Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Video chat and in-person modality switches in online dating: An exploration of modality-switching motives,modality expansion,channel choice,and outcomes
The present study sampled online daters to (a) inductively explore their motives for meeting a potential partner for face-to-face (FtF)-like interaction (i.e. a modality switch [MS]); (b) examine modality-switching motives and pre-MS modality expansion in relation to MS channel choice (e.g. video chat or in person); and (c) investigate whether MS motives, degree of pre-MS modality expansion, and MS channel are associated with partners going on a second FtF-like date. Results revealed that online daters possessed both relational (i.e. romantic, sexual, and platonic companionship) and information-seeking (i.e. fact-checking and exploration) MS motives. Holding the MS in person was associated with romantic, sexual, and platonic companionship motives, whereas meeting through video chat was associated with fact-checking motives and the degree of pre-MS channel expansion. Romantic MS motives and having held the MS through video chat were both associated with online daters going on a second FtF-like date.
BaxterAMaxwellJABalesKL, et al. (2022) Initial impressions of compatibility and mate value predict later dating and romantic interest. Psychological and Cognitive Sciences119(45): e2206925119.
3.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
4.
BryantKSheldonP (2017) Cyber dating in the age of mobile apps: understanding motives, attitudes, and characteristics of users. American Communication Journal19(2): 1–15.
5.
CarlsonJRZmudRW (1999) Channel expansion theory and the experimental nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal42: 153–170.
6.
CaughlinJPSharabiL (2013) A communicative interdependence perspective of close relationships: the connections Between mediated and unmediated interactions matter. Journal of Communication63(5): 873–893.
7.
ClemensCAtkinDSrishnanA (2015) The influence of biological and personality traits on gratifications obtained through online dating websites. Computers in Human Behavior49: 120–129.
8.
DaftRLLengelRH (1986) Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science32(5): 513–644.
9.
DuguaySDietzelCMylesD (2024) The year of the “virtual date”: reimagining dating app affordances during the COVID-19 pandemic. New Media & Society26(3): 1384–1402.
10.
EllisonNHeinoRGibbsJ (2006) Managing impressions online: self- presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11: 415–441.
11.
FinkelEJEastwickPWKarneyBR, et al. (2012) Online dating: a critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest13(1): 3–66.
12.
GlaserBGStraussAL (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
13.
HaythornthwaiteC (2001) Exploring multiplexity: social network structures in a computer-supported distance learning class. The Information Society17(3): 211–226.
14.
KatzEGurevitchMHaasH (1973) On the use of the mass media for important things. American Sociological Review38: 164–181.
McEwanB (2021) Modality switching to modality weaving: updating theoretical perspectives for expanding media affordances. Annals of the Intercultural Communication Association45(1): 1–19.
17.
McEwanBZanollaD (2013) When online meets offline: a field investigation of modality switching. Computers in Human Behavior29: 1565–1571.
18.
Magsamen-ConradKDowdJAbuijadilM, et al. (2015) Life-span differences in the uses and gratifications of tablets: implications for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior52: 96–106.
19.
MarkowitzDMHancockJTTongST (2018) Interpersonal dynamics in online dating: profiles, matching, and discovery. In: PapacharissiZ (ed.) A networked self and love. London: Routledge, pp. 50–61.
20.
RamirezAJrSumnerEMFleurietC, et al. (2015) When online dating partners meet offline: the effect of modality switching on relational communication between online daters. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication20: 99–114.
21.
RamirezAJrSumnerEMSpindaJ (2017) The relational reconnection function of social network sites. New Media and Society19: 807–825.
22.
RamirezAJrWangZ (2008) When online meets offline: an expectancy violations theory perspective on modality switching. Journal of Communication58: 20–39.
23.
RamirezAJrZhangS (2007) When online meets offline: the effect of modality switching on relational communication. Communication Monographs74: 287–310.
24.
RuggieroT (2000) Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication & Society3(1): 3–37.
25.
SharabiLLCaughlinJP (2017) What predicts first date success? A longitudinal study of modality switching in online dating. Personal Relationships24: 370–391.
26.
SharabiLLCaughlinJP (2018) Deception in online dating: significance and implications for the first offline date. New Media & Society21(1): 229–247.
27.
SharabiLLDykstra-DeVetteTA (2019) From first email to first date: strategies for initiating relationships in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships36(11–12): 3389–3407.
SonJLeeHKJinS, et al. (2019) Content features of tweets for effective communication during disasters: a media synchronicity theory perspective. International Journal of Information Management45: 56–68.
30.
StaffordTStaffordMSchkadeL (2004) Determining uses and gratifications for the Internet. Decision Sciences35: 259–288.
31.
SumnerEMRamirezAJr*HerreraA (2024) Should we meet in person or on Facetime? An examination of expectancy violations and predicted outcome value forecasts during online dating modality switches. Human Communication and Technology4(1): 1–25.
32.
TomaCLHancockJT (2011) A new twist on love’s labor: self-presentation in online dating profiles. In: WrightKBWebbLM (eds) Computer-Mediated Communication in Personal Relationships. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, pp. 41–55.
33.
WaltherJB (1992) Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. Communication Research19: 52–89.
34.
WaltherJB (1996) Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research23: 3–43.
35.
WhittyMT (2008) Revealing the “real” me, searching for the “actual” you: presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior24: 1707–1723.
36.
WhittyMTCarrAN (2006) Cyberspace Romance: The Psychology of Online Relationships. New York. Palgrave Macmillan.
