IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormsom/v26y2024i2p537-553.html

Popularity Bias in Online Dating Platforms: Theory and Empirical Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Musa Eren Celdir

    (Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

  • Soo-Haeng Cho

    (Tepper School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

  • Elina H. Hwang

    (Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

Abstract

Problem definition: Generating recommendations of compatible dating partners is a challenging task for online dating platforms because uncovering users’ idiosyncratic preferences is difficult. Thus, platforms tend to recommend popular users to others more frequently than unpopular users. This paper studies such popularity bias in an online dating platform’s recommendations and its consequences for users’ likelihood of finding dating partners. Methodology/results: Motivated by the empirical evidence that a user’s chance of being recommended by the platform’s algorithm increases significantly with the user’s popularity, we study an online dating platform’s incentive that generates popularity bias by modeling the platform’s recommendations and users’ subsequent interactions in a three-stage matching game. Our analysis shows that the recommendations that maximize the platform’s revenue and those that maximize the number of successful matches between users are not necessarily at odds, even though the former leads to a higher bias against unpopular users. Unbiased recommendations result in significantly lower revenue for the platform and fewer matches when users’ implicit cost of evaluating incoming messages is low. Popular users help the platform generate more revenue and a higher number of successful matches as long as these popular users do not become “out of reach.” We validate our theoretical results by running simulations of the platform based on a machine learning–based predictive model that estimates users’ behavior. Managerial implications: Our result indicates that an online dating platform can increase revenue and users’ chances of finding dating partners simultaneously with a certain degree of bias against unpopular users. Online dating platforms can use our theoretical results to understand user behavior and our predictive model to improve their recommendation systems (e.g., by selecting a set of users leading to the highest probabilities of matching or other revenue-generating interactions).

Suggested Citation

  • Musa Eren Celdir & Soo-Haeng Cho & Elina H. Hwang, 2024. "Popularity Bias in Online Dating Platforms: Theory and Empirical Evidence," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 537-553, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:26:y:2024:i:2:p:537-553
    DOI: 10.1287/msom.2022.0132
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.0132
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/msom.2022.0132?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adachi, Hiroyuki, 2003. "A search model of two-sided matching under nontransferable utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 182-198, December.
    2. Anja Lambrecht & Catherine Tucker, 2019. "Algorithmic Bias? An Empirical Study of Apparent Gender-Based Discrimination in the Display of STEM Career Ads," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(7), pages 2966-2981, July.
    3. Runshan Fu & Manmohan Aseri & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2022. "“Un”Fair Machine Learning Algorithms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4173-4195, June.
    4. Jaehwuen Jung & Hyungsoo Lim & Dongwon Lee & Chul Kim, 2022. "The Secret to Finding a Match: A Field Experiment on Choice Capacity Design in an Online Dating Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1248-1263, December.
    5. Ignacio Rios & Daniela Saban & Fanyin Zheng, 2023. "Improving Match Rates in Dating Markets Through Assortment Optimization," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1304-1323, July.
    6. Behnaz Bojd & Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2022. "Star-Cursed Lovers: Role of Popularity Information in Online Dating," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(1), pages 73-92, January.
    7. Rodrigo Belo & Ting Li, 2022. "Social Referral Programs for Freemium Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8933-8962, December.
    8. Soohyung Lee, 2016. "Effect of Online Dating on Assortative Mating: Evidence from South Korea," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(6), pages 1120-1139, September.
    9. Itai Ashlagi & Maximilien Burq & Patrick Jaillet & Vahideh Manshadi, 2019. "On Matching and Thickness in Heterogeneous Dynamic Markets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(4), pages 927-949, July.
    10. Hanna Halaburda & Mikołaj Jan Piskorski & Pınar Yıldırım, 2018. "Competing by Restricting Choice: The Case of Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3574-3594, August.
    11. Yash Kanoria & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Facilitating the Search for Partners on Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 5990-6029, October.
    12. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. "An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
    13. Jinzhao Du & Ying Lei, 2022. "Information design of matching platforms when user preferences are bidimensional," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(8), pages 3320-3336, August.
    14. Saif Benjaafar & Ming Hu, 2020. "Operations Management in the Age of the Sharing Economy: What Is Old and What Is New?," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 93-101, January.
    15. Ong, David & Wang, Jue, 2015. "Income attraction: An online dating field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 13-22.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaehwuen Jung & Hyungsoo Lim & Dongwon Lee & Chul Kim, 2022. "The Secret to Finding a Match: A Field Experiment on Choice Capacity Design in an Online Dating Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1248-1263, December.
    2. Nicole Immorlica & Brendan Lucier & Vahideh Manshadi & Alexander Wei, 2023. "Designing Approximately Optimal Search on Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4609-4626, August.
    3. Ludwig Dierks & Nils Olberg & Sven Seuken & Vincent W. Slaugh & M. Utku Ünver, 2025. "Search and Matching for Adoption from Foster Care," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 1093, Boston College Department of Economics.
    4. Hongchuan Shen & Chu (Ivy) Dang & Xiaoquan (Michael) Zhang, 2024. "Mr. Right or Mr. Best: The Role of Information Under Preference Mismatch in Online Dating," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(4), pages 2013-2029, December.
    5. Kazuki Sekiya & Suguru Otani & Yuki Komatsu & Sachio Ohkawa & Shunya Noda, 2026. "Integrating Predictive Models into Two-Sided Recommendations: A Matching-Theoretic Approach," Papers 2602.19689, arXiv.org.
    6. Peng Shi, 2025. "Optimal Match Recommendations in Two-sided Marketplaces with Endogenous Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(9), pages 7431-7448, September.
    7. Feng, Nan & Xu, Nan & Feng, Haiyang & Li, Minqiang, 2022. "Turn on instant booking or not? Decisions of rival hosts," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    8. Eva Raiber & Weiwei Ren & Jeanne Bovet & Paul Seabright & Charlotte Wang, 2023. "What Do Parents Want? Parental Spousal Preferences in China," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 71(3), pages 903-939.
    9. Suguru Otani, 2025. "Nonparametric Estimation of Matching Efficiency and Elasticity in a Marriage Agency Platform: 2014--2025," Papers 2505.00607, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2025.
    10. Hongchang Wang & Benjamin Williams & Karen Xie & Wei Chen, 2024. "Quality Differentiation and Matching Performance in Peer-to-Peer Markets: Evidence from Airbnb Plus," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(7), pages 4260-4282, July.
    11. Peng Shi, 2023. "Optimal Matchmaking Strategy in Two-Sided Marketplaces," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(3), pages 1323-1340, March.
    12. Yunke Mai & Bin Hu & Saša Pekeč, 2023. "Courteous or Crude? Managing User Conduct to Improve On-Demand Service Platform Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 996-1016, February.
    13. Vahideh Manshadi & Scott Rodilitz & Daniela Saban & Akshaya Suresh, 2025. "Online Algorithms for Matching Platforms with Multichannel Traffic," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 71(9), pages 7674-7691, September.
    14. Liwei Chen & Arun Rai & Wei Chen & Xitong Guo, 2025. "Signaling Effects Under Dynamic Capacity in Online Matching Platforms: Evidence from Online Health Consultation Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 202-224, March.
    15. Lanfei Shi & Siva Viswanathan, 2023. "Optional Verification and Signaling in Online Matching Markets: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1603-1621, December.
    16. Angelos Aveklouris & Levi DeValve & Maximiliano Stock & Amy Ward, 2025. "Matching Impatient and Heterogeneous Demand and Supply," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 73(3), pages 1637-1658, May.
    17. Daniel Boller & Michael Lechner & Gabriel Okasa, 2025. "The effect of sport in online dating: evidence from causal machine learning," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    18. Irene Lo & Vahideh Manshadi & Scott Rodilitz & Ali Shameli, 2024. "Commitment on Volunteer Crowdsourcing Platforms: Implications for Growth and Engagement," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1787-1805, September.
    19. Choe, Jin Seon & Yoon, Sojung & Kim, Seung Hyun & Han, Yoon, 2025. "Message is all about you: The effect of message elements on successful communication outcomes on digital platforms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    20. Otani, Suguru, 2025. "Nonparametric estimation of matching efficiency and elasticity in a marriage agency platform: 2014–2025," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormsom:v:26:y:2024:i:2:p:537-553. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.