IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wrk/wrkesp/37.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why Do Men Keep Swiping Right? Two-Sided Search in Swipe-Based Dating Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Hernandez Senosiain, Patricio

    (University of Warwick)

Abstract

In today’s love market, swipe-based dating platforms (SBDPs) such as Tinder or Bumble have a well-established presence, but novel platform features can add significant complexities to the user’s search problem in ways that have been largely under-studied in previous literature. This paper formulates a model of two-sided search within SBDPs, where agents with heterogeneous preferences seek multipleromantic partners whilst facing intertemporal action constraints. Using numerical methods, I approximate stationary equilibria and perform comparative statics onvarious exogenous parameters that help explain stylised empirical facts. Finally, agent-based simulations are used to asses the structure of stationary equilibria as well as its attainability under myopic best-response dynamics.

Suggested Citation

  • Hernandez Senosiain, Patricio, 2022. "Why Do Men Keep Swiping Right? Two-Sided Search in Swipe-Based Dating Platforms," Warwick-Monash Economics Student Papers 37, Warwick Monash Economics Student Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:wrk:wrkesp:37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/research/wmesp/manage/37_-_patricio_hernandez_senosian.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Fudenberg, Drew & Levine, David, 1998. "Learning in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(3-5), pages 631-639, May.
    3. Duffie, Darrell & Qiao, Lei & Sun, Yeneng, 2018. "Dynamic directed random matching," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 124-183.
    4. Hector Chade & Jan Eeckhout & Lones Smith, 2017. "Sorting through Search and Matching Models in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(2), pages 493-544, June.
    5. Jovanovic, Boyan & Rosenthal, Robert W., 1988. "Anonymous sequential games," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 77-87, February.
    6. Adam Brandenburger & Eddie Dekel, 2014. "Hierarchies of Beliefs and Common Knowledge," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Language of Game Theory Putting Epistemics into the Mathematics of Games, chapter 2, pages 31-41, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Nick Arnosti & Ramesh Johari & Yash Kanoria, 2021. "Managing Congestion in Matching Markets," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 620-636, May.
    8. Ken Burdett & Randall Wright, 1998. "Two-Sided Search with Nontransferable Utility," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 1(1), pages 220-245, January.
    9. Chade, Hector, 2006. "Matching with noise and the acceptance curse," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 81-113, July.
    10. Krishnamurthy Iyer & Ramesh Johari & Mukund Sundararajan, 2014. "Mean Field Equilibria of Dynamic Auctions with Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(12), pages 2949-2970, December.
    11. Ken Burdett & Melvyn G. Coles, 1997. "Marriage and Class," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(1), pages 141-168.
    12. Hopenhayn, Hugo A, 1992. "Entry, Exit, and Firm Dynamics in Long Run Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(5), pages 1127-1150, September.
    13. Burdett, Kenneth & Coles, Melvyn G, 1999. "Long-Term Partnership Formation: Marriage and Employment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(456), pages 307-334, June.
    14. Drew Fudenberg & David K. Levine, 1998. "The Theory of Learning in Games," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061945, April.
    15. Becker, Gary S, 1973. "A Theory of Marriage: Part I," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(4), pages 813-846, July-Aug..
    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. Akiko Maruyama, 2018. "One-sided learning about one fs own type in a two-sided search model: The case of n types of agents," GRIPS Discussion Papers 18-15, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    2. Lauermann, Stephan & Nöldeke, Georg, 2014. "Stable marriages and search frictions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 163-195.
    3. Akiko Maruyama, 2016. "One-sided learning about one's own type in a two-sided search model," GRIPS Discussion Papers 15-26, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    4. Hector Chade & Gustavo Ventura, 2005. "Income Taxation and Marital Decisions," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 8(3), pages 565-599, Juky.
    5. Akiko Maruyama, 2013. "Learning about one's own type: a search model with two-sided uncertainty," GRIPS Discussion Papers 12-24, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    6. Herrenbrueck, Lucas & Xia, Xiaoyu & Eastwick, Paul & Hui, Chin Ming, 2018. "Smart-dating in speed-dating: How a simple Search model can explain matching decisions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 54-76.
    7. Davi B. Costa, 2021. "Benefits of marriage as a search strategy," Papers 2108.04885, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2021.
    8. Friedrich Poeschel, 2008. "Assortative matching through signals," Working Papers halshs-00585986, HAL.
    9. 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.
    10. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2013-044 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Thomas Gall & David Reinstein, 2020. "Losing face," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(1), pages 164-190.
    12. Poeschel, Friedrich, 2012. "Assortative matching through signals," IAB-Discussion Paper 201215, Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung (IAB), Nürnberg [Institute for Employment Research, Nuremberg, Germany].
    13. Stephan Lauermann & Georg Nöldeke & Thomas Tröger, 2020. "The Balance Condition in Search‐and‐Matching Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 595-618, March.
    14. Cheremukhin, Anton & Restrepo-Echavarria, Paulina & Tutino, Antonella, 2020. "Targeted search in matching markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    15. Nöldeke, Georg & Tröger, Thomas, 2009. "Matching Heterogeneous Agents with a Linear Search Technology," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 1/2009, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    16. Ramya Sundaram, 2000. "Multiple Traits in the Marriage Market: Does Diversity Sometimes Win?," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1666, Econometric Society.
    17. Yash Kanoria & Daniela Saban, 2021. "Facilitating the Search for Partners on Matching Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(10), pages 5990-6029, October.
    18. Antler, Yair & Bachi, Benjamin, 2019. "Searching Forever After," CEPR Discussion Papers 14103, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. repec:esx:essedp:769 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Light, Bar & Weintraub, Gabriel, 2018. "Mean Field Equilibrium: Uniqueness, Existence, and Comparative Statics," Research Papers 3731, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    21. Xu, Yujing & Yang, Huanxing, 2019. "Targeted search with horizontal differentiation in the marriage market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 31-62.
    22. Giolito, Eugenio, 2004. "A Search Model of Marriage with Differential Fecundity," IZA Discussion Papers 1082, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Optimal Search ; Two Sided Matching ; Agent-Based Modeling JEL Classification: C78 ; D83 ; C63;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • C63 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computational Techniques

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wrk:wrkesp:37. 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: Margaret Nash (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dewaruk.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.