The Role Of Linguistic Properties In Online Dating Communication - A Large-Scale Study Of Contact Initiation Messages

For people who look for a partner, online dating largely increases the pool of potential mates. At the same time, users of online dating platforms have to cope with a large number of approaches and, therefore, need to choose selectively who they decide to engage in a conversation with. Especially, since the costs of rejection are low on online dating platforms, it is a common strategy to spam others with superficial approaches. With this in mind, and in the absence of nonverbal cues, targets base their decision of whether or not to respond to a message on (a) their impression of the sender’s pictures, and (b) cues which they extract from the content of the message. The purpose of this study is to hypothesize on which linguistic properties of a message in computer-mediated communication may signal various qualities of its sender, to predict how those properties determine a target’s decision of whether to respond or to ignore an initial message. Employing the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) text analysis, relevant variables are operationalized from a corpus of 167,276 initial messages of an online dating platform. Regression analysis is performed in order to test the hypotheses. Results are discussed with respect to design implications for online dating platforms.

[1]  R. Trivers.  Parental investment and sexual selection , 1972 .

[2]  E. Berscheid,et al.  Gender Differences in Characteristics Desired in a Potential Sexual and Marriage Partner , 1997 .

[3]  D. Perrett,et al.  Self-perceived attractiveness influences human female preferences for sexual dimorphism and symmetry in male faces , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[4]  Barbara Gregg,et al.  Human Assortative Mating and Genetic Equilibrium: An Evolutionary Perspective , 1980 .

[5]  H. Reis,et al.  Intimacy as an interpersonal process. , 1988 .

[6]  Jason E. Owen,et al.  Investigation of the effects of gender and preparation on quality of communication in Internet support groups , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  D. Buss,et al.  Tactics for promoting sexual encounters , 1994 .

[8]  Peter M. Todd,et al.  Different cognitive processes underlie human mate choices and mate preferences , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[9]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Predicting Continued Participation in Newsgroups , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[10]  Jeffrey T. Hancock,et al.  The truth about lying in online dating profiles , 2007, CHI.

[11]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Nonverbal Communication: The Unspoken Dialogue , 1988 .

[12]  E. Berscheid,et al.  Outcome dependency: Attention, attribution, and attraction. , 1976 .

[13]  Phillip R. Shaver,et al.  Strategic Behaviors in Romantic Relationship Initiation , 1999 .

[14]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis Methods , 2010 .

[15]  J. Krebs,et al.  Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach , 1978 .

[16]  E. Goffman.  The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life , 1959 .

[17]  Matthew F. Abrahams.  Perceiving flirtatious communication: An exploration of the perceptual dimensions underlying judgments of flirtatiousness , 1994 .

[18]  Charles R. Berger,et al.  Plans and the Initiation of Social Relationships , 1988 .

[19]  Elaine Hatfield,et al.  Gender Differences in Receptivity to Sexual Offers , 1989 .

[20]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Using Computational Text Analysis Tools to Compare the Lyrics of Suicidal and Non-Suicidal Songwriters , 2007 .

[21]  D. Buss,et al.  Preferences in human mate selection. , 1986 .

[22]  D. Buss,et al.  Human Mate Selection , 2020 .

[23]  David A. Huffaker,et al.  Dimensions of leadership and social influence in online communities , 2010 .

[24]  James W. Pennebaker,et al.  Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC2007) , 2007 .

[25]  R. Kowner,et al.  The effect of physical attractiveness comparison on choice of partners. , 1995, The Journal of social psychology.

[26]  B. Baltagi,et al.  Econometric Analysis of Panel Data , 2020, Springer Texts in Business and Economics.

[27]  E. Walster,et al.  Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. , 1966, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  Dan Ariely,et al.  What Makes You Click? Mate Preferences and Matching Outcomes in Online Dating , 2006 .

[29]  Susan K. Green,et al.  Perceptions of male and female initiators of relationships , 1983 .

[30]  D. Buss,et al.  Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures , 1989, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[31]  Napoleon A. Chagnon,et al.  Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: An anthropological perspective , 1979 .

[32]  I. Nisbet,et al.  Courtship-feeding, Egg-size and Breeding Success in Common Terns , 1973, Nature.

[33]  Cindy M Meston,et al.  Sexual Desire and Linguistic Analysis: A Comparison of Sexually-Abused and Non-Abused Women , 2007, Archives of sexual behavior.

[34]  Marti A. Hearst,et al.  Assessing attractiveness in online dating profiles , 2008, CHI.

[35]  E. Potgieter,et al.  Development and Change , 1976 .

[36]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Language use of depressed and depression-vulnerable college students , 2004 .

[37]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Word Use in the Poetry of Suicidal and Nonsuicidal Poets , 2001, Psychosomatic medicine.

[38]  J. Coyne,et al.  Toward an interactional description of depression. , 1976, Psychiatry.

[39]  George Loewenstein,et al.  If I ’ m Not Hot , Are You Hot or Not ? Physical-Attractiveness Evaluations and Dating Preferences as a Function of One ’ s Own Attractiveness , 2008 .

[40]  Alan Feingold,et al.  Sex Differences in the Effects of Similarity and Physical Attractiveness on Opposite-Sex Attraction , 1991 .

[41]  Brandi N. Frisby,et al.  Flirtatious Communication: An Experimental Examination of Perceptions of Social-Sexual Communication Motivated by Evolutionary Forces , 2011 .

[42]  S. Emlen,et al.  Cognitive processes underlying human mate choice: The relationship between self-perception and mate preference in Western society , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.