positive effects of online dating essay

Relationships and Online Dating Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Negative Factors

Truth and trustworthiness, expectations and reality, denial and avoidance, perceptions and waiting, the need for improvement.

The rising popularity of online communication changes the way people socialize. Friends and relatives can stay in touch and feel as though they are close to each other, even if they are at opposite corners of the world. Moreover, now people can find friendship and love online. The increasing interest in online dating also raises the question of whether this particular phenomenon is helping or damaging the current quality of relationships in society.

Many scholars attempt to answer this question by exploring different aspects of online dating. Many of these research articles come to a similar conclusion – online dating has a number of issues that stem from human nature as well as some technological factors. The central problems highlighted in the works of these scholars deal with individuals’ expectations and hopes. While dating online has benefits for finding people with similar interests, it also distances people and makes them suspicious of each other’s true identity.

Human relationships, romantic or otherwise, may be hard to establish and maintain for many reasons. The creation of online dating sites and applications was most likely intended to eliminate these issues and make the process of finding new partners easy and stress-free. Nevertheless, people encounter many problems as they create profiles, search for other individuals, and engage in a conversation. The following arguments show that online dating can complicate an already intricate process of finding affection.

It has been shown that people’s choice to date each other is strongly connected to the aspect of trust. According to McGloin and Denes (2016), attractiveness plays a significant role in both men’s and women’s desire to continue their relations. However, their reactions to this factor are somewhat opposite. Men, as the study finds, are more likely to trust female profiles with less attractive photos. These pictures are usually untouched or not enhanced with professional lighting and photo editing. Men consider images, which appear to be of much higher quality or have various visual effects as suspicious and fictitious. On the other hand, women find retouched photos more attractive and more trustworthy at the same time.

These findings show that online dating makes both men and women perceive their potential partners through a lens of distrust. Constant uncertainty of whether they are talking to the person they see on the screen may disrupt the usual process of bonding, which is typical for real-life meetings. People who cannot trust each other because of their visual appearance may start doubting different sides of their relationship. Interestingly, men, while being more suspicious of an attractive profile picture, are still more interested in dating women with edited photos (McGloin & Denes, 2016). This way of thinking can lead to such issues as the creation of unrealistic expectations and false ideals.

The problem of manufacturing an unrealistic image also results in many negative experiences for older individuals. While younger generations are used to the technological world and usually have a better understanding of the online culture, adults and the elderly encounter many difficulties trying to make themselves more attractive. An article by McWilliams and Barrett (2014) states that older adults feel pressured to appear more youthful online than they are in reality because of the competition from younger individuals. Women suffer from the concepts of beauty being centered on youthfulness and physical attraction and rivalry from younger women, while men have a limited social network.

Therefore, many older individuals try to become someone who they are not. This manipulation of pictures, descriptions, and even behavior leads to the creation of a false identity, which adults often try to retain while interacting with others online. For example, men focus on their abilities, often exaggerating their achievements and assets (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Women, as a contrast, try to appear more youthful physically and by editing their pictures to adhere to the current standards of beauty. These characteristics are the primary interests of these two groups because men are more concerned about their partner’s attractiveness, while women look for someone engaging and financially stable.

When two individuals overcome the issues connected with finding each other, their interaction uncovers another range of problems. Flirting is the primary activity and intention of online dating applications, and it is also affected by all previously mentioned elements. Imagery plays a significant role in finding partners, and flirting online is often connected to one’s appearance. However, as people start to learn more about each other, the desire to exaggerate one’s physical attributes can evolve into the need to present oneself as a completely different person.

Mortensen (2017) argues that online flirting allows people to show themselves in a different light and express personality traits that they usually do not have in real life. The fear of being rejected by another person pressures some individuals to behave differently from their personalities.

Such artificially created personas cannot continue their relationship in real life and are bound by their fear of personal intimacy. This issue strengthens the divide between the online and the real world. While the purpose of online dating is to bring people together and have a positive and accepting atmosphere, it may result in people trying to avoid or ignore negative experiences (Mortensen, 2017). Imaginary visuals and personalities do not have a positive impact on people’s perceptions of reliable partners and stable relations.

If people finally decide to meet in real life, their thoughts about each other may differ from the persons they see face to face. A study by Ramirez, Sumner, Fleuriet, and Cole (2014) evaluates the outcomes of individuals meeting face to face after communicating through dating sites and applications. The authors find that people’s behavior, amount of accessible information, and period of interaction influence their final reaction to the first real-life date.

For instance, people that talk to each other online for a long time are often disappointed during their first meeting. It can be explained by the fact that both individuals start to imagine some personal traits and qualities of their partners and idealize their physical appearance and attitude. Therefore, upon meeting face to face, they are disheartened as their created image is not real.

Some inaccurate expectations do not come from simple idealization but also from dishonesty and exaggeration. Self-presentation, which is often exploited by people online, leads to various disappointing outcomes. To avoid these issues, people can meet each other after some brief online interaction. Alternatively, they can use different platforms for communication to exchange more information about each other.

Various personalized forms of communication, such as phone numbers and personal e-mails, are able to bring people closer than online dating applications can. Furthermore, more private information sharing can also fill the gaps of knowledge that would be otherwise filled with one’s imagination. Photos, interests, and other aspects of one’s everyday life can increase the level of trust and intimacy between people. The authors find that individuals who do not share information cannot spark any interest in other persons (Ramirez et al., 2014). Therefore, people can quickly fail at realistically portraying themselves online.

It is clear that technology is not the only reason for the issues of online dating. People often misinterpret or abuse the information that is available to them. Therefore, online dating, as a concept, can bring some positive results. Moreover, it can be improved to help more individuals build healthy relationships. Although the quality of relations most likely decreased due to the growing lack of trust, people gained an opportunity to find each other with a click of a button. The issue of false imagery can be fixed if individuals stop pressuring each other to fit particular standards and instead focus on real and reliable connections.

Currently, online dating has a number of problems that significantly affect the state of relationships in society. People that meet each other online base their desire to interact on trustworthiness, which is directly connected to profile pictures and personal information. Photo editing is a problem that leads to heightened expectations. Also, many individuals try to behave differently online, which creates false personalities and further contributes to one’s trust issues. Misunderstanding and idealization are also common issues, which further interfere with one’s ability to create meaningful connections in real life. Online dating has adverse effects on people’s relations, but it can and should be improved.

McGloin, R., & Denes, A. (2016). Too hot to trust: Examining the relationship between attractiveness, trustworthiness, and desire to date in online dating. New Media & Society. Web.

McWilliams, S., & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online dating in middle and later life: Gendered expectations and experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411-436.

Mortensen, K. K. (2017). Flirting in online dating: Giving empirical grounds to flirtatious implicitness. Discourse Studies, 19(5), 581-597.

Ramirez, A., Sumner, E. M., Fleuriet, C., & Cole, M. (2014). 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.

• Dating Process
• Online Dating for Aging Adults
• Dating and Partner Selection From Different Decades
• Relationship Between Premarital and Marital Satisfaction
• Communication and Marital Distress
• Abusive Behaviors in Close Relationships
• Human Relations as Interactions in the Social Environment
• Communication Between Parents and Teenagers
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, October 28). Relationships and Online Dating. https://ivypanda.com/essays/relationships-and-online-dating/

"Relationships and Online Dating." IvyPanda , 28 Oct. 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/relationships-and-online-dating/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'Relationships and Online Dating'. 28 October.

IvyPanda . 2020. "Relationships and Online Dating." October 28, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/relationships-and-online-dating/.

1. IvyPanda . "Relationships and Online Dating." October 28, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/relationships-and-online-dating/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Relationships and Online Dating." October 28, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/relationships-and-online-dating/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Dating Apps and Their Sociodemographic and Psychosocial Correlates: A Systematic Review

The emergence and popularization of dating apps have changed the way people meet and interact with potential romantic and sexual partners. In parallel with the increased use of these applications, a remarkable scientific literature has developed. However, due to the recency of the phenomenon, some gaps in the existing research can be expected. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the empirical research of the psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps. A search was conducted in different databases, and we identified 502 articles in our initial search. After screening titles and abstracts and examining articles in detail, 70 studies were included in the review. The most relevant data (author/s and year, sample size and characteristics, methodology) and their findings were extracted from each study and grouped into four blocks: user dating apps characteristics, usage characteristics, motives for use, and benefits and risks of use. The limitations of the literature consulted are discussed, as well as the practical implications of the results obtained, highlighting the relevance of dating apps, which have become a tool widely used by millions of people around the world.

1. Introduction

In the last decade, the popularization of the Internet and the use of the smartphone and the emergence of real-time location-based dating apps (e.g., Tinder, Grindr) have transformed traditional pathways of socialization and promoted new ways of meeting and relating to potential romantic and/or sexual partners [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ].

It is difficult to know reliably how many users currently make use of dating apps, due to the secrecy of the developer companies. However, thanks to the information provided by different reports and studies, the magnitude of the phenomenon can be seen online. For example, the Statista Market Forecast [ 5 ] portal estimated that by the end of 2019, there were more than 200 million active users of dating apps worldwide. It has been noted that more than ten million people use Tinder daily, which has been downloaded more than a hundred million times worldwide [ 6 , 7 ]. In addition, studies conducted in different geographical and cultural contexts have shown that around 40% of single adults are looking for an online partner [ 8 ], or that around 25% of new couples met through this means [ 9 ].

Some theoretical reviews related to users and uses of dating apps have been published, although they have focused on specific groups, such as men who have sex with men (MSM [ 10 , 11 ]) or on certain risks, such as aggression and abuse through apps [ 12 ].

Anzani et al. [ 1 ] conducted a review of the literature on the use of apps to find a sexual partner, in which they focused on users’ sociodemographic characteristics, usage patterns, and the transition from online to offline contact. However, this is not a systematic review of the results of studies published up to that point and it leaves out some relevant aspects that have received considerable research attention, such as the reasons for use of dating apps, or their associated advantages and risks.

Thus, we find a recent and changing object of study, which has achieved great social relevance in recent years and whose impact on research has not been adequately studied and evaluated so far. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the empirical research of psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps. By doing so, we intend to assess the state of the literature in terms of several relevant aspects (i.e., users’ profile, uses and motives for use, advantages, and associated risks), pointing out some limitations and posing possible future lines of research. Practical implications will be highlighted.

2. Materials and Methods

The systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [ 13 , 14 ], and following the recommendations of Gough et al. [ 15 ]. However, it should be noted that, as the objective of this study was to provide a state of the art view of the published literature on dating apps in the last five years and without statistical data processing, there are several principles included in the PRISMA that could not be met (e.g., summary measures, planned methods of analysis, additional analysis, risk of bias within studies). However, following the advice of the developers of these guidelines concerning the specific nature of systematic reviews, the procedure followed has been described in a clear, precise, and replicable manner [ 13 ].

2.1. Literature Search and Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

We examined the databases of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Medline, as well as PsycInfo and Psycarticle and Google Scholar, between 1 March and 6 April 2020. In all the databases consulted, we limited the search to documents from the last five years (2016–2020) and used general search terms, such as “dating apps” and “online dating” (linking the latter with “apps”), in addition to the names of some of the most popular and frequently used dating apps worldwide, such as “tinder”, “grindr”, and “momo”, to identify articles that met the inclusion criteria (see below).

The selection criteria in this systematic review were established and agreed on by the two authors of this study. The database search was carried out by one researcher. In case of doubt about whether or not a study should be included in the review, consultation occurred and the decision was agreed upon by the two researchers.

Four-hundred and ninety-three results were located, to which were added 15 documents that were found through other resources (e.g., social networks, e-mail alerts, newspapers, the web). After these documents were reviewed and the duplicates removed, a total of 502 records remained, as shown by the flowchart presented in Figure 1 . At that time, the following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) empirical, quantitative or qualitative articles; (2) published on paper or in electronic format (including “online first”) between 2016 and 2020 (we decided to include articles published since 2016 after finding that the previous empirical literature in databases on dating apps from a psychosocial point of view was not very large; in fact, the earliest studies of Tinder included in Scopus dated back to 2016; (3) to be written in English or Spanish; and (4) with psychosocial content. No theoretical reviews, case studies/ethnography, user profile content analyses, institutional reports, conference presentations, proceeding papers, etc., were taken into account.

Flowchart of the systematic review process.

Thus, the process of refining the results, which can be viewed graphically in Figure 1 , was as follows. Of the initial 502 results, the following exclusion criteria were applied: (1) pre-2016 documents (96 records excluded); (2) documents that either did not refer to dating apps or did so from a technological approach (identified through title and abstract; 239 records excluded); (3) published in a language other than English or Spanish (10 records excluded); (4) institutional reports, or analysis of the results of such reports (six records excluded); (5) proceeding papers (six records excluded); (6) systematic reviews and theoretical reflections (26 records excluded); (7) case studies/ethnography (nine records excluded); (8) non-empirical studies of a sociological nature (20 records excluded); (9) analysis of user profile content and campaigns on dating apps and other social networks (e.g., Instagram; nine records excluded); and (10) studies with confusing methodology, which did not explain the methodology followed, the instruments used, and/or the characteristics of the participants (11 records excluded). This process led to a final sample of 70 empirical studies (55 quantitative studies, 11 qualitative studies, and 4 mixed studies), as shown by the flowchart presented in Figure 1 .

2.2. Data Collection Process and Data Items

One review author extracted the data from the included studies, and the second author checked the extracted data. Information was extracted from each included study of: (1) author/s and year; (2) sample size and characteristics; (3) methodology used; (4) main findings.

Table 1 shows the information extracted from each of the articles included in this systematic review. The main findings drawn from these studies are also presented below, distributed in different sections.

Characteristics of reviewed studies.

3.1. Characteristics of Reviewed Studies

First, the characteristics of the 70 articles included in the systematic review were analyzed. An annual increase in production can be seen, with 2019 being the most productive year, with 31.4% ( n = 22) of included articles. More articles (11) were published in the first three months of 2020 than in 2016. It is curious to note, on the other hand, how, in the titles of the articles, some similar formulas were repeated, even the same articles (e.g., Love me Tinder), playing with the swipe characteristic of this type of application (e.g., Swiping more, Swiping right, Swiping me).

As for the methodology used, the first aspect to note is that all the localized studies were cross-sectional and there were no longitudinal ones. As mentioned above, 80% ( n = 55) of the studies were quantitative, especially through online survey ( n = 49; 70%). 15.7% ( n = 11) used a qualitative methodology, either through semi-structured interviews or focus groups. And 5.7% ( n = 4) used a mixed methodology, both through surveys and interviews. It is worth noting the increasing use of tools such as Amazon Mechanical Turk ( n = 9, 12.9%) or Qualtrics ( n = 8, 11.4%) for the selection of participants and data collection.

The studies included in the review were conducted in different geographical and cultural contexts. More than one in five investigations was conducted in the United States (22.8%, n = 16), to which the two studies carried out in Canada can be added. Concerning other contexts, 20% ( n = 14) of the included studies was carried out in different European countries (e.g., Belgium, The Netherlands, UK, Spain), whereas 15.7% ( n = 11) was carried out in China, and 8.6% ( n = 6) in other countries (e.g., Thailand, Australia). However, 21.4% ( n = 15) of the investigations did not specify the context they were studying.

Finally, 57.1% ( n = 40) of the studies included in the systematic review asked about dating apps use, without specifying which one. The results of these studies showed that Tinder was the most used dating app among heterosexual people and Grindr among sexual minorities. Furthermore, 35% ( n = 25) of the studies included in the review focused on the use of Tinder, while 5.7% ( n = 4) focused on Grindr.

3.2. Characteristics of Dating App Users

It is difficult to find studies that offer an overall user profile of dating apps, as many of them have focused on specific populations or groups. However, based on the information collected in the studies included in this review, some features of the users of these applications may be highlighted.

Gender. Traditionally, it has been claimed that men use dating apps more than women and that they engage in more casual sex relationships through apps [ 3 ]. In fact, some authors, such as Weiser et al. [ 75 ], collected data that indicated that 60% of the users of these applications were male and 40% were female. Some current studies endorse that being male predicts the use of dating apps [ 23 ], but research has also been published in recent years that has shown no differences in the proportion of male and female users [ 59 , 68 ].

To explain these similar prevalence rates, some authors, such as Chan [ 27 ], have proposed a feminist perspective, stating that women use dating apps to gain greater control over their relationships and sexuality, thus countering structural gender inequality. On the other hand, other authors have referred to the perpetuation of traditional masculinity and femmephobic language in these applications [ 28 , 53 ].

Age. Specific studies have been conducted on people of different ages: adolescents [ 49 ], young people (e.g., [ 21 , 23 , 71 ]), and middle-aged and older people [ 58 ]. The most studied group has been young people between 18 and 30 years old, mainly university students, and some authors have concluded that the age subgroup with a higher prevalence of use of dating apps is between 24 and 30 years of age [ 44 , 59 ].

Sexual orientation. This is a fundamental variable in research on dating apps. In recent years, especially after the success of Tinder, the use of these applications by heterosexuals, both men and women, has increased, which has affected the increase of research on this group [ 3 , 59 ]. However, the most studied group with the highest prevalence rates of dating apps use is that of men from sexual minorities [ 18 , 40 ]. There is considerable literature on this collective, both among adolescents [ 49 ], young people [ 18 ], and older people [ 58 ], in different geographical contexts and both in urban and rural areas [ 24 , 36 , 43 , 79 ]. Moreover, being a member of a sexual minority, especially among men, seems to be a good predictor of the use of dating apps [ 23 ].

For these people, being able to communicate online can be particularly valuable, especially for those who may have trouble expressing their sexual orientation and/or finding a partner [ 3 , 80 ]. There is much less research on non-heterosexual women and this focuses precisely on their need to reaffirm their own identity and discourse, against the traditional values of hetero-patriate societies [ 35 , 69 ].

Relationship status. It has traditionally been argued that the prevalence of the use of dating apps was much higher among singles than among those with a partner [ 72 ]. This remains the case, as some studies have shown that being single was the most powerful sociodemographic predictor of using these applications [ 23 ]. However, several investigations have concluded that there is a remarkable percentage of users, between 10 and 29%, who have a partner [ 4 , 17 , 72 ]. From what has been studied, usually aimed at evaluating infidelity [ 17 , 75 ], the reasons for using Tinder are very different depending on the relational state, and the users of this app who had a partner had had more sexual and romantic partners than the singles who used it [ 72 ].

Other sociodemographic variables. Some studies, such as the one of Shapiro et al. [ 64 ], have found a direct relationship between the level of education and the use of dating apps. However, most studies that contemplated this variable have focused on university students (see, for example [ 21 , 23 , 31 , 38 ]), so there may be a bias in the interpretation of their results. The findings of Shapiro et al. [ 64 ] presented a paradox: while they found a direct link between Tinder use and educational level, they also found that those who did not use any app achieved better grades. Another striking result about the educational level is that of the study of Neyt et al. [ 9 ] about their users’ characteristics and those that are sought in potential partners through the apps. These authors found a heterogeneous effect of educational level by gender: whereas women preferred a potential male partner with a high educational level, this hypothesis was not refuted in men, who preferred female partners with lower educational levels.

Other variables evaluated in the literature on dating apps are place of residence or income level. As for the former, app users tend to live in urban contexts, so studies are usually performed in large cities (e.g., [ 11 , 28 , 45 ]), although it is true that in recent years studies are beginning to be seen in rural contexts to know the reality of the people who live there [ 43 ]. It has also been shown that dating app users have a higher income level than non-users, although this can be understood as a feature associated with young people with high educational levels. However, it seems that the use of these applications is present in all social layers, as it has been documented even among homeless youth in the United States [ 66 ].

Personality and other psychosocial variables. The literature that relates the use of dating apps to different psychosocial variables is increasingly extensive and diverse. The most evaluated variable concerning the use of these applications is self-esteem, although the results are inconclusive. It seems established that self-esteem is the most important psychological predictor of using dating apps [ 6 , 8 , 59 ]. But some authors, such as Orosz et al. [ 55 ], warn that the meaning of that relationship is unclear: apps can function both as a resource for and a booster of self-esteem (e.g., having a lot of matches) or to decrease it (e.g., lack of matches, ignorance of usage patterns).

The relationship between dating app use and attachment has also been studied. Chin et al. [ 29 ] concluded that people with a more anxious attachment orientation and those with a less avoidant orientation were more likely to use these apps.

Sociosexuality is another important variable concerning the use of dating apps. It has been found that users of these applications tended to have a less restrictive sociosexuality, especially those who used them to have casual sex [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 21 ].

Finally, the most studied approach in this field is the one that relates the use of dating apps with certain personality traits, both from the Big Five and from the dark personality model. As for the Big Five model, Castro et al. [ 23 ] found that the only trait that allowed the prediction of the current use of these applications was open-mindedness. Other studies looked at the use of apps, these personality traits, and relational status. Thus, Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 71 ] found that single users of Tinder were more outgoing and open to new experiences than non-user singles, who scored higher in conscientiousness. For their part, Timmermans et al. [ 72 ] concluded that Tinder users who had a partner scored lower in agreeableness and conscientiousness and higher in neuroticism than people with partners who did not use Tinder.

The dark personality, on the other hand, has been used to predict the different reasons for using dating apps [ 48 ], as well as certain antisocial behaviors in Tinder [ 6 , 51 ]. As for the differences in dark personality traits between users and non-users of dating apps, the results are inconclusive. A study was localized that highlighted the relevance of psychopathy [ 3 ] whereas another study found no predictive power as a global indicator of dark personality [ 23 ].

3.3. Characteristics of Dating App Use

It is very difficult to know not only the actual number of users of dating apps in any country in the world but also the prevalence of use. This varies depending on the collectives studied and the sampling techniques used. Given this caveat, the results of some studies do allow an idea of the proportion of people using these apps. It has been found to vary between the 12.7% found by Castro et al. [ 23 ] and the 60% found by LeFebvre [ 44 ]. Most common, however, is to find a participant prevalence of between 40–50% [ 3 , 4 , 39 , 62 , 64 ], being slightly higher among men from sexual minorities [ 18 , 50 ].

The study of Botnen et al. [ 21 ] among Norwegian university students concluded that about half of the participants appeared to be a user of dating apps, past or present. But only one-fifth were current users, a result similar to those found by Castro et al. [ 23 ] among Spanish university students. The most widely used, and therefore the most examined, apps in the studies are Tinder and Grindr. The first is the most popular among heterosexuals, and the second among men of sexual minorities [ 3 , 18 , 36 , 70 ].

Findings from existing research on the characteristics of the use of dating apps can be divided among those referring to before (e.g., profiling), during (e.g., use), and after (e.g., offline behavior with other app users). Regarding before , the studies focus on users’ profile-building and self-presentation more among men of sexual minorities [ 52 , 77 ]. Ward [ 74 ] highlighted the importance of the process of choosing the profile picture in applications that are based on physical appearance. Like Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ], Ward [ 74 ] mentions the differences between the “real self” and the “ideal self” created in dating apps, where one should try to maintain a balance between one and the other. Self-esteem plays a fundamental role in this process, as it has been shown that higher self-esteem encourages real self-presentation [ 59 ].

Most of the studies that analyze the use of dating apps focus on during , i.e. on how applications are used. As for the frequency of use and the connection time, Chin et al. [ 29 ] found that Tinder users opened the app up to 11 times a day, investing up to 90 minutes per day. Strubel and Petrie [ 67 ] found that 23% of Tinder users opened the app two to three times a day, and 14% did so once a day. Meanwhile, Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ] concluded that 23% of the users opened Tinder daily.

It seems that the frequency and intensity of use, in addition to the way users behave on dating apps, vary depending on sexual orientation and sex. Members of sexual minorities, especially men, use these applications more times per day and for longer times [ 18 ]. As for sex, different patterns of behavior have been observed both in men and women, as the study of Timmermans and Courtois [ 4 ] shows. Men use apps more often and more intensely, but women use them more selectively and effectively. They accumulate more matches than men and do so much faster, allowing them to choose and have a greater sense of control. Therefore, it is concluded that the number of swipes and likes of app users does not guarantee a high number of matches in Tinder [ 4 ].

Some authors are alert to various behaviors observed in dating apps which, in some cases, may be negative for the user. For example, Yeo and Fung [ 77 ] mention the fast and hasty way of acting in apps, which is incongruous with cultural norms for the formation of friendships and committed relationships and ends up frustrating those who seek more lasting relationships. Parisi and Comunello [ 57 ] highlighted a key to the use of apps and a paradox. They referred to relational homophilia, that is, the tendency to be attracted to people similar to oneself. But, at the same time, this occurs in a context that increases the diversity of intimate interactions, thus expanding pre-existing networks. Finally, Licoppe [ 45 ] concluded that users of Grindr and Tinder present almost opposite types of communication and interaction. In Grindr, quick conversations seem to take precedence, aimed at organizing immediate sexual encounters, whereas, in Tinder, there are longer conversations and more exchange of information.

The latest group of studies focuses on offline behavior with contacts made through dating apps. Differences have been observed in the prevalence of encounters with other app users, possibly related to participants’ sociodemographic characteristics. Whereas Strugo and Muise [ 2 ], and Macapagal et al. [ 49 ] found that between 60 and 70% of their participants had had an encounter with another person known through these applications, in other studies this is less common, with prevalence being less than 50% [ 3 , 4 , 62 ]. In fact, Griffin et al. [ 39 ] stated that in-person encounters were relatively rare among users of dating apps.

There are also differences in the types of relationships that arose after offline encounters with other users. Strugo and Muise [ 2 ] concluded that 33% of participants had found a romantic partner and that 52% had had casual sex with at least one partner met through an app. Timmermans and Courtois [ 4 ] found that one-third of the offline encounters ended in casual sex and one-fourth in a committed relationship. Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ], for their part, concluded that 18.6% of the participants had had sex with another person they had met on Tinder. And finally, the participants in the study of Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 71 ] indicated that: (1) they had met face-to-face with an average of 4.25 people whom they had met on Tinder; (2) they had had one romantic relationship with people met on Tinder; (3) they had had casual sex with an average of 1.57 people met on Tinder; and (4) they had become friends with an average of 2.19 people met on Tinder.

3.4. Motives for Dating App Use

There is a stereotype that dating apps are used only, or above all, to look for casual sex [ 44 ]. In fact, these applications have been accused of generating a hookup culture, associated with superficiality and sexual frivolity [ 2 ]. However, this is not the case. In the last five years, a large body of literature has been generated on the reasons why people use dating apps, especially Tinder, and the conclusion is unanimous: apps serve multiple purposes, among which casual sex is only one [ 1 , 4 , 44 ]. It has been found that up to 70% of the app users participating in a study [ 18 ] indicated that their goal when using it was not sex-seeking.

An evolution of research interest can be traced regarding the reasons that guide people to use dating apps [ 55 ]. The first classification of reasons for using Tinder was published by Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ], who adapted a previous scale, designed for Grindr, composed of six motives: hooking up/sex (finding sexual partners), friendship (building a social network), relationship (finding a romantic partner), traveling (having dates in different places), self-validation (self-improvement), and entertainment (satisfying social curiosity). They found that the reason given by most users was those of entertainment, followed by those of self-validation and traveling, with the search for sex occupying fourth place in importance. However, the adaptation of this scale did not have adequate psychometric properties and it has not been reused.

Subsequently, Sumter et al. [ 68 ] generated a new classification of reasons to use Tinder, later refined by Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ]. They proposed six reasons for use, both relational (love, casual sex), intrapersonal (ease of communication, self-worth validation), and entertainment (the thrill of excitement, trendiness). The motivation most indicated by the participants was that of love, and the authors concluded that Tinder is used: (1) to find love and/or sex; (2) because it is easy to communicate; (3) to feel better about oneself; and (4) because it’s fun and exciting.

At the same time, Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 70 ] developed the Tinder Motives Scale, which evaluates up to 13 reasons for using Tinder. The reasons, sorted by the scores obtained, were: to pass time/entertainment, curiosity, socializing, relationship-seeking, social approval, distraction, flirting/social skills, sexual orientation, peer pressure, traveling, sexual experience, ex, and belongingness. So far, the most recently published classification of reasons is that of Orosz et al. [ 55 ], who in the Tinder Use Motivations Scale proposed four groups of reasons: boredom (individual reasons to use Tinder to overcome boredom), self-esteem (use of Tinder to improve self-esteem), sex (use of Tinder to satisfy sexual need) and love (use of Tinder to find love). As in the previous scales, the reasons of seeking sex did not score higher on this scale, so it can be concluded that dating apps are not mainly used for this reason.

The existing literature indicates that reasons for the use of dating apps may vary depending on different sociodemographic and personality variables [ 1 ]. As for sex, Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ] found that women used Tinder more for friendship and self-validation, whereas men used it more to seek sex and relationships. Sumter et al. [ 68 ] found something similar: men scored higher than women in casual sex motivation and also in the motives of ease of communication and thrill of excitement.

With regard to age, Ward [ 74 ] concluded that motivations change over time and Sumter et al. [ 68 ] found a direct association with the motives of love, casual sex, and ease of communication. In terms of sexual orientation, it has become commoner for people from sexual minorities, especially men, than for heterosexual participants to use these applications much more in the search for casual sex [ 18 ].

Finally, other studies have concluded that personality guides the motivations for the use of dating apps [ 3 , 72 ]. A line of research initiated in recent years links dark personality traits to the reasons for using Tinder. In this investigation, Lyons et al. [ 48 ] found that people who score high in Machiavellianism and psychopathy offer more reasons for use (e.g., get casual sex, acquiring social or flirting skills).

3.5. Benefits and Risks of Using Dating Apps

In the latter section, the benefits and advantages of the use of dating apps are analyzed. There is also an extensive literature on the risks associated with use. Many studies indicate that dating apps have opened a new horizon in how to meet potential partners, allowing access to many [ 3 , 6 , 8 ], which may be even more positive for certain individuals and groups who have been silenced or marginalized, such as some men from sexual minorities [ 80 ]. It has also been emphasized that these applications are a non-intimidating way to start connecting, they are flexible and free, and require less time and effort than other traditional means of communication [ 1 , 55 ].

On the other hand, the advantages of apps based on the technology they use and the possibilities they pose to users have been highlighted. Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ] underlined four aspects. First is the portability of smartphones and tablets, which allows the use of apps in any location, both private and public. Second is availability, as their operation increases the spontaneity and frequency of use of the apps, and this, in turn, allows a quick face-to-face encounter, turning online interactions into offline relationships [ 70 , 77 ]. Thirdly is locatability, as dating apps allow matches, messages, and encounters with other users who are geographically close [ 77 ]. Finally is multimediality, the relevance of the visual, closely related to physical appearance, which results in two channels of communication (photos and messages) and the possibility of linking the profile with that of other social networks, such as Facebook and Instagram [ 4 ].

There is also considerable literature focused on the potential risks associated with using these applications. The topics covered in the studies can be grouped into four blocks, having in common the negative consequences that these apps can generate in users’ mental, relational, and sexual health. The first block focuses on the configuration and use of the applications themselves. Their emergence and popularization have been so rapid that apps pose risks associated with security, intimacy, and privacy [ 16 , 20 ]. This can lead to more insecure contacts, especially among women, and fears related to the ease of localization and the inclusion of personal data in apps [ 39 ]. Some authors highlight the paradox that many users suffer: they have more chances of contact than ever before, but at the same time this makes them more vulnerable [ 26 , 80 ].

This block can also include studies on the problematic use of apps, which can affect the daily lives of users [ 34 , 56 ], and research that focuses on the possible negative psychological effects of their use, as a link has been shown between using dating apps and loneliness, dissatisfaction with life, and feeling excluded from the world [ 24 , 34 , 78 ].

The second block of studies on the risks associated with dating apps refers to discrimination and aggression. Some authors, such as Conner [ 81 ] and Lauckner et al. [ 43 ], have argued that technology, instead of reducing certain abusive cultural practices associated with deception, discrimination, or abuse (e.g., about body types, weight, age, rural environments, racism, HIV stigma), has accentuated them, and this can affect users’ mental health. Moreover, certain antisocial behaviors in apps, such as trolling [ 6 , 51 ], have been studied, and a relationship has been found between being a user of these applications and suffering some episode of sexual victimization, both in childhood and adulthood [ 30 ].

The following block refers to the risks of dating app use regarding diet and body image. These applications, focusing on appearance and physical attractiveness, can promote excessive concerns about body image, as well as various negative consequences associated with it (e.g., unhealthy weight management behaviors, low satisfaction and high shame about the body, more comparisons with appearance [ 22 , 36 , 67 , 73 ]). These risks have been more closely associated with men than with women [ 61 ], perhaps because of the standards of physical attractiveness prevalent among men of sexual minorities, which have been the most studied collective.

The last block of studies on the risks of dating app use focuses on their relationship with risky sexual behaviors. This is probably the most studied topic in different populations (e.g., sexual minority men, heterosexual people). The use of these applications can contribute to a greater performance of risky sexual behaviors, which results in a higher prevalence of sexually transmitted illnesses (STIs). However, the results of the studies analyzed are inconclusive [ 40 ].

On the one hand, some studies find a relationship between being a user of dating apps and performing more risky sexual behaviors (e.g., having more sexual partners, less condom use, more relationships under the effects of alcohol and other drugs), both among men from sexual minorities [ 19 ] and among heterosexual individuals [ 32 , 41 , 62 ]. On the other hand, some research has found that, although app users perform more risky behaviors, especially having more partners, they also engage in more prevention behaviors (e.g., more sex counseling, more HIV tests, more treatment) and they do not use the condoms less than non-users [ 18 , 50 , 64 , 79 ]. Studies such as that of Luo et al. [ 46 ] and that of Wu [ 76 ] also found greater use of condoms among app users than among non-users.

Finally, some studies make relevant appraisals of this topic. For example, Green et al. [ 38 ] concluded that risky sexual behaviors are more likely to be performed when sex is performed with a person met through a dating app with whom some common connection was made (e.g., shared friends in Facebook or Instagram). This is because these users tend to avoid discussing issues related to prevention, either because they treat that person more familiarly, or for fear of possible gossip. Finally, Hahn et al. [ 40 ] found that, among men from sexual minorities, the contact time prior to meeting in person was associated with greater prevention. The less time between the conversation and the first encounter, the more likely the performance of risky behaviors.

4. Discussion

In a very few years, dating apps have revolutionized the way of meeting and interacting with potential partners. In parallel with the popularization of these applications, a large body of knowledge has been generated which, however, has not been collected in any systematic review. Given the social relevance that this phenomenon has reached, we performed this study to gather and analyze the main findings of empirical research on psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps.

Seventy studies were located and analyzed, after applying stringent inclusion criteria that, for various reasons, left out a large number of investigations. Thus, it has been found that the literature on the subject is extensive and varied. Studies of different types and methodologies have been published, in very diverse contexts, on very varied populations and focusing on different aspects, some general and others very specific. Therefore, the first and main conclusion of this study is that the phenomenon of dating apps is transversal, and very present in the daily lives of millions of people around the world.

This transversality has been evident in the analysis of the characteristics of the users of dating apps. Apps have been found to be used, regardless of sex [ 59 , 68 ], age [ 49 , 58 , 71 ], sexual orientation [ 3 , 59 ], relational status [ 72 ], educational and income level [ 9 , 66 ], or personality traits [ 23 , 48 , 72 ].

Another conclusion that can be drawn from this analysis is that there are many preconceived ideas and stereotypes about dating apps, both at the research and social level, which are supported by the literature, but with nuances. For example, although the stereotype says that apps are mostly used by men, studies have concluded that women use them in a similar proportion, and more effectively [ 4 ]. The same goes for sexual orientation or relational status; the stereotype says that dating apps are mostly used by men of sexual minorities and singles [ 1 ], but some apps (e.g., Tinder) are used more by heterosexual people [ 3 , 59 ] and there is a remarkable proportion of people with a partner who use these apps [ 4 , 17 ].

A third conclusion of the review of the studies is that to know and be able to foresee the possible consequences of the use of dating apps, how and why they are used are particularly relevant. For this reason, both the use and the motives for use of these applications have been analyzed, confirming the enormous relevance of different psychosocial processes and variables (e.g., self-esteem, communication, and interaction processes), both before (profiling), during (use), and after (off-line encounters) of the use of dating apps.

However, in this section, what stands out most is the difficulty in estimating the prevalence of the use of dating apps. Very disparate prevalence have been found not only because of the possible differences between places and groups (see, for example [ 18 , 23 , 44 , 64 ]), but also because of the use of different sampling and information collection procedures, which in some cases, over-represent app users. All this hinders the characterization and assessment of the phenomenon of dating apps, as well as the work of the researchers. After selecting the group to be studied, it would be more appropriate to collect information from a representative sample, without conditioning or directing the study toward users, as this may inflate the prevalence rates.

The study of motives for the use of dating apps may contain the strongest findings of all those appraised in this review. Here, once again, a preconceived idea has been refuted, not only among researchers but across society. Since their appearance, there is a stereotype that dating apps are mostly used for casual sex [ 2 , 44 ]. However, studies constantly and consistently show that this is not the case. The classifications of the reasons analyzed for their use have concluded that people use dating apps for a variety of reasons, such as to entertain themselves, out of curiosity, to socialize, and to seek relationships, both sexual and romantic [ 3 , 59 , 68 , 70 ]. Thus, these apps should not be seen as merely for casual sex, but as much more [ 68 ].

Understanding the reasons for using dating apps provides a necessary starting point for research questions regarding the positive and negative effects of use [ 70 ]. Thus, the former result block reflected findings on the advantages and risks associated with using dating apps. In this topic, there may be a paradox in the sense that something that is an advantage (e.g., access to a multitude of potential partners, facilitates meeting people) turns into a drawback (e.g., loss of intimacy and privacy). Research on the benefits of using dating apps is relatively scarce, but it has stressed that these tools are making life and relationships easier for many people worldwide [ 6 , 80 ].

The literature on the risks associated with using dating apps is much broader, perhaps explaining the negative social vision of them that still exists nowadays. These risks have highlighted body image, aggression, and the performance of risky sexual behaviors. Apps represent a contemporary environment that, based on appearance and physical attractiveness, is associated with several negative pressures and perceptions about the body, which can have detrimental consequences for the physical and mental health of the individual [ 67 ]. As for assaults, there is a growing literature alerting us to the increasing amount of sexual harassment and abuse related to dating apps, especially in more vulnerable groups, such as women, or among people of sexual minorities (e.g., [ 12 , 82 ]).

Finally, there is considerable research that has analyzed the relationship between the use of dating apps and risky sexual behaviors, in different groups and with inconclusive results, as has already been shown [ 40 , 46 , 76 ]. In any case, as dating apps favor contact and interaction between potential partners, and given that a remarkable percentage of sexual contacts are unprotected [ 10 , 83 ], further research should be carried out on this topic.

Limitations and Future Directions

The meteoric appearance and popularization of dating apps have generated high interest in researchers around the world in knowing how they work, the profile of users, and the psychosocial processes involved. However, due to the recency of the phenomenon, there are many gaps in the current literature on these applications. That is why, in general terms, more research is needed to improve the understanding of all the elements involved in the functioning of dating apps.

It is strange to note that many studies have been conducted focusing on very specific aspects related to apps while other central aspects, such as the profile of users, had not yet been consolidated. Thus, it is advisable to improve the understanding of the sociodemographic and personality characteristics of those who use dating apps, to assess possible differences with those who do not use them. Attention should also be paid to certain groups that have been poorly studied (e.g., women from sexual minorities), as research has routinely focused on men and heterosexual people.

Similarly, limitations in understanding the actual data of prevalence of use have been highlighted, due to the over-representation of the number of users of dating apps seen in some studies. Therefore, it would be appropriate to perform studies in which the app user would not be prioritized, to know the actual use of these tools among the population at large. Although further studies must continue to be carried out on the risks of using these applications (e.g., risky sexual behaviors), it is also important to highlight the positive sexual and relational consequences of their use, in order to try to mitigate the negative social vision that still exists about dating app users. Last but not least, as all the studies consulted and included in this systematic review were cross-sectional, longitudinal studies are necessary which can evaluate the evolution of dating apps, their users and their uses, motives, and consequences.

The main limitations of this systematic review concern the enormous amount of information currently existing on dating apps. Despite having applied rigorous exclusion criteria, limiting the studies to the 2016–2020 period, and that the final sample was of 70 studies, much information has been analyzed and a significant number of studies and findings that may be relevant were left out. In future, the theoretical reviews that are made will have to be more specific, focused on certain groups and/or problems.

Another limitation—in this case, methodological, to do with the characteristics of the topic analyzed and the studies included—is that not all the criteria of the PRISMA guidelines were followed [ 13 , 14 ]. We intended to make known the state of the art in a subject well-studied in recent years, and to gather the existing literature without statistical treatment of the data. Therefore, there are certain criteria of PRISMA (e.g., summary measures, planned methods of analysis, additional analysis, risk of bias within studies) that cannot be satisfied.

However, as stated in the Method section, the developers of the PRISMA guidelines themselves have stated that some systematic reviews are of a different nature and that not all of them can meet these criteria. Thus, their main recommendation, to present methods with adequate clarity and transparency to enable readers to critically judge the available evidence and replicate or update the research, has been followed [ 13 ].

Finally, as the initial search in the different databases was carried by only one of the authors, some bias could have been introduced. However, as previously noted, with any doubt about the inclusion of any study, the final decision was agreed between both authors, so we expect this possible bias to be small.

5. Conclusions

Dating apps have come to stay and constitute an unstoppable social phenomenon, as evidenced by the usage and published literature on the subject over the past five years. These apps have become a new way to meet and interact with potential partners, changing the rules of the game and romantic and sexual relationships for millions of people all over the world. Thus, it is important to understand them and integrate them into the relational and sexual life of users [ 76 ].

The findings of this systematic review have relevant implications for various groups (i.e., researchers, clinicians, health prevention professionals, users). Detailed information has been provided on the characteristics of users and the use of dating apps, the most common reasons for using them, and the benefits and risks associated with them. This can guide researchers to see what has been done and how it has been done and to design future research.

Second, there are implications for clinicians and health prevention and health professionals, concerning mental, relational, and sexual health. These individuals will have a starting point for designing more effective information and educational programs. These programs could harness the potential of the apps themselves and be integrated into them, as suggested by some authors [ 42 , 84 ].

Finally and unavoidably, knowledge about the phenomenon of dating apps collected in this systematic review can have positive implications for users, who may have at their disposal the necessary tools to make a healthy and responsible use of these applications, maximizing their advantages and reducing the risks posed by this new form of communication present in the daily life of so many people.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Á.C. and J.R.B.; methodology, Á.C. and J.R.B.; formal analysis, Á.C. and J.R.B.; investigation, Á.C. and J.R.B.; resources, Á.C. and J.R.B.; data curation, Á.C. and J.R.B.; writing—original draft preparation, Á.C.; writing—review and editing, J.R.B. and Á.C.; project administration, Á.C.; funding acquisition, Á.C. and J.R.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research was funded by: (1) Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Government of Spain (PGC2018-097086-A-I00); and (2) Government of Aragón (Group S31_20D). Department of Innovation, Research and University and FEDER 2014-2020, “Building Europe from Aragón”.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

• New Study Reveals Anxiety Risks with Synthetic Estrogen in Contraceptives
• Understanding the Psychological Impact of Trigger Warnings
• Mere Exposure Effect in Psychology
• Psychology Behind Makeup
• Why All Crimes Are Happen? Why Our Children’s Goes To Drugs? – Is The Mental Health Of Our Children’s Important?

Your cart is empty

Online Dating Cause and effect

• by Het Tanna
• November 4, 2022
• 6 minutes read

Well, as it’s the year 2022, it’s no secret that almost everyone who is/was single recently has tried the online dating game. Each one of us, if not tried it, has a friend who definitely is on it. Specially, in this period of lockdown, so many of us are bored at home looking for a way to connect to new people. Dating apps are the best way to do it. I mean, we all know not everyone is on the dating app to look for a relationship and is

just trying to make new friends right?

Mental health and its importance are being highlighted daily now, as it should be. As also dating apps have been on the rise for about a few years now it’s important for us to know its cause and effect, particularly on our mental health. So, this article focuses on the relationship between them-What could be the reasons an individual decides to register on a dating app. How do dating apps impact these individuals’ mental health? This article may be overwhelming in context to the amount of information provided, but don’t let go, it’s important to understand ourselves and the people around us. I swear it’ll be worth it.

Scholars in the psychology field have conducted an immense amount of research to understand its extent. To begin discussing what psychologists have highlighted while trying to understand what could be the reasons that an individual decides to register on a dating app. Apart from the obvious inspirations, such as love, other inspirations that were highlighted were self-esteem approval, popularity, and avoiding anxious situations. Looking into Tinder, which was launched in 2012, holds about 50 million users worldwide (Smith, 2018). The use of Tinder was linked to meeting psychosocial needs such as validation of physical attractiveness, social needs such as searching for a romantic partner/friend; and finally, physical needs i.e., sexual pleasure (Sumter, Vandenbosch, & Ligtenberg, 2017).

A depth study of Tinder users showed that low self-esteem (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2014) was associated to sexting — sharing sexually explicit photos of oneself and high self-esteem was associated with authentic self-representation (Ranzini & Lutz, 2017). An interesting insight into psychological motive was impulsivity, which is usually referred as prematurely expressed action. Being impulsive has been noted as a key characteristic in contributing to urge-driven behaviours which include sexual behaviours and sexting (Aboujaoude, 2011, 2017).

Of course, these underlying motivators researched by psychologists are not always the case of registering to an online dating app. Many individuals simply register to find a partner/friend. You must be thinking, these reasons that psychologists have reported are quite negative and it might feel a little uncomfortable thinking

Could this be one of the reasons I’m registered?

The answer is no. These results do not apply to each and everyone who is on the dating app. These studies are just a way for psychologists to try and understand a certain population while working with them. So don’t stress, learn.

Moving onto discussing research on the LGBTQ community, these individuals seem to opt for online dating apps due to the lack of perceived support or the opportunities to meet someone offline (DeHaan, Kuper, Magee, Bigelow & Mustanski, 2013). Even after some liberation, homo negativity could still be a part of their daily lives. They are insulted or harassed because of their sexual orientation. Almost 60% of gay men, are not comfortable holding a partner’s hand in public (Bachmann & Gooch, 2017). There is a large amount of research which discusses and provides evidence to the negative effect on gay men and lesbian women’s well-being.

Thus, members of this group have found these online platforms a useful space, as it even helps closeted individuals to fight the stigma of being ‘out’ publicly (DeLonga et al., 2011). Comparing the challenges they face attempting to develop and manage a relationship in heteronormative physical environments, online dating platforms attempts to bridge this gap (Van De Wiele, & Tong, 2014). About 40-60% of same-sex couples have connected through chat and dating websites (Rosenfeld & Thomas, 2012).

The other benefit the LGBTQ community gains is a sense of community. It allows them to behave genuinely without the oppression of heterosexist norms. This has a psychological advantage where there is a positive effect on an individual’s sexual self-acceptance (Crowson & Goulding, 2013). This can be socially empowering as it promotes interpersonal relationships and identity processes (Jaspal, 2017). However, there are always downsides to utilizing a service. For instance, high use of social media could be linked to symptoms of depression, anxiety, isolation/loneliness, and making social comparisons.

Now, looking into our second question- How does the dating app impact an individual’s mental health? I know this was a lot of information but this is an important section. So don’t shut the article just yet. Focus in for a minute.

Previous researchers have found that there was a 40.4% of positive impact on self-esteem, whereas a negative impact was just 28.7%. De Vries (2016) compared face-to-face meetings to online dating app use and reported a positive correlation between self-esteem and dating apps. He discusses that because of the control in impressions, individuals with lower self-esteem find online dating very helpful.

Delving further into the impact of dating apps on mental health; not so surprisingly, there are quite a few gender differences. Taking the example of Tinder again, individuals are persuaded to use this app because of its simplicity of correspondence and stylishness (Orosz et al., 2018). For men, the use of this app has been towards looking for easygoing sex and connections (Sumter et al., 2016), whereas for women it has been about companionship and self-approval (Ranzini and Lutz, 2017).

In 2017, Strubel and Petrie noted that more than women, men’s self-worth is affected. This could be due to the societal expectations of men taking the “first step” in which the number of rejections could be perceived as high. Fortunately, now Bumble helps fight this societal stigma. For women, heightened attention elevates their self-esteem (Kreager et al., 2014). On the other hand, individuals who are engaged in online dating get involved in unhealthy weight control behaviours such as laxative use, and self-induced vomiting significantly more than non-users.

Lastly, a review article done in 2009, suggested that individuals from both homosexual and heterosexual communities who look for sexual partners online are more sexually active and are risk-takers. They were also associated with unsafe sex, unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). There is a discussion about how due to the online dating apps providing free accounts, there is a higher risk factor for individuals to be involved in unsafe sexual behaviors.

I know this is not a direct report of the effect on mental health, it is quite important for us to understand, our mental health is directly linked to our physical health and taking precautions in performing any kind of activity is a necessity.

So I know it’s been a long read till here, but to conclude, this article was to help us understand, with scientific backing, how online dating affects us. This article is only attempting to increase mental health awareness. I mean, duh.

There is a reason for our actions and sometimes these actions come from underlying issues. IF you feel, you are on a dating app because of this reason, don’t stress. Reach out. Reach out to a professional and work on it. Improve yourself. You might think it’s too much effort or there is no need, but try to be better. You’ll be surprised at how trying to change a small part of your life, your entire life might change.

Share This Post:

Life of a narcissist: grandiosity or self inflation, “all insurance policies shall cover mental illness”: irdai, leave feedback about this cancel reply.

• Rating 5 4 3 2 1

Related Post

 The Psychology Behind Fences and Boundaries

The Psychology Behind Rebound Sex

The Psychology Behind Interpersonal Relationships

Emotional Validation as a tool to improve Relationship

Making Friends at Workplace

The ups and downs of online dating: Effects of positive and negative anticipatory emotions on participant volition behaviour

• Published: 06 October 2014
• Volume 16 , pages 51–60, ( 2014 )

Cite this article

• Jiyao Xun 1  

5261 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Existing literature on customer emotions devotes much attention to post-consumption emotions, which are feelings elicited towards actual external stimuli. However, little is known about the concrete impact of consumers’ anticipatory emotions — the pre-factual, mentally stimulated emotions due to anticipation of possible outcomes — on consequent volition behaviours that are cognitive-driven where individuals are determined to act in a planned way. In this study, I integrate (hot and emotional) anticipatory emotions with (cold and cognitive-based) volition processes into a single research model. I chose to model seven positive anticipatory emotions (PAEs) and 10 negative anticipatory emotions (NAEs) on three dimensions of behavioural volition: territory planning, account-specific planning and effort. A sample of 93 real paying members registered on online dating websites in China was employed to test the model empirically. This context entails a high personal stake and exhibits a high level of intrinsically motivating and goal-directed behaviour that appears most suitable to elicit the anticipatory emotions for this study. Partial least squares structural equation modelling techniques validate the hypotheses and yield some interesting findings regarding the interplay among PAEs, NAEs and three types of volition.

Similar content being viewed by others

Negative emotions and consumer behavioural intention to adopt emerging e-banking technology

A placebo-controlled online study on potential mediators of a pleasure-based positive psychology intervention: the role of emotional and cognitive components.

The Good, the Bad and the Unitended: Negative Self-Conscious Emotions in Marketing

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

With the maturity and pervasiveness of e-business and the operational simplicity of task-based online self-services, online dating nowadays is increasingly becoming a popular pursuit for many consumers. The online dating or matchmaking services industry exhibits great potential with more than 1,300 sites in operation, 1 where firms such as Match.com and eHarmony.com generate income worth an estimated £600m a year in the UK. Unlike previous cyber-related research that mainly focuses on online ‘search products’ that are highly standardized and are less emotionally stimulating, online dating services create high levels of participants’ emotional output and are also highly influenced by such emotions.

More importantly, research on cyber-psychology is increasingly paying attention to users’ emotions in contexts such as online gaming. 2 , 3 Nevertheless, a highly emotional context like online dating has received relatively little attention. This is an important issue because online dating customers’ emotions emerge during or even before the dating service encounter, whereas I would traditionally treat customer emotions as post-consumption emotions at the end of the service delivery. Understanding these emotional outcomes in both positive and negative ways and how their respective motivation changes in the context of a dating site would be of great theoretical and practical importance for cyber-psychological study and e-business managers.

In addition, understanding online dating users’ emotions and motivations is also essential for predicting their future site usage behaviour. Managers are struggling to keep their customers motivated: Thomas Enraght-Moony, CEO of Match.com, complained that ‘there are 93 million single people in America — only 3 million use online dating services. There are 12 million single people in Britain. That’s set to rise to 16 million by 2011. Almost everyone who could use these services doesn’t. Our task is to get them off the fence’. 4 Managers only seem to assign strategic importance to site-specific functionality aspects of the dating site, but significantly lack understanding of important psychological factors in terms of users’ emotional aspects.

In this study, I aim to investigate the causal link between anticipatory emotions (affective process of cyber-psychology) and volitions (cognitive process of cyber-behaviour). This study examines the relationship between the emotions elicited in users when using an e-service and their motivational volition behaviour developed with this e-service provider.

Hypotheses development

Anticipatory emotions arise when a person contemplates the possible consequences of achieving a goal or not and such appraisals of the consequences produce anticipatory emotional responses. Anticipatory emotions can be further divided into positive and negative ones in terms of valence. Positive anticipatory emotions (PAEs) and negative anticipatory emotions (NAEs) emerge when such appraisals of the consequences are either positive or negative, respectively. In this study, I borrow anticipatory emotion measures based on prior research. 5 There are seven PAEs, namely, excited, delighted, happy, glad, satisfied, self-assured and proud. There is also a battery of ten NAEs, namely, angry, frustrated, guilty, ashamed, sad, disappointed, depressed, worried, uncomfortable and fearful. The statements of measures are modified accordingly to fit the online dating context.

Crucial to anticipatory emotions are the personal stakes vested in an event. In this study, I define personal stake as the extent to which aspects of people’s personal well-being are riding on a situation’s outcome. Online daters are typically goal-directed and have to finish a fair amount of nominal user tasks (also known as NUTs) 6 before starting to advertise their profiles on the site and starting interactions with other registered users. These processes typically require several effortful submissions of NUTs before proceeding to the next steps. For a registered dating user, there are about six NUTs on average (eg, personal information, self-description, lifestyle, expected perfect match, personal ad and photo uploading) to be completed before the service provider offers matching suggestions. Vested financial and social interests demonstrate an intrinsic motivated intent.

In the psychology literature, volition is used interchangeably with behavioural volition, which is defined as acts of the will, special mental events or activities by which an agent consciously and actively exercises her agency to voluntarily direct her thoughts and actions. 7 Volitions are both directive and motivational. 8 Typical directive volitions (ie, what to do) are planning activities and selection of appropriate behaviours, while typical motivational volitions (ie, how to do it) are committing oneself to exerting the necessary effort to attain a personal goal. Figure 1 illustrates the model of anticipatory emotions on volitions: a personal stake is the primary antecedent of emotions. For an online dating activity, an initial emotional state is anticipated (either PAE or NAE). Volitions have three dimensions.

Model of anticipatory emotions on volitions

People experience a high level of emotion when they engage in intrinsically motivating activities. 9 They cognitively assess their personal stakes in achieving an external or self-defined goal. For instance, in a sales task, if salespeople see that the task has a high personal stake invested, they relate the stake of the task to their financial income and recognition from colleagues and the company. In the same vein, in an online dating searching task, the success of finding a satisfactory dating candidate is a great personal stake such as self-esteem, a self-perceived subjective welfare and possible recognition from peers and family of one’s social competences (especially in a Chinese cultural context). 10 However, failing to achieve this goal leads to NAEs.

I therefore formulate the following hypothesis:

For online dating participants, personal stakes positively relate to their (a) positive anticipatory emotions and (b) negative anticipatory emotions.

Prior research postulates that during the transformation of anticipatory emotions into goal-directed behaviours, volition — a psychological construct — is an important mediator. 11 Volitions are activities that include both directive and motivational components. They are fundamentally different from mandatory behaviour or ‘forced choice’, 12 which is externally exerted, while volitions are endogenous, inner motivational forces. 13 According to prior research, volitions mediate the intention-behaviour relationship and are an important factor in successful goal pursuit. 14

In the context of a sales task, 13 salespersons have a detailed, layered plan for achieving their task: a sales territory and specific strategies for targeting specific accounts. 7 Salespersons spend a good deal of time thinking about their selling strategy, listing steps and formulating strategies for a given promotion (territory planning); they will also target specific accounts or have their priority accounts first in pushing sales (account-specific planning); lastly, salespersons also exert personal effort, usually with comparisons to other peer salespersons in assessing the time and intensity of effort put into a task. Similarly, for an online dating task where the goal is to ‘sell oneself’ and to seek an ideal dating candidate, I observe through some exploratory qualitative studies that there are also clear personal purposes, motivations and personal planning.

I therefore formulate the following two hypotheses:

For online dating participants, positive anticipatory emotions positively relate to their volitions, including volitions by way of (a) territory planning, (b) account-specific planning and (c) effort.

For online dating participants, negative anticipatory emotions positively relate to their volitions, including volitions by way of (a) territory planning, (b) account-specific planning and (c) effort.

Materials and methods

I first developed this measurement to fit the context using a pilot study. An online dating website was used for its excellent fit into the cyber-psychology context. First, online dating sites are different from online merchandizing sites, which typically sell standardized commodities. 15 , 16 , 17 Dating sites are associated with a high level of emotional experience and subjective, affective and emotional states. Second, emotion is argued to inherently impact on relationship formation. 18 This research aims to explore consumers who are in the search of partnership and who engage in interpersonal intimate connections, and how such emotions elicited can serve as a new antecedent to volitional behaviours. Therefore, there is a gap in the literature on the online credence context for psychological research.

After an initial qualitative pilot study and focus group analysis and preparation of measurement statements, the author launched electronic surveys on surveymonkey.com. The survey was written in simplified Chinese as used in mainland China. The design of the survey follows three criteria. First, the survey should be short and easy to understand. To facilitate this, an introduction with an illustration was used and the use of Chinese language was kept as clear as possible for ease of understanding. Second, it used a real-life online dating forum for respondent recruitment. Third, to encourage a higher completion rate, a small prize draw was offered to those who were willing to leave their email address, and the personal information requested was kept to a minimum (eg, only retaining participant demographic data).

The final sample was composed of 93 usable questionnaires ( N (female)=49; N (male)=22; gender unreported=22; total=93) collected from registered online dating site users in China who voluntarily participated in the research. Despite the small sample size compared to many social psychology studies involving the subject’s personal goals and using questionnaires for the data collection method, a sample of around 100 is common and acceptable. 19 I used forced answers (ie, the survey page would not proceed until choices were made; also, a pop-up window reminded those who skipped a question) to ensure that all submitted surveys were usable and complete. Follow-up enquiries to those who left email addresses did not reveal a collective concern about the style and length of the rating scale.

I used SmartPLS 2.0 M3 20 to conduct the PLS statistical analysis. The reliability of this partial least squares (PLS) study was assessed by means of composite scale reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE). 21 , 22 Convergent validity was measured by inspecting the standardized loadings of the measures on their respective constructs. 19 I dropped the last four items among the nine indicators for measuring personal stake that did not measure this construct well (ie, loadings under 0.5). I also removed self-assurance as a construct from PAEs measured because its loading is under the 0.5 cut-off point (see Table 1 ). This resulted in the measurement model meeting a high PLS quality standard (see Table 2 ).

Next, the discriminant validity of the measures was assessed. This follows the rule that a construct should always share more variance with its measures than with other model constructs, 19 and the square root of the AVE should be larger than the inter-correlations of the constructs with the other model constructs. 18 I report the descriptive statistics in Table 3 .

For H1a, which is the hypothesized positive relationship between personal stake and positive anticipatory emotions, the γ score in the revised model for Stakes→PAEs was 0.450 ( p <0.001), therefore confirming H1a.

In H1b, I hypothesized a positive relationship between personal stakes and NAEs. The γ score for Stakes→NAEs in the revised model was 0.265 ( p <0.01), therefore supporting H1b.

I then tested the interactions among PAEs on three dimensions of behavioural volitions. H2a has a non-significant β score, therefore not supporting a proposed positive impact of PAEs on territory planning volitions. In contrast, H2b has a β score of 0.254 ( p <0.10), and therefore there is marginal support for this relationship. The last relationship of PAEs on effort was supported by a strong β score of 0.20 ( p <0.05).

H3 hypothesizes the positive relationship of NAEs on three dimensions of behavioural volition. The relationship of NAEs →Territory Planning received strong support with β =0.344 ( p <0.001), therefore confirming H3a. Unfortunately, H3b (which hypothesizes NAEs→Account-specific planning) does not receive support with its non-significant beta score. Lastly, I observe a strong positive effect for the relationship of NAEs →Effort ( β =0.342, p <0.01), which supports H3c. A summary of the hypotheses testing can be found in Table 4 . A summary of the empirical model with statistical outputs is presented in Figure 2 .

Empirical model with outputs

There are several significant findings from this empirical work. First, the main argument of the present study is that linking the seemingly unrelated psychological processes, that is, pre-factual, anticipatory emotions, with the three dimensions of behavioural volitions can be very valuable in understanding consumer behavioural outcomes. The addition of PAEs and NAEs into the model for explaining volitional behaviour is critical. I performed an ad hoc test excluding PAEs and NAEs in the model, by linking stakes directly to three volition constructs. The results show that neither link is statistically significant. This proves the critical mediation effects of PAEs and NAEs in explaining volitions.

From a technical modelling perspective, the R -squares for most of the latent endogenous variables scored 15–21 per cent. The measurement model is solid and theoretically related constructs have clear strong positive correlations. For instance, while PAEs and NAEs are both pre-factual anticipatory emotions, they have a strong non-directional positive correlation ( ϕ =0.42). Similarly, the three dimensions of volitions, territory planning, account-specific planning and effort, all registered strong positive correlations ranging from 0.53 to 0.68 (see Figure 2 ). Overall, the model construction and model refinement results in 75 per cent of the hypothesized relationships being confirmed.

This study reveals several important inter-relationships among the key constructs. Specifically, personal stake in a high-stakes setting has a larger positive impact on PAEs than NAEs. The model also integrates the emotional process entailing a pre-factual stage, that is, anticipatory emotions, with cognitive-based, behavioural volitions. The results show that PAEs do not have any effect on territory planning volition. Rather, PAEs only positively and strongly cause account-specific volition and effort volition. For NAEs, they have strong dual impacts on territory planning and effort volition, but minimal impact on account-specific volition.

Drawing on this context of a high-personal stake setting using an online dating service, I found support for the statements:

effortful volition is a general dimension that captures both PAEs and NAEs, but only NAEs generate more effortful behaviour;

for PAEs that are positive emotions in nature, I measured the impact of six PAEs (after dropping the redundant item ‘self-assured’), namely, excited, delighted, happy, glad, satisfied, proud, on their volitional consequences. The results show that PAEs are more strongly and positively related to account-specific planning — an important dimension of volition;

for NAEs that are negative pre-factual emotions that subjects experience, I measured a battery of ten NAEs, namely, angry, frustrated, guilty, ashamed, sad, disappointed, depressed, worried, uncomfortable and fearful. I found that NAEs do not influence account-specific planning, but strongly influence territory planning.

Some of the limitations of this study should be mentioned. First, I situate the model in a high-stakes setting. This potentially means a lower-personal stake service setting may result in different outcomes when PAEs and NAEs are engaged to predict volition. The choice of a high-stakes context was to generate sufficient anticipatory emotions. The danger of using a low-personal stake context would be the insufficiency of generating anticipatory emotions, and therefore their impacts on the three volitions might be difficult to observe. Second, despite the fact that PLS copes well with a smaller sample size, a larger sample would make the conclusions more convincing.

Practically, managers of highly interactive and personal e-businesses should recognize the importance of customers’ pre-factual emotions, which are mentally stimulated before the real service encounter and service outcomes become available. With proper advertising manipulation, managers can elicit the kind of PAEs and NAEs that have volitional consequences for specific types of volitions, such as territory planning, account-specific planning and effort. Other highly motivating and engaging services, such as online lottery websites, could use advertising to generate PAEs that drive customers to account-specific planning by way of targeting more specific games, or to make customers more careful to work on their highest-priority first. NAEs generated could result in personal planning by devoting more time to strategic and analytical planning. Thus, for instance, online banking services or social policy makers could highlight the negative impacts of ineffective personal saving tasks, and thus such elicited NAEs as worry and fear would push customers online to engage in more strategic planning behaviour. This proper management of emotions could possibly enhance consumer welfare and social welfare at large.

Disclosure Statement

No competing financial interests exist.

Nicola, S. (2009) ‘Love is in the air’, New Media Age, 30 April, pp. 25–26.

Aymerich-Franch, L. (2010) ‘Presence and emotions in playing a group game in a virtual environment: The influence of body participation’, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol. 13, No. 6, pp. 649–654.

Article   Google Scholar  

Poels, K. (2012) ‘Pleasure to play, arousal to stay: The effect of player emotions on digital game preferences and playing time’, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 1–6.

Available at http://www.onlinedatingmagazine.com/onlinedatingindustry.html , accessed 11 January 2013.

Brown, S. P., Cron, W. L. and Slocum Jr, J. W. (1997) ‘Effects of goal-directed emotions on salesperson volitions, behavior, and performance: A longitudinal study’, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 39–50.

Rebane, G. J. (2001) COSMO: Overview and technical approach, Technical Report #TR0103-1, Bizrate.com .

Zhu, J. (2003) ‘Reclaiming volition: An alternative interpretation of libets experiment’, Journal of Consciousness Studies, Vol. 10, No. 11, pp. 61–77.

Google Scholar  

Bagozzi, R. P., Baumgartner, H. and Pieters, R. (1998) ‘Goal-directed emotions’, Cognition and Emotion, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 1–26.

Malone, T. W. (1981) ‘Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction’, Cognitive Science, Vol. 4, pp. 333–369.

Croll, E. (1981) The Politics of Marriage in Contemporary China, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Bagozzi, R. P. (1992) ‘The self-regulation of attitudes, intentions, and behaviour’, Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 55, pp. 178–204.

De Cuyper, N. and De Witte, H. (2008) ‘Volition and reasons for accepting temporary employment: Associations with attitudes, well-being, and behavioral intentions’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 363–387.

Malhotra, Y., Galletta, D. F. and Kirsch, L. J. (2008) ‘How endogenous motivations influence user intentions: Beyond the dichotomy of extrinsic and intrinsic user motivations’, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 267–300.

Reuter, T., Ziegelmann, J. P., Wiedemann, A. U. and Lippke, S. (2008) ‘Dietary planning as a mediator of the intention-behavior relation: An experimental‐causal‐chain design’, Applied Psychology, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 194–207.

Shim, S., Eastlick, M.A., Lotz, S.L. and Warrington, P. (2001) ‘An online prepurchase intentions model: The role of intention to search’, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77, No. 3, pp. 397–416.

Chiang, K. P. and Dholakia, R. R. (2003) ‘Factors driving consumer intention to shop online: An empirical investigation’, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 177–183.

Huang, P., Lurie, N. H. and Mitra, S. (2009) ‘Searching for experience on the web: An empirical examination of consumer behavior for search and experience goods’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 55–69.

Bagozzi, R. P., Gopinath, M. and Nyer, P. U. (1999) ‘The role of emotions in marketing’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 27, pp. 184–206.

Perugini, M. and Conner, M. (2000) ‘Predicting and understanding behavioral volitions: The interplay between goals and behaviors’, European Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 30, No. 5, pp. 705–731.

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S. and Will, S. (2005) SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta, Hamburg, available at http://www.smartpls.de , accessed 2 September 2014.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D. F. (1981) ‘Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 382–388.

Chin, W. W. (1998) ‘The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling’. in Marcoulides, G. A., (eds) Modern Methods for Business Research, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 295–336.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Shanghai University, Room 301, Wende Building, Jiading Campus, Shanghai, 201800, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiyao Xun .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Xun, J. The ups and downs of online dating: Effects of positive and negative anticipatory emotions on participant volition behaviour. J Direct Data Digit Mark Pract 16 , 51–60 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1057/dddmp.2014.38

Download citation

Received : 29 July 2014

Revised : 29 July 2014

Published : 06 October 2014

Issue Date : 01 July 2014

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/dddmp.2014.38

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• digital marketing
• internet dating
• virtual reality
• online sexuality
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Search Utah State University:

Pros and cons of online dating in later life.

As of 2013, half of adults ages 50-64 had a social media profile (Vandeweerd, Myers, Coulter, Yalcin, & Corvin, 2016) and today, a growing number of older adults are using online dating sites and apps to meet new people (Wada, Clarke, & Rozanova, 2015). Older adults who are divorced are significantly more likely to use these online dating sites than those who are widowed or have never married (AARP, 2012). Men are typically encouraged to use these sites by coworkers, while women are frequently encouraged by friends and family members (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Interestingly, one study cited by McWilliams and Barrett (2014) found that men see online dating as a way to quickly jump back into dating following the end of a relationship through death or divorce, whereas women use online sites as a way to ease into the idea of dating again.

As with most things, there are both positives and negatives associated with online dating. It is important to be aware of them in order to make an informed decision of whether to use or not use Internet sites to cultivate new relationships.

• Access to others – Because of retirement, relocation, and the deaths of family members and friends, one’s social network tends to shrink in later life (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2011). Whereas living close by and having the physical ability to go out and socialize used to be prerequisites to meeting new people, online dating has decreased these geographical, transportation, and physical limitations, thus allowing for older adults to expand their social network to include potential dating partners. Online dating is also beneficial when other ways of meeting new people fail to work. For example, when trying to meet new people through one’s friends or the ways that worked when younger (e.g. church, clubs, bars) is not successful, online dating offers yet another opportunity (Vandeweerd, et al., 2016). This can be especially beneficial for divorced older adults who want to meet people outside of the network they knew with their ex-spouse, or when women need to expand their network because they feel uncomfortable dating the spouses of their late friends (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Even when online dating yields little success in creating new relationships, it is seen by some as the only way to connect with new people so they keep using it (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Control – Older adults, especially women, often find that the sense of control they feel in online dating is a positive reason for taking this approach (Vandeweerd et al., 2016). Traditionally, men have initiated dating interactions, but online sites make it easier for women to make the first contact if they choose to do so. The online world also gives a sense of anonymity that takes away some of the feelings of vulnerability associated with initiating contact in person. One study found that more than 20% of initial contact on online dating sites was initiated by women, although the majority of initial interactions are still led by men. However, it is important to note though that the women using these sites may be more outgoing and proactive about dating than average women. Regardless, despite women’s hesitance to make the initial contact, they are still influential in the pacing and termination of relationships created online (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). In addition to women feeling they have more control in initiating and maintaining online relationships, an AARP (2012) study found one of the top reasons people over 50 used online dating sites was because there was no pressure. They could respond if they wanted to, but they did not have to. This added to their sense of control over their dating lives.
• Safety – Due to the fact that the interaction taking place on dating sites happens online makes some feel safe. For example, online daters can view the profiles of potential partners and capture a general understanding of who a person is before ever initiating any form of contact. They can even “Google” the person using other sources to check the background of the person before deciding to initiate contact (Vandeweerd et al., 2016, p. 263). The online platform also allows individuals to limit how much personal information is shared and delay exchanging contact information until they get to know each other better, at which time they will have been able to assess the level of risk and evaluate the potential for the relationship before meeting in person. Many women feel that it would be easier online to part ways if a relationship did not work out and there would be less risk of physical retaliation (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Friendship – Even though a romantic relationship may not work out, many women have found that friendship is one of the most positive outcomes of online dating. Some older adults decide to remain good friends after they realize that a romantic relationship will not work. This was especially found to be the case when the online daters lived in different states (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Effort – Actively dating, whether in person or online, requires time and effort. However, the competitive nature of online dating requires regularly updating one’s profile and responding to messages, which was seen by some as a negative of online dating (Fileborn, Thorpe, Hawkes, Minichiello, & Pitts, 2015).
• Misrepresentations –Whereas older men look for an attractive physical appearance and youthfulness in the women they choose to date, women, in general, are less concerned with looks and instead pay attention to the socioeconomic status, occupational success, intelligence, and communication skills of the men they choose to date (Fileborn et al., 2015; McWilliams & Barrett, 2014; Wada et al., 2015). It is natural to want to appear as attractive as possible in these areas in order to bolster one’s chances of finding a dating partner; however, this often leads people to misrepresent themselves as far as their age, weight, health, and pictures go (Vandeweerd et al., 2016). Some try to create a youthful identity (and look for a youthful identity in others) in order to bring a sense of balance to their aging body but youthful mind, emphasizing how old they feel. For example, one man commented that he rejects the profiles of women who list hobbies that are often associated with being old, such as bingo (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014). Some men lie about their marital status or the type of relationship they want in order to attract more women to have sex with them. Scammers attempt to woo potential dating partners into relationships in order to eventually get money from them (Vandeweerd et al., 2016). The disabled and elderly are especially at risk to be targeted (Hategan, Bourgeois, Parthasarathi, & Ambrosini, 2016). Because of the ease with which online daters could misrepresent themselves, making it difficult to get to know someone until meeting them in- person, these meetings are seen by some as being risky (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Unwanted sexual messages – Older adults are not necessarily against sexual contact, but when sexual messages are sent too soon after meeting someone, they often make the recipient uncomfortable. These messages were reported more as unwanted than threatening though (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Negative experiences – Just as with meeting people in-person, there is always a chance for negative occurrences with online dating. According to a 2013 Pew Internet study of adults using online dating, 42% of women reported having been contacted by someone who made them feel harassed or uncomfortable (cited in Vandeweerd et al., 2016). Unfortunately, those who are harassed online may be less likely to report it though out of fear that it will not be taken seriously or that it will be seen as commonplace online. Older adults have reported being scared, uncomfortable, threatened, stalked, or abused (verbally, physically, and/or sexually) by the people that they have met online. Some women prefer to drive themselves when they go on in-person dates with those they have met online so they do not end up trapped in a bad situation with no way out. It is especially important for older adults to be vigilant in dating because the risks of dating and intimate partner violence, including financial exploitation, threats, and physical harm, are higher among older adults (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).
• Lack of success – While some older adults do meet people online with whom they can create lasting romantic relationships, it unfortunately seems that most are unsuccessful (Fileborn et al., 2015). Several reasons have been cited for the lack of success, such as not being able to find any one “worth” dating (Vandeweerd et al., 2016, p. 265), the lack of responses to messages or dates not showing up for in-person meetings, having great online interactions but finding there is no chemistry when they met in person, not being attractive enough due to aging, the lack of new profiles after online dating for several years, and the impersonal and superficial nature of online dating. However, seeing others succeed in finding a partner gives enough hope for many to keep trying (Vandeweerd et al., 2016).

To summarize, there are several pros and cons to online dating. Some of the positives include growing a social network, gaining new friends and having a sense of safety and control. However, some of the drawbacks to dating online include the time, effort, lack of success, unwanted sexual messages, and the risk of people misrepresenting themselves. Nevertheless, in this age of technology, there are so many new opportunities, including online dating for adults in later life. It is important to weigh the positives and negatives and decide for oneself if this approach to meeting people is worth it. Online dating allows access to more people, a sense of control and safety, and friendship, but also requires effort, putting up with peoples’ misrepresentations of themselves, and being willing to face the risks of having unwanted negative experiences or not finding someone.

• Alterovitz, S. S.-R. & Mendelsohn, G. A. (2011). Partner preferences across the lifespan: Online dating by older adults. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(S), 89-95.
• American Association of Retired Persons [AARP]. (2012). AARP online dating survey. Retrieved from https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research /surveys_statistics/ general/2012/AARP-OnlineDating-Survey-AARP.pdf
• Fileborn, B., Thorpe, R., Hawkes, G., Minichiello, V., & Pitts, M. (2015). Sex and the (single) older girl: Experiences of sex and dating in later life. Journal of Aging Studies, 33, 66-75.
• Hategan, A., Bourgeois, J. A., Parthasarathi, U., & Ambrosini, D. L. (2016). Counseling geriatric patients about opportunity and risk when ‘digital dating.’ Current Psychiatry, 15(7), 75-7.
• McWilliams, S. & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online dating in middle and later life: Gendered expectations and experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411-36.
• Vandeweerd, C., Myers, J., Coulter, M., Yalcin, A., & Corvin, J. (2016). Positives and negatives of online dating according to women 50+. Journal of Women & Aging, 28(3), 259-270.
• Wada, M., Clarke, L. H., & Rozanova, H. (2015). Constructions of sexuality in later life: Analyses of Canadian magazine and newspaper portrayals of online dating. Journal of Aging Studies, 32, 40-49.

Jennifer Viveros ; Dr. David Schramm

David Schramm

Family Life Specialist

Human Development & Family Studies Dept

Related Research

Dating in Later Life

No one likes to be alone, and that includes older adults. If you are over the age of 65 and do not have a spouse/partner who lives with you, some of the following research and tips may be helpful for you.

• About Embark
• Clinical Advisory Council
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Embark Behavioral Health Foundation
• Embark Therapeutic Approach
• CASA Developmental Framework
• Standards of Treatment
• Testimonials
• Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
• Expert Advice Blog
• Embark Company News
• Mental Health Podcasts
• Mental Health Tests
• Parenting Guides
• Community Events
• Educational Consultants
• Job Openings
• Virtual Therapist
• 866-479-3050

• Borderline Personality Disorder
• Eating Disorders
• Gaming Addiction
• Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
• Oppositional Defiant Disorder
• Teens Out-of-Control
• Reactive Attachment Disorder
• Substance Use
• Suicidal Ideation
• Mental Illness and Treatment
• Continuum of Care
• Virtual IOP
• Outpatient Therapy Clinics
• Intensive Outpatient Programs
• Residential Treatment Centers (RTCs)
• Partial Hospitalization Programs
• Therapeutic Boarding Schools
• Young Adult Transitional Living
• Get Started
• Residential Treatment Centers (RTCs) for Teens and Youths

The Psychological Effects of Online Dating for Young Adults

If you’re a young adult using dating apps like Tinder or Bumble, you may be wondering about the psychological effects of online dating — positive and negative — and if they include mental health issues like depression and anxiety.  

To explore this issue, we spoke with Alisa Foreman, a licensed marriage and family therapist and executive clinical director of Optimum Performance Institute in Woodland Hills, California. The transitional living program works with young adults of all genders who are dealing with various mental health issues, including technology addiction . 

Having provided therapy to adolescents, couples, and families, Foreman offered useful insights on the difference between online and traditional dating as well as the work required to build a strong relationship in the digital world.

Table of contents

Online dating statistics, online dating vs. traditional dating, 1. can ease social anxiety, 2. pairs based on psychological profiles and interest, 1. depression, 3. dating app addiction, 4. becoming more impatient, 5. difficulties forming in-person relationships, 6. developing self-esteem issues, 7. feeling rejected, ask yourself the right questions, put work into building the relationship, online dating wrapup.

According to a survey of U.S. adults conducted by the Pew Research Center in late 2019, 48% of young people ages 18 to 29 have used a dating site or app. This use is particularly high for those who identify as lesbian, gay, or bisexual, with 55% of people in this group stating they’ve looked for potential partners through this method. 

Also of note: In 2020, online dating platform usage increased, with 31% of responders to a survey published by Statista Research Department reporting that they were using online dating services or apps somewhat more than prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

So, what are the differences between online dating vs. in-person dating? They start with the way you connect with other people: via technology rather than face to face . In addition, having relationships digitally allows you to date people who live far away from you. The other person could be in another state or country.   

Another difference between online dating vs. in-person dating is that it’s easier for the other person to misrepresent who they are when you’re meeting virtually. For example, they could use someone else’s photo in their profile or lie significantly about their age. 

“The main difference is the lack of face-to-face contact and connection,” Foreman said. “Without that, there’s less opportunity to practice recognizing and identifying social cues, both verbal and nonverbal, including body posture and facial expressions. Those cues help determine whether or not someone seems interested and whether or not there’s a true connection. There’s a physical barrier online that’s not present in person, so there’s likely an added level of vulnerability when initially meeting in person vs. online.” 

The Positive and Negative Psychological Effects of Online Dating 

While there are benefits to connecting with people digitally, there are also negative effects of online dating. These psychological effects can have an impact on your emotional well-being, so it’s good to keep them in mind as you consider or engage in relationships in the digital world. 

The positive psychological effects

Embark Behavioral Health

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Dating and Relationships in the Digital Age

From distractions to jealousy, how Americans navigate cellphones and social media in their romantic relationships

Table of contents.

• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

How we did this

Pew Research Center has long studied the changing nature of romantic relationships as well as the role of digital technology in people’s lives. This particular report focuses on the patterns, experiences and attitudes related to digital technology use in romantic relationships. These findings are based on a survey conducted Oct. 16 to 28, 2019, among 4,860 U.S. adults. This includes those who took part as members of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses, as well as respondents from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel who indicated that they identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB). The margin of sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

Recruiting ATP panelists by phone or mail ensures that nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. This gives us confidence that any sample can represent the whole U.S. adult population (see our Methods 101 explainer on random sampling). To further ensure that each ATP survey reflects a balanced cross-section of the nation, the data is weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories.

For more, see the report’s Methodology . You can also find the questions asked, and the answers the public provided in the topline .

Amid growing debates about the impact of smartphones and social media on romantic relationships, a Pew Research Center survey conducted in October 2019 finds that many Americans encounter some tech-related struggles with their significant others.

For instance, among partnered adults in the U.S. – that is, those who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship, roughly half (51%) say their partner is often or sometimes distracted by their cellphone while they are trying to have a conversation with them, and four-in-ten say they are at least sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their mobile device.

Partnered adults under the age of 50 are particularly likely to express the feeling that their partner is distracted by their phone, with those ages 30 to 49 most likely to report this. Fully 62% of 30- to 49-year-olds and 52% of 18-to 29-year-olds who are in a romantic relationship say their partner is at least sometimes distracted by their phone when they’re trying to talk them. Still, this issue is not confined to younger age groups: 41% of partnered Americans ages 50 and older say they have encountered this in their relationship at least sometimes.

With phones being such a distraction, people might be tempted to look through their partner’s phone. However, there is widespread agreement among the public that digital snooping in couples is unacceptable. Seven-in-ten Americans – regardless of whether they are in a relationship – say it is rarely or never acceptable for someone to look through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge. Still, 34% of partnered adults say they have looked through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge, with women being more likely than men to say they have done this (42% vs. 25%).

For many adults, social media plays a role in the way they navigate and share information about their romantic relationships. Roughly eight-in-ten social media users (81%) report that they at least sometimes see others posting about their relationships, including 46% who say this happens often, but few say that seeing these posts affects how they feel about their own love life.

Moreover, social media has become a place where some users discuss relationships and investigate old ones. Roughly half of social media users (53%) say they have used these platforms to check up on someone they used to date or be in a relationship with, while 28% say they have used social media to share or discuss things about their relationship or dating life. For adult users under the age of 30, those shares who have used social media to checked-up on a former partner (70%) or posted about their own love life (48%) are even higher.

But social media can also be a source of annoyance and conflict for some couples. Among those whose partner uses social media, 23% say they have felt jealous or unsure of their relationship because of the way their current partner interacts with others on these sites, and this share rises to 34% among those ages 18 to 29.

Still, some users view these platforms as an important venue for showing love and affection. This is especially true for younger users who are partnered: 48% of 18- to 29-year-old social media users say social media is very or somewhat important for them in showing how much they care about their partner.

These are some of the main findings from a nationally representative survey of 4,860 U.S. adults conducted online Oct. 16 to 28, 2019, using Pew Research Center’s American Trend Panel.

Terminology

Several terms are used in this report to describe people’s current relationship status. This reference guide explains each term. Single is used to describe people who are not currently in a committed relationship but may be casually dating (31% of the sample). Single and looking refers to people who are not in a committed relationship (but may be casually dating) and are looking for dates or a relationship (15% of the sample). Casually dating refers to single people who are casually dating someone but are not in a committed relationship (4% of the sample). Partnered refers to adults who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship (69% of the sample). Cohabiting is used to describe people who currently live with their partner but are not married (11% of the sample). Committed relationship is used to describe people who are in a relationship but are not married or cohabiting (8% of the sample). Unmarried is used to refer to any adults who are not currently married – single, cohabiting or in a committed relationship (50% of the sample). This term is sometimes used in conjunction with the term “partnered” to refer to those who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship (for example, unmarried partnered adults constitute 19% of the sample).

40% of partnered adults say they are bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone

At the time of the survey, four-in-ten Americans who are married, living with a partner or who are in a committed relationship say they are often or sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone, including 12% who say they feel this way often. 1

In addition, 24% of partnered Americans report that they are at least sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on social media, while a somewhat smaller share (15%) say they feel this way about their partner playing video games.

There are certain groups who are more likely to express annoyance over their partner’s digital activities than others. Among partnered adults, women are more likely than men to say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone (16% vs. 8%) or playing video games (7% vs. 3%). 2

Beyond gender differences, people’s attitudes also vary by age. Some 18% of partnered adults ages 18 to 49 say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their phone, compared with 6% of those ages 50 and older. Younger adults in romantic relationships also are more likely than their older counterparts to say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on social media (11% vs. 4%) and playing video games (7% vs. 3%).

Roughly half of partnered people say their significant other is distracted by their phone at least sometimes when they try to talk to them

While relatively few Americans are familiar with the term “phubbing” – which is the practice of snubbing others in favor of their cellphones – notable shares say they have encountered that behavior in their romantic relationships.

When asked to reflect on their partner’s cellphone use, 51% of Americans in a romantic relationship say their partner is at least sometimes distracted by their cellphone when they are trying to have a conversation with them, including 16% who say their significant other is often distracted by their mobile device.

This pattern differs by age: Roughly six-in-ten partnered adults ages 30 to 49 say their significant other is at least sometimes distracted by their cellphone when they are trying to hold a conversation with them, compared with 52% of those ages 18 to 29 and even smaller shares for those ages 50 and older (41%). Among those in relationships, younger adults also are more likely than older adults to assert that their partner is often distracted by their phone when they are trying to have a discussion (20% vs. 10%).

Women who are in a relationship are more likely than men to say their partner is often distracted by their phone while they are trying to hold a conversation, but this gender difference is most pronounced among younger adults. Three-in-ten partnered women ages 18 to 29 say their significant other is often distracted by their phone while they are trying to hold a conversation, compared with 15% of men in this age group who say this.

About one-in-three partnered adults say they have looked through their current spouse or partner’s phone without their knowledge, but there’s strong public consensus this is unacceptable

Americans – regardless of whether they are in a relationship – were asked in the survey about their views about some issues related to technology and relationships. For example, they weighed in on the acceptability of looking through a significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge. Seven-in-ten U.S. adults say it is rarely (28%) or never (42%) acceptable to look through a significant other’s cellphone without their knowledge. Smaller shares – about three-in-ten (29%) – view this behavior as at least sometimes acceptable.

Majorities across major demographic groups view these actions as unacceptable, but there are some Americans who are more accepting of this behavior than others.

Women are more likely than men to think it is at least sometimes acceptable for someone to look through their partner’s cellphone without their knowledge (35% vs. 24%). And about one-third of adults under the age of 65 (33%) view this as acceptable, compared with 16% of those 65 and older.

Americans’ views on the acceptability of looking through a partner’s phone varies by current relationship status. Americans who are married or cohabiting are more likely than those who are single or in a committed relationship to say that looking through a significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge is sometimes or always acceptable.

Despite the overall public uneasiness with this type of digital snooping, there are some Americans who report that they have looked through their significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge. Roughly one-third of partnered adults (34%) say they have done this, but there are substantial differences by gender, age and relationship status when it comes to looking through a significant other’s phone.

Among adults who are partnered, women are far more likely than men to report that they have looked through their current partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge (42% vs. 25%). And while 52% of partnered adults ages 18 to 29 say they have done this, those shares are 41% among those ages 30 to 49, 29% among those ages 50 to 64 and 13% among those 65 and older.

These actions also vary by the type of relationship. Roughly four-in-ten Americans (41%) who are living with a partner report that they have looked through their current partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge, compared with 27% of those who are in committed relationship and 34% of those who are married. However, this pattern is largely due age differences in relationship status, as twice as many adults under 50 live with a partner than do those 50 and older. While 48% cohabiters under 50 report having gone through their partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge, only 18% of cohabiters ages 50 and older say the same.

There also are some differences by race and ethnicity. About half of Hispanic adults who are in a relationship say they have looked through their partner’s phone, compared with a third among their black or white counterparts.

Those in partnered relationships also are more likely to look through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge if they think it is acceptable to do so (61% say they have done this). Smaller shares of partnered adults who deem this unacceptable say they have personally gone through their current partner’s phone – though still about one-in-five say they have done this.

It is fairly common for partners to share the password or passcode to their cellphone

Overall, sharing passwords to digital devices or accounts is a fairly common practice in romantic relationships. In the October 2019 survey, a majority of Americans who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship say they have given their spouse or partner the password for their cellphone (75%), their email account (62%) or any of their social media accounts (42%). 3

Still, experiences do vary depending on the type of relationship partnered people have. Married or cohabiting adults are much more likely to share their cellphone or social media passwords with their partner than those who are in a committed relationship but are not living with their partner. Roughly three-quarters or more of married adults (79%) or those who live with a partner (74%) say they have given their partner the password to their cellphone, compared with 58% of those who are in a committed relationship. A similar pattern is present among partnered social media users when they are asked about whether they have shared their login information for any of their social media accounts. When it comes to email password sharing, married adults are the most likely group to say they have given their email password to their partner: 70% say this, compared with 50% of cohabiting internet users and just 22% of those in a committed relationship.

There also are some differences by age. Among partnered adults, those ages 18 to 49 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they have given their cellphone password to their spouse or partner (81% vs. 69%). On the other hand, older adults are more likely than younger adults to say they have shared their email password with their significant other (70% vs. 59%).

Most social media users see other people post about their relationship or dating life, but relatively few say these posts affect how they feel about their own relationship

This survey conducted last fall also examined how social media might be affecting the way people think about their own love lives. More specifically, does seeing relationship posts on social media affect the way people think about their own relationships?

Overall, eight-in-ten social media users see others post about their relationship on social media often or sometimes. This differs by both age and gender. Women are slightly more likely than men to see these posts (84% vs. 77%). In addition, 90% of social media users ages 18 to 49 say they see these types of post at least sometimes, compared with 68% of those ages 50 and older.

A majority of social media users who are in a relationship (81%) say they see posts about other people’s relationships when using social media. Among these partnered social media users, 78% of those who are married say they at least sometimes see posts about other people’s relationships, compared with 89% of those who are living with partner and 86% of those in a committed relationship.

Overall, seeing these posts appears to have little effect on how people view their own romantic relationships. A large majority of partnered adults (81%) who at least sometimes see posts about other people’s relationships say that these posts have not made much of difference in how they feel about their own relationship. On the other hand, relatively few say these posts make them feel better (9%) or worse (9%) about their relationship.

When it comes to social media users who are single and looking, 87% see other people making posts about their relationships on social media platforms at least sometimes. Social media users who are single and not looking for a relationship or dates are less likely to report seeing these types of posts at least sometimes (78%).

A third of the social media users who are single and looking and who say they see others’ posts about their love life say that seeing these posts makes them feel worse. This compares with 62% who report that such posts by others do not make much of a difference in how they feel about their own dating life. Just 4% say it makes them feel better.

These relationship-focused posts tend to have a bigger impact on women than men. Among social media users who are single and looking, women who see relationships posts at least sometimes are more likely to report that seeing these posts on social media makes them feel worse about their dating lives than are their male counterparts (40% vs. 28%).

About three-in-ten social media users say they have discussed their love life on social media

While it is fairly common for social media users to come across other people posting things about their love lives, only a minority of Americans who use these platforms (28%) say they have ever shared or discussed things about their relationship or dating life. About four-in-ten adults who are living with their partner (39%) and nearly half of those in a committed relationship (48%) but not living together say they have ever posted about their relationship on social media. Conversely, married and single adults are the least likely to post about their love lives (24% and 26%, respectively).

About four-in-ten social media users who are either Hispanic or lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) say they have ever posted about their dating life or relationship on social media, while around one-quarter of white, black and straight social media users say the same.

Younger social media users also are more likely to have posted about their love lives on social media previously. While about half of social media users ages 18 to 29 have ever posted on social media about their dating life or relationship, a third of 30- to 49-year-olds say the same. By comparison, far fewer social media users ages 50 and older (11%) say they ever post about their relationship or dating life.

Roughly half of social media users have used these sites to check up on an ex-romantic partner

Using social media to check up on former romantic partners is a fairly common practice among social media users. About half of social media users (53%) say they have used these sites to check up on someone with whom they were in a relationship or whom they used to date.

Social media users ages 18 to 49 are far more likely than those ages 50 and older to report using social media to check up on an ex-romantic partner. Seven-in-ten 18- to 29-year-olds report that they have used these platforms to check up on someone they used to date or be in a relationship with. That share is lower – though still a majority – among users ages 30 to 49 and falls sharply among those ages and 50 and older.

There also are some notable differences, depending on a person’s relationship status. About two-thirds each of social media users who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship say they have used social media to check up on someone they used to date. Meanwhile, 56% of single people, and even fewer married people (45%), say the same. In addition, social media users who have a high school degree or less education are less likely to report that they have used to social media to check up on an ex-romantic partner than those with a bachelor’s or advanced degree or who have some college experience.

Younger Americans in relationships are especially likely to view social media as having an important role in connecting and keeping up with their partner

Overall, about three-in-ten partnered adults who use social media say that these sites are at least somewhat important in showing how much they care about their partner (33%) or keeping up with what is going on in their partner’s life (28%). But the level of importance that these users place on social media varies substantially by age. Among partnered social media users, 48% of 18- to 29-year-olds say these platforms are very or somewhat important in how they show how much they care about their partner, compared with 28% of those ages 30 and older who say this.

There also are age differences when it comes to the importance social media users place on these platforms for keeping up with their significant other’s life. About four-in-ten partnered users ages 18 to 29 say social media is somewhat or very important when it comes to keeping up with what’s going on in their partner’s life, compared with 29% of those ages 30 to 49 and only 17% of those ages 50 and older.

Married social media users are more likely than those who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship to say they do not see social media as important for keeping up with what’s going on in their partner’s life or for showing how much they care about their partner.

The level of importance that partnered adults place on social media also varies by race and ethnicity as well as by sexual orientation. Nonwhite social media users are more likely than white users to say these platforms are a very or somewhat important for keeping up with their partner’s life and showing how much they care. 4 Among partnered social media users, LGB adults are more likely than those who are straight to say social media is at least somewhat important for keeping up with their partner’s life or showing how much they care.

Even when controlling for age, racial and ethnic differences persist when it comes to the likelihood of saying social media is a personally important way to keep up with one’s partner or show how much they care. Similarly, marital status and sexual orientation are significant predictors of how important it is for people to use social media to keep up with one’s partner, even after controlling for age differences.

Social media can be a source of jealousy and uncertainty in relationships – especially for younger adults

Even as younger Americans value social media as a place to share how much they care about their partner or to keep up with what’s going on in their partner’s life, they also acknowledge some of the downsides that these sites can have on relationships.

Overall, 23% of partnered adults whose significant other uses social media say they have felt jealous or unsure about their relationship because of the way their current spouse or partner interacts with other people on social media. But this share is even higher among those in younger age groups.

Among partnered adults whose significant other uses social media, 34% of 18- to 29-year-olds and 26% of those ages 30 to 49 say they have felt jealous or unsure in their current relationship because of how their partner interacted with others on social media, compared with 19% of those ages 50 to 64 who say this and 4% of those ages 65 and up. Nearly four-in-ten unmarried adults with partners who are social media users (37%) say they have felt this way about their current partner, while only 17% of married people say the same.

Women also are more likely to express displeasure with how their significant other interacts with others on social media. Women who say their partner uses social media are more likely than men to say they have felt jealous or unsure of their relationships because of how their partner interacts with others on social media (29% vs. 17%).

Among those whose partner uses social media, about three-in-ten nonwhite adults who are in a relationship report having felt jealous or uncertain in their current relationship based on their partner’s social media interactions, compared with 19% of white adults who say the same. About one-third of LGB partnered adults whose significant other uses social media report that they have felt jealous or unsure in their current relationship because of how their partner interacted with others on social media, while 22% of straight people say this. College graduates are less likely to report having felt this way than those with some college experience or a high school degree or less.

• These items were only asked among those whose partner uses these digital technologies, but are presented here among all partnered adults. This group does include portions of those who say their partner does not own a cellphone (4%), use social media (27%) or play videos games (47%). Please read the Methodology section for full details on how these questions were asked. ↩
• Prior research from 2019 shows that the majority of both men (84%) and women (79%) in the U.S. report owning a smartphone . In addition, about three-in-ten U.S. adults say they are online almost constantly , and this does not differ by gender. Prior work in 2018 found that men under 50 are more likely than women under 50 to report playing video games at least sometimes. ↩
• These items were only asked among those who use these digital technologies, but are presented here among all partnered adults. This group does include portions of those who say they do not use the internet or use social media. Please read the Methodology for full details on how these questions were asked. ↩
• Nonwhite includes those who identify as black, Asian, Hispanic, some other race or multiple races; these groups could not be analyzed separately due to sample size limitations. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Age & Generations
• LGBTQ Attitudes & Experiences
• Online Dating
• Platforms & Services
• Romance & Dating
• Social Media
• Stresses & Distraction Online

Teens and Video Games Today

As biden and trump seek reelection, who are the oldest – and youngest – current world leaders, how teens and parents approach screen time, who are you the art and science of measuring identity, u.s. centenarian population is projected to quadruple over the next 30 years, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 56

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

• Skip to main content
• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Study Today

Largest Compilation of Structured Essays and Exams

Essay on Positive & Negative Effects of Online Dating

January 12, 2018 by Study Mentor Leave a Comment

Online dating is a very common occurrence among the youth of today and almost every other person is constantly resorting to this option for various reasons.

Like every other consequence of the internet era, online dating has both its advantages and disadvantages and we must not be clouded by any preconceived notions while we are evaluating its effects.

Some people are extremely apprehensive of the anonymity which is allowed to one by the procedure of online dating as such, but this cannot be denied that many a perfect match had been also made by dating sites and several social networks, but one can never completely deny the obvious risk that online dating brings along with it.

Table of Contents

Ways in which online dating occurs

Online dating started to spread itself mostly through social media and social networking and all such sites which permit the same- starting from the times of Orkut to the modern age of Facebook , Twitter , and Instagram . There are also various virtual chat rooms which might facilitate online dating as well.

Moreover, there are several mobile applications specifically designed to help people find suitable partners for online dating, etc. The most prominent example of such an application will be Tinder, which is now very popular among the Indian youth too, especially the college goers.

There are other similar apps too but they do not concentrate solely on the prospect of online dating. However, there are many software’s and applications dedicated to online dating, chatting, and for other such purposes.

However, online dating is not an entirely new phenomenon, as it had started in the medieval times in the form of sending letters to carry out more or less a similar function. It has merely redecorated and rejuvenated itself in various newer forms over the ages and is now highly digitalised.

Negative effects of Online Dating

The biggest problem of online dating is when two people get acquainted, and then attracted to practically someone who is a complete stranger to them. This can cause many risks and eventually be very harmful to the individual, who is entering in any such relations without being completely aware of the other person’s actual identity. Many people create different fake profiles on social media sites to entrap such vulnerable individuals.

In such a way, they can easily make such vulnerable people trust them and not perceive their malicious intentions. Many cases have been reported that through this way, people have been blackmailed, robbed, and exploited in many other ways- all of them being equally harmful to one’s resources and reputation.

Another effect can be misunderstandings between the people involved in any such relations. Any such relationship which is built merely on a virtual premise can never possibly inform both the involved parties about each other’s identities completely, thus there is an inevitable tendency of misconceptions to creep in, which might result in both underestimating or overestimating someone and their abilities.

This can be the root cause behind such misunderstandings, as texting and virtual messaging are two most important and effective ways to misrepresent the actual message one is trying to convey in plenty of situations. Many a times, it is also seen that males have formed accounts with the fake name and images of females, and vice versa, to further trick people for reasons which are certainly not very humble or altruistic.

The different MMS scams which surface every now and then can also be seen as an adverse effect of online dating, as on sites such as Facebook, etc. it is quite easy to download one’s pictures and use them for evil purposes or to blackmail someone as such.

However, that particular website had recently taken some measures to try and prevent such acts through some safety measures, but the problem has not been yet curbed in its entirety. Therefore, further safety measures are still required.

Positive effects of online dating

However, at times, online dating can also link two people aptly based on their likes and interests, and it can turn out to be a very good match indeed which might turn out to be fruitful in the future. Needless to say, all relationships need certain qualities to prosper and progress, but how they are acquainted to each other can also play a big role in advancing their relationship as such.

For example, social media is often used by people to convey their feelings and opinions on different issues, and this is how we find like-minded people or people we can engage in a healthy debate and discussion with. This can go a long way in establishing a proper relationship between them, and thus leading to online dating.

Also, online dating might also keep aside one’s prejudices before they delve into any relationship as in this case, one likes a person only on the basis of their identity and not on other grounds such as their family identity, their financial status, etc. which can otherwise attract people in other forms of dating, besides the virtual form being discussed in this essay.

Therefore, in a certain way, online dating might eliminate relationships based on false premises and a pretentious sense of attraction between people.

It cannot be really said that online dating is completely a bad thing; likewise, it cannot be referred to be something entirely positive. It is obviously a blend of both its diverse pros and cons, but we need to realize that either of these over weigh the other at certain situations, and therefore, the social and geographical setting and context of online dating also highly influences how the system fairs out to be eventually.

Reader Interactions

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Top Trending Essays in March 2021

• Essay on Pollution
• Essay on my School
• Summer Season
• My favourite teacher
• World heritage day quotes
• my family speech
• importance of trees essay
• autobiography of a pen
• honesty is the best policy essay
• essay on building a great india
• my favourite book essay
• essay on caa
• my favourite player
• autobiography of a river
• farewell speech for class 10 by class 9
• essay my favourite teacher 200 words
• internet influence on kids essay
• my favourite cartoon character

Brilliantly

Content & links.

Verified by Sur.ly

Essay for Students

• Essay for Class 1 to 5 Students

Scholarships for Students

• Class 1 Students Scholarship
• Class 2 Students Scholarship
• Class 3 Students Scholarship
• Class 4 Students Scholarship
• Class 5 students Scholarship
• Class 6 Students Scholarship
• Class 7 students Scholarship
• Class 8 Students Scholarship
• Class 9 Students Scholarship
• Class 10 Students Scholarship
• Class 11 Students Scholarship
• Class 12 Students Scholarship

STAY CONNECTED

• About Study Today
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions

Scholarships

• Apj Abdul Kalam Scholarship
• Ashirwad Scholarship
• Bihar Scholarship
• Canara Bank Scholarship
• Colgate Scholarship
• Dr Ambedkar Scholarship
• E District Scholarship
• Epass Karnataka Scholarship
• Fair And Lovely Scholarship
• Floridas John Mckay Scholarship
• Inspire Scholarship
• Jio Scholarship
• Karnataka Minority Scholarship
• Lic Scholarship
• Maulana Azad Scholarship
• Medhavi Scholarship
• Minority Scholarship
• Moma Scholarship
• Mp Scholarship
• Muslim Minority Scholarship
• Nsp Scholarship
• Oasis Scholarship
• Obc Scholarship
• Odisha Scholarship
• Pfms Scholarship
• Post Matric Scholarship
• Pre Matric Scholarship
• Prerana Scholarship
• Prime Minister Scholarship
• Rajasthan Scholarship
• Santoor Scholarship
• Sitaram Jindal Scholarship
• Ssp Scholarship
• Swami Vivekananda Scholarship
• Ts Epass Scholarship
• Up Scholarship
• Vidhyasaarathi Scholarship
• Wbmdfc Scholarship
• West Bengal Minority Scholarship
• Click Here Now!!

Mobile Number

Have you Burn Crackers this Diwali ? Yes No

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Dating — The Benefits of Online Dating to Society

The Benefits of Online Dating to Society

• Categories: Dating Online Dating Society

About this sample

Words: 1297 |

Published: Oct 2, 2020

Words: 1297 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 469 words

1 pages / 559 words

2 pages / 702 words

2 pages / 737 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Dating

The 21st century has introduce a new way of life in the dating world. Traditionally, whenever a person was interested in dating, he/she would have to actually meet the other person first then plan for a date from there on [...]

Throughout human history, spanning over 30,000 years, communication has been the cornerstone of our evolution and dominance as a species. From rudimentary cave art to smoke signals, carrier pigeons to telephones, and now the era [...]

There are 3 distinct occupation levels represented in the case profile, plus the ground surface which only contains a few rubbles and the tip of the stone wall foundation. We labeled the very top layer of stratum underneath the [...]

Getting on that first date can be particularly intimidating, especially when you are just starting to get to know each other better. This is also often true for couples who have gotten used to the presence of one another. What [...]

Smith, J. (2019). The Impact of Social Media on Interpersonal Communication Skills. Journal of Communication Studies, 25(2), 45-62.Johnson, M. (2020). Online Communication and Its Effects on Offline Interpersonal Skills. [...]

Whenever someone thinks of Jane Austen, it is no surprise that they may think of her best-selling novel Pride and Prejudice. When people ask me to suggest a book for good reading, I always choose this novel. However, many [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• Parenting & Family Parenting Family Pregnancy
• Courses Marriage Save My Marriage Pre Marriage
• Quizzes Relationship Quizzes Love Quizzes Couples Quiz
• Find a Therapist

10 Benefits of Online Dating

In This Article

Unlike a decade ago, where online dating was associated with desperate individuals, this era has registered a significant increase in the number of online dating sites’ users.

In the U.S, for example, at least 30% of the population have used an online dating app or website at one point.

The number of users keeps increasing, so do the dating sites. Worldwide there are over 1500 online dating sites.

Why online dating

But, what are the benefits of online dating? Why has it garnered so much fame?

This year, online dating is going mainstream , especially with the pandemic still looming. 

People are craving human connection because staying indoors is frustrating.

Therefore, more people are exploring the possibilities of finding a social relationship on Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge, which are some of the best online dating sites in the world.

So, whether you are comparing Bumble vs. Tinder or other dating sites to identify the right one to join, one thing is for sure, online dating still works.

What is the success rate of online dating?

As it is, online dating is here to stay. Statistics indicate that in March 2020 , Bumble registered a 21%, 23%, and 26% increase in messages sent in Seattle, New York, and San Francisco, respectively.

By now, the numbers have gone up not only in Bumble but also on other online dating sites. The trend will probably continue to rise even after the pandemic owing to the distinct benefits of online dating.

You can’t put all the effort into finding the “one” only to exit the app after the pandemic. Besides, once people are used to online platforms, it is challenging to break the habit.

Besides, the increase in such apps has given people more options to explore better. So, even if one is disheartened by one app, they clearly have an option to find someone on some other app.

In the end, it is important for you to know the advantages and disadvantages of online dating to decide for yourself and take the required steps.

10 pros of online dating

Why online dating, after all? Well, we have the answers.

The following are some remarkable benefits of online dating to let you know why online dating is good.

1. It is easy to get started

To start your journey on online dating, you only need a mobile device and an internet connection. You’ll either download the application or register on their website.

The next step is to set up your profile, which includes information about you, your hobbies, beliefs, and the traits you are looking for in a match.

Once you’ve entered this data, you get to the fun part of assessing your matches. You can swipe right or left, depending on whether you are interested in the person or not.

It is more comfortable to start a conversation online with a stranger than in real life.

One of the benefits of online dating is that it provides a secure space to get to know the other person without the tense atmosphere of a first date .

2. It increases the probability of finding your match

Online dating is a great way to find your soulmate .

The app scans through a dozen profiles to connect you with a match. Every day you get additional suggestions of people you could be compatible with.

Depending on your filter options, you only get suggestions for people within your preferred location, age limit, or other factors you singled out.

You are at liberty to contact the face that interests you. You can start a conversation with several of your matches to establish the degree of compatibility with each.

You can also have several adult dating apps at a go . This increases the number of people you meet and the probability of ultimately finding the perfect match.

3. It opens dating opportunities beyond your geographical location

With the lockdown, life can get boring with the continuous “stay at home” slogan.

But, you don’t have to soak in boredom until the last case of COVID-19 . The Tinder passport feature option has been made available to all its users.

You can travel the world by changing your location to another state or country and connect with people beyond your borders.

You might be searching for your match in New York, yet they are in Tokyo. The feature increases your visibility.

Online dating has helped people not only to support others in quarantine across the globe but also to establish a casual or serious connection.

4. It gives a glimpse of personality

One of the prominent benefits of online dating is that you get to know people better before you meet them.

The chatting feature enables you to ask questions and interact through messages. It allows you to understand your match’s personality and interests.

You can either pass or pursue if your personality is compatible. With time, you can exchange contacts and take your conversation on other social media platforms to get to know each other.

It minimizes the chances of getting into a relationship only to find out that your date is the exact opposite of what you wanted. Typical of what happens in traditional dating setups.

Also, online dating acts as an icebreaker. You converse and relate before you meet .

When you finally arrange a date after the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s like you’ve known each other already. You are only picking up from where you left.

5. It has great features to enhance your user experience

In the wake of the coronavirus pandemic, mainstream online dating sites have integrated more features to enhance their users’ experience.

Bumble for starters, has an inbuilt video and voice call. You can initiate a video or voice call to familiarize yourself with another person and know them beyond the text messages.

Plenty of Fish app has also enrolled live streams in several states in the U.S. and is planning to launch the feature globally. There are numerous benefits of online dating.

And, the virtual dating platform is getting better by the day.

Online dating enthusiasts can also take their interaction to zoom or google hangout in cases where the dating app doesn’t offer video or audio calls.

These features may not compensate for the face-to-face hook-up , but it’s an impressive way to spice online dating. Besides, video and audio calls are the new normal.

6. It is flexible and convenient

One of the positives of online dating is that you can access any dating app either on a phone or a desktop. Most people prefer mobile devices because you are mostly with them and can check out your matches from anywhere.

Some of the other benefits of online dating are that you can opt for a free version or subscribe for a premium membership and unlock exciting features that will give you an added advantage in finding the one.

You are in charge. You choose whom to connect with despite the app’s suggestion. You can start conversations as well as block those who turn out to be a nuisance.

7. It is affordable

One of the good things about online dating is that it is cost-effective. 

Apart from the internet connection and the subscription fee, which is not a must, you don’t have any other expenses, unlike when getting to know someone offline, where each date translates to Uber fees, movie tickets, or dinner expenses.

8. You decide the pace

One of the benefits of online dating is that you can set the pace of your relationship. You have better control over how to set things through. Considering there are no social obligations and you are not meeting the person in real life yet, it eases things out for both the participants.

9. Honest interactions

In the list of benefits of online dating, one of the important advantages is that it often starts honestly. While signing up for online dating, the dating sites will ask you to feed some important information about yourself along with your interests and general lifestyle. 

This is the basic information based on which matches are suggested. So, you don’t have to toggle through the truth and lie in order to please your partner, as honest information is revealed before any interaction happens.

10. Less effort in approaching

In the real world, there is comparatively more effort and hesitation while approaching a person, whereas the benefit of dating apps is that the efforts are reduced because both parties already understand each other’s willingness on online dating sites. Besides, there is also a non-judgmental environment.

10 cons of online dating

As much as there are benefits of online dating, there are also negatives of online dating. In the online world, not everything is black and white, and at times, things can become risky. Let’s look at some of the disadvantages of online dating:

1. People treated as commodities

Online dating is just a matter of swipes. So, it starts with less to no emotions involved at the time of selecting someone. The entire system is designed in a way that compels people to think about themselves first and not about prospective partners they are rejecting.

2. Longer time in finding the right one

More choices, more confusion. Considering there are ample options available on a dating site, it makes sense to take time to find the right one. This makes people more desperate, and it works psychologically to cause distress. This is so because people see a lot of options in front of their eyes but have none to pick. 

3. Online algorithms might not always be effective

Results are shown based on the data collected and algorithms of a particular dating website or app. This means it only shows what it would want to show based on its data and your preferences. This could mean that you won’t necessarily bump into your Mr. Right or Ms. Right online.

4. Unrealistic expectations

We often have a list of qualities we want in our partner. In real life, as we meet people, we tend to accept people for who they are, but behind the screens, it is difficult to gauge the person as both show their best sides. This sets unrealistic expectations from both ends.

5. Exposed to trolling

The online world is often cruel. One wrong move, one wrong word, and people will not hesitate to take you down. 

That is why one must take very cautious steps while dating because people won’t shy away from commenting on each other’s looks or calling each other names when things don’t fit into their ideologies.

6. Physical attraction plays a major role

When you meet someone in real life, you tend to know the person as a whole rather than basing your judgment on their looks, whereas, in the online dating world, it all starts with a profile picture or a set of images as a deciding factor.

7. Dangers of the unknown

The online dating world is exposed to various threats. We don’t know the person in real life to decide whether or not they are dangerous. At times, this exposes people to mishaps and gives an added avenue to the criminals to commit wrongdoing.

8. People could lie

Everyone likes others to think highly of themselves. This makes people lie about themselves. Especially in dating online, people can often paint a rosy picture of themselves in order to impress someone they like.

So, it makes more sense when you already have background information about the person and at least some interest in knowing them better.

9. It doesn’t guarantee a date

You might come across many people who will seem fit for you. However, you can’t be sure of getting a date after you sign up. Dating online is just an avenue for you to explore more. It will not guarantee a date, and it totally depends on you. 

10. Curated information

The information provided on the websites is as much as the website wants you to know about the other person. And it totally depends on the other person to feed in the information as much as they want. In that way, you have less control.

Is online dating safe

Many people are skeptical about online dating and can often consider it unsafe. They often question, “Is online dating good? Is online dating for me?” However, there are both sides of the coin. As much as online dating gives you an opportunity to explore online dating options, it can also expose you to the world of lies, threats, and cybercrimes.

According to reports, the online dating scam has almost tripled over the past two years, and in 2019, more than 25,000 consumers filed a report against romance scams.

So, it is always advisable to be safe and have a background check done.

10 safety tips for online dating

Online dating is a popular habit now, and in search of true love , people are sure to give in to this ease of technology. Such benefits of online dating help us find matches faster and with a lot of ease. 

However, in order to be safe in the dating world while enjoying the benefits of online dating, here are a few tips to keep in mind:

• Propose a video chat before meeting your date in person in order to reduce the risk of being catfished.
• Choose a public place for the first few dates.
• Let your close friends or family know about the details of your date.
• Avoid giving out too much information about yourself before you both actually begin to date in real life.
• Carry pepper spray for your safety.
• Avoid drinking during the first few dates unless you have known the person well enough.
• Share your live location with your friend or a family member.
• Always Reverse Image Search your dates before going out with them.
• Always go on your own rather than accepting the offer to be picked up.
• Avoid a place too far away from your home.

Online dating has made a world of difference in the 21st century. It has definitely opened new doors and made people seeking love so much more hopeful. 

There can be many benefits of online dating, but it can also be worrisome to meet a complete stranger. However, with the right approach and a pragmatic mindset, you can stay safe and enjoy your date with comfort and ease.

Share this article on

Amy Orlando is the founder of online4.love . She has a bachelor's degree (BA) in communication and is a certified online dating expert. Amy works part-time as a marriage and a couple counselor. She loves playing cupid and helping people find the ONE.

Want to have a happier, healthier marriage?

If you feel disconnected or frustrated about the state of your marriage but want to avoid separation and/or divorce, the marriage.com course meant for married couples is an excellent resource to help you overcome the most challenging aspects of being married.

Take Course

Learn More On This Topic

Relationship

By rachael pace.

By Editorial Team, Relationship & Marriage Advice

By Brent Scott

By Jane Song

Approved By Shannon McHugh, Psychologist

By Mary J Gibson

By Laura Jane Todd

By Kristin Savage

You may also like.

Emotional Intimacy

Approved by angela welch, marriage & family therapist.

Approved By Dionne Eleanor, Coach

Zodiac Signs

By marriage.com editorial team, relationship & marriage advice.

By Kelli H, Licensed Clinical Social Worker

Approved By Christiana Njoku, Licensed Professional Counselor

By Draven Porter

Recent articles.

By Owen Kessler

By Dylan Banks

By Kaida Hollister

Popular topics on married life.

The Downsides of Online Dating

Three factors to consider when seeking a relationship online..

Posted November 7, 2019 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

The Internet has transformed the dating game. Many changes have been positive such as broadening the pool of potential partners and matching people based on preset characteristics. In fact, online dating is now responsible for approximately 20% of marriages! But this article isn’t about the positives; it’s about the negatives. Here are some pitfalls for online daters to consider, and my suggestions for addressing each one.

1) Overemphasis on physical appearance. Dating services that present a brief bio or profile for people to evaluate lead to an overemphasis on looks. Although valuing physical appearance is not new, traditional methods of meeting people such as through friends, or at school or work, afford the opportunity to observe much more than outward appearance before deciding whether to pursue a relationship. The rapid and sometimes shallow evaluations involved in online dating may cause people to overlook partners who would otherwise be a good match. How can you solve this problem? Expand your “type” to allow for a broader range of connections. Attraction can be more intense and long-lasting when a person’s character influences the degree to which you find them physically attractive. Give people the chance to show their character before they are discounted.

2) Disposable view of relationships. Let’s say two people make it past the initial swipe or message and actually end up on a date, the context in which they first met (online) sets them up for further scrutiny. Rather than focusing on a person's positive attributes, online daters are looking for turnoffs. One reason for this tendency is that online dating exposes people to abundant prospective partners. If one partner has too many flaws, it’s easy to move onto the next person. When people meet through traditional channels, they typically spend time getting to know one another before deciding to go out, which enables them to learn each other’s personality and make an informed decision about whether to pursue something further. But if you still plan to meet a partner online, how can you enhance the likelihood of building a strong connection? Seek to develop a friendship first . I would recommend putting “friends first” or “seeking friends” in your profile headline. When you take the pressure off of a romantic connection, you stop looking for flaws and focus instead on commonalities. This emphasis helps build a foundation of friendship, which is key to a long-lasting romantic relationship .

3) Risk of deception . The potential for deception exists in any relationship but the likelihood of misrepresentation is greater online, and some distortions are unique to online dating. For instance, although a person could lie about their marital status or sexual orientation in face-to-face contexts, lying about one’s gender and entire physical makeup is only possible online. One study reported that up to 90% of online daters have been deceptive, which is a huge number considering about 50 million people have participated in online dating (Epstein, 2009). Most online daters are aware of the risks including encountering fake profiles, meeting dangerous people, and experiencing emotional distress, but they continue using these forums anyway. How can you avoid being deceived online? Listen to your gut and pay attention to red flags . If a person refuses to video chat or meet in person, or if they seem too good to be true, they are likely hiding something. Don’t waste your time on someone who won’t give you the respect and treatment you deserve. If you are seeking a relationship and they can’t make the time and effort to meet you, it’s not a good match.

Epstein, R. (2009). The truth about online dating. Scientific American Mind, 20(3), 54-61.

I’m currently recruiting online daters to participate in a study. If you’re interested, please follow this link: http://csusb.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_3OTQ65oeTKpKQst

Follow me on Twitter: @DrKellyCampbell

Listen to my podcast: Let's Talk Relationships

Kelly Campbell, Ph.D. , is a Professor of Psychology at California State University, San Bernardino.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience