Romantic Relationships and Online Dating

  • Nicola Fox Hamilton
Chapter

Abstract

The influence of technology in our lives has seeped into nearly every aspect of how we relate to others. We connect with our friends and family through text, email, social networking sites (SNS), and instant messaging to name but a few. Through a variety of online platforms we seek old and new friends, business partnerships and collaborations, employers and employees and of course, we seek candidates for those relationships most dear to us, romantic relationships. This chapter cannot attempt to address the vast area of how technology changes the ways in which we interact in all of our relationships, but rather will focus on the influence of technology and the Internet on our romantic relationships, in particular how we find those relationships through online dating.

Keywords

Romantic Relationship Social Networking Site Marital Satisfaction Romantic Partner Physical Attractiveness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aretz, W., Demuth, I., Schmidt, K., & Vierlein, J. (2010). Partner search in the digital age. Psychological characteristics of online-dating-service-users and its contribution to the explanation of different patterns of utilization. Journal of Business and Media Psychology, 1, 8–16.Google Scholar
  2. Blackhart, G. C., Fitzpatrick, J., & Williamson, J. (2014). Dispositional factors predicting use of online dating sites and behaviors related to online dating. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 113–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bridle, J. (2014, February 9). The algorithm method: How internet dating became everyone’s route to a perfect love match. The Observer. Retrieved April 9, 2015 from http://www.theguardian.com/observer
  4. Cacioppo, J. T., Cacioppo, S., Gonzaga, G. C., Ogburn, E. L., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2013). Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and offline meeting venues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(25), 10135–10140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clemens, C., Atkin, D., & Krishnan, A. (2015). The influence of biological and personality traits on gratifications obtained through online dating websites. Computers in Human Behavior, 49, 120–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cloyd, L. (1977). Effect of acquaintanceship on accuracy of person perception. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 44(3), 819–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Couch, D., & Liamputtong, P. (2008). Online dating and mating: The use of the internet to meet sexual partners. Qualitative Health Research, 18(2), 268–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Downey, G., & Feldman, S. I. (1996). Implications of rejection sensitivity for intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(6), 1327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ellison, N. B., Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2012). Profile as promise: A framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentations. New Media & Society, 14(1), 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fiore, A. T., & Donath, J. S. (2005). Homophily in online dating: When do you like someone like yourself? Computer-Human Interaction2005, 1371–1374.Google Scholar
  12. Fiore, A. T., Taylor, L. S., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Hearst, M. A. (2008). Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles. Computer-Human Interaction 2008, 797. New York, USA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fiore, A. T., Taylor, L. S., Zhong, X., Mendelsohn, G. A., & Cheshire, C. (2010). Who’s right and who writes: People, profiles, contacts, and replies in online dating. Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1–10. CA, USA: IEEE Computer Society. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2010.444Google Scholar
  14. Frost, J. H., Chance, Z., Norton, M. I., & Ariely, D. (2008). People are experience goods: Improving online dating with virtual dates. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 22(1), 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fullwood, C. (2015). The role of personality in online self-presentation. In A. Attrill (Ed.), Cyberpsychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-presentation in online personals: The role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in Internet dating. Communication Research, 33(2), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goedel, W. C., & Duncan, D. T. (2015). Geosocial-networking app usage patterns of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men: Survey among users of Grindr, a mobile dating app. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance, 1(1), e4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Guadagno, R. E., Okdie, B. M., & Kruse, S. A. (2012). Dating deception: Gender, online dating, and exaggerated self-presentation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 642–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hall, J. A. (2014). First comes social networking, then comes marriage? Characteristics of Americans married 2005–2012 who met through social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(5), 322–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heino, R. D., Ellison, N. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2010). Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(4), 427–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henry-Waring, M., & Barraket, J. (2008). Dating and intimacy in the 21st century: The use of online dating sites in Australia. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 6(1), 14–33.Google Scholar
  22. Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94(3), 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hitsch, G. J., Hortaçsu, A., & Ariely, D. (2010). What makes you click? Mate preferences in online dating. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 8(4), 393–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hogan, B., Li, N., & Dutton, W. H. (2011). A global shift in the social relationships of networked individuals: Meeting and dating online comes of age. Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=47Google Scholar
  25. Kotlyar, I., & Ariely, D. (2013). The effect of nonverbal cues on relationship formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 544–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lee, A. Y., & Bruckman, A. S. (2007, November). Judging you by the company you keep: Dating on social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work (pp. 371–378). Florida, USA: ACM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lo, S. K., Hsieh, A. Y., & Chiu, Y. P. (2013). Contradictory deceptive behavior in online dating. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1755–1762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Leogue, J. (2015, February 18). Warning over homophobic ‘catfish’ attacks. Irish Examiner. Retrieved from http://www.irishexaminer.com
  29. Mascaro, C. M., Magee, R. M., & Goggins, S. P. (2012, February). Not just a wink and smile: an analysis of user-defined success in online dating. In Proceedings of the 2012 iConference (pp. 200–206). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  30. Masden, C., & Edwards, W. K. (2015, April). Understanding the role of community in online dating. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 535–544). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  31. Montoya, R. M., Horton, R. S., & Kirchner, J. (2008). Is actual similarity necessary for attraction? A meta-analysis of actual and perceived similarity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 25(6), 889–922.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morgan, E. M., Richards, T. C., & VanNess, E. M. (2010). Comparing narratives of personal and preferred partner characteristics in online dating advertisements. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 883–888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Norton, M., Frost, J., & Ariely, D. (2007). Less is more: The lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paul, A. (2014). Is online better than offline for meeting partners? Depends: Are you looking to marry or to date? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(10), 664–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ramirez, A., Fleuriet, C., & Cole, M. (2015). When online dating partners meet offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication between online daters. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(1), 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rao, S., Hurlbutt, T., Nass, C., & JanakiRam, N. (2009, April). My dating site thinks I’m a loser: Effects of personal photos and presentation intervals on perceptions of recommender systems. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 221–224). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  37. Rosenfeld, M. J. (2010). Meeting online: The rise of the internet as a social intermediary. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association annual meeting. Retrieved from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p409508_index.htmlGoogle Scholar
  38. Rosenfeld, M. J., & Thomas, R. J. (2012). Searching for a mate the rise of the Internet as a social intermediary. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 523–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2013). Online dating & relationships. PEW Internet & American Life Project. Washington, D.C., US. Retrieved November 10, 2013 from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Online-Dating.aspx
  40. Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Who visits online dating sites? Exploring some characteristics of online daters. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(6), 849–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van De Wiele, C., & Tong, S. T. (2014, September). Breaking boundaries: the uses & gratifications of Grindr. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing (pp. 619–630). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  43. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whitty, M. T. (2008). Revealing the ‘real’ me, searching for the ‘actual’ you: Presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1707–1723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wu, P. L., & Chiou, W. B. (2009). More options lead to more searching and worse choices in finding partners for romantic relationships online: An experimental study. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(3), 315–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zytko, D., Freeman, G., Grandhi, S. A., Herring, S. C., & Jones, Q. G. (2015, February). Enhancing evaluation of potential dates online through paired collaborative activities. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 1849–1859). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar
  47. Zytko, D., Grandhi, S. A., & Jones, Q. (2014, November). Impression management struggles in online dating. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on supporting group work (pp. 53–62). New York, USA: ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Nicola Fox Hamilton 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicola Fox Hamilton

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations