Abstract
In this chapter, the Bourdieusian approach will be applied to observational and questionnaire data from a major German dating site. Firstly, by analyzing life-style indicators using multiple correspondence analysis, it will be shown that the dating site can be interpreted as a digital emanation of the ‘offline’ German social space rather than as an autonomous field. As physical attributes correspond to this social space, the idea that ‘erotic capital’ manifests as an independent structuring factor on a digital partner market will be dismissed. In a second step, an Eigen-value operationalization of chances for attention and exchange will be presented. Finally, using users’ interaction events, it will be shown that both objective and subjective chances are to be understood as functions of the users’ positions in the social space.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
From a relational point of view, the latent phenomenon of mate value cannot just be represented by the quantity and quality of ego’s contact network (that is, the value of the offers), but must also take into account the fact that the ego himself contacts alteri who can react to this offer in a permissive or dismissive way. I call this the ‘Casanova problem’: Ccontacts from actors whose activities are more widely distributed are worth less than from those who concentrate on one person. Therefore, an important indicator of ego’s mate value is the value operationalized by means of accepted and rejected offers. Again, this indicator of appeal is meaningful only when augmented with the value of those that accept or reject ego’s offer.
- 2.
The items are: ‘How likely do you think you are to find a partner on this platform?’ and ‘How likely do you think you are to find a partner at all?’
- 3.
This result is extremely stable, appearing both in models of the probability of individual profile deception and in models with several traits. This effect did not disappear when the influence of resources on self-perceived market value was specified using a structural equation model approach, nor did it disappear when the survey drop-out mechanism was modelled with Heckman correction models. Zillmann et al. 2013 present a description of the selective survey participation of the particular data.
- 4.
The average dyadic length is 1.9, with a standard deviation of 2.2.
- 5.
Although formal education is an emanation of cultural capital in the Bourdieusian sense, this analysis focuses on the question of whether cultural capital, as measured via lifestyle differences, shows a pattern independent from formal education.
- 6.
This was measured as interactions with more than one user in a day. This variable is only used for one actor per dyad as it determined the variable value of the dyadic partner in all models.
- 7.
However, this is not necessarily a sign of long-term stabilization, but may just as well represent a sign of insufficient motivation to change the communication medium (email, telephone etc.).
- 8.
A solution with more classes represents better fits, but the size of the resulting classes is negligible both empirically and substantively.
- 9.
Alternatively – and this is less plausible given the findings of the previous analysis, which showed that women consistently ‘disprefer’ men with lower status than themselves – the interaction is transferred to email, telephone, or even face-to-face meetings.
- 10.
Of course, the interplay of these analytically distinct mechanisms cannot be neglected.
- 11.
The Abitur is Germany’s highest level of secondary education and a prerequisite for university admission.
References
Blasius, J., & Mühlichen, A. (2010). Identifying audience segments applying the “Social Space” approach. Poetics, 38(1), 69–89.
Blasius, J., & Winkler, J. (1989). Gibt es die „feinen Unterschiede”? Eine empirische Überprüfung der Bourdieuschen Theorie. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 41, 72–94.
Blossfeld, H. P., & Timm, A. (2003). Who marries whom? Educational systems as marriage markets in modern societies (European studies of population, Vol. 12). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Bonacich, P. (1987). Power and centrality: A family of measures. American Journal of Sociology, 92(5), 1170–1182.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge/Kegan Paul.
Bourdieu, P. (1993). Sociology in question. Theory, culture and society. London: Sage. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0656/93086215-d.html
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditations. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P. (2005). Principles of an economic anthropology. In N. J. Smelser & R. Swedberg (Eds.), The handbook of economic sociology (2nd ed., pp. 75–89). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Brase, G. L., & Guy, E. C. (2004). The demographics of mate value and self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(2), 471–484.
Gigerenzer, G., & Todd, P. M. (Eds.). (1999). Evolution and cognition. Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/catdir/enhancements/fy0640/98051084-d.html
Hakim, C. (2011). Erotic capital: The power of attraction in the bedroom and the boardroom. New York: Basic Books.
Hakim, C. (2013). The new rules of marriage: Internet, playfairs, and erotic power. London: Gibson Square.
Hall, J. A., Park, N., Song, H., & Cody, M. J. (2010). Strategic misrepresentation in online dating: The effects of gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(1), 117–135.
Hancock, J. T., Thoma, C., Ellison, N. (2007). The truth about lying in online dating profiles. In Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 449–452). Springfield.
Hollingshead, A. B. (1950). Cultural factors in the selection of marriage mates. American Sociological Review, 15(5), 619–627.
Illouz, E. (2007). Cold intimacies: The making of emotional capitalism (1st ed.). Cambridge: Polity.
Joppke, C. (1986). The Cultural dimensions of class formation and class struggle: On the social theory of Pierre Bourdieu. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 31, 53–78.
Klein, T. (1996). Der Altersunterschied zwischen Ehepartnern. Ein neues Analysemodell. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 25(5), 346–370.
Krais, B., & Gebauer, G. (2002). Habitus. Bielefeld: Transcript.
Kuipers, G. (2006). Good humor, bad taste. A sociology of the joke. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter.
Lewis, R. A., & Spanier, G. B. (1979). Theorizing about the quality and stability of marriage. In W. Burr, I. Reiss, R. Hill, & F. Nye (Eds.), Contemporary theories about the family: General theories and theoretical orientations (pp. 268–294). New York: Free Press.
Lin, K. H., & Lundquist, J. (2013). Mate selection in cyberspace: The intersection of race, gender, and education. American Journal of Sociology, 119(1), 183–215.
Nagel, I., Ganzeboom, H. B. G., Kalmijn, M. (2011). Bourdieu in the network: The influence of high culture and popular culture on network formation in secondary schools. In J. Rössel & G. Otte (Eds.), Lebensstilforschung (pp. 424–446). Sonderheft 51, Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie.
Pawlowski, B., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (1999). Impact of market value on human mate choice decisions. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 266, 281–285.
Penke, L., & Denissen, J. J. (2008). Sex differences and lifestyle-dependent shifts in the attunement of self-esteem to self-perceived mate value: Hints to an adaptive mechanism? Journal of Research in Personality, 4(42), 1123–1129.
Phillips, M. C., Meek, S. W., & Vendemia, J. M. C. (2011). Understanding the underlying structure of deceptive behaviors. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(6), 783–789.
Schmitz, A. (2009). Virtuelle Zwischengeschlechtlichkeit im Kontext relationaler Methodologie. Überlegungen zu einer Soziologie der digitalen Partnerwahl. In H. G. Soeffner (Ed.), Unsichere Zeiten. Herausforderungen gesellschaftlicher Transformationen; Verhandlungen des 34. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Jena 2008. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Schmitz, A. (2012). Elective affinities 2.0? A Bourdieusian approach to couple formation and the methodology of E-Dating. Social Science Research on the Internet (RESET), 1(1), 175–202.
Schmitz, A. (2014). The online dating market: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Economic Sociology, 16(1), 11–25.
Schütze, Y. (2008). Die feinen Unterschiede der Liebe. Leviathan, 36(1), 76–84.
Skopek, J., Schmitz, A., & Blossfeld, H. P. (2011). The gendered dynamics of age preferences – Empirical evidence from online dating. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 23(3), 267–290.
Spanier, G. B., & Glick, P. C. (1980). Mate selection differentials between Whites and Blacks in the United States. Social Forces, 58(3), 707–725.
Streib, J. (2015). Explanations of how love crosses class lines: Cultural complements and the case of cross-class marriages. Sociological Forum, 30(1), 18–39.
Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2010). Looks and lies: The role of physical attractiveness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Communication Research, 37(3), 335–351.
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023–1036.
Vermunt, J., & Magidson, J. (2003). Latent class models for classification. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 41(3–4), 531–537.
Vermunt, J. K., & van Dijk, L. A. (2001). A non-parametric random-coefficient approach: The latent class regression model. Multilevel Modeling Newsletter, 13, 6–13.
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society. In G. Roth & C. Wittich (Eds.). Berkeley: University of California Press
Whitty, M. T. (2008). Liberating or debilitating? An examination of romantic relationships, sexual relationships and friendships on the net. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1837–1850.
Zillmann, D. (2016). Von kleinen Lügen und kurzen Beinen. Selbstdarstellung bei der Partnersuche im Internet. [About little lies and small legs. Self-presentation in online dating.] Wiesbaden: VS Verlag (forthcoming).
Zillmann, D., Schmitz, A., & Blossfeld, H. P. (2011). Lügner haben kurze Beine. Zum Zusammenhang unwahrer Selbstdarstellung und partnerschaftlicher Chancen im Online-Dating. Zeitschrift für Familienforschung, 23(3), 291–318.
Žižek, S. (2010). Time of the monsters. A call to radicalness. Le Monde diplomatique 12.10.2010
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schmitz, A. (2017). Empirical Analyses. In: The Structure of Digital Partner Choice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43530-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43530-5_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43529-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43530-5
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)