You're trolling through Tinder

You swipe left, you swipe left, you swipe right

BAM! You make a match

You feel good all over. This person is definitely the one

One of you initiates conversation with a Hi, What's up, NM, HBU

Someone says how awesome it'd be to meet up for drinks or go bowling

Plans are made for an evening sometime in the vague future

Conversation slogs along, or maybe even tapers off

You still haven't met each other in real life, but promise one day you will

Then, before you know it your Tinder relationship has flatlined

You can hear the monotone of the interaction's pulse in the background: beeeeeeeeeeeep.

And it's dead.

What the heck just happened?





Both you and your match showed interest in each other from the beginning: You had to otherwise you wouldn't have been connected. So why did the love boat suddenly come to a screeching halt? What made you two abandon ship? Maybe the other person's digital personality was such a turn-off that you decided to pull the plug early. Or perhaps your match detected a character flaw in you early on they wanted to avoid?





I have another theory.





I believe that one reason your Tinder relationship didn't take the leap from the 2D realm of romantic fantasy to the 3D world of tangible reality was this: either you, your match, or both of you were satisfied enough just being connected that you didn't need to take things any further. What's the point? Why go through all the trouble? When it might be sufficient to know there's someone out there that thought you were attractive enough to even consider dating you.





Now, this theory of mine has not be tested yet to my knowledge. I am also not a scientist despite the many chemistry sets my parents bought me for my birthday. But there is some research that backs up my theory, and I'd like to introduce it here.





Off the bat, the way Tinder operates resembles an online social dating network (i.e. OKCupid). But it strips down the concept to these two essential concepts:

Hot or not



and





and Let's talk. It took the "Like" attribute of Facebook and built an entire dating application around it. Its genius is in its simplicity. But so is its peril.

It took the "Like" attribute of Facebook and built an entire dating application around it. Its genius is in its simplicity. But so is its peril.





That same "Like" function has some serious neuro-psychological repercussions. A study performed in 2013 at University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, found that getting a "Like" on Facebook triggers the release of the same " pleasure chemical " in the brain. That giddiness you feel when someone likes a witty comment you posted on your wall? That's dopamine tickling your brain, baby. Feels great, doesn't it? Well that thrill comes with a price.





The thing is that frequent dopamine rushes can create dependencies as strong as those experienced by cocaine addicts. Your brain starts to expect, even need, dopamine to function normally. That means if you use social media enough, you can actually get addicted to it. How does this relate to online dating?





When I spoke with scientist Kayt Sukel she told me that a match on Tinder is virtually the same as getting a "Like," but about yourself rather than just your status. The affirmation that comes from knowing other users "Like" you can trigger dopamine to stimulate your brain's pleasure centers and you can get aroused. Applying the same principle UNC researchers discovered, that means you can actually get addicted to receiving "Likes" on Tinder. If you've ever used Tinder, you can attest to just how hard it is to stop once you've started. Those thumbs can stay busy for a long time.





Along the same lines, a study released out of the University of Kansas explained that Tinder is so popular because humans are generally awful at flirting. Of course we would naturally flock to an app that let's us immediately know if someone is interested or not. This is very gratifying. One could even say it's instantly gratifying.





Instant gratification ties back into the interplay between dopamine and the brain's pleasure centers. We value instant gratification (dopamine right now!) over delayed gratification (dopamine later). It only makes sense that we'd rather know if someone likes us this moment rather than wait a few weeks to hear them say it to our faces.





The problem with Tinder is that there is a seemingly endless supply of instant gratifiers. No matter how many times you swipe, there are always more queued up. You could literally spend hours checking out strangers. And given the number of potential mates out there, the probability of landing a match is really, really high. That means that there's a good likelihood you're going to get a dopamine shock from time to time.





More swipes = more dopamine. It's an easy and dangerous equation.





So let's take a look at your failed Tinder relationship knowing what we know now about dating, social media and the brain. By the time you and your partner are matched, you've both already gotten your dopamine fix: The "Like" you received went directly to your pleasure centers and shocked it. And you liked it.





You could put in the time and energy to set up and follow through with a real-life date, but it's a risk "” who knows if you'll get the same neurological response? You could also continue swiping on Tinder: If you don't match up, it's no biggy, just keep swiping. If you do get lucky...well, I think you get the point.





So is this the future of dating? Is it enough to just get matched, reap the dopamine reward of an instant "Like," and then move on down the line? Could people become so infatuated with the brief encounters of a digital exchange they don't even need to meet in real life?





Her is a great example of how a person can fall in love with a disembodied, invisible, intangible idea of another person (or in this case an Artificially Intelligent operating system). If you want a non-Hollywood reference, a writer for New York Magazine Fiona Duncan maintains an The movieis a great example of how a person can fall in love with a disembodied, invisible, intangible idea of another person (or in this case an Artificially Intelligent operating system). If you want a non-Hollywood reference, a writer forFiona Duncan maintains an extensive relationship with a woman named M she came across on OKCupid. The two have never met in person, yet they communicate every day and even engage in a kind of physical intimacy (use your imagination).





Maybe it was just a movie. But maybe it's a prophecy supported by science.

Let me know if this has ever happened to you: