27 Replies to “Dan Ariely: On Dating & Relationships | Talks at Google”

  1. 11:40
    Partners in a successful relationship convey the amount of work they're putting into it
    19:03
    Consider "opportunity cost" when selecting a partner
    24:40
    Use a "canoe test" or other mildly stressful situation to gauge a compatibility
    34:39
    Market asymmetry magnifies differences in negotiating power or "date-ability"
    46:10
    Dating websites cheat users by using shortcuts that convey little about what people are actually like, while at the same time letting users show off only their most positive aspects
    54:40 First date idea: Bring a favorite book and describe it

  2. Biggest takeaways:
    -What truly matters to people is the end of situations or experiences, because that's what people remember the most.
    -Forget generic, boring questions like "what's your job?" or "where did you go to school?" because they don't form any deep bond and don't show the person's true colors. Instead, use the 36 questions formula.
    -Your perception of an objective is correlated with how much effort and hard work you put into it: things that are easy are not worthwhile. And even more, it's not only the effort but SHOWING and EXPLAINING and CLARIFYING the effort to the outside and the other person.
    -Imagine that you have an apartment. And you have a deal with the landlord that the lease is day to day. And every morning you wonder if you want to extend the lease. How much would you invest in the apartment? Would you paint the walls, buy flowers, fix the doors? Of course not. You'd continously be with one foot out. So if you have that short term thinking, your investment in the relationship will be low.
    -The canoeing test for a relationship: when you canoe, unexpected or stressful events occur like hitting rocks, flipping over, getting wet from waves. The question is, how much do you blame the other person? The fundamental attribution error is the idea that when bad things happen to us it's not our fault and we blame external events, but if it happens to other people, it's their fault and we blame them. When things happen out of our control, we tend to blame the world, but if it happens to other people we tend to blame them. So it's a great situation to simulate.
    -Love marriage versus arranged marriage: arranged marriage tend to improve over time in contrast to love marriage that spiraled downhill over time.
    -An effective date where you can see the other person's character includes: solving puzzles, showing meaningful objects, facing moral dilemmas.

  3. Does anybody found exact paper about arranged marriages? I found only Marriage Satisfaction and Wellness
    in India and the United States (by Jane E. Myers, Jayamala Madathil, and Lynne R. Tingle), but it's defenietly not "so huge" as DA putted here.
    Thanks!

  4. First off I'd like to say I enjoyed the lecture. I learned something about myself and maybe why I never married. I was never all in with anyone. So unfortunately the information is about 40 years too late for me, but I will pass it on. Around the 20 min. mark and the secretary scenario, wouldn't the person have that "one foot in, one foot out" feeling about the "temporarily trying you out" situation? The employer may not get their all from the temporary worker. Thank you, cindy

  5. great talk.
    really informative.

    so we girls really should play hard to get to leverage the cognitive bias.

    the canoe test and the 20 questions for dating are brilliant.

    Dr. David Buss had great insights into looking at 4 or 5 characteristics we should look for and prioritize in choosing:
    1 intelligence
    2 compatibility
    3 physical attractiveness
    4 commonality
    5 values

Comments are closed.