Saturday 30 August 2014

The Speed Dating Value-Add

In a speed dating event, you meet dates that the organizer has arranged for you. In a singles mixer, you are free to mingle with and speak to anyone you wish.

When it comes to matching up with guys that you might be interested in, is there a difference between a speed dating event and a casual singles mixer?

That was a question that I asked myself when I first started 7for7. A speed dating event is a whole lot of work to organize. There are participants to confirm registration for, seating arrangements to devise, program sheets to print out, matches to coordinate at the end of an event...Quite frankly, a singles mixer is a lot less preparation. It can accommodate walk-ins, and it's also more profitable since I can pack in as many guys as the venue can hold.

So, why do I organize speed dating events?

Because I had a hunch that they work better than casual mixers. And I set out to collect data to verify that hypothesis. This post is about how speed dating improves your chances of getting matches as compared to just attending a mixer event.

Let's start with a diagram.


Let's take our gold-colored guy in the diagram as an example: "John".

When I hold a speed dating event for 20 guys, John meets with 7 other guys on a speed date: the guys in blue. Now, John attended the event with a friend, whom he has no romantic inclinations toward. John's friend is the green guy.

Aside from John, his friend and John's 7 speed dates, there are 11 other guys who are also participating in the event: the guys in black. John doesn't meet these guys on his speed dates, but he can meet with them during the mingling after the speed dating portion of the event.

Now, John can express interest in any of the guys who attend the event, not just those he speed dated. Because he has 1 friend whom he knows, 7 speed dates and 11 other participants, we can expect that all other things being equal, the proportion of guys he's interested in should be, on average, 1:7:11, in the order of his friend, speed dates and other participants. That is, we would expect that the number of "other participants" that John would be interested in would be about 11/7 times the number of "speed dates" that he's interested in.

All other things being equal of course.

Now of course, John probably isn't very interested in his friend. And he might actually leave the event without being interested in anyone at all. The ratio of 1:7:11 is just an expected proportion. John obviously can't be interested in fractional guys.

But, I can do the same proportioning for every guy who attends my event. More generally, I can count, across all the events I have held, the number of possible "expressions of interest" in speed dates, other participants, and the "declined": those guys that participants at my event have told me specifically that they do not wish to speed date (usually because they already know each other).

Based on data I have collected, this is the theoretical distribution of expressions of interest.


As can be expected, the greatest theoretical share of expressions of interest belongs to other participants. After all, there can be up to 20 participants at one event, but each guy only speed dates 7 guys; there can be up to 12 other participants he doesn't speed date. The smallest share goes to declined, which is also expected, since most guys attend my events with at most 1 or 2 friends.

This theoretical distribution is premised on all other things being equal. If speed dating adds no value as compared to a casual singles mixer, we would expect the actual distribution of expressions of interest to look very similar to the theoretical distribution.

In fact, the actual distribution of expressions of interest looks like this:


Clearly, the vast majority of expressions of interest is actually between guys who speed date each other. So, speed dating does make a difference.

Do note that this disparity between theoretical and actual distributions is not due to participants having spent more time speed dating instead of mixing with other participants.

If you have ever attended a 7for7 event, you would know that I specifically budget slightly more than 1 hour for mingling. This is intended by design. The speed dating portion of the event takes up just 50 minutes. I wanted to ensure that participants had more than enough time to mingle around so that a fair comparison could be made between speed dating and mingling.

Now of course, the design of the experiment is not perfect. The optimal experimental design would involve me holding separate speed dating-only events and casual mixer-only events, and comparing results between the two. But as it is, getting enough participants is already a challenge, which is why I blended the two kinds of events.

There are other caveats when interpreting the results:
  1. Some participants leave right after the speed dating portion of the event, not staying to mingle. This would naturally diminish the number of expressions of interest in the "other participants" group. But the number of such participants is generally small.

  2. The seating arrangement for 7for7 is not random, but devised by an algorithm that minimizes age differences while maximizing common interests. It's an open question whether it is my algorithm that is increasing the proportion of expressions of interest coming from speed dating, or the nature of speed dating itself.
Despite the caveats however, the evidence does seem to suggest that speed dating enhances opportunities for interaction far more than compared to casual mingling. Speed dating leaves a deeper impression and improves the likelihood that you'll find someone you're interested in.

The next logical question to ask then is, assuming you were interested in someone after a speed date, what's the likelihood that they are interested in you back? That is, what percentage of expressions of interest arising from speed dating become matches? And how does this percentage compare to expressions of interest that arise from casual mingling instead?

Here's the data:



If you are interested in someone that you met while mingling, the probability of him being interested in you back is 13%. In contrast, for a speed date you're interested in, the probability of him being interested in you back is a significantly higher 19%.

Remember, this is the proportion of expressions of interest that turn into matches. So, irrespective of how likely you are to be interested in someone you speed date versus someone you mingle with, the chances of someone you are interested in being interested in you back are still higher for a speed date as opposed to a casual meeting during the mingling. Much higher in fact, almost by half.

I've refrained from showing the raw data thus far, but now is a good time to mention it. Across all 3 events that I have held, there have been 18 matches that resulted from speed dates. In contrast, there have been only 5 matches that resulted between participants who did not speed date each other. The contrast is quite remarkable when you consider that despite the larger amount of time that I allocate for mingling and the far larger number of guys that each participant can meet while mingling as compared to speed dating, the number of matches that result is fewer than half.

So, what's the conclusion? The conclusion that I draw from the data is this: in terms of getting you matches, facilitated events such as speed dating work much better than unstructured events like singles' mixers.

A facilitated event need not be a speed dating event. It could be a small group of guys at a party hosted by one of your friends who's trying to introduce you to other friends of his. The point here is this: a little bit of facilitation that promotes conversation between guys who would not normally approach each other of their own volition is a good thing.

In retrospect, it's hardly a surprise that facilitated events work better than unstructured events. I have a very good straight friend who attends singles' meet-ups, and according to him, the few hot girls who attend the event invariably get surrounded and buttonholed by many guys, while the less attractive girls (who may be perfectly decent looking, just not as hot) get ignored.

I imagine the same would occur for gay men attending such events. Going to singles' mixers works well if you are very good-looking and attractive. But if you are very good-looking and attractive, online dating on gay apps like jack'd probably works just as well; you get lots of messages without stepping outside the house.

For those of you who are less confident of your looks, facilitated events are probably going to work better for you than mixers or online dating.