Yes, after realizing the popularity of the DCM, I decided to do some further polishing of the spreadsheet.
As explained earlier, the Matrix is based on the theory that every relationship’s success is completely based on equality. It can be real equality or perceived equality – both work fine. Relationships fall apart when one partner feels either BETTER THAN or WORSE THAN their mate. An M.D. isn’t going to marry a heroin addicted prostitute. And a brilliant scientist isn’t going to be happy with a stupid idiot, unless the stupid idiot is incredibly hot. In the DCM, that’s what we refer to as “Tradeoff.”
In a relationship, you don’t need to have equality in any given category. You merely need to have relative equality across the board. For example, with myself and Jenna, our strong qualities are not the same. However, our relative DCM scores are very similar. For example, she’s highly sociable – I am not, and that Tradeoff gets picked up in another category where I may be stronger than her.
Under this theory, an M.D. might be completely happy being married to a moron if she happens to be a smokin’ hottie. And of course we’ve seen this play out in real life. Incidentally, the M.D. might be a hideous freak of nature, but his education and income counteract that, allowing him to attract a smokin’ hottie.
However, a hideous looking M.D. would not be compatible with a smokin’ hottie who also happens to be a brilliant businesswoman. She would then have the higher score.
Although not completely scientific, you could fill out the DCM for couples that you know based on your best guesses. You’ll find that it’s incredibly good at predicting relational success.
The interface of the DCM still looks the same, but the formulas and weightings have been revised with the latest statistical information to date. (no pun intended) Obviously, the DCM has a right-leaning slant to it (DUH), but the theory is strong.
Download it here:Dating Classification Matrix v. 3.0