雙語達人:婚戀網站不爲人知的祕密
FOR as long as humans have romanced each other, others have wanted to meddle. Whether those others were parents, priests, friends or bureaucrats, their motive was largely the same: they thought they knew what it took to pair people off better than those people knew themselves.
只要一有人要找對象，周圍人就喜歡摻和。這些人，不管是父母、牧師、朋友還是同事，他們的說辭都一個模樣：你當局者迷啊，我旁觀者清，我比你更知道你該找個什麼樣的，我來給你參謀參謀。
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".
如今，網絡紅娘新加入到這些人當中來。不同於傳統媒人的是，這位新式紅娘動機單純到只爲掙錢；並且單身人士競相註冊使用，他們一點兒也不像原來那樣因討厭別人的絮叨而感到煩惱。這是爲什麼呢？原來，婚戀網站許諾了兩件事，這兩件事舊式紅娘辦不到，街頭邂逅也辦不到。其一，網站爲單身們提供了大量的候選人；其二，網站總是宣稱他們可提供科學方法來幫助單身們找到合適人選，從而能增加伴侶們“從此過上幸福生活”的機率。
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, , 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.
更多選擇這一點毫無疑問，可這確實能帶來更好的結果嗎？而所謂的“科學驗證過的算法”真的有用嗎？這些算法真的能提供傳統的追求方式（至少是，調情方式）所辦不到的事嗎？ 美國伊利諾斯州西北大學伊萊·芬克博士領導的一個心理學專家小組關心的正是這些問題，他們恰是在情人節前（也許真的不是巧合）發表了這麼一篇論文。這篇論文，發表在《公衆心理科學雜誌》上，回顧了自最早的婚戀網站自1995年上線以來各路心理學家爲此所做的各種研究成果。在這篇論文中，芬克博士和他的同事們對價值千億美元的網絡婚戀產業投去質疑的目光，而研究結論也確實令他們對本段開頭所提的那些問題答案更爲懷疑了。
Blueprint for a perfect partner?
完美伴侶藍圖？
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.
研究人員最先着手的問題是：被過分誇大的伴侶匹配算法在實戰中是如何發揮作用的？這一點並非爲之前的研究所驗證過，而恰是它們未能展示的部分。
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.
從商業角度看，這並無不妥。很多公司都會將其智力成果作爲商業機密而加以保護，根本不會去申請專利而使之公開，那麼婚戀網站就沒理由不在其中啊。可這當然就會使得其所聲稱的有效性得不到客觀驗證。於是，根本就不存在獨立客觀的科學證據可以證明婚戀網站所發佈的配對算法能夠增加人們相遇後互相覺得投緣的機率。有關這方面的發表論文均出自網站內部工作人員，他們根本就不會透露這個關鍵的電腦程序是如何進行計算的。
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.
然而，去驗證這些算法所歸納的結論又似乎是可能的：網站總是挑出那些具備包容性格的人進行配對。假設他們在申請表中列上一些有關這類性格的問題，電腦肯定能做到這件事。可是，這種說法與其說是種驗證不如說是種猜測——即假設那些具備包容性格的人比那些不太包容的人更容易找到對象。爲了檢驗這個命題，芬克博士引用了刊登於2010年的一項研究成果，這項研究由位於美國紐約州日內瓦城的霍巴特威廉史密斯學院的波西亞·德萊佛斯（Portia Dyrenforth）所做。
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."
德萊佛斯博士對超過2萬人進行了調查，問題涉及人們的伴侶關係以及性格評估。伴侶雙方性格相近的確實比性格差異較大的更覺幸福一些。但從數量上看，這個差別真的不大，只有0.5%的差距。芬克博士說：“假如網站說其配對算式能夠令人們配對成功的概率有小幅上升，我對此毫無意見。可是他們說網站能幫你找到真愛，我就覺得有問題了。”
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.
或許網絡能帶來的第二點益處——大量選擇——能增加人們找到另一伴的機會？不過同樣的，事實也並不像人們想得那麼簡單。
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.
有些網站並不採用武斷的“我們最懂你”策略，相反，他們讓用戶自已去決定想要找的類型，網站就是儘可能多的按照用戶標準提供候選人。
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.
當然，這裏有一個關鍵假設是人們總是認爲他們想要的就是他們需要的。這個假設實際上適用於所有的消費者決定。對於上網選購一本書或一臺洗衣機你可以這麼做，可是上網去選擇一位潛在的性伴你這麼做就太過感性了吧。而且，有數據顯示人們其實並不如自己想像中的那樣瞭解自己的需求。舉個芬克博士自己的研究成果來說吧，此案例顯示：當人們沉溺於網絡相親，快速約會時，人們在這些活動初始時的表現出來的性格特徵與喜好與他本身的個性特徵是非常不一樣的。
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.
沒錯，甚至這巨大的可供選擇量都可能是個問題。消費者心理學告訴我們，少即是多，從在超市選擇一盒巧克力到在飯館挑瓶葡萄酒，這都是已被證實了的一個道理。從6盒棒棒糖中挑出一盒，或從一打酒中選出一瓶總是比從30、40箇中選更容易些。可是婚戀網站給你提供了多少選擇？可不是幾十個，那是好幾千所謂適合你的人選啊。
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.
將 “選擇困難”放到人身上同樣適用，這沒什麼好奇怪的。不過將這一點放在婚戀網站中來考察，芬克博士確實沒有找到相關研究。不過，有關“快速約會”的研究又一次告訴了我們答案。芬克發現這些研究表明，當人們面對大量選擇時，對於那些需要通過交談和思考才能瞭解的特質，人們傾注的注意力會減少（比如職業狀況、教育背景等），反之對那些外在特徵則更爲關注。換句話說，大量選擇屏蔽了人們對重要關鍵特質的判斷力。
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.
芬克博士研究的結論要點可以總結爲：在網上尋找真愛並不比其他地方容易。但這並非是一條拒絕用網絡的理由。你在街角的咖啡館可能幸運地邂逅心上人；你也可以在躑躅於街頭時，忽然被陌生人一個眼神所打動便衝動地停下來和人家搭訕；所以當然，你也可以動一動鼠標，並且祈禱忽然有一天，自己幸運地被丘比特神箭擊中。
