Podcast Summary: The Happiness Lab with Dr. Laurie Santos

Episode: Why Algorithms Can’t Predict Your Love Life with Dr. Paul Eastwick
Date: February 23, 2026
Host: Dr. Laurie Santos (Yale professor, Happiness researcher)
Guest: Dr. Paul Eastwick (Relationship scientist, author of "Bonded: The New Science of Love and Connection")

Episode Overview

This episode explores the misconceptions surrounding love, attraction, and romantic compatibility. Dr. Paul Eastwick challenges popular beliefs rooted in evolutionary psychology—such as "mate value," gender differences in preference, and the predictability of compatibility. He argues that much of what we assume about finding and keeping love (and what is perpetuated by online dating algorithms and advice) is not supported by scientific evidence. Instead, Paul's research reveals the importance of compatibility as something built in unpredictable, creative ways over time, rather than determined by fixed traits or algorithms.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. The "Evo Script" and the Myth of Mate Value

Time: 00:13–02:22, 05:12–11:31

• Evo Script Defined: The belief that attraction is determined by a hierarchy of genetic desirability, where people with "better" traits get better partners.
• Mate Value: Each individual is assigned a value based on traits like attractiveness, intelligence, or status. People are presumed to "pair off" with others at the same level.
  • Dr. Paul Eastwick: "There can be a lot of rejection. It can be pretty demoralizing, and to some extent, you can't skip that part. But I think it really matters. Why was I rejected in this instance?" (00:41)
  • Internet memes and pop culture reinforce these ideas, reducing people to numbers ("she's a nine, but...").
• Roots in Research: The idea emerged from studies showing a correlation in attractiveness between couples and agreement on attractiveness among strangers.
• Online Dating as Evidence: Dating apps intensify the "marketplace" effect, creating an impression of harsh competition and inequality.
  • Eastwick: "When all you've got is a photo and a brief description...people are swiping quickly. And the attractive people, the people with the high value attributes, boy, do they earn a lot of likes." (07:43)

2. A New Model: Attraction Is More Than Popularity

Time: 08:16–09:18

• Three Components of Attraction:
  • Popularity: Some shared agreement about desirability.
  • Selectivity: How open or selective people are to forming relationships.
  • Compatibility: The unique, idiosyncratic connection between two people; the most significant component, especially over time.
  • Memorable Quote: "Attraction is not one thing, it's three...compatibility is the biggest share of what's going on." (08:24)

3. The Overstated Consensus on Attractiveness

Time: 09:18–11:21

• Research Findings: Studies show much less agreement on who is attractive than commonly believed. Only about 4% of faces were rated similarly by everyone in one study.
  • Eastwick: "So that means that only for 4% of the faces did everybody agree that you’re on the top half or the bottom half. So that is mostly disagreement there." (09:30)
• Implication: Someone is likely to find you attractive, even if not everyone does.

4. The Declining Role of Consensus and Rising Importance of Compatibility Over Time

Time: 10:33–11:31

• Real Relationships vs. First Impressions:
  • As people get to know each other, the importance of universal desirability fades. Unique compatibility grows, and what draws pairs together becomes individualized.

5. Debunking Gender Differences in Preference

Time: 12:17–17:04

• Stereotype: Men care more about looks, women care more about status/resources.
• Surveys vs. Revealed Preferences: Traditional surveys support these differences, but experiments using "revealed preferences" (actual behavior in settings like speed dating) show that men and women react similarly to traits like ambition and attractiveness.
  • Eastwick: "Their revealed preference is the same." (16:26)
  • Eastwick: "Maybe when we look at these differences and what men and women say they want, they're not translating into their experienced preferences." (17:04)
• Online Culture: Misunderstandings about these differences fuel misogynistic narratives and unhelpful ideologies online.

6. The False Dichotomy: Short-Term vs. Long-Term Mates

Time: 17:19–20:18

• Popular Belief: People who attract many short-term partners are poor candidates for long-term relationships, and vice versa—think "alpha" vs. "beta" males.
• Reality: Data shows very little connection between someone's short-term desirability and their potential as a long-term partner.
  • Eastwick: "Your desirability as a short term partner really has no bearing one way or the other on how you're going to do in the long term." (19:23)

7. Why Evolution Favors Compatibility

Time: 23:19–25:32

• Evolutionary Context: For most of human history, people formed bonds in small groups to raise children together. Bonding, cooperation, and compatibility were crucial for survival, not just mate value.
  • Eastwick: "What matters a lot more is, do we work well together? Are we coordinated?" (23:19)

8. Psychological Mechanisms for Building and Maintaining Compatibility

Time: 24:33–26:47

• Bias Toward Our Partners: People tend to see their partners in the best light, overlooking flaws to maintain relationship satisfaction.
• Defending Relationships: We unconsciously devalue alternatives to maintain our current relationships.
  • Eastwick: "If you're in a relationship...when you imagine other potential partners, you literally imagine somebody who is less attractive than what single people imagine in their heads." (25:32)

9. The Limits of Similarity and the "Algorithm" Myth

Time: 27:03–31:12

• Myth: We're most compatible with people who are like us ("similarity effect") or who meet our "dealbreakers."
• Research Findings: Similarity and checking boxes on dealbreakers predicts little about actual romantic compatibility.
  • Eastwick: "It was surprising how poorly similarity fared at predicting compatibility." (27:06)
  • On dating apps and algorithms: "She used the algorithms to try to...predict who's going to click especially well with whom, and she was able to predict absolutely nothing." (30:02)
• Big Data Fails at Matching: Algorithms are good at predicting who is popular or selective, but not at matching compatible pairs.

10. What Is Compatibility Really? The "Creative Chaos" Model

Time: 31:13–33:26

• Compatibility Is Constructed: It's built through countless small, serendipitous interactions, not predetermined by matching profiles or lists.
  • Eastwick: "A lot of what compatibility is...takes place in sequences of interactions that unfold over time." (31:13)
  • Luck and timing play a large role.
• **Relationships grow through iterative, sometimes random moments where people "click."

11. Practical Implications for Modern Dating

Time: 36:35–41:40

• Online Dating Pitfalls: The expectation for instant chemistry and resume-style interviews undermine natural compatibility building.
  • Eastwick: "We're expecting sparks very, very quickly... Keep in mind...you were getting to know these people over time... Maybe the luck doesn't happen on the first interaction, maybe it happens on the eighth." (36:35)
• Choice Overload: Too many options and perfectionist standards lead to quick dismissals and missed opportunities.
• Advice:
  • Expand your pool; be open-minded
  • Give people more than one chance
  • Stop pre-screening for perfect matches—look for potential, not a checklist fit.
• Get Back to Real-World Community:
  • Seek more in-person, organic interactions (e.g., mutual friends, group activities, community events).
  • Eastwick: "Just hanging out with friends and you see where the night takes you and you meet a few new interesting people. But these things take time..." (41:50)

12. Friendship, Social Networks, and the "Friend Zone"

Time: 42:46–44:34

• Friend Zone Origins: A misunderstood and maligned space; online advice often warns men to avoid being "just friends" with women.
  • Eastwick: "Men and women can be friends just fine... they're ultimately more likely to find romantic partners to the extent that their friend networks have both men and women in them." (43:13)
• Broader Social Networks: The more diverse your network, the more likely you are to meet potential partners.

13. The Value of Patience, Enjoyment, and Expanding Your Network

Time: 44:34–46:27

• Emphasis on Patience: Building compatibility and relationships takes time and repeated interaction.
• Focus on Enjoyment: Being social is inherently happiness-inducing, even if it doesn't immediately result in romance.
  • Eastwick: “…I stopped being so focused on exactly where the prospects were. And things really started to change after that point... I just had this expanding social network." (45:34)

Notable Quotes and Memorable Moments

• On the "Evo Script":
  “There's a whole set of ideas out there that suggest you got rejected because you're a 3 out of 10 and you're just gonna need to settle for the other threes.” – Dr. Paul Eastwick (00:58)
• On Compatibility:
  "Attraction is not one thing, it's three... compatibility is the biggest share of what's going on." – Dr. Paul Eastwick (08:24)
• On Online Matching Algorithms:
  "She used the algorithms...to predict who's going to click especially well with whom, and she was able to predict absolutely nothing." – Dr. Paul Eastwick (30:02)
• On the Process of Bonding:
  "Compatibility is constructed...it takes place in sequences of interactions that unfold over time." – Dr. Paul Eastwick (31:13)
• On Friendship and Romantic Success:
  “For both heterosexual men and women, they're ultimately more likely to find romantic partners to the extent that their friend networks have both men and women in them.” – Dr. Paul Eastwick (43:13)
• On Patience and Enjoyment:
  "Socializing is very, very important. Spending time with friends, meeting new people ... can be helpful. We just gotta reestablish that lost art of hanging out and seeing where the night takes us." – Dr. Paul Eastwick (44:56)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Evo Script/Mate Value Debunked: 00:13–02:22, 05:12–11:31
• Three Components of Attraction: 08:16–09:18
• The Decline of Consensus Over Time: 10:33–11:31
• Gender Differences in Preference: 12:17–17:04
• Short-Term vs. Long-Term Myths: 17:19–20:18
• Evolutionary Purpose of Bonding: 23:19–25:32
• Similarity and Algorithmic Matching Debunked: 27:03–31:12
• Creative Chaos of Compatibility: 31:13–33:26
• Modern Dating Advice & The Value of Community: 36:35–41:40
• Friend Zone and Social Networks: 42:46–44:34
• Patience and Social Enjoyment: 44:34–46:27

Takeaways for Listeners

• Attraction isn't about static "mate value"—it's about dynamic, unpredictable compatibility.
• Algorithms and checklists can't reliably predict romantic matches.
• Compatibility develops over time through shared experiences, not through resumes or perfectly-matched profiles.
• Being social, building broad and diverse networks, and being patient are key to both happiness and finding love.
• Don't be discouraged if you don't find instant chemistry. Give people more than one chance!
• Spending time in mixed-gender friendships expands opportunities for connection, and the "friend zone" is not a trap but a potential path to new relationships.

For more insights:

• Read Dr. Paul Eastwick’s book, "Bonded: The New Science of Love and Connection"
• Listen to his podcast, "Love Factually"

Host Note:
If you've enjoyed this episode or want to learn more about the science of happiness and love, check out Dr. Laurie Santos’ newsletter at drlauriesantos.com.