Welcome back, dorks. We’ve processed the messaging habits of over a million people and are about to basically prove that, despite what you might’ve heard from the Obama campaign and organic cereal commercials, racism is alive and well. It would be awesome if the other major online dating players would go out on a limb and release their own race data, too. I can’t imagine they will: multi-million dollar enterprises rarely like to admit that the people paying them those millions act like turds. But being poor gives us a certain freedom. To alienate all our users. So there.
When I first started looking at first-contact attempts and who was writing who back, it was immediately obvious that the sender’s race was a huge factor. Here are just a handful of the numbers that illustrate that:

The takeaway here is that although race shouldn’t matter in messaging, it does. A lot.
First of all, how do we know that race shouldn’t matter? Are we just making some after-school-special assumption that “true love is colorblind?” more compatibility usually
means more repliesNo, we’re not: we know race shouldn’t matter to replies because the races all match each other more or less evenly, and reply rate correlates to matching. That is, more compatibility generally means more replies.
On OkCupid you create your own unique matching system, and that means your better matches are people you actually want talk to. Below is a graph showing match percentages vs. reply rates for a random sample of 500,000 people.As you can see, in general, the better you match someone, the more likely you are to reply to a first message from them.

We can see this principle in action when we look at our trusty control, the Zodiac. Here are the match and reply rates side-by-side, with similar rates colored yellow. There’s no real need to inspect the numbers; just observe the similar colors.
- Throughout this post, yellowish colors are short-hand for “neutral” and red and green indicate “strong preference.”

People of the various Zodiac signs match each other all at roughly the average rate, and, as we would expect, they reply to messages similarly. In general, the correlation between match percentage and reply rate means that whenever we compare the match/reply charts for a given breakdown of the population, they should look about the same. However, this, like so many other fine assumptions, totally breaks down when race gets involved:

Again, don’t bother squinting, just check out the colors. We’ll soon look very closely at these tables.
So here’s last week’s compatibility by race table (I explained how we can confidently measure “compatibility” in that post). This is a blow-up of the leftmost table above:

As you can see, the races all match each other roughly evenly: good news. It means all other things being equal, two people, of whatever race, should have the same chance to have a successful relationshp. But now let’s look at the table of how individuals actually reply to each other’s messages. First we’ll examine messages sent by men to women (I know our gay readers are interested in same-sex versions of these tables, there’s a link to them here and at the end of this post):

The numbers on the perimeter of the table are the weighted average rates for each column/row. Here’s what we can know:
- Black women write back the most. Whether it’s due to talkativeness, loneliness, or a sense of plain decency, black women are by far the most likely to respond to a first contact attempt. In many cases, their response rate is one and a half times the average, and, overall, black women reply about a quarter more often that other women.
- White men get more responses. Whatever it is, white males just get more replies from almost every group. We were careful to preselect our data pool so that physical attractiveness (as measured by our site picture-rating utility) was roughly even across all the race/gender slices. For guys, we did likewise with height.
- White women prefer white men to the exclusion of everyone else—and Asian and Hispanic women prefer them even more exclusively. These three types of women only respond well to white men. More significantly, these groups’ reply rates to non-whites is terrible. Asian women write back non-white males at 21.9%, Hispanic women at 22.9%, and white women at 23.0%. It’s here where things get interesting, for white women in particular. If you look at the match-by-race table before this one, the “should-look-like” one, you see that white women have an above-average compatibility with almost every group. Yet they only reply well to guys who look like them. There’s more data on this towards the end of the post.
Let’s see what happens when it’s the women writing the messages to men.

- Men don’t write black women back. Or rather, they write them back far less often than they should. Black women reply the most, yet get by far the fewest replies. Essentially every race—including other blacks—singles them out for the cold shoulder.
- White guys are shitty, but fairly even-handed about it. The average reply rate of non-white males is 48.1%, while white guys’ is only 40.5%. Basically, they write back about 20% less often. It’s ironic that white guys are worst responders, because as we saw above they get the most replies. That has apparently made them very self-absorbed. It’s interesting that white males do manage to reply to Middle Eastern women. Is there some kind of emergent fetish there? As Middle Easterners are becoming America’s next racial bogeyman, maybe there’s some kind of forbidden fruit thing going on. (Perhaps a reader more up-to-date on his or her Post-Colonial Theory can step in here? Just kidding. Don’t.)
Finally, here are a couple tables that shed further light on our discussion. These are site-wide answers to a couple user-written match questions. They barely need any explanation: one comments on the other, really. Together they shed more light on the theory/practice schizophrenia of people’s racial attitudes.


It’s surely not just OkCupid users that are like this. In fact, it’s any dating site (and indeed any collection of people) would likely exhibit messaging biases similar to what I’ve written up. Any dating site probably
has these biasesAccording to our internal metrics, at least, OkCupid’s users are better-educated, younger, and far more progressive than the norm, so I can imagine that many sites would actually have worse race stats. But like I said at the beginning, we’ll probably never know. See you next week.
For a further discussion of race and replies, the same-sex equivalents of this post’s data are here.
Hey there, Thanks for the chance to post here as it is better than phoning! My group is pretty stunned at the contribution many other blog writers are making on your site and hope to make contributions too when i can. I agree along with the earlier blogger and hope to check back here and there.
I see no reason to think there’s anything wrong with interracial relationships. Even so, my strongest attraction tends toward pale skin and red/brown/black hair, and somewhat sharper features. That may be genetic (Celtic ancestry), or it may be from an “imprinting” effect left by the looks of my first love. There are certainly exceptions found in members of all ethnicities, and in my experience physical attraction shifts a bit once I get to know and like a person, but I can no more help what I initially find attractive than a gay person can. I don’t think of lesbian women as heterophobes just because they aren’t going to be attracted to me.
I don’t think my coloration and bone structure attraction preferences make me a racist any more than my gender attraction preferences make me a homophobe. Just as freedom of religion includes freedom /from/ religion, acceptance of interracial relationships doesn’t mean I’m likely to be in one personally.
That said, I do respond to /all/ sent messages as long as I’m reasonably certain that the sender is not a scammer (if you are legitimate, please answer a few dozen matching questions before messaging anyone).
Is there data about how often each gender/race combination initiates contact? Obviously men initiate contact more often that women, but it’s possible that certain racial types tend to come from cultural backgrounds where women are less likely to initiate contact, leaving the sample set too small to form a significant percentage from.
I think it’d be funny if Christian devoted one post to blog reaction trending by running stats on the text of the replies to see which categories they fall in to, ie: “epistemological argument” or “angry reply to implication of statistics”, and of course “defensive statement revealing user’s insecurities”.
Keep up the studies, they are fascinating!
Do you keep records on the time it takes to respond after a question is posed? There is an interesting study that has been done at Harvard measuring the time to response and how it is affected by the time it takes to select the socially right answer as opposed to what we truly believe. It basically says that the longer it takes for you to select the socially correct answer the more that answer is opposite from your beliefs. It would be interesting to run the numbers again on your 2nd to last chart using that methodology to get a better representation of what people really think.
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/background/index.jsp
This makes me wonder how much cultural differences and upbringings affect match scores. There bust certainly be a lot of effort put in on OkCupid to show people others who have high match percentages, not just a random sample of the population. Could the larger message volume be a side-effect of the matching algorithms themselves?
Geographical factors could also apply, assuming the dating pool is a representative sample of the population of your region…
Awesome blog! Keep it up!
I am an attractive 42 year old black female who looks 32. I am slim and educated and date using Match.com. I get many many sending me attempts for contact and I sometimes send out winks or emails as a first contact. I always thought that if I were a white female with the same stats I would be remarried by now. But, I have to say that of the white males I actually go out with are nicer in many respects than my own race…not because there is something wrong with black males. But, my color weeds out the less progressive white males…thus the ones that I do end up going out with are much better people. So, I may get the short end of the stick in the short run, but in the end I have had some great dates.
Some of these comments are pretty ridiculous… the beauty of internet dating is that you get to shop online for exactly what you want with anybody seeing your reaction, so you can be politically incorrect… I personally weed out:
a) Men without college degrees.
b) Men who can’t spell or put together thoughts in complete sentences.
c) Men whose profiles seem canned or boring (or downright offensive).
d) Men who don’t appear to be athletic.
e) Men who are shorter than I am.
f) Athiests.
Now in real life would I be this choosy? No. Because in a face-to-face setting, I have whole lot of additional information on which to base my decision as to whether or not I am interested in someone or would like to date him. In CupidLand, I only get a photo, words, and a matching algorithm. I find no fault with white guys who only want to date white women, or Asians who only want to date Asians, or even black men who only want to date white women (gasp! Tiger-itis strikes again) because if that’s what is going to make you happy, no amount of external scrutiny is going change how you feel when it’s just the two of you. So why fake it?
I am not really bummed by the low response rate. If I can weed out those of any race who are not interested right off the mark because I am black, it narrows my focus on finding the awesome men out there for whom that isn’t a negative factor.
Giddyup.