship quality led to greater perceived similarity on the moderately relevant traits. Study 3 indicated greater perceived similarity between self and dating partner than between self and average same-gender student on the moderately relevant traits. Relationship quality and perceived similarity with the dating partner on the moderately relevant traits also predicted psychological benefit.

See the Methods: Participants, Materials and Procedures of the 3 studies to analyze how they had reached the conclusions. The authors should use data from online dating sites and repeat their procedures using the 16PF5 and not the Big5. Anyway they will conclude compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.


Since several years ago, I had been hammering your head, drilling your brain with the personality similarity concept. Please notice I will continue with this policy for the next 10 years, until 2021 if necessary.

WorldWide, there are 5,000 -over five thousand- online dating sites
 but no one
is using the 16PF5 to assess personality of its members!
 but no one
calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!
 but no one
can show Compatibility Distribution Curves to each and every of its members!
 but no one
is scientifically proven!

TOP papers for the Online Dating Industry

TOP scientific papers for the Online Dating Industry

TOP researchers are Drs. Dick P. H. Barelds & Pieternel Dijkstra

1- "Do Birds of a Feather Flock Together? A Differential Approach to Similarity Effects in the Association Between Personality Traits and Life Satisfaction in Intimate Relationships" 2011
Katrin Furler & Veronica Gomez.
2- "Personality similarity between self, partner and parents" 2011
Dick P. H. Barelds & Pieternel Dijkstra.
3- "An assessment of positive illusions of the physical attractiveness of romantic partners" 2011
Dick P. H. Barelds, Pieternel Dijkstra, Namkje Koudenburg and Viren Swami.
4- "Perceptions of Ideal and Former Partners' Personality and Similarity" 2010
Pieternel Dijkstra / Dick P. H. Barelds.
5- "Personality similarity, perceptual accuracy, and relationship satisfaction in dating and married couples" 2011
Mieke Decuyper, Marleen De Bolle and Filip De Fruyt.
6- "Goal Complementarity in Intimate Relationships: Is Couples' Perception of Acting in Concert Positively Related to Subjective Well-Being?" 2011
Karin Stadler & Veronica Gomez.
7- "It's that time of the month: The effects of hormonal shifts on female mate value, depressive symptomology, and short term mating orientation." 2011
Heather Adams and Victor Luévano.
8- "The Relations Between Actual and Perceived Similarity in Personality" 2011
Jessica Wortan & Dustin Wood.
9- "Similarity predicts relationship satisfaction in Brazil" 2011
Erina Lee, Gian Gonzaga.

10- "Assortative mating, convergence, and satisfaction in married couples" 2010
Gian Gonzaga, Steve Carter and J. Galen BuckWalter.
11- "Predicting relationship and life satisfaction from personality in nationally representative samples from three countries: the relative importance of actor, partner, and similarity effects." 2010
Portia Dyrenforth et al.
12- "Why Mate Choices are not as Reciprocal as we Assume: The Role of Personality, Flirting and Physical Attractiveness" 2010
Lars Penke, et al.
13- "What lies beneath: The linguistic traces of deception in online dating profiles. Journal of Communication." 2010
Toma, C. & Hancock, J.T.
14- "Genetic and environmental influences on personality trait stability and growth during the transition to adulthood: A three wave longitudinal study." 2010
Hopwood, C.J., Donnellan, M.B., Blonigen, D.M., Krueger, R.F., McGue, M., Iacono, W.G., & Burt, S.A.
15- "Is spousal similarity for personality a matter of convergence or selection?" 2010
Mikhila N. Humbad, M. Brent Donnellan, William G. Iacono et al.
16- "From Dating to Mating and Relating: Predictors of Initial and Long-Term Outcomes of Speed-Dating in a Community Sample" 2010
Lars Penke, et al.
17- "The attraction–similarity model and dating couples: Projection, perceived similarity, and psychological benefits" 2010
Marian M. Morry, Mie Kito and Lindsey Ortiz.

18- "Personality influences on marital satisfaction: Integrating the empirical evidence using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) model" 2009
Charania & Ickes.
19- "Does the contraceptive pill alter mate choice in humans?" 2009
Alvergne & Lummaa.

20- "Human oestrus" 2008
Gangestad & Thornhill
21- "Only the congruent survive - Personality similarities in couples. Personality and Individual Differences" 2008
Rammstedt & Schupp. 
22- "Personality trait change in adulthood." 2008
Roberts, B. W. & Mroczek, D.
23- "Do People Know What They Want: A Similar or Complementary Partner?" 2008
Dick P. H. Barelds & Pieternel Dijkstra.
24- "Personality Trait Similarity Between Spouses in Four Cultures" 2008
McCrae, Martin, Hrebícková, Urbánek, Boomsma et al.
 
25- "Love at first sight or friends first? Ties among partner personality trait similarity, relationship onset, relationship quality, and love" 2007
Dick P. H. Barelds & Pieternel Dijkstra.
26- "Preferences for symmetry in faces change across the menstrual cycle." 2007
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., Burt, D. M. & Perrett, D. I. 
27- "Assortative mating for perceived facial personality traits. Personality and Individual" 2006
Little, AC, Burt, DM & Perrett, DI.
 
28- "The ideal romantic partner personality" 2006
Figueredo, Sefcek & Jones.
29- "Social Structure and Personality Assortment Among Married Couples" 2006
Bekkers, van Aken & Denissen.

---------------------

30- "A New Method for Dimensionality Reduction using K-Means Clustering Algorithm for High Dimensional Data Set" International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887) Volume 13– No.7, January 2011
31- "Addressing the new user problem with a personality based user similarity measure" 2010
Marko Tkalcic, Matevz Kunaver, Andrej Kosir, Jurij Tasic
32- "Towards to Psychological-based Recommenders Systems: A survey on Recommender Systems" 2010
Maria Augusta Nunes
33- "Design and User Issues in Personality-based Recommender Systems" 2010
Rong Hu


If you are a researcher and you are not cited in this list, it is because you had fallen asleep!


Do you see how Latest Research in Theories of Romantic Relationships Development shows: compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment?
*personality measured with a normative test.
*similarity: there are different ways to calculate similarity, it depends on how mathematically is defined.

Also several studies showing contraceptive pills users make different mate choices, on average, compared to non-users and people often report partner preferences that are not compatible with their choices in real life [uncovered by Eastwick & Finkel (2008); Kurzban & Weeden (2007); Todd, Penke, Fasolo, & Lenton (2007)].

ARP 2011 Featured posters about dating

ASSOCIATION for RESEARCH in PERSONALITY
2nd Biennial Conference / Riverside, California / June 16-18, 2011

Featured posters about dating

Symposium 8.4:
"Personality and meta-accuracy: A social relations model approach"
Mitja D. Back / University Mainz, Germany
Meta-accuracy – how well we know how others view us – is an important but seldom studied domain of interpersonal abilities.
Following a personality-oriented social relations model approach, four distinct kinds of individual differences in meta-accuracy can be distinguished:
Generalized meta-accuracy (differences in how well one knows how others view oneself),
Perceiver meta-accuracy (differences in how well others know how one generally views them),
and two forms of dyadic meta-accuracy (differences in how well one knows others unique impression of oneself, differences in how well others know one's own unique impressions of them).
Individual differences in meta-accuracy were investigated using three realistic interpersonal designs: an observation of one complete group of freshmen at zero and long-term acquaintance (Study 1), interactions of unacquainted students in small discussion groups (Study 2), and singles in speed-dating sessions (Study 3).
Results show that (a) meta-accuracies are generally small at zero acquaintance but (b) systematically increase with level of acquaintance. Moreover, (c) there was substantial variance in metaaccuracies across individuals and (d) these individual differences were differentially predicted by personality. Results underline the use of a componential approach to individual differences in the accuracy of interpersonal perceptions.
Future prospects for the study of personality and meta-accuracy are discussed.



Poster 2.09
"Evaluative Organization of Self- and Partner Knowledge in Relationships Founded Online"
Patrick Mayfield & Alicia Limke / University of Central Oklahoma
This project examines evaluative organization of self- and partner knowledge in the context of online dating and relationships in general.
Previous research (e.g. Showers & Zeigler-Hill, 2004; Showers & Limke, 2006) has suggested that evaluative organization at Time 1 predicts the stability of the relationship at Time 2, especially if the relationship experiences conflict in the interim. In the current study, approximately 103 participants completed the Evaluative Organization Inventory (EOI; Limke & Mayfield, 2010), an electronic version of the card sorting task used to assess evaluative organization (cf. Showers, 1992) and measures of relationship satisfaction and relationship closeness.
Preliminary results suggest that there are differences in 'default' styles of evaluative organization for individuals who meet their relationship partners online and individuals who meet their relationship partners in other ways. Results are also consistent with previous studies suggesting the vulnerability associated with compartmentalization of self- and partner knowledge as well as the ability to predict relationship outcomes by evaluative organizational style.

eHarmony's latest research

Compatibility is all about a high level on personality* similarity* between prospective mates for long term mating with commitment.
Please remember there are different ways to assess personality and there are different ways to calculate similarity. Thus, "personality similarity" is a broad concept.

WorldWide, there are 5,000 -over five thousand- online dating sites
 but no one is using the 16PF5 to assess personality of its members!
 but no one calculates similarity with a quantized pattern comparison method!



PAPER "Assortative mating, convergence, and satisfaction in married couples"

Measures of personality were collected from a sample of 417 married couples who met via eHarmony since 2005 before they met and twice after they were married (2 years period).  results indicate that similarity and convergence in psychological characteristics may benefit relationships and that while spouses may choose partners with similar personalities they do not become more like their partners in the early part of their marriage.

There are two reasons why romantic partners may be similar. The first is positive assortment, or the tendency for individuals to select similar partners. The second is convergence, or the tendency for partners to become more alike over time. Similarity in psychological characteristics predicts greater relationship satisfaction. Similarity in personality did not change over time, which is not surprising considering change in personality is gradual across adulthood.

If similarity is due to positive assortment, it suggests that the roots of relationship success may be established before individuals meet.

Participants: 417 married couples, who met via eHarmony, participated for a 2-year period.
The average male in the sample was 43.75 years old (SD = 11.08 years) and the average female was 40.73 years old (SD = 10.21 years).
They were first assessed at the time they registered for service. On average the second assessment took place 550 days after the original assessment and the final assessment took
place 1,350 days after the original assessment.
At the time of the final assessment, the average couple had been married for 2 years and 10 months with a range of 4 years and 8 months to 2 years and 2 months.
As a part of registration to the eHarmony service, all participants completed the eHarmony relationship questionnaires (EHRQ). Responses to EHRQ were used to match individuals with compatible potential partners.  As a part of the eHarmony service, all participants were invited to communicate with between 1 and 1,079 other eHarmony users (M = 121.9, SD = 133.2). Each match met proprietary criteria for compatibility established by eHarmony.
eHarmony's proprietary matching algorithms were not used to determine similarity (between mates) in that study. Similarity was calculated using a couple centered approach (Klohnen & Mendelsohn, 1998; Luo & Klohnen, 2005).

As of August 2005 (the date of the initial follow-up survey), eHarmony had contact information on over 5,000 couples either married or engaged to be married. In August 2005 these couples were invited to participate in a marketing study designed to provide information on the efficacy of the eHarmony matching service.


POSTER "Similarity predicts relationship satisfaction in Brazil"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If eHarmony were a medicine, it will be performing as placebo.

eHarmony's personality similarity approach is correct, but how eHarmony assesses personality (intoxicated with Big5) and how eHarmony calculates similarity (low precision method) is incorrect.

I say the success rate* of eHarmony is less than 10%**.

*success rate == percentage of persons who leave the site because they found someone compatible.

**estimated by Fernando Ardenghi using reverse engineering.

The majority, over 90% of eHarmony's members are not going to achieve a long term relationship with commitment (or marriage) using that site.

SPSP 2011 series of posters

B32 "Is it a date? How payment affects perceptions of romantic interest"
This study examined the effect of financial payment on perceptions of romantic interest. Results suggest that a meal is more likely to be defined as a date when the man pays fully and that men view partial payment by a man as detrimental to the female partner’s romantic interest.

SPSP 2011 series of posters

E46 "Your Torso Can Talk: Visual Cues to Similarity Detection"
People rely on visual cues in the torso area to detect similarity and to translate similarity into attraction. In an experiment, dyads wearing a black garbage bag over their body (head, arms, legs exposed) were less similar (and existing similarity did not lead to attraction) compared to normal, bagless dyads.

Topic Area: Attitudes/Persuasion

SPSP 2011 series of posters

C253 "It's that time of the month: The effects of hormonal shifts on female mate value, depressive symptomology, and short term mating orientation."

Heather Adams, MA, and Victor Luévano, PhD
California State University Stanislaus

It is consistent with
I.1) "Human oestrus" Gangestad & Thornhill (2008)
"Only short-term but not long-term partner preferences tend to vary with the menstrual cycle"

I.2) "Does the contraceptive pill alter mate choice in humans?" Alvergne & Lummaa (2009)
".. whereas normally cycling women express a preference for MHC (Major Histocompatibility Complex) dissimilarity in mates, pill users prefer odours of MHC-SIMILAR men, indicating that pill use might eliminate adaptive preferences for genetic dissimilarity."

I.3) "Personality and reproductive success in a high-fertility human population"  Alvergne, Jokelac & Lummaaa (2010)
The reproductive success of both men and women is influenced by our personality traits, according to the paper.
The study, found that women with higher levels of neuroticism and more extravert men, are likely to give birth to a larger number of children in societies with traditionally high birth rates.