Jetzt Mitglied werden

← Table of Contents of the Book

Dating Apps – Structure, Motives, and Risks | Consonance (Gleichklang)

Structure and Motives of Dating Apps

Dating apps are experiencing enormous popularity worldwide. They allow users to click through an seemingly unlimited number of profile suggestions in the blink of an eye.

Everything is oriented toward geographic proximity and appearance:

  • Most users search at their current location. The photo is the decisive selection criterion.

Globally known dating apps include Tinder, Bumble, Badoo, Lovoo, and Hinge. For the LGBTIQ+ community, Grindr is the leading provider.

Tinder is famous for allowing profiles to be marked as interesting or swiped away as uninteresting. This decision is usually made in a matter of seconds. Only if both sides confirm interest can those involved contact each other.

Bumble claims to be a particularly women‑friendly dating app. This women‑friendliness is supposedly implemented by allowing only women to write the first message and blocking the contact if men do not reply within 24 hours.

Hinge claims to place more emphasis on the search for serious relationships than other dating apps. This is also supported by a filter function that allows users to search profiles by ethnicity, religion, family planning, height, politics, smoking, and drug use. Whether these and some other aspects actually make Hinge fundamentally distinguishable from other dating apps is debatable.

All dating apps share the fact that the photo plays the decisive role for the initial selection. In addition, the barrier to entry is low for dating apps. The apps can be downloaded free of charge and your own profile can be created in no time at all. In just a few minutes, online dating can begin.

Dating apps have achieved a breakthrough. Worldwide, they captivate hundreds of millions of people. Their spectacular rise shows that they obviously appeal to something in people – but what?

Sobieraj and Humphreys (2021) conducted a qualitative interview study on this, in which they interviewed male and female Tinder users and had them discuss in focus groups:

  • The thematic analysis of the collected material came to the conclusion that the focus of Tinder use is on entertainment. This extends to the social networks of those involved outside of Tinder, as profiles and encounters are discussed among friends. The authors also identify gender‑typical behavioral patterns: men appear as conquerors and compete with each other for dates, while women consult with their female friends but also amuse themselves together about the respective profiles, messages, and encounters. The analyses also clearly show the enormous importance of photos and appearance, with values and life attitudes beyond location and appearance apparently playing only a limited role.

Jänkälä et al. (2019) examined the significance of photos for the use of Tinder in another qualitative interview study:

  • The authors came to the conclusion that almost everything revolved around the selection and viewing of photos, although participants believed that they could convey important information about their personality and lifestyle through their photos. The use of photos did not end with the first meeting but continued afterward via messenger services. The function of further photo exchange after the first encounter outside the internet also lay in the recognition value of the photos. With the help of the photos, it could be ensured that a person was actually recognized after an encounter and that there were no mix‑ups with other people.

What becomes clear here is a focus on quantity and appearance, as well as an arbitrariness and interchangeability of people. The structure of dating apps, for which Tinder is certainly a representative example, seems to be more suitable for superficial virtual and non‑virtual contacts than for the profound encounter of individual people with the goal of a lasting partnership.

In this respect, it is not surprising that the search for a long‑term relationship is not actually the focus for users of dating apps:

  • Sumter et al. (2017) surveyed 163 Tinder users about their motives for using the dating app. At the top of the list was trend orientation as a motive. The app was experienced as new and cool. This was followed by a thirst for excitement in the sense of thrill and adventure. Only in third place did the love motive appear, with participants talking about wanting to find a relationship. Closely followed by these three motives were the search for self‑validation (receiving compliments and attention), sex (one‑night stands, exchanging erotic pictures), and uncomplicated communication (overcoming shyness, being able to communicate easily online).

Apart from the ranking, the average strength of the motives is also of interest:

  • The participants indicated their respective motives on a scale ranging from 1 (not at all present) to 5 (strongly present). None of the six motives reached a high average scale value; the values ranged from a minimum of 1.63 (simplicity of communication) to a maximum of 2.97 (thirst for excitement). The love motive reached an average value of 2.24.

Overall, in this study, it is striking that all motives were rather low on average, which suggests a strong heterogeneity of motives among the various participants or a lack of clarity in the goal structure of the individual participants.

It is also remarkable that trend and thirst for excitement were significantly more pronounced than the love motive. However, thirst for excitement is contrary to the motive of wanting to find a long‑term relationship. Those who primarily want to satisfy their own thirst for excitement are less likely to commit.

The results thus indicate that Tinder appeals to a wide variety of motives, with no clear dominance of any single motive. A uniform desire for a committed partnership is certainly not present among Tinder users.

These findings can probably be generalized to all dating apps, since the various dating apps are overall similar to each other, despite some differences in detail.

A side effect of the different motives of participants can be that communication is less authentic:

  • People who are only looking for online sex may use fake photos.

  • Those looking for erotic encounters may pretend to have an interest in a relationship in order to achieve their goal.

  • People who are seeking self‑validation may feign interest in meetings and then disappear.

There can also be intrapsychic side effects:

  • If the same person has several motives, it is highly likely that over time those motives that can be achieved most quickly and are rewarded immediately will gain in strength. These include thirst for excitement, sex, self‑validation, or simple entertainment through online communication, but not the search for a stable relationship, which involves more effort and typically leads to success much later.

This interpretation is consistent with the findings of a survey of participants at a music festival in Australia about their use of dating apps, which showed a much greater significance of distraction and sex and a low significance of long‑term relationships (Garga et al., 2021):

  • The main motive for using the apps was boredom, given by 59.7 % of respondents. 45.1 % were looking for sex, 42.8 % for casual dating contacts, 33.4 % wanted to improve their self‑confidence, and only 22.8 % said they were looking for a long‑term relationship. Only the search for friendship was affirmed less frequently (16.2 %) than the search for a long‑term relationship.

The study did not distinguish between the various dating apps. Would the results have been different, for example, for users of the dating app Hinge, which claims to be focused on long‑term relationships?

This cannot be said with certainty, but the dating app itself has published a survey according to which 87 % of current participants are open to a relationship and 45 % are even exclusively looking for a committed relationship. On the one hand, this may indeed speak for a higher interest in long‑term relationships on Hinge; on the other hand, heterogeneity is also evident here, with a majority not exclusively seeking a long‑term relationship.

Psychologically problematic is that the structure of dating apps with their different motives and the possibility of quickly satisfying the non‑relationship‑related motives can weaken existing relationship motives. Dating apps can promote a dating behavior geared toward quick motive gratification, which can reduce the probability of finding a relationship.

In individual cases, this can go as far as addictive use of the app – with a narrowing of everyday activities to the app and a loss of willingness and ability for communication and relationships outside the app.

Of course, not all users are affected by such potential dangers; most will succeed in using the app in phases and selectively without impairing their activities outside the app. However, there are particularly vulnerable groups:

  • Coduto et al. (2019) showed in a study that especially people suffering from social anxiety are a vulnerable group that can develop an online addiction, particularly when loneliness is added to social anxiety. Especially for socially inhibited, shy people who are lonely, the use of dating apps may seem obvious, but here it can apparently have an unfavorable effect particularly quickly.

Overall, dating apps are mainly suitable for satisfying entertainment needs or for distraction through immediate communication at the virtual level or quick offline encounters facilitated by spatial proximity. They can certainly effectively support flirting and erotic encounters, for example. A side effect, however, is that due to their structure, they can also lead to boundary violations, dehumanized eroticism, and virtual addictive behavior.

This can also be seen in Tinder messages that Tinder users sent to the Instagram page Tindernightmares, where they are regularly posted. Just to give an impression, a selection of a few quotes translated into English: “Are you a bloody steak? Because I would love to eat you while you’re still bleeding.” , “You look like you’d ruin my life…” or “Roses are red. Violets are kinda gross. You’re in good shape. Let’s go f***.”

What becomes clear here is misogyny, sexism, and massive harassment:

  • Laura Thompson (2018) conducted a qualitative analysis of 526 messages posted on Tindernightmares and the comparable Instagram page Bye Felipe. She identified as core themes the reduction of women’s value to their appearance and the claim of their sexual availability by men who responded to real or suspected rejection with misogynistic and harassing remarks.

In principle, there is nothing against a high significance of eroticism and sexual topics. However, it is hard to see from the quoted remarks that they would be suitable for enabling those concerned to have truly fulfilling sexuality and eroticism, let alone long‑term relationships. On the contrary, crude, insulting, vulgar‑erotic, sexist, and misogynistic patterns become apparent that stand in the way of exploring mutual compatibility and entering into a process of relationship building.

Even if certainly numerous users of dating apps distance themselves from such patterns and some users are indeed looking for a lasting relationship, such messages can nevertheless leave their mark:

  • On the side of the aggressive men, misogynistic, sexist patterns can be further reinforced through daily practice, so that their ability to form relationships is likely to decline further. On the side of the affected women as recipients of such messages, more negative images of men and fundamental doubts about the seriousness of other participants may arise.

Sexual harassment and insults are to be assessed differently from more harmless entertainment motives. But even the latter can make the process of finding a relationship more difficult. Their strong representation in dating apps can hinder the getting‑to‑know process simply because it becomes difficult to recognize which participants have serious relationship intentions. This applies all the more since motives may change through the process of use and – possibly even unnoticed by those concerned – entertainment motives can increasingly take the place of relationship motives.

There is also the possibility that dating apps promote sexual risk behavior among their users:

  • In a study by Choi et al. (2016) with students from Hong Kong, users of dating apps showed a significant increase in the frequency of not using condoms during sexual intercourse. Only alcohol consumption had a similarly critical effect.

However, there are by no means only negative findings on dating apps. Other data do indicate that a partnership can also arise through dating apps:

  • Timmermans and Courtois (2018) observed in a sample of Belgian Tinder users that less than half of the users had ever actually met someone through the app, confirming Rosenfeld’s findings. Of those who had meetings, 31 % reported casual sex, but at least 27 % also stated that they had found a partnership through Tinder. For sexual encounters, this study showed the expected relationship to the motives for using the app: the more strongly sexual motives were named for use, the more often erotic contacts actually occurred. In contrast, there was no relationship for the motive “committed relationship” with actually finding such a relationship on Tinder. Committed relationships thus seem to have arisen more by chance among users, independently of their actual motives.

And yes, it may well be assessed as a hopeful result that 27 % of respondents found a relationship via Tinder. However, this study did not collect any information about the quality and durability of these relationships. Moreover, this percentage only refers to the minority of participants who had any dates at all. Since the desire for a relationship also did not improve the chances of success and an unknown proportion of the relationships would certainly have proven unsustainable if this had been asked, these data yield a very modest overall prospect of actually finding a long‑term relationship through a dating app.

Ghosting, Breadcrumbing, and Catfishing

Especially in the context of dating apps and social networks, three other critical phenomena can be increasingly observed worldwide, known as ghosting, catfishing, and breadcrumbing:

  • Ghosting consists of a person with whom there is a serious offline or online contact, or even already a relationship, suddenly and completely unexpectedly disappearing without any explanation and deleting all contact options.

  • Breadcrumbing is defined as people pretending interest in others, complimenting them, and flirting with them, without ever having had a real willingness to deepen the contact. There are sporadic expressions of interest (like scattered breadcrumbs), although in reality there is no intention for a relationship at all. However, this fact is unknown to the recipients.

  • Catfishing means creating completely fictitious online profiles to control, monitor, deceive, or defraud other people. Sometimes the goal is to collect blackmail material (for example, sent nude photos). It can involve purely financial intentions, and catfishing is often connected with so‑called love scamming. But intrapsychic control motives up to sadism can also play a role. Friends, family members, employers, employees, neighbors, or criminal organizations, as well as complete strangers, can hide behind these profiles.

Timmermans et al. (2020) surveyed users of dating apps who had either engaged in ghosting or been affected by ghosting. It was shown that the experience of ghosting is often perceived as stressful and burdensome. 59 % of those affected held the ghosters responsible for the event, 37 % saw the reasons in themselves, and 17 % assigned shared responsibility to the dating apps. (The percentages do not add up to 100 % because multiple responsible parties could be named.)

Regarding the ghosters, those affected assumed, for example, that they had other relationships, personal problems, or a low willingness to commit. Regarding themselves, it was assumed, among other things, that they had not met expectations, were not attractive enough, or had shown wrong behavior. Regarding the responsibility of dating apps, it was argued that they provided contact structures in which ghosting was an easy and obvious course of action.

Among those who had engaged in ghosting, 67 % saw the responsibility with the affected persons, 44 % with themselves, and 29 % with the apps. The responsibility of the apps was also seen in providing a structure that facilitated ghosting. Reasons within themselves included, for example, avoiding a direct rejection of the other person. Reasons on the side of the ghosted persons included their alleged negative traits and behaviors or the expectation of difficulties in accepting a rejection. 22 % of ghosters believed they had no obligation toward the other person, while 16 % wanted to spare the other person the injuries of a direct rejection through their disappearance.

It becomes clear here that there are various causes and motives for ghosting, but that in the perception of both ghosters and those affected, the dating apps also play a facilitating role in ghosting. The ghosters avoid any confrontation and choose the easiest path by deleting the connection. While some want to spare the affected persons emotional pain – in a misguided view – others see themselves as having no human obligation toward those affected when they press the delete button.

In principle, neither ghosting nor breadcrumbing is tied to online dating; they can also occur in other contexts. However, a study by Navarro et al. (2020) showed that the probability of experienced or self‑committed ghosting was significantly related to the use of dating apps.

Gender and Age Distributions

What is also striking about dating apps is the unbalanced distribution of genders and age groups:

When looking at the gender ratios in dating apps not belonging to the LGBTIQ+ sector, a strong predominance of men becomes apparent:

A predominance of men is known from erotic portals and is based on the fact that men on average are indeed more frequently interested in casual sexual contacts than women. The strong overrepresentation of men on dating apps is another critical sign against the suitability of dating apps for a serious partner search.

Younger age groups are also significantly overrepresented in dating apps:

  • A current analysis for the USA in April 2020 shows that 53 % of respondents had never used Tinder. However, for the 18‑29 age group, this percentage was only 24 %, and it increased continuously with age up to 97 % for people aged 65 and older. Interestingly, Grindr, the best‑known app for the LGBTIQ+ community, shows a somewhat more balanced age distribution, although here too the younger age groups clearly dominate.

The focus of dating apps on entertainment and fun, non‑commitment, and eroticism can certainly be explained to a large extent by the young target group, whose life paths are less established and for whom commitment and obligation are less important.

In an interview by Markus Böhm with Tabea Glindemann at Spiegel‑Online, she reports on her experiences with dating apps:

  • Although there are people who write reflective things or nice opening lines, much is copy and paste. Very often she received unambiguous offers, such as how or whether she wanted to be picked up. She experienced that for many on Tinder it is not about finding partners but only about matches. Sometimes there is no interest in chats or meetings at all. She also suspects that those who are looking for a monogamous relationship find it difficult to reach the point where they say: “Now I have found the person I want to be with.” After all, you can look into the app at any time, where at least seemingly hundreds of thousands of other potential partners are waiting for you.

Tabea Glindemann’s descriptions fit well with the psychological findings.

Incidentally, the various dating apps have never presented meaningful data on how many of the millions of users found a lasting partnership through their apps and how these relationships developed over time.

Due to the rather problematic structure of dating apps for partner search – the almost exclusive focus on appearance, the orientation toward immediate reward, the strong entertainment character, the spread of misogyny, sexism, and harassment, as well as the heterogeneity of motives among users – it is to be assumed that this percentage is likely to be small.

Psychological Assessment of Dating Apps

From a psychological perspective, dating apps are therefore to be viewed critically, particularly due to the following six aspects summarized once more:

  • Dating as a consumer process: In dating apps, the getting‑to‑know process becomes a consumer process, with a seemingly huge selection available, but the profiles are actually in competition with each other. The expectation of the next and possibly even better profile makes it difficult to commit, so that non‑commitment prevails and bonding processes can be impaired.

  • Attraction for dishonest intentions: The basic functions are completely free and can be used immediately. The effort required to download the app and create your own profile is minimal. This means that numerous people with less honest motives, or at least no real relationship motive, mix in among the participants – such as photo collectors, married people posing as singles, pure online flirts who do not disclose this, right up to stalkers and people who use the apps for harassment, insults, fraud, and sexual assault.

  • Risk behavior: The ease and speed with which largely anonymous sexual contacts can be found through dating apps can reduce safety concerns and lead to sexual risk behavior, such as non‑use of condoms.

  • Continuous use: The fun and addictive character of the apps is high and does not have to end when a relationship has already been found. Once someone is on the apps, they can stay or return at any time, even if a relationship exists. Those who met through an app must at least expect that their partner may return to the app sooner or later. But even for themselves, some users may not be able to vouch for their own behavior. Dating apps have the character of gambling.

  • Illusory evaluations: The almost complete orientation of partner search toward appearance overlooks numerous factors that are important for relationship happiness. Due to the focus on appearance with hardly any other information available, the effectiveness of the halo effect described above is promoted, where people assume, based solely on appearance and thus on insufficient information, the existence of numerous other positive characteristics in the other person. Conversely, it can just as quickly lead to incorrect assumptions about negative traits of people who are rejected solely based on first glance. In many dating apps, there is no possibility or it gets lost in the sea of alternatives to gain a corrected impression of rejected profiles through a second look and closer acquaintance. For all those whose interest is more focused on online contact or online sex, the willingness to present a false image and create incorrect expectations also increases. This means that the structure of dating apps promotes the motivation for non‑authentic behavior and false self‑presentation, making authentic evaluations more difficult.

  • Impairment of relationship ability: Building a partnership and ongoing relationship work are complex interpersonal processes that require attention and commitment. In partnerships, it is about truly understanding each other, engaging with each other, communicating openly, developing commonalities, standing by each other, developing goals, and being able to accept the mistakes and weaknesses of partners. With their simplicity and focus on immediate reward, speed, and superficiality, dating apps convey an unrealistic picture of human relationships and reduce the willingness to actually make an effort for a relationship. People in dating apps appear interchangeable; they are clickable and swipeable, and the selection seems endless. It is equally easy to harass others or respond to rejection with insults. All this can damage one’s own ability to form relationships. In individual cases, negative effects of dating apps on relationship ability may not only be temporary but can lead to a lasting pattern of short‑term thrill and lack of commitment.

On the other hand, these possible negative consequences of dating apps, which can undoubtedly occur in individual cases, should not be overestimated. For example, existing findings argue against there having been, at least so far, a fundamental societal change in partnership relationships due to the spread of dating apps:

  • Rosenfeld (2018) concludes in a study based on interviews and survey data that the relationships of married couples in the USA have not been damaged by dating apps. The vast majority of married couples live in a stable relationship.

Of course, these couples in the survey hardly used dating apps either, and it remains to be seen in the long term whether people who previously used dating apps will increasingly continue to use them, so that the percentage of couples in stable relationships who continue to use dating apps would increase. This could result in impairments in the relationships that were not yet visible in Rosenfeld’s survey.

But even among singles, Rosenfeld (2018) considers the significance of dating apps for actual encounters to be overestimated:

  • According to his data, more than 80 % of the heterosexual singles surveyed had not met a single other person through a dating app in the past 12 months. Rosenfeld therefore suspects that the main function of dating apps often lies in flirting online or looking at photos.

The finding that many participants had no meetings at all and apparently used the dating app mainly for entertainment effects argues against the apps leading to the search for a relationship being replaced by an endless series of casual dates. However, this finding also argues against a high effectiveness of dating apps for partner search.

The danger of a possible reduction in relationship ability and a transition to casual meetings instead of entering into relationships is certainly not so strong that it could be demonstrated on a large scale. However, it can still affect individuals who slide into online addiction, aggression, or a pattern of permanent non‑commitment and thereby impair their ability to form relationships.

While individuals or groups may be particularly vulnerable, the majority of users can be expected to show resilience against possible impairments to their ability to form relationships. For most, possible effects on relationship ability and willingness to commit are likely to be at most temporary and will end when those concerned become aware of their lasting need for commitment and enter into a partnership presumably found outside the dating apps.

This is precisely what the results of a study by Head (2019) point to, which examined the effects of using dating apps on women using qualitatively evaluated interviews and quantitatively evaluated questionnaires:

  • In the quantitative evaluation, no mean differences were found between users and non‑users in self‑esteem or in the risk of experiencing sexual assault. No general negative effects of using dating apps could be identified. In the differentiated qualitative analysis of the interviews, participants reported, on the one hand, negative experiences of sexual assault and pressure to have sex, as well as experienced degradation and reduction to the body; on the other hand, they also reported positive experiences because contact barriers were removed, positive experimentation with their own sexuality, and a gain in self‑esteem.

Dating apps thus seem less suitable for people who are specifically looking for a long‑term relationship. However, they also offer advantages and opportunities alongside the risks, in the sense of playful exploration and experimentation with sexuality and relationship needs.

The strong overrepresentation of young people in the apps suggests that these are experiential needs whose expression can certainly also have developmental value.

Viewed analogously, dating apps seem to perform functions similar to discotheques in the offline world, where the younger generation is also strongly overrepresented and where far more casual contacts than lasting partnerships arise. On the other hand, some people who meet in discotheques do develop serious relationships. It is likely similar with dating apps.

← Back: Choosing the Right Platform | Table of Contents of the Book | Next: Dating Platforms →

 

Become part of the
Consonance-Community!

Register now