自人類開始談戀愛以來，局外人就總想多管閑事。不論這些局外人是父母、牧師、朋友還是官僚，其動機大都一致：他們認為自己比當事人更清楚誰該和誰談戀愛。

　　Today, though, there is a new matchmaker in the village: the internet. It differs from the old ones in two ways. First, its motive is purely profit. Second, single wannabe lovers are queuing up to use it, rather than resenting its nagging. For internet dating sites promise two things that neither traditional matchmakers nor chance encounters at bars, bus-stops and bar mitzvahs offer. One is a vastly greater choice of potential partners. The other is a scientifically proven way of matching suitable people together, enhancing the chance of “happily ever after”。

　　不過如今，地球村里出現了一種新式紅娘：互聯網，它與舊式紅娘有兩個不同點。首先，它只有一個目的：盈利。其次，渴望尋求另一半的單身人士排著隊上網交友，而不會抱怨它像傳統紅娘那樣嘮嘮叨叨。因為，婚戀網站提供了不論傳統紅娘還是在酒吧、車站、成人禮中的邂逅都不能提供的兩個保證：第一，可選擇的對象數量大大增加；第二，用經過科學驗證的方法將合適的男女配對，使他們“從此幸福快樂”的幾率更大。

　　The greater choice is unarguable. But does it lead to better outcomes? And do the “scientifically tested algorithms” actually work, and deliver the goods in ways that traditional courtship (or, at least, flirtation) cannot manage? These are the questions asked by a team of psychologists led by Eli Finkel of Northwestern University, in Illinois, in a paper released—probably not coincidentally—a few days before St Valentine’s day. This paper, published in Psychological Science in the Public Interest, reviews studies carried out by many groups of psychologists since the earliest internet dating site, Match.com, opened for business in 1995. In it, Dr Finkel and his colleagues cast a sceptical eye over the whole multi-billion-dollar online dating industry, and they are deeply unconvinced。

　　婚戀網站能提供更多選擇這點無可爭議，但它能否帶來更好的結果呢？還有，“經過科學驗證的算法”果真有效嗎？這些算法能夠以傳統的求愛方式(或至少，調情)無法勝任的方式幫用戶找到合適的對象嗎？這些問題是伊利諾州西北大學以伊萊•芬克爾為首的一組心理學家在一篇論文中提出的，論文在情人節的幾天前發表，這可能并非巧合。這篇刊登在《公眾利益的心理科學》雜志上的論文重新考察了自1995年第一個婚戀網站Match.com成立以來多組心理學家所進行的研究。在文章中，芬克爾博士及其同事對這個市場達數十億美元的網絡交友產業能為人尋找合適的伴侶深表懷疑。

Blueprint for a perfect partner?

完美對象的模板？

　　The researchers’ first observation is not so much what the studies they examined have shown, but what they have been unable to show, namely how any of the much-vaunted partner-matching algorithms actually work.Commercially, that is fair enough. Many firms preserve their intellectual property as trade secrets, rather than making it public by patenting it, and there is no reason why internet dating sites should not be among them. But this makes claims of efficacy impossible to test objectively. There is thus no independent scientific evidence that any internet dating site’s algorithm for matching people together actually does enhance the chance of their hitting it off when they meet. What papers have been published on the matter have been written by company insiders who do not reveal how the crucial computer programs do their stuff。

　　在考察過程中，研究者們還未及看到這些研究說明了什么，就首先發現這些研究無法解答一個問題：這些備受吹捧的配對算法到底是如何行之有效的。從商業角度看來，這似乎無可厚非。許多公司將它們的知識產權當作商業機密來保護，不會申請專利將其公之于眾，而婚戀網站采取類似策略也合情合理。但這就讓人無法對那些配對算法的效果進行客觀的測試。所以，根本沒有獨立的科學證據能夠證明婚戀網站的配對算法確實增加了男女雙方見面時擦出火花的機會。僅有的一些這方面的論文都是網絡交友公司發表的，他們并沒有透露那些核心的電腦程序究竟是如何運作的。

　　It is, though, possible to test the value of a claim often made for these algorithms: that they match people with compatible personality traits. No doubt they do, given the number of questions on such matters on the average application form. What is assumed, but not tested, however, is that this is a good thing—that those with compatible personalities make more successful couples than those without. To examine this proposition, Dr Finkel draws on a study published in 2010 by Portia Dyrenforth of Hobart and William Smith Colleges, in Geneva, New York。

　　一般都認為這些算法是根據人的個性特點來進行配對的，要驗證這一點倒是可能的。看看普通的交友申請表上有那么多這類問題，就知道情況確實如此。有人提出了一個假設：雙方性格相似是件好事，也就是說那些性格相似的人比性格有差異者更適合在一起；但并未得到驗證。為了驗證這個假設，芬爾克博士引用了紐約日內瓦霍巴特與威廉•史密斯學院的波西亞•Dyrenforth在2010年發表的研究。

　　Dr Dyrenforth asked more than 20,000 people about their relationships, and also assessed their personalities. Members of couples with similar personalities were indeed happier than those whose partners were dissimilar. But the difference was not exactly huge. It was 0.5%. As Dr Finkel puts it, “I wouldn’t have a problem with companies claiming that their matching algorithm could increase the chances of developing a lasting relationship by a tiny amount; I get concerned, though, when companies claim they can find your soul mate for you。”

　　Dyrenforth博士就伴侶關系向超過20000人提問，同時也評估了他們的性格。確實，性格相似的伴侶比性格有差異的伴侶相處得更加融洽。但兩者在數量上差別并不大，只有0.5%。正如芬克爾博士所說，“那些公司說它們的配對算法能夠稍微增加兩人發展一段持久的感情的機會，對此我沒有異議；然而若那些公司說它們能為你找到你的靈魂伴侶，那我表示懷疑。”

　　Surely, however, the chances of finding that magic other are increased by the second thing internet dating brings: oodles of choice? But here, too, things are not as simple as they might seem。

　　但婚戀網站的第二項保證——大量的選擇——就應該能夠提高你找到神奇的另一半的幾率吧？但這點同樣并非表面看上去那么簡單。

　　Some dating-site algorithms do not take the high-handed “we know best” approach but, rather, let the punter decide what he or she is looking for and then offer as many matches to those criteria as are on the website’s books。

　　有些婚戀網站的算法用的并非“我們最清楚”式的專橫做法，相反，卻讓用戶決定他(她)要找什么樣的人然后從網站名單里找出盡可能多符合標準的匹配對象提供給用戶。

　　The crucial assumption here, of course, is that what people think they want is what they actually need. That, it is true, is an assumption behind all consumer decisions. But changing your mind about a book or a washing machine chosen over the internet is not as emotionally fraught as changing your mind about a potential sexual partner. And here, too, the data suggest people are not good at knowing what they want. One of Dr Finkel’s own studies, for example, showed that when they are engaged in internet dating’s cousin, speed dating, people’s stated preferences at the beginning of the process do not well match the characters of the individuals they actually like。

　　此處關鍵的假設當然是人們認為自己想要的就是他們所需要的。固然，所有消費者決策都是建立在這個假設之上的。但是，上網選擇未來性伴侶時改變心意與網購書籍或洗衣機時改變心意可不一樣，前者會令你更加糾結。而且，相關數據也說明人們并不太了解他們想要什么。例如，芬克爾博士自己進行的其中一個研究表明，人們在進行與網絡交友類似的活動——快速約會時，一開始所說的喜好與其實際喜歡的對象類型的性格并不怎么一致。

　　Indeed, even the very volume of alternatives may be a problem. Studies on consumer choice, from boxes of chocolates to restaurant wine lists, have shown that less is more. Half a dozen bonbons, or a dozen bottles, are easier to pick between than 30 or 40. And an internet dating site may come up with not just a few dozen, but thousands of allegedly suitable matches。

　　其實，有大量的選擇甚至可能是個問題。關于消費者選擇(從巧克力到餐館酒單)的研究表明，選擇并非越多越好。在六種巧克力或十二種酒中作出選擇要比在三四十種中選擇來得容易。婚戀網站提供給你的可能不止幾十個人，而是幾千個所謂適合你的人。

The supermarket of love

愛情超市

　　Not surprisingly, the difficulty of choosing from abundance seems to apply to choice of people, too. Dr Finkel could find no study which addressed the question directly, in the context of internet dating. But speed-dating once again provided an answer. Here, he found studies which showed that when faced with abundant choice, people pay less attention to characteristics that require thinking and conversation to evaluate (occupational status and level of education, for example) and more to matters physical. Choice, in other words, dulls the critical faculties。

　　同樣，挑對象也像在琳瑯滿目的商品中作出選擇一樣困難，這不足為奇。在網絡交友領域芬克爾博士找不到直接解答這個問題的研究，但快速約會再次提供了答案。他在其中發現了一些研究表明，當人們面臨大量選擇時，就不太會注意那些需要思考和交流才能進行評價的特質(如職位、受教育程度)，而會比較注重外表。換言之，太多選擇會鈍化人的批判思維。

　　The upshot of Dr Finkel’s review is thus that love is as hard to find on the internet as elsewhere. That is not a reason not to use it. But you may be just as likely to luck out in the local café, or by acting on the impulse to stop and talk to that stranger on the street whose glance you caught, as you are by clicking away with a mouse and hoping that, one day, Cupid’s arrow will strike。

　　所以，芬克爾博士重新考察種種研究后得出了以下結論：通過網絡尋找真愛并不比其他方式容易。這個并非不上網交友的理由。只不過，不論是泡在本地咖啡館或在街頭一時沖動駐足搭訕與你四目交投的陌生人，還是手握鼠標在婚戀網站上四處亂點、憧憬著終有一日會被丘比特之箭射中，愛情之神眷顧你的幾率大概是一樣的。