Game theory for showing interest and availability when dating The more cynical (or perhaps realistic) of us would argue that there's a fair amount of game theory going on in the dating game. 

For example a classic ploy is 'Don't ring for three days, because you don't want to come across too keen'.  Of course this rule is now widely considered obsolete (as would be natural in any game).

A fairly straight forward hypothesis I would put forward is:


Everybody in the dating game is looking to get hitched with their highest possible value match. 
By conveying unconditional interest in the other partner, you let them know that they can safetly 'get you' and so it's safe to pursue higher value mates knowing that they can score at least as highly as you.
Therefore, the smarter strategy is to not let your dating interest know how available you are for them, so that they are incentivised to make commitments to you. 


Now I know, this seems like a deeply cynical and flawed way of thinking. I'm not looking for a social criticism of this thinking. Rather I'm interested if there have been any studies carried out, where by the attractiveness of someone is assessed according to the availability they've communicated, etc.
Sending costly signals may work, at least when the recipient is less attractive than the sender.
There's also a nice popular science book by Paul Oyer called Everything I Ever Needed to Know About Economics I Learned from Online Dating that covers some of this ground, including the paper linked above.
Another theoretical paper suggests that costly signals that are worthless to the recipient work nicely, because the cost signals to the recipient that the donor has resources and values her highly, but by being worthless, it screens out &quot;gold-diggers&quot; that merely want the gift. Perhaps setting a pile of cash on fire would do the trick?