According to the research published in the The British Journal of Psychiatry, a virtual reality ride on the London Underground may help assess and treat paranoia.

Researchers from the Institute of Psychiatry at King’s College London used virtual reality to recreate a subway ride where a user interacted with other virtual passengers.  Subjects were taken on a four minute virtual subway ride, where they “walked” among virtual characters who behaved like real people, breathed, looked around, and sometimes met the gaze of the participants. Users’ interpretation of virtual characters’ intent helped assess the degree of their paranoia.

Congratulations!

However, according to a survey by MakeFriendsOnline.com, women do NOT like webcam dating.

While two-third of male respondents like webcams and want to use them on dating sites, an astounding 63% of female respondents said they don’t like webcams and most certainly don’t want to use them on dating sites!

The same survey reports that webcam dating appeals, perhaps unsurprisingly, to daters under the age of 25.

How does webcam dating compare with virtual dating? OmniDate reports that 55% of the membership base on its virtual dating site are women (45% are men) and roughly half of its membership are over the age of 30.

These very preliminary numbers suggests that virtual dating maybe more consistent with the current trends, including the growth of the “mature daters” segment of the market.

So, what should online dating sites do to effectively cater to this age group?  They need to provide features that facilitate more meaningful interaction for this age group: More genuine conversations, discussions of interests, etc … more about that later.

As virtual dating technology continues to develop, it will soon be able to address many of these requirements. It will allow dating sites to evolve from the passive “window shopping” model to a much more interactive “get to know each other” experience.

I am willing to bet that, shortly, online dating sites will graduate to virtual dating … particularly with respect to their offering for the 40+ market.

The biggest benefit, of course, will go to the First Mover, as it always does!  Who will it be?  It remains to be seen … but several visionaries are looking at virtual dating closely as I write this

Oh, yeah, back to my conversation with Ravit … she was the first to post her prediction that “Dating sites without a virtual dating component will not survive” - she gets to claim the First Mover Advantage!

From the online dating perspective, this opens up interesting opportunities to create a variety of amazing products. Presently, OmniDate is still the only virtual dating-specific application, however over the next year or so more exciting products will likely emerge.

Being the only virtual dating application, OmniDate welcomes new virtual experiences, as it validates the “virtual” concept and creates awareness.

SIMmersion offers a virtual aide for learning social skills. Simulated people interact with the user by showing emotions and behaving like real people. They interact differently each time and can carry on conversations for extended periods. Feedback helps users improve their social skills.

OmniDate is doing something similar on the virtual dating front. It has introduced a feature that allows singles to receive real feedback from the people they have virtually dated … and improve their approach if they fall short.

Want to know just how charming or funny you really are? Go on few virtual dates and find out! Knowing where your shortcomings is the first step in improving your social skills, lol.

I’d like to post here an excerpt from a blog written by my partner, Ravit Abelman, in response to David Evans. They address an interesting question: To what extent does virtual dating compete with video dating?

David Evans has posted interesting analysis on his Online Dating Insider blog: Virtual Dating or Video Dating? As usual, he makes insightful observations and raises great questions.

I agree with much of his analysis, but respectfully take issue with this statement: “Will people prefer Flash-based avatars from OmniDate, live video conversations from WooMe or strictly speed-dating from SpeedDate?”

Virtual dating and video dating (or more accurately, video conferencing) are not directly competing options. In fairness, David seems to acknowledge that: “Totally different markets.”

David accurately points out that “OmniDate wants to serve as a bridge between profile reading and meeting in person … OmniDate is for people who want to interact before going on a date.”

In contrast, “Woome could care less if you meet up after your session.” In David’s words “video dating is for younger people … who don’t think twice about turning on a webcam and chatting with a few people.”

David points out that “OmniDate gets a lot more repeat visits than Woome or Speeddate” … I’d also like to add that OmniDate sessions tend to last much longer than video chats. Virtual dates typically go on for 30 minutes (and often as long as 1-2 hours), which is in sharp contrast to 2-min long video sessions. Afterall, it takes time to get to know someone.

I agree with Ravit and David - each technology appeals to a different audience. It will be exciting to see how these cool technologies develop and grow over the next 12 months.

Yes, it’s true that folks like me, a 40-something over-the-hill oldie, have little interest in playing games designed for children. While my kids love Webkinz, i personally prefer to do just about anything else … even watch Oprah if i have to.

The thing is, me and the other old folks like me are not actually against having fun or doing cool things … It’s just has be be fun for us.

I think my generation would gladly embrace virtual worlds that are built to match our interests and enhance websites that we actually use … online dating is definitely one of them.