Why Our ‘Ideal’ Partners on Paper Don’t Always Match Our Dating Choices

Scene from GoDaddy Super Bowl commercial

You might call it your dream date, your soulmate, or, if you’re the pragmatic sort, you may call it your list of must-haves. Regardless of the framing, if you’re single-and-looking then you probably have an idea of the sort of romantic partner you’re after. And although some of the qualities you’re looking for are probably attractive to everyone (e.g., trustworthiness), you may also be after other personality traits that are attractive to some but not to others (e.g., sophistication). Ultimately, though, does it really matter? To what extent do we actually pick partners who resemble our “ideal partner” images?

In a recent series of studies, P.W. Eastwick and colleagues found that it depends on the context. Partner preferences (the list of must-haves and must-have-nots) were found to predict people’s dating choices when they read about potential dates (i.e., dating profiles), but not when they had real-life interactions with these potential dates. In other words, although ideal partner preferences mattered a lot when people were evaluating their potential dates on paper, those preferences were thrown out the window once people met their potential dates in person.

But it’s not that ideal partner preferences don’t make a difference down the road. Indeed, in Eastwick and colleagues’ third study, they found that people are happier with partners who live up to their romantic standards. So why do our decision making capabilities fail us so when it comes to making that crucial initial choice? The researchers believe that it is because of the emotional reaction that comes from first meeting a potential partner. On those first few dates when we’re getting to know someone, our rationality seems to get a bit overpowered by factors such as chemistry and attraction. As a result, instead of coldly evaluating the new love interest against our standards, we tend to see the person in the most favorable way possible.

Read more: Samantha Joel, PsychologyToday

Still independent.

We hope this story was worth your time. For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed Black-owned and independently run. We didn't get here by waiting on ad budgets that were never built to prioritize us. Our readers did that.

Corporate support for Black media has always been thin. Outlets like ours get roughly 1% of the $170 billion spent on U.S. advertising each year, and that margin is shrinking further as advertisers walk back the DEI-linked commitments they made in 2020. That's the backdrop. It's not why we're asking.

The wider picture isn't any steadier. Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under, it's rarely the ones built to center a Black perspective from the ground up that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top