A study led by Jessika Witmer at the University of Amsterdam suggests that physical attractiveness carries the most weight in swiping decisions on dating apps. The research, published in Computers in Human Behavior Reports, tracked how people chose between realistic-looking dating profiles that varied on multiple traits.
For anyone who has ever wondered why one profile gets attention while another gets skipped, this study offers a clear clue. It also helps explain why many users feel that apps reward strong first impressions more than thoughtful details.
You can read the study here.
How The Researchers Tested Realistic Swiping Choices
Dating research often asks people to list what they want in a partner. Those answers can feel sincere. Still, the moment-to-moment choices on an app can follow a different pattern because decisions happen fast.
To get closer to real app behavior, Witmer and her colleagues used a method called conjoint analysis. This approach is popular in marketing research. It works by presenting people with bundles of features and seeing which bundle they choose.
In this study, participants were shown sets of profiles where key traits changed from profile to profile. Each profile included a photo and several details. These included height, occupation, an IQ score and a short biography.
The sample included 445 heterosexual and bisexual dating app users in Germany who were 18 to 35 years old. Participants made repeated choices in swipe-like scenarios. Across the whole study, the researchers analyzed 5,340 decisions.
Looks Had The Largest Effect On Being Chosen
The central result was straightforward. Profile photos and overall perceived attractiveness did most of the work when people decided who to match with.
When the researchers modeled the choices, a one standard deviation increase in attractiveness predicted about a 20% boost in the odds of being selected. In everyday terms, moving from average-looking to clearly above-average changed outcomes a lot. It also changed them more than the other traits in the profile.
Quick takeaway: If apps feel image-driven, this study suggests many users really do treat them that way during early matching.
Intelligence, Bio, Height And Job Played Smaller Roles
Other traits did matter in the analysis, yet their effects were much smaller. Intelligence, for example, showed a modest bump in selection.
According to the study’s estimates, a one standard deviation increase in intelligence raised the odds of being chosen by about 2%. That number is easy to miss next to the effect of attractiveness. Still, it hints that people noticed information beyond the photo.
Height showed a small positive effect as well. Occupation and biography attractiveness had weaker impacts compared with the photo-based ratings. These details may help at the margins, especially when users are deciding between several profiles that feel similar.
It also matters that the study focused on a limited set of features. Dating apps include many other signals. Users may react to humor, hobbies, politics, or distance. Those factors were outside this design, so the study cannot rank every possible profile ingredient.
Men And Women Weighted Traits In Similar Ways
A lot of dating talk assumes big differences between what men and women want. This study found a much tighter overlap in how traits were weighted during swipe choices.
In this sample, men and women showed very similar patterns. Both groups placed heavy emphasis on physical attractiveness. Both groups gave smaller weight to intelligence, height and job cues.
One reason this matters is that earlier work has often relied on self-reports. Swiping tasks add a different kind of pressure. People must choose quickly. That format may pull men and women toward similar behavior because everyone is reacting to the same layout and the same time-limited decision style.
People Slightly Preferred Similar Partners
The researchers also looked at similarity, a tendency sometimes called homophily. Here, similarity meant being close to the chooser’s self-reported traits, such as their own attractiveness, intelligence, or height.
Participants showed a small preference for profiles that felt similar to them on these dimensions. The effect existed, yet it stayed modest next to the photo effect. Similarity gave a gentle push, while attractiveness gave a strong shove.
There is an important detail here. Similarity was based on people rating themselves. Self-ratings can be sincere. They can also be off by a bit, especially for socially sensitive traits. Even with that limitation, the pattern fit a familiar idea in relationship science, people often feel drawn to someone who seems like a good “fit.”
What The Findings Mean And What They Miss
So what should readers take from this? At the earliest stage of app dating, many choices look like fast visual sorting. That does not tell the whole story of who ends up dating. It does describe what gets someone through the first gate.
In practical terms, the findings help explain why users spend so much time choosing photos. A clear picture, good lighting and an expression that feels warm could influence split-second decisions. Plenty of people already sense this. The study adds numbers that show how lopsided early matching can be.
Reality check: This study measured initial selection, not long-term relationship quality. Being chosen on an app is only one step in a longer process.
The study also has design limits that are worth keeping in mind. The profile photos were created with AI tools and rated in a pretest. Those images may not capture the full range of real faces, styles and cultural cues that show up on actual apps.
Finally, the study involved app users in Germany who were 18 to 35 years old. Dating markets vary by culture, age and app type. The results suggest a strong general pattern. Future work could test other countries, older users and same-sex matching contexts with similar methods.