Despite the overarching theme of this (long stagnant and finally revived) blog, I must say that in the past couple years of dating attempts, I have only endured one or two truly no good, horrible, awful, bad dates. The vast majority of the time, I walk away feeling pretty good about the experience. Recently, I found myself committing to a third date with someone I was not even close to attracted to. How does this happen? Thus, a return to the blogging universe...
My theory: I can have a "good" conversation with a rock. Now, this is of course hyperbolic (though I have never attempted to talk to a rock, so there's no guarantee it's not completely accurate), but the point I'm trying to make is that quality conversation alone should no longer be the barometer for measuring the success of a date, and in turn whether or not to go on two or more dates with the person.
As a graduate student looking to change the world and all that, I recognize the importance of "data driven decision making," "evidence-based practice," and all the other wonderful buzzwords that float around. So I believe it's time to use these principles to establish a new standard of measurement for determining the quality of a date.
It's time to re-operationalize my definition of a good date, and to do so, like any good researcher, I must begin with the research question: Dear world, what is an effective way to measure the quality of a first and/or second date? My background research is already completed (see previous blog entries for a review of the literature). That leaves me with creating a hypothesis.
Given my previous research, I have developed the following hypothesis: A good date is the result of quality conversation in addition to a willingness and desire to jump his bones.
Clearly, additional exploration is needed to test this hypothesis. I will do my due diligence as a researcher and continue this inquiry. Future results will be reported.
No comments:
Post a Comment