A compatibility researcher says dating apps are 'mostly a waste of time.' Here's how to find a partner you actually click with.

• A psychology researcher said dating apps are mostly unhelpful for finding a compatible partner.
• He said couples build compatibility, rather than automatically being perfect fits for each other.
• Dating apps make it easier to reject people quickly and label benign behaviors as red flags.

Today's dating apps are marketed to help you find a compatible partner.

According to a psychology researcher, it's practically useless for actually finding one, no matter how similar your interests, lifestyles, or political views are.

"It's mostly a waste of time," Dr. Paul Eastwick, a psychology professor at the University of California, Davis, and the author of "Bonded by Evolution: The New Science of Love and Connection," told Business Insider.

While it can feel productive to filter out prospective partners, Eastwick said attraction is "going to be more or less a dart throw" when you actually meet the person on the other end.

It's because many of us look at compatibility the wrong way, he said, focusing on broad personality traits like "adventurous" or "funny." That thinking often leads us astray because there's no way to know whether the person, with our laundry list of dream qualities, will actually make us feel supported in the way we need.

"Compatibility is a construction process rather than an initial attraction process," Eastwick said. Rather than falling into relationships that fit us perfectly, the happiest couples find someone they really like, focus on their similarities, and build a compatible relationship over time. "It's a very complicated thing to do," he added.

While compatibility isn't straightforward, finding someone who clicks with you is less daunting than it sounds. Eastwick shared three tips for finding a long-term partner — none of which involve swiping harder.

If you're on the fence, commit to three dates

When it comes to dating apps, one of Eastwick's biggest concerns is the illusion of endless matches.

"When people have so many options, it means that you don't give those options much of a shot," he said, adding that it puts the onus on people to wow each other 20 minutes into a coffee date, in the hope of a second date, to everyone's detriment. "Our opinions of somebody will get more and more variable as we get to know them."

Statistically, the chances that you'll feel an immediate spark on that first date are slim. According to his own research, Eastwick said most people in long-term relationships felt "middling" in their first impressions of their partners. Rather than feeling lightning bolts, most people took time to build attraction for each other.

"Where you start doesn't have a lot of predictive power over where this thing is going," he said. "All these relationships eventually get to the same highs of, 'I fell for this person.'"

That's why Eastwick advocates a three-date rule: if you generally like someone but don't know if you feel something just yet. He explained, "Your impression's going to be kind of unstable for those first two dates, but at least you reach some stability after a third."

Join groups for slow-burn connections

Humans evolved in small groups, Eastwick said. When it comes to dating, we should strive to emulate that environment as much as possible.

"I want groups interacting over long stretches of time," he said, such as co-ed sports like run clubs, dance classes, and improv workshops. "I want people to get together with the same people on repeated occasions without the ability to opt out if they don't initially blow you away."

The one complicating factor: single straight men need to start showing up more. A recent episode of The Daily revealed that at a recent in-person dating event, three times as many women showed up as did men — and the women paid $100 to attend while men went for free. Across the board, many straight women feel like they're consistently putting themselves out there, only to find few (if any) men to talk to.

It echoes a trend Eastwick noticed himself at events promoting his book. "It's either women or couples. Where are the gaggles of men?" he said. "It may be that it's men who need this particular advice more than women do."

Count the green flags, not the red

Eastwick said there are two types of red flags people look for in potential partners — and one of them might be sabotaging you.

The first kind is anything that gives you an immediate "ick," like a date being rude to waitstaff or droning on the whole time without asking you a single question.

The other is more about trying to predict future heartbreak. For example, a person not texting you back at the cadence you'd like. You might "forecast" that this is an insurmountable problem and a sign of the person's ultimate flakiness and carelessness, rather than a difference you can work through.

"It's like we've internalized all this noise out here, and it's become this little voice in our head that urges caution and building walls," Eastwick said. "Relationships don't work if people do that. It's antithetical: You have to be vulnerable."

If you have trouble getting out of analytical mode, he encourages shifting to a more positive frame of mind. "I want people to count green flags," he said. In a dating environment where we're constantly scouring profiles and social media posts, the best remedy is to simply focus on how you feel.