JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE RESEARCH IN

ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY

Copyright © The Author, 2019
Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019
ISSN 2068 – 0317
http://compaso.eu

The globalized online dating culture:

Reframing the dating process through online dating

Maria Stoicescu1

Abstract
The use of online dating websites and applications is becoming an increasingly accepted
way to meet a potential partner. Dating is known to be an ambiguous and contradictory
process, highly vulnerable to influences from cultural settings. In this paper I argue upon
the capabilities online dating may have in reframing the dating process and in generating
changes in the social structure of our society. These changes would result in the
adherence of a globalized dating culture as online dating applications increase in
popularity world-wide. This paper also reviews literature on behaviour in online dating
environment, underling the advantageous characteristic that computer-mediated
communication is known to have. Moreover, a retrospective with regard to popular
concepts that explain relationships in the digital era is made.

Keywords
Online dating, culture, globalization, digital society, modern relationships, computer-
mediated communication, online behaviour

The current literature review seeks to understand what has been said about online dating
so far by exploring studies, theories and concepts relevant in describing the
phenomenon. It also explores the gaps in the literature and offers leads for what could be
taken in account in what concerns future research.
The review is structured in multiple parts: the first part – the rise of online dating –
explores the studies on demographics and explanations regarding the mass acceptance
of online dating and seeks to describe a world in which such dating strategies are not only

1
Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, University of Bucharest, Romania, [email protected]

21
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

optional, but needed; the second part – the online dating culture – describes how online
dating can be viewed as responsible in the creation and modification of the traditional
dating techniques, offering a culture of its own; the third part – typologies and behaviours
in the online dating setting – investigates previous research on behaviour in the online
dating environment and seeks to establish typologies of daters; the fourth part –
relationships in the digital era – explores concepts that depict modern relationships in
terms of negative consequences of globalization and digitalization; and finally, the fifth
part – mass-media and the presentation of online dating – points to the explanations given
by the media in relation to online dating and strengthens the idea that such knowledge is
useful for the internet users that try to make sense of the changes occurring in their love
lives.

The rise of online dating

Of the most visible elements that reorganize the modern world, the technological
development remains of great importance when analyzing change in social structures
and institutions. The rise of the new information and communication technologies (ICTs)
have reshaped the public and the private spheres (Barraket and Henry-Waring, 2008),
deconstructing and reconstructing the traditional into modern. As Castells (2011)
observes, an individualized use of electronics and technologies seems to be one of the
main characteristics of humans in the digital era. As a consequence, ICTs have increasingly
started to support and ease the creation and maintenance of interpersonal relationships
(Barraket and Henry-Waring, 2008), through social media and online communities.
Among the technologies aimed at forming interpersonal connections, online
dating websites and applications apply the function of matching individuals with the
purpose of creating romantic relationships.
The key services online dating applications and websites are known to offer are
access, communication and matching (Finkel, Eastwick, Karney, Reis, & Sprecher, 2012).
Online dating offers access to a multitude of potential partners, the possibility to
communicate and to exchange technologically enhanced messages, and a helping tool,
the matching algorithm, producers seeking to promote an image of individuals more
compatible from the start (Finkel et al., 2012).
Brym, Lenton, Hindson, Kaljuste, Smith and Curtis (2001) have conducted a study
regarding online dating in Canada and researched the main motives that aid the fast
growth of online dating. Their findings expose the existence of an unprecedented
population of singles, which is the main target population when it comes to dating
businesses. Also, a primed focus in building a career in early youth is another cause that
accelerates online dating acceptance, claiming the need of efficient, handy dating
strategies and digitally enhanced alternatives. Furthermore, the study includes work
mobility as a cause, nowadays individuals being expected to travel and frequently change
their work location or employer, and the decrease of workplace romance due to
implications that might lead to possible sexual harassment accusations (Brym et al., 2001).

22
 Stoicescu / The globalized online dating culture: Reframing the dating process through online dating

Sautter, Tippett and Morgan (2010) mention three factors that reflect upon the
high usage of online dating applications. First off, technological accessibility and the
integration of the Internet in people’s lives and households remains one of the main
factors that eases the online presence. Furthermore, people seeking romantic and sexual
partners as a result of the delay of marriage, and also the changes in perception
regarding online dating and the release of stigma linked to dating apps and websites are
two other factors to consider when it comes to explaining the online dating layout.
By researching the online dating usage in 18 countries, Hogan, Dutton, & Li (2011)
indicate that online dating complements traditional dating techniques, “a blend of offline
and online networks” (Hogan et al., 2011, p.3). Also, exposure to the world of dating
(knowing couples that met online or people that use online dating) might influence
people into having a more positive approach towards it (Hogan, Dutton and Li, 2011). It
what concerns age, the study shows that individuals over 40 years are much more likely
to use online dating to form relationships (see also Stephure, Boon, Mackinnon, &
Deveau, 2009), in contradiction to common beliefs that online dating is for the youth
(Hogan, Dutton and Li, 2011).
According to Smith and Duggan (2013), researchers at Pew Research Center, “one
in every ten American adults has used an online dating site or a mobile dating app” (Smith
and Duggan, 2013, p.2), with 66% of online dating users experiencing a date with someone
they’ve met online, and 23% achieving marriage or long-lasting commitments through
online dating. The study strengthens the fact that attitudes toward online dating are
becoming more favourable and, interestingly enough, it captures one of the effects
online dating has on the quality and longevity of a relationship as perceived by internet
users: <<32% of internet users agree with the statement that “online dating keeps people
from settling down because they always have options for people to date.”>> (Smith and
Duggan, 2013, p.3). The benefits of online dating are taken in account, which are mostly
connected to access, and also the negative experiences that individuals have
encountered online, significantly more relevant for female users. Moreover, the
researchers associate the social networking with a “world of dating and relationships”
(Smith and Duggan, 2013, p.6) in which it is highly common to do research on people one
used to date or to obtain more information about people of romantic interest.

Online dating culture

Dating is one of those processes that came to be known as an ordinary stage in our
contemporary lives, but it wasn’t always as such. Modell (1989) associates the beginnings
of dating with the “dance craze” (Modell, 1989, p.71) happening in the 1910s and early
1920s. The multiplication of the dancing events in this period created a custom for
teenagers to seek dance partners and to establish close contact with unacquainted
individuals (Modell, 1989). Furthermore, the increased popularity of motion pictures
between 1921 and 1930 has offered further opportunities for unmarried youth to pursue
contact with their crushes (Modell, 1989). Movies played also an educative part on “the
timing and sequencing of the emotional structure of the life course” (Modell, 1989, p.74)

23
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

by offering a selection of romantic movies that envisioned “marriage for love”, “winning
another’s love” or “illicit love” scenarios (Modell, 1989, p.74). As a result, dating has
quickly developed as an integrated part of the modern individual’s life, becoming an
institution precursory to marriage or, in our own times, possibly independent from it.
Patterns and ideal scenarios of dating and marriage differ from culture to culture.
The institution of dating involves a pattern which is ambiguous and unstable due to major
influences from the cultural productions and different assessments based on individual
experiences on the matter. Ansari (2015) talks about the confusion men and women feel
nowadays towards the dating process. The multiple correspondence channels, the timing
one should respect prior responding to or sending an initial text are parts of the dating
process that reflect highly on the success of the relationship (Ansari, 2015). In such way,
online dating settings may highly influence users’ behaviour and have an educative part in
how the dating process should evolve and in what intentions users should pursue.
Fiore (2004) observes the reciprocal and influential relationship between culture
and online dating environments with regard to the meaning of love and relationships.
From all the characteristics regarding cultural ideals of love, designers of applications
borrow only a few to make visible in their dating applications, aiding in the formation of a
new description of how relationships and love should look like (Fiore, 2004).

“The designer of a personals system chooses to emphasize (both visually and

algorithmically) some characteristics more than others. […] As a suddenly popular way
to meet partners for dates or relationships, online personals not only reflect but also
have the potential to shape how people attract one another, date, and fall in love.”
(Fiore, 2004, p.15)

As a consequence, users become part of an environment that designates a specific

way of doing dating. For example, Tinder, one of the most popular dating applications,
offers access to people within close location, with little self-information required.
Because of the fast and easy facilities, Tinder has long been perceived as a hook-up app
that eases sexual demands and harassment (Thompson, 2018). Other dating applications
and websites that use more complex matching algorithms (e.g. match.com, eHarmony,
etc.) might be underlining the idea of a compatibility importance between partners. If we
were to analyze dating applications and websites as part of a constituent culture or as
belonging to multiple, different cultures, we ought to analyze the causal role the culture
exerts. What is the main purpose of the dating app/website and how users respond to the
declared purpose? Swidler (1986) views culture as having “an independent causal role
because it shapes the capacities from which such strategies of action are constructed”
(Swidler, 1986, p.277). Therefore, I believe that analyzing online dating as a culture could
capture important findings and explanations on how the institution of dating is defined in
different online environments.
The idea of an online dating influence with direct role in exerting changes is not
new. Hergovich and Ortega (2018) describe through a network analysis how online dating
websites and applications have encouraged interracial relationships and the ascendance
of interracial families. Their findings constitute an important argument in the analysis of

24
 Stoicescu / The globalized online dating culture: Reframing the dating process through online dating

online dating as an accountable influence in the changing structure of society and dating
culture as a whole.
On the idea of technological surveillance, the online dating industry has been
involved in discussions regarding the use of the data gathered across time. Christian
Rudder, former co-founder of OkCupid explains how data, “an enormous set of what
people are doing and thinking and saying” (Rudder, 2014, p.12) is highly revelatory in
understanding human nature. The documentary “Swiped: Hooking up in the digital era” is
also persistent on the idea that big companies are collecting huge amounts of data in
order to offer efficient and addictive products for large consumption. Particular is the
experiment on pigeons exemplified in the documentary, illustrative for the gamification
feature in mobile dating applications:

<<In the documentary, Tinder CSO Jonathan Badeen — a.k.a. the guy who invented
swiping — told Sales that he was partly inspired by college psychology classes, in which
he had studied the work of B.F. Skinner.
In one of Skinner’s experiments, he conditioned hungry pigeons to believe that food,
which was actually being delivered at random times, was prompted by random pecking.
So, the pigeons began pecking more often in certain ways, in the hopes of getting more
food.
“That’s the whole swiping mechanism,” Sales said. “You swipe, you might get a match,
you might not. And then you’re just like excited to play the game ... Skinner essentially
turned pigeons into gamblers.”>> (Johnson, 2018, web)

Also, the same documentary captures the idea that dating applications might have
influenced the dating culture in an unfavourable way, facilitating short, numerous and
simultaneous relationships due to the access to hundreds of possible partners given by
the dating applications and websites (Swiped: Hooking Up in the Digital Age, 2018).
The data obtained from online dating platforms can be used in an intentional
manner in accordance to the addictive part of human nature. Future research is needed in
understanding the making of the matching algorithms and purposes engaged in the
description of the dating platforms.

Typologies and behaviours in the online dating setting

Various studies have searched to explain the behaviour of users in the online dating
environment. The majority of them are concentrated in understanding how self-
presentation and impression management is done (Ellison, Heino and Gibbs, 2006;
Guadagno, Okdie and Kruse, 2012; Ward, 2016), in analyzing the gendered discourse
performed in the online dating setting (Fullick, 2013), in capturing the preferences and
perceived attractiveness of users (Brand et al., 2012; Hitsch, Hortaçsu and Ariely, 2016) or
in understanding the gendered perception on age (Skopek, Schmitz and Blossfeld, 2011)
and intentional distortion of personal characteristics in achieving certain goals (Hall et al.,
2010).
Studies on user typology in online dating settings concerning characteristics and
purposes are still to be made. Johnson and Kulpa (2007) underline that online user

25
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

typologies could be useful in exploring “characteristic patterns or types of online

behaviour” (Johnson & Kulpa, 2007, p.777) that can be measured and used in
understanding how users interact (Johnson and Kulpa, 2007). However, some particular
typologies are identified by Giddens (1992) when referring to the womansier of today – “a
thrill-seeker in a world of open sexual opportunities” (Giddens, 1992, p.84) or to the
codependent person – “someone who […] requires another individual, or a set of
individuals, to define her (or his) wants” (Giddens, 1992, p.89). Although Giddens (1992)
didn’t point out at online dating when describing the proposed typologies, such
definitions would be highly useful for future research concerning the online dating
setting.
Abramova, Baumann, Krasnova, & Buxmann (2016) have conducted a meta-review
in which 69 studies related to gender differences, behaviour, and dating process in the
online setting were analyzed. The discussed findings showed that preferences in others
differ for men and women. Men are more likely to focus on the physical aspect, whereas
women tend to have multiple demands. Also, the meta-review described findings
suggesting a focus on the quantity of partners in what concerns men, and a focus on the
quality of partners in what concern women. The traditional and stereotypical
characterization of male and female are also discussed, men searching to expose traits
that place them on the superiority scale, being expected to initiate contact, whereas
women focus on creative means to expose their self and use more photos than men,
perceiving success as related to appearance.
As online dating takes place in a computer-mediated communication environment
(CMC), various studies have approached online behaviour in contrast to face-to-face
interaction (FtF). CMC’s line of discussion is constituted by an analysis of the
technological in regard to the emotional nuances it implies. More specifically, studies
have referred to how individuals shape the online environment with relation to the social
construction of the online reality (Jones, 1998); to the social presence in CMC
environments and the degree in which a person is acknowledged in the digital
(Gunawardena, 1995), findings suggesting the need of an autonomous inference of one’s
presence in such environments (Gunawardena, 1995) or to a discussion on the CMC forms
- impersonal and interpersonal vs. hyperpersonal CMC (Walther, 1996).
Walther (1996) proposes, through the concept of hyperpersonal communication, a
complex definition of CMC. The hyperpersonal perspective views computer-mediated
communication as conducted by stereotypically positive enhancements that ensure
“opportunities for self-presentation, idealization, and reciprocation” (Walther, 1996,
p.28). The concept of hyperpersonal CMC has been used in order to analyze self-
presentation in internet dating by Hancock, Toma, & Ellison (2007) and (Gibbs, Ellison and
Heino, 2006) findings suggesting that individuals use technology to their advantage.
Pierce (2009) analyzed the CMC among teens and pointed out that technological
intermediaries are regarded as a “safe opportunity for them to interact with others”
(Pierce, 2009, p.1370) and notices the necessity that CMC devices imply, as they are
viewed as a replacement or substitution of unmediated forms of interaction.

26
 Stoicescu / The globalized online dating culture: Reframing the dating process through online dating

It is to be noticed that the use of computer-mediated communication is different

among users, which implies the need of a categorization of users in what concerns their
purpose in using dating technology. When analyzing typologies of users, the environment
in which such typologies are created should be taken in account as well.

Relationships in the individualized era

The deinstitutionalization of marriage has been discussed and defined as a “weakening of

the social norms that define people’s behaviour” (Cherlin and Hopkins, 2004, p.848). As
marriage becomes flexible, dating, a concept used to define the process in which
individuals select a partner for a long-lasting commitment, has changed as well.
Giddens (1992) envisions through the concept of confluent love the “separating
and divorcing society” (Giddens, 1992, p.62) in which pure relationships are more
prevalent. Giddens (1992) defines pure relationships as partnerships in which individuals
involved perceive certain satisfactions from each other. When the beneficial exchanges
are gone, the relationship ends.
The concept of commensuration might point to the same idea Giddens (1992)
underlined. Espeland and Stevens (1998) argue upon the habit of conversion of “qualities
into quantities” (Espeland and Stevens, 1998, p.316) that modern individuals use in order
to understand and compare different aspects of their lives. According to Espeland and
Stevens (1998), lovers might be discredited when their qualities are quantified. By
comparing the amount of benefits and qualities one may receive from another than their
lover, feelings of devaluation towards the lover might occur. In this way, the perceived
uniqueness of the loved one is undermined and thought of as a replaceable good. The
concept of commensuration could be useful in understanding how online dating users
make choices regarding future partners. Is commensuration a part of the process? Do
online daters compare and measure their potential partners’ qualities?
Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (2014) observe the importance Internet has gained in
the construction of relationships: “it’s the Internet that makes lovers” by providing an
accessible virtual space in which one can search among infinite possibilities of potential
partners (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2014). The authors talk about the changes that
globalization lessened in the personal life of the individuals and recognize the online
environment as significant in analyzing modern romantic processes.
Through the concept of liquid love, Bauman (2003) explains relationships as
unstable and uncertain. One of most prevalent causes is the virtual proximity which has
become more important that the real one, as we are always connected. Bauman
(2003)recognizes online dating as entertainment, a place in which individuals shop for
partners, where exchanges are made “without the fear of ‘real world’ repercussions”
(Jeff Gavin in Bauman, 2003, p.65), and where conversations are frequently followed by
sudden dialogue termination (Bauman, 2003).
Following the same idea, Heino, Ellison and Gibbs (2010) propose the concept of
relationshopping for the process in which users search for “the perfect mate” on the
online dating platforms (Heino, Ellison and Gibbs, 2010, p.443). Their findings suggest

27
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

negative aspects of relationshopping, more specifically, the commodification it entails, in

which the characteristics of an individual are devaluated because they don’t suit initial
expectations. Authors define this feeling as a buyer’s remorse that describes the moment
in which online daters discover that the people they’ve connected with “were not what
they appeared to be” (Heino, Ellison and Gibbs, 2010, p.444).
The concepts described above are contouring the border between the traditional
and modern. Although traditional feelings toward marriage and relationship still prevail, it
is important to acknowledge the changes brought up by the digitalization of the society.

Mass-media and the presentation of online dating

Online dating has also been approached to a great extent in the mass-media and has been
integrated in the mass-culture productions initially as „another tool the writers will
employ to turn your life into a swirling miasma of entertaining chaos” (Dating Service
Disaster, TV Tropes, web), strengthening the perceived negative attitudes towards dating
that were more prevalent in the beginning (in the ‘90s), and lately, becoming a valuable
source of knowledge for most internet users that need guidance with their social lives.
In search for sensational and subjects of mass importance, journalists pick some of
the most striking titles related to online dating. Their content was observed to be either
educative or informational (The Economist, 2018a, web), adopting a positive (The
Economist, 2018b, web) or negative (Marateck, 2018, web) approach towards online
dating, containing online dating statistics (Brooks, 2018, web), expressing concerns
regarding the role dating apps might have in rising STDs (Belluz, 2017, web), or collecting
experiences of people that used such apps (The Observer, 2015).
In the digital era, many individuals use the internet to make sense of the world
around and mass-media plays an important part in the shape of knowledge they receive.
Because the situations some of us might experience nowadays are new, mass-media
helps in naming processes and connecting people that share similar happenings. For
example, Haynes (2017) wrote an article explaining and naming processes engaged in the
modern dating setting: ghosting – the act of sudden disappearance of a potential
romantic partner; slow fading – in which someone becomes less and less available for the
other; cuffing season – seasons in which people perceive relationships as more
favourable; deep-like – the art of showing your interest in an exaggerated manner;
breadcrumbing – receiving little and random attention; haunting – characteristic to a
stalking ex-lover with the help of social media. All these processes are relevant in
understanding and learning the way that dating is done in present times.
How do individuals learn about dating nowadays? Apart from the media articles,
books about dating in general and YouTube channels dedicated to education in the art of
dating offer a learning support without precedent. Their need on the market points to
confusion and also to the need of understanding the different approaches individuals
might have on the matter.

28
 Stoicescu / The globalized online dating culture: Reframing the dating process through online dating

Conclusions

The consulted studies have captured the extent to which online dating is used in present
times and have revealed the motives that stand before the popularity of such dating
strategies. While a considerable number of studies have relied on the analysis of
behaviour in the online dating setting, this paper surprises the need of a new approach in
consideration to the effects that online dating websites and applications might have on
the alteration of the dating culture.
While the sociological perspective is needed in understanding the considerable
changes brought by globalization and digitalization and knowledge making, mass-media
represents a helpful tool for internet users that seek answers.

REFERENCES

Abramova, O. et al. (2016). ‘Gender differences in online dating: What do we know so far? A
systematic literature review’, (January). doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2016.481.
Ansari, A. (2015). Modern Romance. Penguin Press.
Barraket, J. and Henry-Waring, M. S. (2008). ‘Getting it on(line): Sociological perspectives
on e-dating’, Journal of Sociology, 44(2), pp. 149–165. doi: 10.1177/1440783308089167.
Bauman, Z. (2003). Liquid love. On the frailty of human bonds, Polity Press.
Beck, U., & Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2013). Distant love. John Wiley & Sons.
Belluz, J. (2017). Tinder and Grindr don't want to talk about their role in rising STDs.
[Online]. VOX. http://bit.ly/2Y6AeQL.
Brand, R. J. et al. (2012). ‘What is beautiful is good, even online: Correlations between
photo attractiveness and text attractiveness in men’s online dating profiles’,
Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), pp. 166–170. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.023.
Brooks, A. (2018). 21 Amazing Online Dating Statistics — The Good, Bad & Weird (2018).
Dating Advice. [online] https://www.datingadvice.com/online-dating/online-dating-
statistics.
Brym, R. J. et al. (2001). ‘Love Online: A Report on Digital Dating in Canada’.
Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of the Network Society. The Information Age: Economy,
Society, and Culture Volume I (Information Age Series). London: Blackwell.
Cherlin, A. and Hopkins, J. (2004). ‘The Deinstitutionalization of American Marriage’,
Journal of Marriage and Family, 66(November), pp. 848–861.
Dating Service Disaster (2018). TV Tropes. [online]. http://bit.ly/32n05TX.
Ellison, N., Heino, R. and Gibbs, J. (2006). ‘Managing Impressions Online: Self-
Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment’, Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication, 11(2), pp. 415–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x.
Espeland, W. N. and Stevens, M. L. (1998). ‘Commensuration as a Social Process’, Annual
Review of Sociology, 24(1), pp. 313–343. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.313.

29
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

Finkel, E. J. et al. (2012). Online Dating: A Critical Analysis from the Perspective of
Psychological Science, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement. doi:
10.1177/1529100612436522.
Fiore, A. T. (2004). ‘Romantic Regression. An Analysis of Behavior in Online Dating Systems’,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Fullick, M. (2013). ‘“Gendering” the Self in Online Dating Discourse’, Canadian Journal of
Communication, 38(4), pp. 545–562. doi: 10.22230/cjc.2013v38n4a2647.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B. and 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), pp. 152–177. doi:
10.1177/0093650205285368.
Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy. Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern
societies. California: Stanford University Press.
Guadagno, R. E., Okdie, B. M. and Kruse, S. A. (2012). ‘Dating deception: Gender, online
dating, and exaggerated self-presentation’, Computers in Human Behavior. Elsevier
Ltd, 28(2), pp. 642–647. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.010.
Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). ‘Social presence theory and implications for interaction and
collaborative learning in computer conferences’, International Jl. of Educational
Telecommunications, 1(2/3), pp. 147–166.
Hall, J. A. et al. (2010). ‘Strategic misrepresentation in online dating: The effects of
gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits’, Journal of Social and Personal
Relationships, 27(1), pp. 117–135. doi: 10.1177/0265407509349633.
Hancock, J. T., Toma, C. and Ellison, N. (2007). ‘The truth about lying in online dating
profiles’, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing
systems - CHI ’07, p. 449. doi: 10.1145/1240624.1240697.
Haynes, G. (2017). Cushioning, breadcrumbing or benching: the language of modern
dating. The Guardian. [Online]. http://bit.ly/2LPXcF8.
Heino, R. D., Ellison, N. B. and Gibbs, J. L. (2010). ‘Relationshopping: Investigating the
market metaphor in online dating’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,
27(4), pp. 427–447. doi: 10.1177/0265407510361614.
Hergovich, P. and Ortega, J. (2018). ‘The Strength of Absent Ties: Social Integration via
Online Dating’.
Hitsch, G. J., Hortaçsu, A. and Ariely, D. (2016). ‘Matching and Sorting in Online Dating M’,
American Economic Review, 100(1), pp. 130–163.
Hogan, B., Dutton, W. H. and Li, N. (2011). ‘A Global Shift in the Social Relationships of
Networked Individuals : Meeting and Dating Online Comes of Age’.
Johnson, G. M. and Kulpa, A. (2007). ‘Dimensions of Online Behavior: Toward a User
Typology’, CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(6), pp. 773–780. doi:
10.1089/cpb.2007.0043.
Jones, S. (Ed.). (1998). Cybersociety 2.0: Revisiting computer-mediated community and
technology (Vol. 2). Sage Publications.

30
 Stoicescu / The globalized online dating culture: Reframing the dating process through online dating

Johnson, Eric (2018). Swiping on Tinder is addictive. That’s partly because it was inspired
by an experiment that ‘turned pigeons into gamblers’. Recode Decode [Online]
http://bit.ly/30Cv8Jt.
Marateck, J. (2018). Online dating lowers self-esteem and increases depression, studies
say. CNN. [Online] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/29/health/online-dating-
depression-study/index.html.
Modell, J. (1991). Into one's own: From youth to adulthood in the United States, 1920-1975.
Univ of California Press.
Pierce, T. (2009). ‘Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus
technological communication among teens’, Computers in Human Behavior. Elsevier
Ltd, 25(6), pp. 1367–1372. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.06.003.
Rudder, C. (2017). Dataclysm, Crown Publishing Group.
Sautter, J. M. et al. (2010). ‘The Social Demography of Internet Dating in the United
States. Introduction: The Emergence of Internet Dating’, Social Science Quarterly,
91(2), pp. 554–575.
Sales, J. Nancy (Director). (2018). Swiped: Hooking Up in the Digital Age. [DVD]. USA
Skopek, J., Schmitz, A. and Blossfeld, H. P. (2011). ‘The gendered dynamics of age
preferences - Empirical evidence from online dating’, Zeitschrift fur
Familienforschung, 23(3), pp. 267–290.
Smith, A. and Duggan, M. (2013). ‘Online Dating and Relationships’, Pew Research Center.
Stephure, R. J. et al. (2009). ‘Internet initiated relationships: Associations between age
and involvement in online dating’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,
14(3), pp. 658–681. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01457.x.
Swidler, A. (2018). ‘Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies Author’, American
Sociological Review, 51(2), pp. 273–286. Available at:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2095521.
The Economist (2018a). Modern love. [Online]. https://econ.st/2LkVOLl.
The Economist (2018b). How Internet has changed dating. The Economist, [Online]
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/08/18/how-the-internet-has-changed-
dating
The Observer (2015). Internet dating: 10 things I’ve learned from looking for love online.
The Guardian. [Online]. http://bit.ly/2Si7sHK.
Thompson, L. (2018). ‘“I can be your tinder nightmare”: Harassment and misogyny in the
online sexual marketplace’, Feminism and Psychology, 28(1), pp. 69–89. doi:
10.1177/0959353517720226.
Walther, J. B. (1996). ‘Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal,
and hyperpersonal interaction’, Communication Research, 23(1), pp. 3–43. doi:
10.1177/009365096023001001.
Ward, J. (2016). Swiping, matching, chatting: Self-Presentation and self-disclosure on mobile
dating apps, Human IT. doi: 10.1177/1529100612436522.

31
 Journal of Comparative Research in Anthropology and Sociology, Volume 10, Number 1, Summer 2019

Maria Stoicescu is a Ph.D. Candidate at the Doctoral School of Sociology. Her research
interests are science, knowledge, and technology; gender and sexuality. In her
dissertation thesis, Maria analyzes dating practices and emotion work in online dating
settings.

32