Computer-Mediated Communication Perspective on Theories of Mating Relationships: A Literature Review
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
IBIMA Publishing
Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities
https://ibimapublishing.com/articles/JISNVC/2019/432051/
Vol. 2019 (2019), Article ID 432051, 15 pages, ISSN : 2166-0794
DOI: 10.5171/2019.432051
Research Article
Computer-Mediated Communication Perspective
on Theories of Mating Relationships:
A Literature Review
Ayman BAJNAID1, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI2, Tariq ELYAS3 and
Ra’ed MASA’DEH4
1
New Media and Communication, Faculty of Media and Communication, Communication Department,
King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
2
Research Methodology and Cognitive Sociology, Department of Sociology and Social Research, the
University of Trento
3
Applied Linguistics, European Languages Department, Faculty of Arts & Humanities, King Abdulaziz
University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
4
Management Information Systems, School of Business, the University of Jordan
Received date: 11 March 2019; Accepted date: 27 April 2019; published date: 11 June 2019
Academic Editor: Fabrizio Amarilli
Copyright © 2019. Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH
. Distributed under Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0
Abstract
This study provides a review of the theories relevant to the understanding of online dating.
Dating as a concept and as an activity has a specific history and takes a specific form. It
traditionally occurred in the offline world although there were mediated aspects to it with
daters advertising themselves in newspapers and magazines and on other available platforms.
There are theories that try to explain the dating process and how relationships form between
humans. There are associated theories of impression formation which are not exclusive to the
dating context but are nonetheless relevant to it. There is then the migration of these various
theories from the offline into the online world. This paper reviews all this theoretical evidence
through focusing on two key elements. The first is the efficacy with which offline theories can
explain behavior in the online world and the importance of new developments in the
explanation of interpersonal relationships and communications in the online world. The second
is the cultural specificity of specific theories and any research that has been produced to test
them.
Keywords: Computer-Mediated Communication, Theories of Mating Relationships, Literature
Review.
______________
Cite this Article as: Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH
(2019), “Computer-Mediated Communication Perspective on Theories of Mating Relationships: A Literature
Review ", Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, Vol. 2019 (2019), Article ID 432051,
DOI: 10.5171/2019.432051Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 2
_____________________________________________________________________________
Introduction one stage to another. Indeed, it will be
illustrated that the sexual strategy theory,
Researchers called for more research on the hyper-personal theory and script theory offer
enabling factors of applying electronic an explanation for mate preferences
services (e.g. Hunaiti et al., 2009; Shannak et strategies, impression formation, and
al., 2010; Alkalha et al., 2012; Shannak et al., courtship process that were initiated within
2012; Masa’deh et al., 2013a,b; Obeidat et al., Muslim matrimonial websites.
2017; Tarhini et al., 2017; Masa’deh et al.,
2019). Online dating provides a new setting Mate Selection Theories
and method for individuals to meet with
potential partners for the first time, form Scholars have investigated the criteria for
impressions, and establish ongoing selecting a partner in order to provide a
relationships. As the current overarching better understanding of the process. Their
research objectives concerns mate approaches could be divided into three
preferences, impression formation, and the perspectives. The first perspective has
script of developing relationships between focused on homogamy in personality traits,
Saudis initiated through matrimonial attitudes, and beliefs as the starting point in
websites, this paper reviews theories that selecting a partner. The second perspective
investigate offline mate selection and their or the economic perspective has been
applicability to online dating sites, theories of adopted by scholars from different fields in
offline and online impression formations, and their attempts to explain the mate selection
online courtship models. The paper also process. The third perspective is the
evaluates the weaknesses and strengths of all completion perspective. Some of the theories
the reviewed theories in relation to online under these perspectives were not embraced
environments. in either offline or online mate selection
studies, whereas others have only been
Regarding the courtship theories, there are studied offline, and the rest have been widely
three approaches explaining courtship applied in both online and offline settings.
processes that are initiated online. The first This section provides an overview of the
approach bases its models on pre-existing mate selection theories most relevant to the
offline relationship development theories aims of the current research.
and does not receive any support from either
Western or Islamic scholars to test its The Homogamy Perspective
applicability to courtship processes initiated
online. The second approach generates new Reiss (1960), Kerckhoff and Davis (1962),
models through the utilisation of the Lewis (1973), and Levinger (1983) based
grounded theory. Although this approach their theories on the homogamy perspective,
provides a description of the conditions that that individuals are attracted to the company
lead to the move from one stage to another, a of people similar to themselves in
detailed explanation of the users’ behaviour characteristics such as race, social traits, and
and the interaction between users in each cultural background. That means that deep
stage is missing. The third approach utilises homogamy in values and beliefs should lead
script theory to provide a precise description to successful partner selection. In particular,
of the stages of relationship development in Kerckhoff and Davis (1962) illustrate this
an online context. This approach is principle through their filter theory, based on
characterised by being clear, accurate, and the idea of illuminating heterogeneous traits
detailed. It describes the behaviour and through certain phases. Lewis’ (1973) dyadic
conditions that lead to the transitioning from formation theory, Reiss’s (1960) Wheel
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 4320513 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities
_____________________________________________________________________________
Theory of Love, and Levinger’s (1983) in order to determine or clarify their feelings
“ABCDE” model echo this notion that toward each other and to decide together or
homogamy enhances mutuality in certain individually to continue to the next stage,
circumstances that mainly depend on the which is difficult to apply to Saudi culture in
partners’ consensus in values and beliefs an offline setting. However, an online setting
drawn from a shared culture, religion, and differs from an offline setting in some
educational background. According to Määttä aspects. The former may provide individuals,
and Uusiautti (2013), in spite of the extensive especially those from a conservative
body of mate selection research, there is background, more opportunities to know the
insufficient support for these theories. extent of homogeneity between them and
their potential partners in essential
Hoyt and Hudson (1981) used another way characteristics given their profile
to explain homogamy in mate selection by descriptions and screen names, and provide
focusing on the similarities of personality them the chance to interact directly with
traits. They collected a ranked list of each other.
preferred characteristics in a partner that
revealed in previous research from 1939– The Economic Perspective
1977. Based on their list, people had ranked
“reliability” and “emotional balance” as Social exchange theory is the main branch of
significant. “Mutual attraction”, “social the economic perspective proposed by
character”, and “education-intelligence” were Thibaut and Kelley (1959) to explain the
characteristics that have increasingly become mate selection process through the
appreciated. “Decency" had become less calculation of the costs and rewards of the
important both in males’ and females’ lists, as relationship. The authors have based their
had “good cooking and housekeeping skills” investment and equity model on the
in males’ preferences. However, Buss (1984) exchange of costs and rewards among
utilised three different methods (surveys, couples, they emphasise that individuals try
spouse rating, and interviews) to measure to maximize the rewards they get from the
the correlation between married couples on relationship as much as possible after
16 personal traits dimensions. Any of these subtracting their costs from it. These costs
traits has to be consistently demonstrated to can be perceived as emotional, financial, or
be the aspect that governs partner choice, physical, and so forth (Allen, Babin, and
but the results revealed low correlations McEwan, 2012). This process of coordination
among them for all of these traits. relies on two criteria when assessing the
potential consequences of relationships.
It is worth noting that the main strength of First, “the comparison level (CL)”, which is
this perspective is that its main principle of the criterion against which an individual
similarity among partners has become an assesses the satisfaction of his\her
essential concept in some of the subsequent relationship. Second, “the comparison level
theories. The concept of homogamy is also in for alternatives (CLalt)”, which is the
line with some of the traditional Saudi criterion an individual depends on when
principals in mate selection. For instance, assessing his\her interpersonal gains.
Saudi and Islamic cultures value the Sprecher (2011) attempted to apply this
consensus between partners in their religion theory to a longitudinal study among
and beliefs. This principle is a must for romantic partners to investigate the value of
women and favourable for men. However, equity relative to social exchange factors (i.e.,
the homogamy perspective might fail in “rewards”, “investments”, and “alternatives”)
providing a complete understanding of the in expecting successful relationships.
mate selection process in an offline setting Consistent with the investment and equity
because it requires a direct interaction Model, the study reveals that under-
among partners. This interaction is necessary
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 4
_____________________________________________________________________________
benefiting inequity was correlated with a Stories” section among women living in cities
greater likelihood of breakup. and more rural areas (n = 575). The study
finds that speaking English well and having a
Edwards (1969) proposes four interrelated good body shape are positively correlated
assumptions regarding the procedure of with success in the marriage market. Such a
mate selection that stem from social finding is in line with the assumption of
exchange theory: “the partner is selected by social exchange theory that higher economic
the rewards he or she brings into the resources or the potential to live in a rich
relationship”; “individuals with equivalent developed country could be exchanged for a
resources are likely to maximize their good body shape and the capacity to speak
rewards because they are likely to reject English. Living in big cities also seems to be
those with fewer resources”; “individuals desirable. A Swedish study by Jakobsson and
with equivalent resources are likely to have Lindholm (2014), on the other hand, reveals
equivalent characteristics”, and “thus the that being an Arab is considered a cost that
relationship is likely to become would lower a person’s value in the Swedish
homogenous”. Edwards (1969) states that marriage market. The study applied social
individuals with equal values do not have to exchange theory to a number of Swedish
be exactly the same in all positive online dating profiles (n=1,490) to determine
characteristics because the balance is built the significance of ethnicity (Swedish, Greek
on exchange theory, which is based on the and Arab) in males’ online dating
equality between positive and negative preferences. The results reveal that being
features in several aspects. This assumption Swedish is highly evaluated in the dating
has been confirmed in a study conducted by market and that Arab daters face ethnic
Skopek, Schulz, and Blossfeld (2011). They penalties in comparison with Swedes and
collected data from an online German dating Greeks. Such a result could be interpreted
site (n = 12,608) to investigate the based on the idea that Arabs are ranked
significance of education in initiating and lower than Swedes in the Swedish social
responding to online interactions. The hierarchy, and thus going on a date with
findings indicate that educational homophily them could be interpreted as a cost.
is the main determinate in online mating
selection, as it significantly increases the Based on costs and rewards principles,
likelihood of both starting and responding to Murstein (1970) proposed the concept of
online interactions. The findings also support “premarital bargaining” in his stimulus-
social exchange theory’s notion that value-role theory to account for the matching
homophily rises with educational process commonly observed among real
qualification. While females are hesitant to partners. It argues that physical
contact a partner with lower educational attractiveness is viewed as a good that
level, males do not mind contacting less individuals invest in a dating market. In the
educated females. early stages of courtship, individuals attempt
to bargain with each other to obtain the most
Based on social exchange theory, the attractive partners possible in exchange for
marriage market that determines costs and their personal physical attractiveness. Thus,
rewards differs from one culture to the next. individuals who are equal or similar in their
For instance, a Russian study conducted by physical attractiveness attempt to select each
Sahib, Koning, and Witteloostuijn (2006) other. Murstein’s matching hypothesis
emphasizes being slim and proficient in assumes the same outcome as anticipated by
English and living in a major city as Walster, Aronson, Abrahams, and Rottman
important rewards sought in females in the (1966) in their original matching hypothesis,
Russian marriage market. Their study which indicates that people who have similar
compares single Russian females who seek levels of physical attractiveness are more
mates to females highlighted in a “Success
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 4320515 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities
_____________________________________________________________________________
likely to be attracted to select each other in through these theories (Stafford, 2008).
the dating market. Given that Saudi culture has different values
compared to the Western world, it could be
Nevertheless, Murstein’s theory is more argued that investigating the criteria of the
inclusive than the initial matching hypothesis Saudi marriage market would yield different
because his theory elaborately illustrates the results.
circumstances under which having an
attractive body is the main determinant of The Completion Perspective
courtship desirability. This theory also
clearly describes both behavioural and The completion perspective has been widely
cognitive bases for the matching trend. The adopted by scholars to explain the process of
matching hypothesis indicates that in the mate selection. It is based on the fulfilment
dating market, each individual assesses needs principle, in that people search for
his\her values and searches for a partner partners who complement them, fulfil their
whose social desirability equals his\her own. unfulfilled dreams, or resemble their ideal
Taylor, Fiore, Mendelsohn, and Cheshire selves in order to obtain a productive
(2011) conducted four studies to test this relationship. For instance, in his instrumental
hypothesis, which implies that individuals’ theory, Centers (1975) argues that males and
assessment of their own worth determines females have numerous needs that can
the partners they select. Their findings supplement each other. Such an assumption
support that “self-worth”, “physical differs from Winch's classic theory of
attractiveness”, and “popularity” predicts complementary needs (1958) in stating that
mating selection. some needs are generally more important
than others, and adding that sex and
Although social exchange theories could be affiliation are more important than succour
credited for being tested and amplified and abasement for both sexes when in love,
among different cultures in offline and online and couples should show a significant
settings, they have been criticized because positive correlation for both needs. Also,
they largely equate relationships with a some needs are more important for one sex
mechanical process that is free of emotions than another. In sum, theorists using the
and reduced to purely mental and logical completion perspective examine partners’
operations. Critics have argued that needs from several angles, such as social
individuals differ in their level of repayment psychology (e.g., social role theory) or
and the amount they spend in exchange. Also, evolution (e.g., sexual strategies theory).
people in general are not rational in their
relationships and do not calculate their From the social psychological perspective,
expected rewards, especially in long-term social role theory argues that males and
relationships (Stafford, 2008). Duck (1982) females are attracted to traits in one another
also argues that assessments of equity and that are assets in a particular society (Eagly,
exchange may happen in the first stages of a Wood, and Diekman 2002). According to
relationship and that individuals may not Whitty and Buchanan (2010), social role
recognize inequalities or become theory argues that males and females modify
disappointed about them until the their behaviours to resemble gender roles
relationship becomes disappointing. Some valued by society. Thus, partnering with an
critics even go on to claim that social attractive woman will raise a man’s social
exchange theories cannot be considered status in Western society. On the contrary, as
theories at all, rather they are frames of women often have fewer economic resources
reference within which many theories— than men and they are expected to take care
some micro and some macro—can support of children, women search for men with
or oppose each other. Critics claim that many higher socio-economic statuses. Social role
types of relationships cannot be explained theory argues that when the structure of a
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 6
_____________________________________________________________________________
society and the social categorization of males’ descendants. They look for mates who have
and females’ are different, both genders tend characteristics that enhance the existence of
to seek mates who complement their their offspring (Buss, 1989). Based on this
characterises. notion, Buss and Schmitt (1993), in their
sexual strategies theory, proposed that males
Whitty and Buchanan (2010) used this and females developed distinctive strategies
theory to investigate whether the screen of their mate selections in long-term and
names chosen by online daters provide short-term relationships. The strategies of
advantages in attracting a mate on dating males in long-term relationships are based
websites. The results reveal that males were on potential mates’ characteristics that
more motivated to contact users with reflect their paternity confidence,
attractive screen names than females, while reproductive value, commitment, good
females were more motivated to contact parenting skills and gene quality. On the
users with neutral names or those whose contrary, the strategies of females in long-
screen names imply intelligence than males. term relationships are based on potential
These results could be interpreted as mates’ characteristics that reflect their ability
indicating that these individuals were to invest, willingness to invest, physical
attracted to qualities that might increase protection, commitment, good parenting
their social status in Western society. Hwang skills and gene quality.
(2013) collected data from 2,123 online
dating profiles from four self-reported racial Although scientists across numerous
groups (Asian, Black, Latino, and White) to disciplines like biologists, psychologists,
test the applicability of this theory. Results sociologists, and anthropologists all argue
have also indicated that willingness to date that the physical attractiveness of a romantic
intra-racially was generally high and that mate is more important to men than it is to
willingness to date interracially was lower women (Gustavsson, Johnsson, and Uller,
and influenced by racial social status. 2008; March and Bramwell, 2012), the view
Because men evidenced an overall high that males and females differ in their mate
willingness to date interracially, women’s preferences has recently been challenged by
willingness to date outside their races research suggesting that physical
provided a more accurate depiction of racial attractiveness and economic status may be
social status and exchange. Women of higher just as important to both sexes. Nevertheless,
racial status groups were less willing than a recent meta-analysis study by Eastwick,
those from lower status groups to date Luchies, Finkel, and Hunt (2014) reveals no
interracially. Given the fact that the social support for sex-differentiated desires and
roles of both sexes differ in Islamic societies relational outcomes in either established
compared to Western culture, it could be relationships or mate selection contexts. As
argued that cues of attractiveness may also this meta-analysis study has been conducted
differ, such as mentioning performing the among western samples, it may not be
five obligatory prayers daily, having a beard applicable to generalize its findings on the
for men, and wearing a hijab for women; samples who belong to Islamic traditional
thus, applying social role theory to the cultures. Within these cultures, being
Islamic context would yield different results. responsible for expenses is considered
among the main responsibilities of males,
From the evolutionary perspective, Darwin even if the females have high economic
(1859) proposed that random changes in statuses. Nevertheless, sexual strategies
organisms’ traits are more or less adaptive to theory provides one of the clearest
survival in local environments. This articulations of both sexes’ preferences for
perspective is based on the argument that finding a partner for long-term relationships,
when choosing a mate, individuals attempt to such as marriage. Such articulations are
increase the genetic appropriateness of their important given that Saudi culture considers
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 4320517 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities
_____________________________________________________________________________
marriage the only acceptable framework for emphasise their positive attributes and
intimate relationships between sexes. conceal any negative ones, thereby editing
their self-presentation so as to be perceived
Impression Formation Theories in an acceptable way by the audience. Such
altering of an individual’s image depends
Online dating sites provide access to a mainly on the feedback and judgment
considerable number of users’ profiles, received by the audience. Social norms are
providing a basis for comparison. Unlike in subsequently formed in the given social and
an offline environment, impression cultural setting through feedback and
formation starts in the online dating setting judgments that help the individual to alter
before the couple physically meets. Daters his or her image to be acceptable to others.
consider their profiles in online dating sites Several studies have been conducted to
as résumés through which they constantly determine the applicability of Goffman’s
attempt to market their “best” selves (Heino, (1959) impression formation theory in
Ellison, and Gibbs, 2005). Therefore, offline interaction contexts to the online
individuals may spend a considerable dating context. They found that impression
amount of time forming attractive profiles formation is often the first factor that plays a
that would leave a positive impression on role in evaluating the success of the profile
their viewers. Aspects like screen name, (e.g. Whitty, 2008; Ellison, Hancock, and
profile photo, personal information, personal Toma, 2011; Kalinowski and Matei, 2011).
preferences, and description text are
therefore heavily edited to provide the best In their investigation of the application of
impressions possible. In other words, users Goffman’s theory in an online dating setting,
tend to put a lot of effort into creating Kalinowski and Matei (2011) not only
flattering profiles (Whitty, 2010). This explore the way individuals form
section provides an overview of the impressions through their online profiles, but
impression formation theories that are most also whether they modify them according to
relevant to the aims of the current research. the feedback of other users. They indicate
In particular, it provides a review of offline that online profiles provide a space in which
impression formation theories and their expectations regarding impression formation
applicability to online settings, the quality of can be jointly structured. These expectations
impression formation in online settings from also support and enhance pre-existing rules
the perspective of computer-mediated within the online community. Further, social
communication theories, and impression norms among users affect the types of
formation management from individual and behaviours that are considered acceptable.
collective perspectives. The study by Kalinowski and Matei (2011)
revealed that the complex series of
One of the early scholars to provide an interactions among users were in fact
explanation of impression formation in an governed by the social norms of the online
offline setting is Goffman (1959). Goffman context and the larger offline culture; further,
argues that the ways in which an individual they found that users’ interactions influenced
engages with another is strategically how they edited their profiles to form an
manipulated “to convey an impression to impression. Although this theory provides
others which it is in his interests to convey” substantial insight into impression formation
(1959, p. 4). He outlines the basic tenets of in face-to-face contexts, it would appear to be
this idea in his classic book, The Presentation incomplete with regard to such formation in
of Self in Everyday Life. According to Goffman, a computer-mediated context. This is
individuals engage in performances to leave because impression formation in a mediated
a positive impression on others. He also context occurs through written
argues that to make positive impressions communication without the visual cues
upon an audience, individuals try to present in face-to-face contexts.
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 8
_____________________________________________________________________________
Computer-mediated communication model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) was
theorists have explored the quality of originally proposed to provide an
impression formation in online settings and explanation of deindividuation effects that
hold different perspectives. While some emerged from situational aspects like “group
scholars argue that it is difficult to form an immersion”, “anonymity”, and “reduced
impression online due to the impersonality of identifiability”. They argue that
messages (Short, Williams and Christie, deindividuation manipulations can impact an
1976; Sproull and Kiesler, 1986), some individual’s capability to express identity-
indicate that it reduces self-definition based relevant behaviour once an identity is
on the identity of one’s social group (Spears prominent. Individuals in computer-
and Lea, 1992; 1994; Reicher, Spears and mediated communication viewed themselves
Postmes, 1995; Postmes, Spears and Lea, as part of a predominant social group, and
1998). The rest argue that an online setting that anonymity can enhance the prevalence
has an advantage over an offline setting in of shared social identity instead of individual
that it enables users to control the identity. When writers have a shared social
impressions they create online (Walther, identity, they are more inclined to “group
1996; McKenna, 1998; McKenna, Green, and influence”, “social attraction”, “stereotyping”,
Gleason, 2002; Whitty, 2008, 2010). “gender typing”, and “discrimination” in
online interaction conducted anonymously
Early scholars in the field of computer- (Postmes, Spears, and Lea, 1998). This model
mediated communication argue that distinguishes between two kinds of
impression formation is limited in an online anonymity in online interaction: anonymity
setting because the lack of social cues forms of others to the users and anonymity of the
impersonal messages between users. For users to others, which is referred to as
instance, Short, Williams, and Christie (1976) “identifiability”. Although the social identity
argue in their social presence theory that the model of deindividuation impact is in line
fewer the channels or codes offered by a with collective culture in some of its
medium, the less energy users devote to the assumptions, it fails to highlight the role that
existence of other social members in a individual differences may play in forming a
communication. On a continuum of social positive impression online.
presence, the offline medium is viewed as
having the most social presence and online A study by Tanis and Postmes (2003)
communication the least. In addition, Sproull revealed that social cues affect two
and Kiesler (1986) argue that computer- characteristics of impression formation:
mediated communication decreases “social “ambiguity” and “positivity of impressions”.
context cues”—features of physical setting, These social signs, which can be as limited as
charisma, and nonverbal ordered status a photograph or some biographical
cues—the absence of which is considered to background information, significantly impact
prevent interpersonal formation of impression formation. The findings reveal
impressions. Culnan and Markus (1987) that the disappearance of social cues is
called these kinds of approaches the “cues- correlated with less positive impressions
filtered-out” perspective. Although this than the presence of one or both. Thus,
perspective received support at that time, it different from what was expected on the
did not last long. basis of the social identity model of
deindividuation effects, group membership
Taking a group perspective as their does not impact the relationship between
standpoint, Spears and Lea (1992; 1994) and social cues and positivity of impression.
Reicher, Spears, and Postmes (1995) were
the first to empirically discover the practical On the other hand, Walther (1992, 1993,
element of group behaviour roles in forming 1996), in his social information processing
impressions online. Their social identity (SIP) theory and then hyperpersonal theory,
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 4320519 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities
_____________________________________________________________________________
indicated that due to these lack of social cues, Theories of the Courtship Process
users could be quite strategic in lessening Initiated Online
potential partners’ access to their
undesirable attributes because they can The emergence of developing relationships in
design, construct, and manage their cyberspace has drawn the attention of
impression formation much more computer-mediated communication scholars
intentionally than they would in face-to-face to investigating the stages that partners go
first meetings. This notion has been applied through when developing their relationships
in several studies (e.g., Tidwell and Walther, online. There are three approaches
2002; Walther, 2007). It has also been explaining courtship processes that were
confirmed by Vasalou and Joinson (2009) initiated online. The first approach based its
research on self-presentation through online models on pre-existing offline relationship
avatars; their results revealed that development theories (e.g. Sprecher, 2009;
participants in the online dating setting Whitty, 2010). The second generated new
emphasised specific aspects of their avatar in models through the utilisation of grounded
order to present a more attractive self. theory (e.g. LaBuda, 2012). The third
Walther’s hyperpersonal theory (1996) helps depends on script theory to provide a precise
in demonstrating the communication description of the stages of relationship
components of sender, receiver, channel, and development in an online context (e.g. Long,
feedback in online environment. It also 2010). This section provides an overview of
explains how impressions are formed and these approaches, their strength and
relationships are initiated and developed. weaknesses, and their applicability to the
The weakest point of hyperpersonal theory is Saudi script of courtship processes initiated
that it does not investigate whether its in matrimonial websites.
numerous assumptions are theoretically
interdependent or simply accidental In explaining the initial stages of courtship
(Walther and Parks, 2002). grounded in offline theories, Sprecher (2009)
based her model on Levinger’s (1974) three
When comparing impression formation stages of relationship initiation. The first
between offline and online settings among stage is awareness of the other. This stage
conservative Saudi Islamic cultures, it can be occurs online when an individual accesses
said that the offline setting is the one that the profile of the potential partner, visits
lacks social cues between the sexes. Due to his/her blog or profile, or sends him/her an
the hijab, Saudi women are obliged to cover online message. The second stage, the surface
their whole bodies, and the majority of contact stage, starts when online users
women cover their faces as well. This means contact others after they have received a
that males will not be able to easily form an great deal of information about the other
impression due to the lack of both verbal and from his/her profile, his/her interaction with
non-verbal social cues from females. Thus, it others and his/her posts, activities and
could be argued that for Saudis, an online preferences. According to Sprecher (2009),
setting would carry more information than although the first two stages are considered
face-to-face meetings, as an online important to forming an online relationship,
environment would enable users to a “real relationship” cannot be considered to
experience a more intensive interaction in exist unless there is “mutuality” and
comparison to face-to-face meetings. Given “interdependence” between the two
that there is a lack of research regarding partners, which is considered the third stage.
online interactions among Saudis, addressing Characteristics of this final stage are
the impact of social cues in online settings “interdependence”, “self-disclosure”,
will contribute to the body of knowledge. “investment in each other”, and “a feeling of
couple identity”. Sprecher (2009) argues that
in order to reach full mutuality, an offline
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 10
_____________________________________________________________________________
contact requires the couples to reach the interaction stage) begins with exchanging
“mutuality” and “interdependence” levels. emails through the site and often evolves into
However, this model of relationship the exchange of cell phone numbers and text
development is more descriptive than messages. The face-to-face meeting stage, the
explanatory. It also does not cover when the fourth stage, is very important in
change in a stage happens and when determining whether the two individuals will
transitions from one stage to another occur. have further dates or not. However, this stage
What is the stimulus for the transfer from is different from traditional dates because
one stage to another? What are the situations the sexual attraction had already begun
surrounding that transfer? What are the online. The purpose of the meeting for the
situations surrounding the transfer that is online daters is to test the chemistry
not identified? In short, Sprecher (2009) between them and the similarities and
relationship development model falls short in differences between them and their profiles.
terms of theoretical clarity and specificity. It The last stage (resolution) occurs when an
does not receive any support from either individual decides after the first date if
Western or Islamic scholars to test its he/she is sexually attracted to the other
applicability to courtship processes initiated person, and then decides whether to go on
online. another date with that person or go back to
the dating website to search for other
A more sophisticated model that is also options. Despite its clarity, accuracy, and
based on an offline theory is articulated by detail, Whitty’s (2010) theory only addresses
Whitty (2010), who based her developing the development of relationships via online
relationships model of online dating sites on dating websites in Western society, which is
Givens’ (1979) five-stage theory of the totally different from the Islamic culture. The
traditional courting process. In stage one (the weakest point in this approach, which based
attention stage), an individual starts trying to its models on offline theories, is that there
catch the attention and attraction of a are no offline theories that could explain
potential partner by sending non-verbal cues. Islamic offline courtship processes that could
In online dating, an individual does not have be in turn applied to online settings.
a specific target towards whom to show
interest. Therefore, the individual sends LaBuda (2012) has put forward an online
attention signals through maintaining an relationship model utilising the grounded
attractive profile and posting a personal theory. His model consists of four distinctive
photo to introduce himself/herself. Whitty stages: He argues that an online relationship
(2007) suggests in her BAR approach that starts when the participants have a desire to
online daters should maintain a balance find a significant other and they believe that
between their attractiveness and real selves there is no other way to meet them, which
when constructing their online profiles. An leads them to put their profiles on an online
ideal presentation of the self does not work dating site. Second, users start to enjoy the
in the context of online dating sites: if people control that the online dating site provides
do not live up to their profiles, they typically them. The third stage states that being open
do not earn a second date. Presenting a real to a new experience leads to a successful
profile also means avoiding writing anything relationship development. Finally, the
that appears too clichéd. The second stage personality trait to take a risk in moving the
(the recognition stage) requires more flirting. relationship offline determines whether it
In this stage, users replace exchanging emails will flourish or fail. Although this model
between the members of the site with provides a description of the conditions that
sending “pokes” or “kisses”, which seems less lead to the move from one stage to another, a
intrusive than sending a direct email to detailed explanation of the users’ behavior
express interest in a member and disclose and the interaction between users in each
information to this member. Stage three (the stage is missing.
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 43205111 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities _____________________________________________________________________________ Utilising script theory, Long (2010) provided parties, (M), it stays offline and the match no a model to explore the processes and scripts longer uses the dating site (N). This model is for online relationships initiated in dating characterized by being clear, accurate, and websites. Long’s model consists of 14 stages. detailed. It describes the behavior and These stages are as follows: (A) Love styles: conditions that lead to transitioning from one date seekers usually explained that they do stage to another. Using script theory as a not have only one way to relate to others theoretical framework would provide a more romantically, but rather that they have a mix comprehensive and systematic model as it of styles or “want it all.” (B) Deciding to join enables the researchers to capture users' an online dating site: given a lack of partners actions and the decisions behind them. Being offline, their acquaintances had had more based on Western culture, it would be success dating online. They want to find a interesting to know which stages provided by partner or date, and since it is more efficient this script model would match the script than initiating dates offline, they decide to provided by Saudis regarding their courtship join the site. (C) Goals for online dating: process initiated through matrimonial individuals use sites for their own purposes, websites. whether for a serious partner, casual dates, or fun. (D) Choosing a dating site: date Conclusion seekers choose a site based on the perceived members of the site, the culture and features This study reviewed the theories relevant to of the site (including cost), their goals for the understanding of online dating. online dating, and how they perceive the Reviewing the theories of mate preferences site’s ability to help them achieve those goals. shows that these theories fall within three Daters may join more than one site. (E) perspectives: homogamy perspective, Creating a profile: date seekers must create a economic perspective, and completion profile and describe what or who they are perspective. While the main strength of the looking for in terms of a partner. (F) homogamy perspective is that its main Matching: users are provided with principle of similarity among partners has potentially compatible partners through a list become an essential concept in some of the or searching feature. (G) Making decisions subsequent theories, there is insufficient about matches: once a list of potential support for homogamy perspective in the matches or results of a search is available, empirical research. The theories under the users make decisions about matches. If the economic perspective could be credited for matches are turned down, contact is stopped. introducing new concepts such as “marriage (H) The process returns to the matching step market”, “premarital margining”, “self- (F). (I) Initial contact with matches can take worth”, and “costs and rewards”. place before and/or after the decisions about Nevertheless, these theories have been the matching step (G). (J) If both parties pass criticized because they equate relationships the tests, this establishes a mutual match. A with mechanical processes that are free of mutual match means that both date seekers emotions and reduced them to purely mental want to advance their communication. (K) and logical operations. Some critics have Engaging in mediated communication: even claimed that the economic theories depending on their levels of interest and cannot be considered theories at all, rather additional rounds of elimination, the match they are frames of reference within which can move to phone calls and text messages or many theories can support or oppose each skip right to meeting offline. (L) Meeting other. The completion perspective has, on the face-to-face: the date seekers discuss moving other hand, been widely adopted by scholars the relationship offline and meeting in to explain the process of mate selection. In person, as well as discussing particular, sexual strategies theory provides when/where/how to meet. If the decision to one of the clearest articulations of both sexes’ continue offline contact is made by both preferences for finding a partner for long- ______________ Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051
Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 12
_____________________________________________________________________________
term relationships, such as marriage. Such Assessment with three different data
articulations are important given that Saudi sources. Behavior genetics, 14(2), 111-123.
culture considers marriage the only 5. Buss, D.M. (1989). Sex differences in
acceptable framework for intimate human mate preferences: Evolutionary
relationships between sexes. hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral
and Brain Sciences, 12(01), 1-14.
Focusing on impression formation theories, 6. Centers, R. (1975). Sexual attraction
while Goffman’s (1959) self-presentation and love: An instrumental theory. Springfield,
theory provides a substantial insight into IL: Thomas Pub Ltd.
impression formation in face-to-face 7. Culnan, M.J., & Markus, M.L. (1987).
contexts, it appears to offer an incomplete Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L.L.
explanation to such formation in the usage of Putnam, K.H. Roberts, & L.W. Porter (Eds.),
matrimonial websites’ context. Although the Handbook of organizational communication: An
social identity model of deindividuation is interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 420443).
applied in the online context and it is in line Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
to some extent with the nature of collective 8. Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of
culture, it fails to highlight the role that species by means of natural selection. London:
individual differences may play in forming a Murray.
positive impression online. On the other 9. Duck, S. (1982). A topography of
hand, Walther’s hyperpersonal theory (1996) relationship disengagement and dissolution.
helps in demonstrating the communication Personal relationships, 4, 1-30.
components of sender, receiver, channel, and 10. Eagly, A., Wood, W., Diekman, A.
feedback in online environment. It also (2002). Social role theory of sex differences
explains how impressions are formed and and
relationships are initiated and developed similarities: A current appraisal. In T. Eckes &
online. HM Trautner (Eds.), The developmental social
psychology of gender (pp. 123-174). Mahwah,
References NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Eastwick, P.W., Luchies, L.B., Finkel,
E.J., & Hunt, L.L. (2014). The many voices of
Darwin’s descendants: Reply to
1. Alkalha, Z., Al-Zu'bi, Z., Al-Dmour, H.,
Schmitt.Psychological Bulletin, 140(3), 673-
& Alshurideh, M. (2012). Investigating the
681.
effects of human resource policies on
12. Edwards, J.N. (1969). Familial
organizational performance: An empirical
behavior as social exchange. Journal of
study on commercial banks operating in
Marriage and the Family, 518-526.
Jordan. European Journal of Economics,
13. Ellison, N., Hancock, J., & Toma, C.
Finance and Administrative Sciences, 51, 44-
(2011). Profile as promise: A framework for
64.
conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-
2. Allen, L.F., Babin, E.A., & McEwan, B.
presentations. New Media and Society, 13(6),
(2012). Emotional investment: An
1-18.
exploration of young adult friends’ emotional
14. Givens, D. (1979). The non-verbal
experience and expression using an
basis of attraction: Flirtation, courtship, and
investment model framework. Journal of
seduction. Psychiatry, 41, 346–359.
Social and Personal Relationships, 29(2), 206-
15. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation
227.
of self in everyday life. New York, NY: Anchor.
3. Buss, D. & Schmitt, D. (1993). Sexual
16. Gustavsson, L., Johnsson, J.I., & Uller,
strategies theory: An evolutionary
T. (2008). Mixed support for sexual selection
perspective on human mating. Psychological
theories of mate preferences in the Swedish
Review, 100, 204-232.
population. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(4),
4. Buss, D.M. (1984). Marital
575-585.
assortment for personality dispositions:
______________
Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal
of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 43205113 Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities _____________________________________________________________________________ 17. Heino, R.D., Ellison, N.B., & Gibbs, J.L. Peterson (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 315- (2005). Are we a “match”? Choosing partners 359). New York, NY: Freeman. in the online dating market. Paper presented 27. Lewis, R.A. (1973). Social reaction at the meeting of the International and the formation of dyads: An interactionist Communication Association, New York. approach to mate selection. Sociometry, 409- 18. Hoyt, L.L., & Hudson, J.W. (1981). 418. Personal characteristics important in mate 28. Long, B.L. (2010). Scripts for online preference among college students. Social dating: A model and theory of online romantic Behavior and Personality: An International relationship initiation. Unpublished Doctoral Journal, 9(1), 93-96. dissertation. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling 19. Hunaiti, Z., Mansour, M., & Al- Green State University. Nawafleh, A. (2009). Electronic commerce 29. Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2013). adoption barriers in small and medium-sized Who is the one? The difficulty in selecting the enterprises (SMEs) in developing countries: partner. In K. Määttä, & S. Uusiautti The case of libya. Innovation and Knowledge (Eds.), Many Faces of Love (pp. 19-39). Management in Twin Track Economies Rotterdam, The Netherland: The Sense Challenges and Solutions-Proceedings of the Publishers. 11th International Business Information 30. March, E., & Bramwell, A. (2012). Sex Management Association Conference, IBIMA Differences in mate preferences in Australia: 2009, 1-3, 1375-1383. Exploring evolutionary and social-economic 20. Hwang, W.C. (2013). Who are people Theories. Journal of Relationships Research, 3, willing to date? Ethnic and gender patterns in 18-23. online dating. Race and Social Problems, 5(1), 31. Masa’deh, R., Almajali, D., Alrowwad, 28-40. A., & Obeidat, B. (2019). The role of 21. Jakobsson, N., & Lindholm, H. (2014). knowledge management infrastructure in Ethnic preferences in internet dating: A field enhancing job satisfaction: A developing experiment. Marriage & Family Review, 50(4), country perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal 307-317. of Information, Knowledge & Management, 14, 22. Kalinowski, C., & Matei, S. (2011). 1-25. Goffman meets online dating: Exploring the 32. Masa’deh, R., Gharaibeh, A., ‘virtually’ socially produced self. Journal of Maqableh, M., & Karajeh, H. (2013a). An Social Informatics, 16, 6-20. empirical study of antecedents and outcomes 23. Kerckhoff, A.C., & Davis, K.E. (1962). of knowledge sharing capability in Jordanian Value consensus and need complementarity telecommunication firms: A structural in mate selection. American Sociological equation modeling approach. Life Science Review, 295-303. Journal, 10 (4), 2284-2296. 24. LaBuda, M. (2012). Individuals 33. Masa’deh, R., Shannak, R., & involved in online dating sites description of Maqableh, M. (2013b). A structural equation the process of developing a relationship: A modeling approach for determining grounded theory study. Unpublished PhD antecedents and outcomes of students’ dissertation. Capella University. attitude toward mobile commerce adoption. 25. Levinger, G. (1974). A three-level Life Science Journal, 10 (4), 2321-2333. approach to attraction: Toward an understanding of pair relatedness. In T.L. 34. McKenna, K.Y.A. (1998). The Huston (Ed.), Foundations of interpersonal computers that bind: Relationship formation attraction (pp. 99–120). New York: Academic on the Internet. Unpublished PhD Press. dissertation. Athens, OH: Ohio University. 26. Levinger, G. (1983). Development 35. McKenna, K.Y.A., Green, A.S., & and change. In H.H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A Gleason, M.E.J. (2002). Relationship Christensen, IH. Harvey, T.L. Huston, G. formation on the Internet: What’s the big Levinger, E. McClintock, LA Peplau, & D.R ______________ Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051
Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities 14 _____________________________________________________________________________ attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9- homophily in online mate 31. selection. European Sociological 36. Murstein, B.I. (1970). Stimulus value Review, 27(2), 180-195. role: A theory of marital choice. Journal of 46. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social Marriage and the Family, 465-481. influence and the influence of the "social" in 37. Obeidat, B., Tarhini, A., & Aqqad, N. computer-mediated communication. In M. Lea (2017). The impact of intellectual capital on (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated innovation via the mediating role of communication (pp. 30-65). London: Harvester- knowledge management: A structural Wheat-sheaf Publishing. equation modeling approach. International 47. Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 8 panopticon? The hidden power in computer- (3-4), 273-298. mediated communication. Communication Research, 38. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. 21, 427459. (1998). Breaching or building social 48. Sprecher, S. (2009). Relationship boundaries? SIDE- effects of computer- initiation and formation on the Internet. mediated communication. Communication Marriage & Family Review, 45(6-8), 761-782. Research, 25(6), 689-715. 49. Sprecher, S. (2011). The influence of 39. Reicher, S.D., Spears, R., & Postmes, social networks on romantic relationships: T. (1995). A social identity model of Through the lens of the social network. deindividuation phenomena. European Personal Relationships, 18(4), 630-644. Review of Social Psychology, 6, 161-198. 50. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). 40. Reiss, I.L. (1960). Toward a Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail sociology of the heterosexual love in organizational communication. relationship. Marriage and Family Living, Management Science, 32(11), 1492-1512. 139-145. 51. Stafford, L. (2008). Social exchange 41. Sahib, P.R., Koning, R.H., & van theories. Engaging theories in interpersonal Witteloostuijn, A. (2006). Putting your best communication: Multiple perspectives, 377- cyber identity forward an analysis of ‘success 389. stories’ from a Russian internet marriage 52. Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2003). agency. International Sociology, 21(1), 61-82. Social cues and impression formation in CMC. 42. Shannak, R., Al-Zu'bi, Z., Obeidat, B., Journal of Communication, 53, 676–693. Alshurideh, M., & Altamony, H. (2012). A 53. Tarhini, A., Al-Badi, A., Almajali, M., & theoretical perspective on the relationship Alrabayaah, S. (2017). Factors influencing between knowledge management systems, employees’ intention to use cloud computing. customer knowledge management, and firm Journal of Management and Strategy, 8(2), 47. competitive advantage. European Journal of Social Sciences, 32 (4), 520-532. 54. Taylor, L.S., Fiore, A.T., Mendelsohn, 43. Shannak, R., Obeidat, B., & Almajali, G.A., & Cheshire, C. (2011). “Out of my D. (2010). Information technology league”: A real-world test of the matching investments: A literature review. Business hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Transformation through Innovation and Bulletin, 37(7), 942-954. Knowledge Management: An Academic 55. Thibaut, J.W., & Kelley, H.H. (1959). Perspective-Proceedings of the 14th The social psychology of groups. New York, International Business Information NY: Wiley. Management Association Conference, IBIMA 56. Tidwell, L.C., & Walther, J.B. (2002). 2010, 1356-1368. Computer-mediated communication effects 44. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal (1976). The social psychology of evaluations: Getting to know one another a telecommunications. London: Wiley Publishing. bit at a time. Human Communication 45. Skopek, J., Schulz, F., & Blossfeld, H.P. Research, 28(3), 317-348. (2011). Who contacts whom? Educational ______________ Ayman BAJNAID, Giuseppe Alessandro VELTRI, Tariq ELYAS and Ra’ed MASA’DEH (2019), Journal of Internet Social Networking & Virtual Communities, DOI: 10.5171/2019. 432051
You can also read
