Kinsey Scientist Rebuts Myths About Modern Dating

Dating apps and AI companions may feel like they rewired romance, but an evolutionary biologist at the Kinsey Institute argues we’re misreading what’s actually changed. The tools are new; the psychology of pair-bonding is not. If we want better outcomes, we have to stop treating technology as the relationship — and start using it to support the human parts we keep sidelining.

The Core Error About Courtship in the Digital Age

The biggest misconception, according to Kinsey scientist Justin Garcia, is that technology has altered the basic architecture of attraction and attachment. It hasn’t. What makes relationships thrive still hinges on reciprocity: two people investing, responding, and improving one another’s lives over time.

Garcia frames healthy partnership as a triad of “me, you, and us.” Many of the new tools optimize the “me” and “you” — polished profiles, perfect responses — but neglect the “us,” the shared container where growth and generosity live. That’s the piece too many daters overlook.

AI Aids Practice, Not Partnership, in Real Dating

AI can be useful as practice — training wheels for confidence, conversation prompts, or feedback on a profile. But training wheels are meant to come off. An algorithm that flatters you endlessly can’t provide the defining feature of real intimacy: the knowledge that your actions genuinely make another person’s life better, and theirs improve yours.

That reciprocal loop is a dyadic process — a back-and-forth that refines empathy, timing, and trust. A chatbot can simulate warmth; it can’t share a Sunday errand run, notice you’re anxious in a crowded room, or wake up early to help you meet a deadline. Those small, prosocial behaviors are the glue of long-term satisfaction.

Apps Change Discovery, Not Desire, in Modern Dating

Dating apps have expanded the pool of potential partners and lowered the friction of meeting. They’ve been especially helpful for people who are neurodivergent, live outside dense social hubs, or seek specific cultural or religious matches. The discovery function is real and valuable.

But the medium strips away much of what human courtship evolved to evaluate: voice, timing, microexpressions, scent, and social context. A grid of faces can’t replicate a laugh in a coffee line or the warmth of being introduced through friends. Garcia, who has advised Match since 2010, is blunt about this trade-off — apps are tools, not environments. Treat them as a doorway, not the living room.

Burnout and the Optimization Trap in Online Dating

Where daters stumble is in how they use the tools. Infinite scroll encourages overselection and underinvestment. Gamified design nudges snap judgments and ghosting. Many people mistake “maximizing options” for “making a good match,” then feel depleted when abundance yields anxiety rather than connection.

Fresh data collected by The Harris Poll for Match Group and the Kinsey Institute underscores the ambivalence. Among 2,500 U.S. singles, only 55% of 18–29-year-olds said they feel ready to pursue a relationship, even as 80% believe they will find true love. That aspiration–readiness gap suggests perfectionism and paralysis — the sense you must become an ideal partner before you’re allowed to date seriously.

The Self-Improvement Myth in Building Relationships

“Work on yourself first” is useful up to a point, but growth accelerates in relationships. You can’t practice compromise, repair, or mutual support in isolation. Kinsey-linked researchers describe relationships as the place where vulnerability and friction — the very messiness some apps and AI try to smooth away — become the engine of intimacy.

Amelia Miller of Match Group’s Human Connections Lab puts it starkly: platforms can teach young people to avoid discomfort, when in fact tolerating it together is how couples mature. The goal isn’t perfection; it’s responsiveness. Partners are co-pilots, not final products.

Science-Backed Ways to Date Better and Build Bonds

Use apps to get to humans fast. Prioritize voice notes or a quick video chat to restore missing social cues, then meet in person when it’s safe. If there’s mild interest, take a second date; real compatibility often appears after nerves settle.

Limit choice to reduce noise. Time-box swiping, cap daily likes, and stop searching once you’ve scheduled one or two promising meetings. Replace endless optimization with intentional engagement — thoughtful messages, clear profiles in your own voice, and curiosity about the “us” you might build together.

Practice reciprocity early. Small acts — remembering details, following up after dates, offering help — test the dyadic loop more than witty banter. Track progress by depth of connection, not by match counts.

The headline isn’t that love is broken; it’s that our tools are only as good as our habits. When we let technology run the show, we drift. When we use it to quickly find and invest in real people, the old rules of bonding still work exactly as designed.