OpenAIRE is about to release its new face with lots of new content and services.
During September, you may notice downtime in services, while some functionalities (e.g. user registration, login, validation, claiming) will be temporarily disabled.
We apologize for the inconvenience, please stay tuned!
For further information please contact helpdesk[at]

fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Whitty, Monica T. (2008)
Publisher: Pergamon Press
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: BF, HQ
This paper considers the presentation of self on an internet dating site. Thirty men and 30 women were interviewed about their online dating experiences. They were asked about how they constructed their profiles and how they viewed other individuals’ profiles. Which types of presentations of self led to more successful offline romantic relationships were also investigated. Additionally, gender differences were examined. In line with previous research on presentation of self online, individuals were quite strategic in their online presentations. However, important differences between initiating a relationship on an internet dating site and other spaces (online and offline) included the type of self disclosed as well as the depth of breadth of information individuals self-disclosed about themselves before any one-on-one conversations took place.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001, November). 2001 Census basic community profile and snapshot. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory: Author. Retrieved June 5, 2005 from the World Wide Web:
    • Altman, I., and Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    • Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., and Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the internet. Journal of Social Issues 58, 33-48.
    • Brym, R. J., and Lenton, R. L. (2003). Love at first byte: Internet dating in Canada. Retrieved March 25th, 2005 from the World Wide Web:
    • Buss, D. M., and Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 50, 559-570.
    • Cooper, A., and Sportolari, L. (1997). Romance in cyberspace: Understanding online attraction, Journal of Sex Education and Therapy 22 (1), 7-14.
    • Ellis, B., and Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy. Journal of Sex Research 27 (4), 527-555.
    • Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co.
    • Goffman, E (1959/1997). In The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. In C. Lemert & A. Branaman (Eds.). The Goffman Reader. Massachusetts, USA: Blackwell Publishers. New York: Doubleday Anchor. (original work published in 1959)
    • Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy theory. Psychological Review 94, 1120-1134.
    • Kenrick, D. T., Sadalla, E. K., Groth, G., and Trost, M. R. (1990). Evolution, traits, and the stages of human courtship: Qualifying the parental investment model. Journal of Personality 58, 97-116.
    • Levine, D. (2000). Virtual attraction: What rocks your boat. CyberPsychology & Behavior 3, 565-573.
    • McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., and Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues 58, 9-31.
    • Miller, H. (1995). The presentation of self in electronic life: Goffman on the internet. Embodied Knowledge and Virtual Space, June 1995. Retrieved July 26th, 2006 from the World Wide Web:
    • Miller, H., and Arnold, J. (2001). Breaking away from grounded identity? Women academics on the web. CyberPsychology & Behavior 4 (1), 95-108.
    • Morton, L., Alexander, J., and Altman, I. (1976). Communication and relationship definition. In G. R. Miller. Explorations in interpersonal communication (pp. 105-125). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
    • Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46, 80-97.
    • Parks, M. R., & Roberts, L. D. (1998). 'Making MOOsic': The development of personal relationships online and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 517-537.
    • Rice, R. E., & Love, G. (1987). Electronic emotion: Socioemotional content in a computer mediated communication network. Communication Research, 14, 85-108.
    • Rogers, C. (1951). Client-centered therapy. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
    • Rollman, J., Krug, K., and Parente, F. (2000). The chat room phenomenon: Reciprocal communication in cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior 3 (2), 161-166.
    • Scharlott, B. W., & Christ, W. G. (1995). Overcoming relationship-initiation barriers: The impact of a computer-dating system on sex role, shyness, and appearance inhibitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 11, 191-204.
    • Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
    • Townsend, J. (1993). Sexuality and partner selection: Sex differences among college students. Ethology and Sociobiology 14, 305-330.
    • Townsend, J., and Wasserman, T. (1997). The perception of sexual attractiveness: Sex differences in variability. Achieves of Sexual Behavior 26, 243-268.
    • Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
    • Walther, J. B. (1995). Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organizational Science 6, 186-203.
    • Walther, J. B., Slovacek, C., and Tidwell, L. (2001). Is a picture worth a thousand words? Photographic images in long-term and short-term computer-mediated communication. Communication Research 28, 105-134.
    • Whitty, M. T. (2003). Cyber-flirting: Playing at love on the internet. Theory and Psychology 13, 339-357.
    • Whitty, M. T. (2004). Cyber-flirting: An examination of men's and women's flirting behaviour both offline and on the Internet. Behaviour Change 21, 115-126.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information Ok