Lund University

MSc. Strategic Communication

Research proposal

Dating in the digital age

The ‘big 5’ personality traits and self-disclosure in online dating

Word count: 2724 & page count: 5 (excluding frontpages, references, model and appendix)
1. Introduction

The use of social networking services have become a large part of many people’s lives, as individuals
more commonly turn to technology to interact with others, either on a friendly, romantic or sexual level
(Rosenfeld & Thomas, 2012). Since the launch of match.com in 1995, online dating services have
become increasingly popular social networking services and today, online dating is the second most
common way for heterosexual couples to meet (MIT Technology Review, 2017). To facilitate
compatibility, users often share personal information, either through their profile or via one-on-one
communication (Cobb & Khono, 2017). For a relationship to develop, self-disclosure is essential (Ward,
2016) and research has shown that online users tend to feel more comfortable disclosing personal
information, in comparison to offline-interactions, as they feel less shy, self-conscious and anxious on
the Internet (McKenna, Green & Gleason, 2002; Rosen, Cheever, Cummings & Felt, 2008). A study by
Joinson (1998) has also shown that people tend to disclose more intimate details online as they are “self-
regulated and responding in tune with their innermost thoughts, attitudes, and goals” (p. 13).
Despite self-disclosure being common online and especially on online dating services, there are
many concerns regarding privacy and the security of the information we choose to share with others.
Meeting and engaging with strangers online can be dangerous and lead to threats of stalking, sexual
predators and identity thefts (Spitzberg & Hoobler, 2002).
Many studies have been conducted in order to try to explain different factors influencing to
which extent users choose to self-disclose information online but these have not always provided unified
results (Kokolakis, 2017). However, although personality has been shown to impact online
communication interactions and research has proved that personality traits impact a person’s decision
to disclose personal information on social networks (Loiacono Carey, Misch, Spencer, & Speranza,
2012), few studies have investigated personality traits in relation to self-disclosure on online dating
services, which has created a gap in literature (Schrammel, Köffel & Scheligi, 2009).
This study thus aim to minimize this gap and clarify the relations between different personality
traits and self-disclosure on online dating services. The research will focus on examining the “big 5”
personality traits and what impact they have on individuals’ self-disclosure on online dating services. In
order to explore self-disclosure behaviour and personality traits in online dating, the following research
question has been formulated:

RQ: What is the effect of the ‘big 5’ personality traits on self-disclosure on online dating
services?

2. Literature review

2.1 Dependent variable: Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure has been defined by Collins & Miller (1994) as “the act of revealing personal information
about oneself to another”, referring to the personal information someone shares when engaging in
conversation with someone else. Online users often question each other about personal issues a lot more
frequently than when meeting face-to-face, which may be due to the fact that there is an increased
pressure online to disclose personal information to build up trust and relationships between individuals
(Tidwell & Walther, 2002; Lawson & Leck, 2006). It is not uncommon that online users share age,
height, weight and other personal information, early on in conversation with romantic and sexual
encounters (Jones, 2005). People that have the goal to establish future face-to-face relationships tend to
disclose more honest, intentional and personal information which is common especially within the
context of online dating (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino, 2006).

Page 2 of 11
 The use of online dating services differs from using other social network sites as the former are
more often used to bring people together without prior relationship (Gibbs, Ellison & Lai, 2011). Gibbs
et al. (2006) believe that self-disclosure is key for developing more intimate relationships and creating
a sense of closeness. Online dating services, unlike other online forums, create an anticipation between
individuals of eventual face-to-face interactions and due to this, online daters are more prone to
revealing personal information because of their wish to form romantic relationships (Gibbs et al., 2006;
Gibbs et al., 2011).

2.2 Independent variables: Personality traits

McCrae & Costa (1997) have identified five different personality traits, called the ‘big 5’, involving
neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness and conscientiousness. A study by
Chen et al. (2015) showed that these personality traits can be considered when explaining self-disclosure
on social media. However, since online dating sites can be considered as social networks (Nandwani &
Kaushal, 2018), it is reasonable that research results from former studies in relation to social media will
act as a basis to create the hypotheses about online dating. Even though, as stated above, online dating
services and other social networks differ in practice, both are considered to theoretically show similar
relations to self-disclosure which thus helps to form accurate hypotheses.

2.2.1 Neuroticism
Neuroticism refers to the feelings of anxiety, anger, hostility, depression, self-consciousness,
impulsiveness and vulnerability (McCrae & Costa, 1997). According to studies conducted by Chen et
al. (2016) and Sumner, Byers & Shaering (2011), neurotic traits influence self-disclosure behaviour and
highly neurotic individuals are generally more concerned with online privacy. The study showed a
positive correlation between neuroticism and online privacy. These results can be explained by the fact
that neurotic people are often aware of the dangers that exist online due to holding a negative state of
mind which results in less disclosure (Skrinjaric Budak & Zokalj, 2018).

H1: People that are more neurotic disclose less when online dating.

2.2.2 Extraversion
Extraversion, involving warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement seeking and positive
emotions (McCrae & John, 1992), has been, in the study by Chen et al (2016), shown to have a positive
significant relation with engaging in self-disclosure behaviour on social network sites. The given reasons
for this are that extroverts focus on their online status and therefore tend to share more private
information online.

H2: Extraversion has a positive significant relation with self-disclosure in online

dating.

2.2.3 Openness to experience

Openness to experience means that individuals tend to be more artistic, curious, imaginative,
aesthetically responsive and have appeared to be less judgemental (McCrae & Costa, 1991). This
personality trait has, according to Hollenbaugh & Ferris (2014), been found to have a positively
significant correlation with self-disclosure on social media.

H3: A high level of openness to experience increases self-disclosure on online dating

services.

Page 3 of 11
2.2.4 Agreeableness
Agreeableness includes characteristics such as being appreciative, trusting, straightforward, compliant,
modest, kind and forgiving (McCrae & John, 1992; McCrae & Costa, 1997). According to Tsai et al
(2017), people who score high on agreeableness have been associated with a higher level of information
disclosure. This is strengthened by a study conducted by Wang (2013) that found that agreeableness has
a positive correlation with self-disclosure on social media. Given explanations for this have been that
agreeable people are less concerned about privacy issues as they are less suspicious and have more trust
in people not misusing their personal information (Selden & Goodie, 2018; Sumner et al , 2011).

H4: People with higher levels of agreeableness are less concerned with self-disclosure
when online dating.

2.2.5 Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness involves personality traits such as competence, order, dutifulness, achievement
striving, self-discipline and deliberation (McCrae & Costa, 1997). Conscientious people tend to be more
cautious online (Seidman, 2012) and are often more informed about risks regarding disclosure of
personal information online. Hence, these people are more cautious when sharing private information
to others, as they often believe that others may use their information for unintended purposes (Osatuyi,
2015).

H5: Conscientious individuals are more careful about disclosing personal information
on online dating services.

Image 1: Hypotheses model

Page 4 of 11
3. Methodology

To be able to examine the effects of the “big 5” personality traits on self-disclosure on online dating
services, quantitative research methods will be used by applying a variance method explaining the
causation of changes in independent variables on the dependent variable (Van de Ven, 2007). A variation
in each personality trait and its effect on self-disclosure behaviour will be investigated, focusing on an
efficient causality between the two (Van de Ven, 2007).

3.1 Sample selection

The target population is defined as people using online dating services, whom are located in Sweden. In
order to collect the respondents, convenience sampling of the non-probability sampling strategies will
be used (Van de Ven, 2007). Thus, the researchers will be choosing cases that are easily available, such
as people within their social network (Gorard, 2003). Using convenience sampling increases the mixed
composition of the sample (Gorard, 2003) and has been chosen for reasons of practicality (mentioned
more in-depth in the limitations chapter).
The sample size is also important to consider, as using the right amount can decrease the risk of
a sampling error which will increase the precision of the study (Aldridge & Levine, 2001). The rule of
thumb, as discussed by Aldridge & Levine (2001), to “not [permit] the size of any subgroup of the
analysis to fall below 50” (p. 77), will be used. Along with the fact that the used method for measuring
the “big 5” personality traits (appendix 1), requires a minimum of 400 participants, this study will aim
for 100 participants regarding each of the different personality traits as mentioned above, thus having at
least 500 respondents in total.

3.2 Survey design

The empirical material will be collected through the use of online self-administered surveys which will
be sent to people within the researchers’ social networks. A self-administered survey is easy and
convenient for the participants as well as it promotes high response rates and increases the production
of unbiased results (Gorard, 2003). The survey will also be pre-tested on a small sample of the target
audience in order to ensure that the instructions and questions are clearly pronounced and understood
(Pallant, 2007).
To measure which personality trait is dominant the BFI-2-S scale in will be used. The BFI-2-S
scale is a shortened version of the Big Five Inventory-2, but is proven to be equally trustworthy and
reliable (Soto & John, 2017). The questions used in the survey to determine the personality traits of the
participants can be found in Appendix 1. These questions will then be analysed in relation to self-
disclosure in online dating.
In the survey, a five-point Likert scale will be used. The five-point scale is preferred over the 7-
point Likert scale, because it can reduce the respondents “frustration level” and confusion of having to
choose between too many alternatives (Buttle, 1996; Bouranta et al, 2009). The five point scale will take
the form of 1=Disagree completely, 2=Disagree somewhat, 3=Neither, 4=Agree somewhat and 5=Agree
completely.

3.4 Questionnaire design

The first part of the questionnaire will be designed to ask whether the participant is an online dating
user, with the aim to only include online daters. In addition, other questions regarding the socio-
demographics of the participant, such as gender, age and location, will be asked. These variables will
be used as control variables. According to Van de Ven (2007), control variables are important to consider
because they “may influence the cause-and-effect relationship being studied” (p. 172). If the respondents
fill in that they use online dating services, they proceed to the survey. If not, they will be filtered out
immediately and not take part in the survey.

Page 5 of 11
 The second part of the questionnaire will address the personality traits, followed by questions
involving the participant’s perception of his or her own self-disclosure habits on online dating services.
Statements based on the self-disclosure study of Collins & Miller (1994), such as “I disclose a large
amount of personal details when online dating”, and “I am not careful about what I disclose”, will be
rated by the participant on the five-point scale as explained in the survey design.
In this survey, measuring self-disclosure is divided in two different categories. These categories
will be the following: 1) Amount of sharing, which will refer to statements such as “I share more personal
information online than offline when dating.” and “I share personal information quickly when
encountering with a new user when online dating.” 2) Concerns about self-disclosure, involving
statements such as “I am concerned about disclosing too much about myself when online dating.” and
“I do not trust people on online dating services with my personal information.”

3.5 Data analysis

In order to analyse the results and come to a discussion and conclusion, the statistics program SPSS will
be used. In order to ensure an understanding of the results, a descriptive statistical analysis will be run.
Before carrying out statistical analysis on the set of data, it is necessary to calculate the total
scale scores for any scales used (Pallant, 2010) which will create indexes for the variables. The results
about self-disclosure will therefore be computed into two indexes which summarise to what extent each
participant self-discloses on their dating services and the level of concerns they have. However, the
reliability and consistency of the scales will first be analysed by using Cronbach’s alpha (Pallant, 2010).
A Cronbach alpha value over 0.7 is acceptable but the closer the alpha is to 1, the better, because that
shows to which extent the scale is a consistent measure of the concept (Goforth, 2018; Pallant, 2010).
Furthermore, in order to make the personality traits data easier to handle, a separate index of
each personality trait will be made. To be able to analyse the five different personality traits, the original
dataset will be duplicated five times, to maintain one datasheet per personality trait. This will make it
possible to focus upon one trait and analyse, by excluding everyone who scored low on this specific
personality, eg. there will be one dataset for extraversion, which only consists the data of participants
that scored high on the extraversion questions. This will be done with the filtering tool in SPSS.
Finally, a bivariate analysis will be used to examine the relationship between the dependent
variable and all of the independent variables separately (Pallant, 2010). This will make it possible to
confirm the strength of the correlation, establishing the value of Pearson’s r. Additionally, the statistical
significance will also be examined by looking at the sig. 2 tailed, expecting that it is below 0.05 (Pallant,
2010). This will allow for a potential argument for a causal relation between each of the five personality
traits and self-disclosure on online dating services, thus proving or disproving the hypotheses. Regarding
the control variables, a multiple analysis will be used, to examine what the relations of socio-
demographics are on self-disclosure and see whether they have more of an impact on self-disclosure
than the personality traits have.

4. Expected results

The expected results of this study consist of proving the hypothesis and answering the research question.
It is expected that the hypotheses are proven to be true and that the ‘big 5’ personality traits have an
effect on self-disclosure on online dating services.

4.1. Research implementation on theory and practice

On a practical level, the implications of this study will provide an understanding of how self-disclosure
in online dating can be measured and influenced, considering the ‘big 5’ personality traits. On a

Page 6 of 11
theoretical level, this implies a basic understanding of the ‘big 5’ and their influence on self-disclosure
in online dating, thus filling a gap in literature regarding the understanding of the subject.

4.2. Limitations and recommendations for future studies

The fact that this research solely focuses on personality traits could be seen as a limitation, as there
naturally are more variables that could explain the extent of self-disclosure. For instance, according to
Ward (2016), finding someone attractive could increase self-disclosure when dating online. Therefore,
future research should consider other independent variables to explain self-disclosure in online dating.
To understand the underlying explanations and motives of self-disclosure in online dating, a qualitative
study with in-depth interviews is recommended.
Another limitation involves the chosen sampling method. Ideally, the respondents would all be
users of online dating services and would be collected via communication with online dating services.
However as this is less realistic and may cause legal issues following the General Data Protection
Regulations (GDPR), the sampling has to be broadened to our own social networks including the use of
convenience sampling. However, the study now runs the risk of ending up with a sample that is too
small as convenience sample may lead to having less relevant participants if, for example, only 60% of
our chosen participants use online dating and the rest has to be discarded. It is therefore recommended
for future research to consider other sampling methods to increase the reliability of the study.
Finally, it should be mentioned, as Van de Ven (2007) states for quantitative research, “a
limitation of many quantitative coding systems is that they reduce rich qualitative data to a single
dimension of meaning” (p. 222). This research will attempt to include this richness by asking a wide
amount of questions, however this limitation cannot be completely avoided.

Page 7 of 11
References

Aldridge, A. & Levine, K. (2001). Surveying the social world: Principles and practice in survey
research. Open University Press: Buckingham.
Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda. European Journal of Marketing,
30(1), 8-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569610105762
Bouranta, N. N., Chitiris, L & Paravantis, J. (2009). The relationship between internal and external
service quality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 21(3), 275-
293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09596110910948297
Chen, J. V., Widjaja, A. E. & Yen, D. C. (2015). Need for affiliation, need for popularity, self-esteem,
and the moderating effect of big five personality traits affecting individuals' self-disclosure on
Facebook. Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 31, 815-831.
Chen, X., Pan, Y. & Guo, B. (2016). The influence of personality traits and social networks on the
self-disclosure behavior of social network site users. Internet research, 26(3), 566-586.
Cobb, C. & Kohno, T. (2017). How public is my private life? Privacy in online dating. International
World Wide Web Conference Committee. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3038912.3052592
Collins, N. L., & Miller, L. C. (1994). Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review.
Psychological Bulletin, 116(3), 457-475.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-Presentation in Online Personals: The Role of
Anticipated Future Interaction, Self-Disclosure, and Perceived Success in Internet Dating.
Communication Research, 33(2), 152–177.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C.-H. (2011). First comes love, then comes Google: An
investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating.
Communication Research, 38(1), 70–100.
Goforth, C. (2018) Using and interpreting Cronbach’s Alpha. Retrieved from
https://data.library.virginia.edu/using-and-interpreting-cronbachs-alpha/
Gorard, S. (2003). Quantitative methods in social science. New York; London, Continuum
Hollenbaugh, E. E. & Ferris, A. L. (2014). Facebook self-disclosure: examining the role of traits,
social cohesion and motives. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 50-58.
Joinson, A. N. (1998). Causes and implications of disinhibited behavior on the Internet. In J.
Gachkenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and
transpersonal implications (pp. 43–60). San Diego: Academic Press.
Jones, R.H. (2005). ‘You show me yours, I‘ll show you mine’: the negotiation of shifts from textual to
visual modes in computer-mediated interaction among gay men. Visual Communication, 4(1),
69–92.
Kokolakis, S. (2017). Privacy attitudes and privacy behaviour: A review of current research on the
privacy paradox phenomenon. Computers and Security, 64, 122-134. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2015.07.002
Lawson, H., & Leck, K. (2006). Dynamics of Internet Dating. Social Science Computer Review, 24(2),
189-208.
Loiacono, E., Carey, D., Misch, A., Spencer, A., & Speranza, R. (2012). Personality impacts on self
disclosure behavior on social networking sites. AMCIS 2012 Proceedings, 6.
McCrae, R.R. & Costa, P.T. (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American
Psychologist, 52(5), 509-516.
Mccrae, R.R. & Costa, P.T. (1991). Adding Liebe und Arbeit: The full five-factor model and
wellbeing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(2), 227-232.
McCrae, R. R. & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its implications.
175-215. Retrieved from
http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/courses/psyc5112/readings/psnbig5_mccrae03.pdf
McKenna, K., Green, A., & Gleason, M. (2002). Relationship Formation on the internet: What's the
big attraction?. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9-31.
MIT Technology Review. (2017, October 10). First evidence that online dating is changing the nature
of society. Retrieved from https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609091/first-evidence-that-
online-dating-is-changing-the-nature-of-
society/?fbclid=IwAR1pzhspHKp5J5uRcmi4X9ZhPIS-Hg1-fxashzqvbIaO1OcX323kH-
oOV3c

Page 8 of 11
Nandwani, M. & Kaushal, R. (2018). Evaluating user vulnerability to privacy disclosures over online
dating platforms. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 342-353.
Osatuyi, B. (2015). Personality traits and information privacy concern on social media platforms.
Journal of Computer Information Systems. 55. 11-19.
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. McGraw-
Hil, England.
Rosen, L., Cheever, N., Cummings, C., & Felt, J. (2008). The impact of emotionality and self-
disclosure on online dating versus traditional dating, Computer in Human Behaviour, 24(5),
2124-2157.
Rosenfeld, M. J & Thomas, R. J (2012). Searching for a mate: The rise of the internet as a social
intermediary. American Sociological Review, 77(4), 523–547. DOI:
10.1177/0003122412448050
Schrammel, J., Köffel, C & Scheligi, M (2009). Personality traits, usage patterns and information
disclosure in online communities. People and Computers XXIII Celebrating People and
Technology. Retrieved from
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/6be0/11209c7c6e702f3fe294729be8434194ca3a.pdf
Selden, M. & Goodie, A. S. (2018). Review of the effects of five factor model personality traits on
network structures and perceptions of structure. Social Networks, 52, 81-99.
Skrinjaric, B., Budak, J. & Zokalj, M. (2018) The effect on personality traits on online privacy
concern. Ekonomski Pregled, 69(2), 106-130
Spitzberg, B. & Hoobler, G. (2002). Cyberstalking and the technologies of interpersonal terrorism.
New Media & Society, 4, 71-92.
Sumner, C., Byers, A. & Shaering, M. (2011). Determining personality traits & privacy concerns from
Facebook activity. Black Hat Briefings, Abu Dhabi, UAE. Retrieved from
https://media.blackhat.com/bh-ad-11/Sumner/bh-ad-11-Sumner-
Concerns_w_Facebook_WP.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0W4UV47y7YfgvhLZPXe3X9Pyh07K4ns2Ny
U9G5_ogUT57N-PFAlAE5WB4
Tidwell, L., & Walther, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure,
impressions, and interpersonal evaluations getting to know one another a bit at a Time. Human
Communication Research, 28(3), 317-348. Tsai, T.H., Chang, H-T., Chang, Y-C. & Chang, Y-
S. (2017). Personality disclosure on social network sites: An empirical examination of
differences in Facebook usage behavior, profile contents and privacy settings. Computers in
Human Behaviour, 76, 469-482
Wang, S. S. (2013). I share, therefore I am: personality traits, life satisfaction and facebook check-ins.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 16(2), 870-877.

Page 9 of 11
Appendix 1

The BFI-2-S scale will be used to determine the personality traits of the participants. The method is
developed by Soto & John (2017) based upon the Big Five Inventory-2, which originally exists of 60
questions. As 60 questions seem a bit much to ask in an online survey and it is assumed that the
participants will not take the time to answer these properly, the choice has been made to go for the
shorter variant with 30 questions. According to Soto & John (2017) this measurement is just as reliable
and trustworthy as the 60 question variant, but only when counted in 400 or more respondents. This is
at the same time a limitation of the method that will be used. The questions for the survey as stated in
the BFI-2-S scale by Soto & John (2017) are named below and will be answered on a 5 point scale: 1=
Disagree strongly, 2= Disagree a little, 3= Neutral; no opinion, 4= Agree a little, 5= Agree strongly.

Table 1
Questions to determine personality according to BFI-2-S
1. Tends to be quiet. 16. Is outgoing, sociable.
2. Is compassionate, has a soft heart. 17. Can be cold and uncaring.
3. Tends to be disorganized. 18. Keeps things neat and tidy.
4. Worries a lot. 19. Is relaxed, handles stress well.
5. Is fascinated by art, music, or literature. 20. Has few artistic interests.
6. Is dominant, acts as a leader. 21. Prefers to have others take charge.
7. Is sometimes rude to others. 22. Is respectful, treats others with respect.
8. Has difficulty getting started on tasks. 23. Is persistent, works until the task is finished.
9. Tends to feel depressed, blue. 24. Feels secure, comfortable with self.
10. Has little interest in abstract ideas. 25. Is complex, a deep thinker.
11. Is full of energy. 26. Is less active than other people.
12. Assumes the best about people. 27. Tends to find fault with others.
13. Is reliable, can always be counted on. 28. Can be somewhat careless.
14. Is emotionally stable, not easily upset. 29. Is temperamental, gets emotional easily.
15. Is original, comes up with new ideas. 30. Has little creativity.

Table 2
Scoring the BFI-2-S domain and facet scales
Extraversion 1R, 6, 11, 16, 21R, 26R

Sociability 1R, 16
Assertiveness: 6, 21R
Energy Level: 11, 26R

Agreeableness 2, 7R, 12, 17R, 22, 27R

Compassion: 2, 17R
Respectfulness: 7R, 22
Trust: 12, 27R

Conscientiousness 3R, 8R, 13, 18, 23, 28R

Organisation: 3R, 18

Page 10 of 11
 Productiveness: 8R, 23
Responsibility: 13, 28R

Neuroticism 4, 9, 14R, 19R, 24R, 29

Anxiety: 4, 19R
Depression: 9, 24R
Emotional Volatility: 14R, 29

Openness to experience 5, 10R, 15, 20R, 25, 30R

Aesthetic Sensitivity: 5, 20R

Intellectual Curiosity: 10R, 25
Creative Imagination: 15, 30R
* False-key items are shown by R.

Reference
Soto, C. J. & John, O. P. (2017). Short and extra-short forms of the Big Five Inventory-2: The BFI-2-S
& BFI-2-XS. Journal of Research in Personality, 68, 69-81.

Page 11 of 11