The Enduring Effect of Internet Dating: Meeting Online and the Road to Marriage

Abstract

This study takes a relational stage approach to understanding the role of online dating in the progression of relationships toward marriage. Fifty interviews were conducted with individuals from across the United States (ages 21–62; M_age = 33.42) who were married or engaged to someone they met via online dating. The results present a comprehensive view of online dating through 4 stages and 13 subcategories of relationship development. Participants described meeting through a process of technology-enabled relationship initiation. Once the relationship escalated offline, they entered a period of multimodal development that demonstrated the enduring influence technology continued to have after meeting in person. Throughout this process, participants stressed the role of online dating platforms in breaking down barriers and reinforcing divisions. Three outcomes for marriage were also uncovered. Findings from this study suggest that online dating is changing more than where couples meet and have theoretical and practical implications.

Keywords

courtship marriage online dating relationship development stage theories

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Altman

Taylor

D. A.

(1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Amato

P. R.

(2010). Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 650–666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x

Anderson

Vogels

E. A.

Turner

(2020). The virtues and downsides of online dating. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/06/the-virtues-and-downsides-of-online-dating/

Antheunis

M. L.

Schouten

A. P.

Walther

J. B.

(2020). The hyperpersonal effect in online dating: Effects of text-based CMC vs. Videoconferencing before meeting face-to-face. Media Psychology, 23(6), 820–839. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2019.1648217

Aron

E. N.

Smollan

(1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596–612. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596

Baker

(2002). What makes an online relationship successful? Clues from couples who met in Cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(4), 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102760275617

Bandura

(1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

Berger

C. R.

Calabrese

R. J.

(1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1975.tb00258.x

Bossard

J. H. S.

(1932). Residential propinquity as a factor in marriage selection. American Journal of Sociology, 38(2), 219–224. https://doi.org/10.1086/216031

10.

Buehlman

K. T.

Gottman

J. M.

Katz

L. F.

(1992). How a couple views their past predicts their future: Predicting divorce from an oral history interview. Journal of Family Psychology, 5(3-4), 295–318. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.5.3-4.295

11.

Burgess

E. W.

Wallin

(1953). Engagement and marriage. Lippincott.

12.

Burgoon

J. K.

Hale

J. L.

(1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55(1), 58–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758809376158

13.

Cacioppo

J. T.

Cacioppo

Gonzaga

G. C.

Ogburn

E. L.

VanderWeele

T. J.

(2013). Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110(25), 10135–10140. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222447110

14.

Carter

S. R.

Buckwalter

J. G.

(2009). Enhancing mate selection through the Internet: A comparison of relationship quality between marriages arising from an online matchmaking system and marriages arising from unfettered selection. Interpersona, 3(supp2), 105–125. https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.v3isupp2.78

15.

Caughlin

J. P.

Sharabi

L. L.

(2013). A communicative interdependence perspective of close relationships: The connections between mediated and unmediated interactions matter. Journal of Communication, 63(5), 873–893. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12046

16.

Charmaz

(2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). SAGE.

17.

Cherlin

(2010). Demographic trends in the United States: A review of research in the 2000s. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 403–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00710.x

18.

Coontz

(2005). Marriage, a history: How love conquered marriage. Penguin.

19.

D’Angelo

J. D.

Toma

C. L.

(2017). There are plenty of fish in the sea: The effects of choice overload and reversibility on online daters’ satisfaction with selected partners. Media Psychology, 20(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1121827

20.

Ellison

Heino

Gibbs

(2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x

21.

Felmlee

D. H.

(2001). No couple is an island: A social network perspective on dyadic stability. Social Forces, 79(4), 1259–1287. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0039

22.

Finkel

E. J.

Eastwick

P. W.

Karney

B. R.

Reis

H. T.

Sprecher

(2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(1), 3–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436522

23.

Haythornthwaite

(2005). Social networks and Internet connectivity effects. Information Communication & Society, 8(2), 125–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180500146185

24.

Hendrick

S. S.

(1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50(1), 93–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/352430

25.

Huston

T. L.

(2000). The social ecology of marriage and other intimate unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 62(2), 298–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00298.x

26.

Johnson

D. J.

Rusbult

C. E.

(1989). Resisting temptation: Devaluation of alternative partners as a means of maintaining commitment in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 967–980. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.967

27.

Karney

B. R.

Bradbury

T. N.

(2020). Research on marital satisfaction and stability in the 2010s: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 100–116. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12635

28.

Kelley

Thibaut

(1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. Wiley.

29.

Knapp

M. L.

(1978). Social intercourse: From greeting to goodbye. Allyn and Bacon.

30.

Knapp

M. L.

Vangelisti

A. L.

Caughlin

J. P.

(2020). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (8th ed.). Kendall Hunt.

31.

LeFebvre

L. E.

(2018). Swiping me off my feet: Explicating relationship initiation on Tinder. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(9), 1205–1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407517706419

32.

MacKenzie

Wajcman

(1999). The social shaping of technology (2nd ed.). Open University Press.

33.

McKenna

K. Y. A.

Green

A. S.

Gleason

M. E. J.

(2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00246

34.

Niehuis

Huston

T. L.

Rosenband

(2006). From courtship into marriage: A new developmental model and methodological critique. Journal of Family Communication, 6(1), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327698jfc0601_3

35.

Prensky

(2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. Horizons, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816

36.

Pronk

T. M.

Denissen

J. J. A.

(2020). A rejection mind-set: Choice overload in online dating. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 11(3), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550619866189

37.

Ramirez

Jr. Sumner

E. M.

Fleuriet

Cole

(2015). When online dating partners meet offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication between online daters. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12101

38.

Rosenfeld

M. J.

Thomas

R. J.

Hausen

(2019). Disintermediating your friends: How online dating in the United States displaces other ways of meeting. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(36), 17753–17758. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908630116

39.

Rosenfield

(2017). Marriage, choice, and couplehood in the age of the Internet. Sociological Science, 4(20), 490–510. https://doi.org/10.15195/v4.a20

40.

Rusbult

C. E.

Martz

J. M.

Agnew

C. R.

(1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives, and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5(4), 357–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1998.tb00177.x

41.

Sharabi

L. L.

(2021). Exploring how beliefs about algorithms shape (offline) success in online dating: A two-wave longitudinal investigation. Communication Research, 48(7), 931–952. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219896936

42.

Sharabi

L. L.

Caughlin

J. P.

(2017). What predicts first date success? A longitudinal study of modality switching in online dating. Personal Relationships, 24(2), 370–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12188

43.

Sharabi

L. L.

Dykstra-DeVette

T. A.

(2019). From first email to first date: Strategies for initiating relationships in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(11-12), 3389–3407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518822780

44.

Sharabi

L. L.

Timmermans

(2021). Why settle when there are plenty of fish in the sea? Rusbult’s investment model applied to online dating. New Media & Society, 23(10), 2926–2946. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820937660

45.

Sprecher

(2009). Relationship initiation and formation on the Internet. Marriage & Family Review, 45, 761–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494920903224350

46.

Strauss

Corbin

(1998). Basics of qualitative research (2nd ed.). SAGE.

47.

Suler

(2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321–326. https://doi.org/10.1089/1094931041291295

48.

Thornberg

Charmaz

(2014). Grounded theory and theoretical coding. In Flick

(Ed.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis (pp. 153–169). SAGE.

49.

Timmermans

De Caluwé

(2017). Development and validation of the Tinder motives scale (TMS). Computers in Human Behavior, 70, 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.028

50.

Tong

S. T.

Hancock

J. T.

Slatcher

R. B.

(2016). Online dating system design and relational decision making: Choice, algorithms, and control. Personal Relationships, 23(4), 645–662. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12158

51.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2021, July 1). QuickFacts: United States. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045221

52.

Welch

Rubin

R. B.

(2002). Development of relationship stage measures. Communication Quarterly, 50(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370209385644

53.

Wildermuth

S. M.

(2004). The effects of stigmatizing discourse on the quality of on-line relationships. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493104322820147

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.03 MB