I made up that title. It could be a completely inaccurate description of the study below. W 
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C05E0DC113EF93AA35751C1A9619C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
A team of researchers, led by Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School, looked at online daters' opinions of people they were about to meet for the first time and compared those ratings with another group's post-date impressions. Before the date, based on what little information the daters saw online, most participants rated their prospective dates between a 6 and a 10 on a 10-point scale, with nobody giving a score below a 3. But post-date scores were lower, on average, and lots of people deemed their date a total dud.
Why? For starters, initial information is open to interpretation. ''And people are so motivated to find somebody they like that they read things into the profiles,'' Norton says. If a man writes that he likes the outdoors, his would-be mate imagines her perfect skiing companion, but when she learns more, she discovers ''the outdoors'' refers to nude beaches. And ''once you see one dissimilarity, everything you learn afterward gets colored by that,'' Norton says.
The letdown from getting more information isn't true just for romance. In one experiment, the researchers showed college students different numbers of randomly selected traits and asked them to rate how much they'd like the person described. For the most part, the more traits participants saw, the less they said they would like the other person. But another group of students had overwhelmingly said they would like people more after learning more about them.
We make this mistake, the researchers say, largely because we can all recall cases of more knowledge leading to more liking. ''You forget the people in your third-grade class you didn't like; you remember the people you're still friends with,'' Norton explains.
http://www.predictablyirrational.com/?page_id=17 (from one of the author's (Dan Ariely) blog)
The paper itself is about the idea that although people expect that the more they get to know about another person the more they will like this person, in reality familiarity breeds contempt!
Why is this the case? When we get partial information about others we tend to fill the gaps optimistically, assuming that they are just like us and that they like the same things we like. However, when we learn more about that other person we can no longer hold this optimistic interpretation, the disappointment begins, and from there on the disappointments escalate. For example, imagine that someone writes that they like music. You assume that it is the same music you like (blues) and you immediately like this blues-music-lover. But when you learn more, you discover that in fact they like jazz, and once you see one dissimilarity, everything you learn afterward is colored by that.
What is the lesson here? Sure there are some people that are worth knowing very well, but in the process of finding these individuals we will encounter a lot of heartache and disappointments.