With the advent of technology came a full force of interruptions in various walks of life. The internet was meant to make life easier and connect people who are far apart. However, the technology came with a sweeping effect and even penetrated into our private lives of dating and relationships. Many people today resort to find partners and love online then translate it to the physical world. This gave rise to the success of dating sites and apps such as Tinder. The online presence has become an arena which documents the changing socio-cultural values and norms that surround the formation of computer-mediated relationships. Technology provides an opportunity to learn important aspects of online behavior such as self-presentation processes. Given the assumptions Social Information Processing Theory, our self-presentation in an online dating context facilitates the process of becoming romantically or intimately involved with another person by creating an ideal person to convey a particular impression to others.
One thing is certain in the online dating arena. There is a high complexity in assessing the identity of the other party. It involves deconstructing, reading hidden cues, and employing both active and passive processes in trying to decipher the true presentation. Social Information Presentation (SIP) theory considers how people use the internet to develop impressions and how these impressions affect how others interpret them. Conceptualized in 1992 by Joseph Walther, this model explains that it is possible for individuals using computer-mediated communication (CMC) to develop affinity over time ( Ellison, Heino, & Gibbs, 2006) . People present themselves online using a series of signals that make us convey our particular impression to others. In dating apps such as Tinder, people always present themselves with the motivation of obtaining self-worth validation from others. This is especially true because they seek positive feedback on their physical appearance and ideologies. The choice of photograph, the language used, and username, among others, are important factors used to send certain signals that communicate specific qualities in online interaction.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
One study found out that when filling an online dating or any social media profile, there is always competing motivations such as presenting information more accurately versus presenting oneself as attractive as possible ( Bargh, McKenna, & Fitzsimons, 2002 ). Most times, the latter win. This is because of the existence of several competing profiles that look so perfect and we want to look like or beat them. The filtering of what to include in an online platform makes it possible for an individual to create different forms of self. One type is the real self that involves a person giving attributes that he or she actually possesses. The second form is the ideal self, where the CMC user shows characteristics that they wish they had or think they will have in the future. Lastly, there is the ought self, which describes the attributes that an individual believes he or she should possess.
Another study found out that the less information provided, the more attraction occurs between two parties ( Norton, Frost, & Ariely, 2007). Generalizing help people to relate to the information provided. Statistics show that about 15% of adults in the United States report they have used mobile dating apps or online dating sites. This translates to about 1 in 10 people in the country. On average, these users spend 22 minutes each time they visit a dating site. According to Pew Research (2016), online dating is characterized by five facts. In this list, there are some that are directly concerned or are in line with the presentation of oneself is that one-in-five people who date in these platforms have asked another party to help them with their profile. This involves the presentation of the picture, communication, and the like.
Regardless of the form of self a person uses, the individual on the other side processes this information continuously. The receiver then creates a perception of the sender and bases them on the verbal cues received. This is where SIP theory comes in and explains how a person uses the information to create an interest that may lead to a strong bond that can be as effective as a physical relationship. The effect of developing intimacy from processing information offered online is captured in the statistics showing that 5.5% of couples in the United States have been together as a result of online dating. When put against the 81% of the users lying about their age, weight, and height it means that people often put the profiles that are ideal and adjusted.
The other information that makes people become intimate with other CMC users is the ambiguity of information when creating profiles. People find generalizing to facilitate the process of information processing. For instance, when a person says that they like good music, it is easier for another person to relate to this. There is a wide spectrum of what qualifies as “good music.” However, when a person says that they like a specific type of music, say that of Metallica, the other party that does not like this type of music may find a way of processing incompatibility. It has been found that the more a person gives out information, the more the opposite individual has opportunities to assess dissimilarity. In this regard, the user carefully decides on the amount of information they should disclose.
In conclusion, the internet is a vast platform that connects a lot of people including potential intimate partners. Social Information Presentation (SIP) theory considers how people use the internet to develop impressions and how these impressions affect how others interpret them. People only provide the information that is enough to create an ideal self and what would be attractive to the opposite person. This leads to the receiver to read only the information and validate the sender as a potential fit. The more information sent, the more the opportunities for assessing for dissimilarity.
References
Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y., & 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 (1), 33-48.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of computer-mediated communication , 11 (2), 415-441.
Hallam, L., Walrave, M., & De Backer, C. J. (2018). Information Disclosure, Trust and Health Risks in Online Dating. In Sexting (pp. 19-38). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Norton, M. I., Frost, J. H., & Ariely, D. (2007). Less is more: The lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. Journal of personality and social psychology , 92 (1), 97.
Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2016). 5 facts about online dating. Pew Research Center , 29 .
