Rerunning the sim with ‘non-negative preferences’, I get an average self-satisfaction of 21.44 and average other-satisfaction of 23.82; doing it with a random preference direction I get an average self-satisfaction of 0.53 and average other-satisfaction of 5.43 (with 95% preferring their partner). So with preferences that are less correlated between people, the matching has more ability to drive up other-satisfaction, which makes sense.
[I was expecting the average self-satisfaction to be 0, so I’m not quite sure why it’s so high; maybe the randomness of the simulations is high enough that’s a reasonable result? Running it some more times I get 0.28, −0.37, 0.10, −0.13, and −0.04 for self-satisfaction averages, which seems consistent with “you had an abnormally pleased group that time, but the average is 0”.]
(I’m noticing I divided by net numbers by 2, which means they’re “per-relationship” numbers instead of “per-person” numbers, and that was probably a mistake; oops!)
Rerunning the sim with ‘non-negative preferences’, I get an average self-satisfaction of 21.44 and average other-satisfaction of 23.82; doing it with a random preference direction I get an average self-satisfaction of 0.53 and average other-satisfaction of 5.43 (with 95% preferring their partner). So with preferences that are less correlated between people, the matching has more ability to drive up other-satisfaction, which makes sense.
[I was expecting the average self-satisfaction to be 0, so I’m not quite sure why it’s so high; maybe the randomness of the simulations is high enough that’s a reasonable result? Running it some more times I get 0.28, −0.37, 0.10, −0.13, and −0.04 for self-satisfaction averages, which seems consistent with “you had an abnormally pleased group that time, but the average is 0”.]
(I’m noticing I divided by net numbers by 2, which means they’re “per-relationship” numbers instead of “per-person” numbers, and that was probably a mistake; oops!)