3
Online Relationships
Although the Internet was not originally designed to be a social space, it did not take long for users to start appropriating it in social ways. Much of what we do online is social, and research has demonstrated that psychologically healthy relationships can be formed and maintained online. As outlined in this chapter, scholars have also learnt that these relationships are not always the same as their offline counterparts (sometimes they are closer or more intimate and sometimes they are more transitory). This chapter begins with a brief overview of some of the main theories developed prior to the advent of the Internet to explain relationship formation. It is important to consider these theories with regard to explaining the initiation, development and maintenance of relationships formed on the Internet; however, it has also been necessary to develop new theories to explain some of the observed differences in the ways people relate online compared with in more traditional spaces.
3.1 TRADITIONAL RELATIONSHIPS: OFFLINE REALM
What comes to mind when you think about how a ‘traditional’ offline romantic relationship develops from initiation to commitment? How you imagine these trajectories is quite possibly different from the way your parents’ relationship developed, which is again different from the development of other romantic relationships in other cultures as well as in the distant past. It is important to be mindful of this point as you read the literature on relationship formation.
Romantic attraction is a fairly new motivator for bringing couples together (see Whitty & Carr, 2006). In early nineteenth‐century Europe, marriages were often arranged (Murstein, 1974; Rice, 1996) and in current times some cultures still have arranged marriages. Courtship was very formal in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and families still had a say in whom their children would marry (Cate & Lloyd, 1992). It was not until the mid‐twentieth century, in Westernized cultures, that courtship became more informal and the peer group established the rules of dating (Mongeau, Hale, Johnson & Hillis, 1993). The sexual revolution of the 1960s in Westernized culture changed courting for both men and women, bringing about the sort of courtship you might have imagined when you thought about how your parents met. This time period brought about more choice for individuals; marriage was no longer necessary for a couple to represent their commitment, and cohabitating became a popular choice.
It is important to note that many theories about romantic relationships are based on specifically Western norms of the 1960s onwards. Below we summarize some of the theories that aim to explain how and why romantic relationships develop.
3.1.1 Social evolutionary theory
In brief, social evolutionary theory explains that, through natural selection, humans have inherited certain traits and emotional reactions. Humans have evolved to value certain qualities in the opposite sex. When it comes to forming romantic relationships, the more an individual possesses certain characteristics, the more likely they are to attract others of the opposite sex (Buss, 1987). According to this theory, women are more attracted to men who can provide for their offspring. Men, in contrast, are attracted to women who are fertile and thus reproductively valuable. Numerous studies on attraction have found support for this theory, finding that men seek out women who are physically attractive and that women are more romantically interested in men who have high socioeconomic status (see, e.g., Buss & Barnes, 1986; Greenless & McGrew, 1994; Kenrick, Sadalla, Groth & Trost, 1990; Townsend & Wasserman, 1997).
3.1.2 Social penetration theory
In contrast, social penetration theory considers the development of romantic relationships (and can also be applied to friendships). The theory was proposed by Altman and Taylor (1973) and has been modified by others (e.g., Morton, Alexander, & Altman, 1976). According to this theory, relationships move from less intimate to more intimate involvement over time. The process has been described using an onion analogy, arguing that people self‐disclose deeper and deeper aspects about themselves as a relationship progresses. This theory discusses the depth and breadth of relationship formation. Depth represents dimensions that start at the surface and move to the central, core aspects of personality. Breadth refers to information about a broad range of topics, such as one’s family, career and so forth. According to social penetration theory, in the early phases of relationship development, one moves with caution, discussing less intimate topics and checking the conversations for signs of reciprocity. Gradually one feels safer and conveys other aspects of oneself.
3.1.3 Exchange and equity theories
Exchange and equity theories have examined the types of choices individuals make when selecting a romantic partner. Exchange theory explains relationships in terms of rewards and costs. Thibaut and Kelley (1959) developed the first of these theories, arguing that, whatever our feelings are for someone (no matter how pure and admirable our motives might seem), individuals pursue relationships with others only so long as those relationships are satisfying in terms of the overall rewards and costs. According to exchange theory, individuals try to maximize their profits; that is, the rewards should outweigh the costs. These theorists also argued that, in order to predict how satisfied an individual is likely to be with a given relationship, it is necessary to take their expectations into account. For instance, individuals develop expectations about relationships based on their past relationships and observations of relationship outcomes with other people similar to themselves. Therefore, for them to be satisfied with a relationship, the outcomes must match or exceed these comparison levels. Like exchange theory, equity theory suggests that individuals in personal relationships try to maximize their outcomes. Advocates of this theory argue that, when individuals find themselves in inequitable relationships, they experience distress, and the degree of distress increases in proportion to the perceived inequity. When individuals experience such distress, they will attempt to restore equity.
In contrast to Thibaut and Kelley’s (1959) theory, which states that the information individuals use to generate comparison levels comes from their own past experiences and/or from observations of similar others, equity theory focuses on the relative contributions and outcomes of the partners. Therefore, the relevant information for deciding what is fair in the relationship comes from within the relationship. Those who make more of a contribution should expect to get more out of it; those who put in less should expect less from the relationship. There is also a fair amount of research to support these theories. Harrison and Saeed (1977), for example, performed a content analysis of 800 heterosexual personal ads. They found complementary but gendered differences between what individuals offered of themselves and what they hoped for in a potential partner. In other words, they found that individuals sought out others of about equal attractiveness to themselves and that, if they sought out someone more attractive, they typically offered some other quality in return (e.g., social status and wealth) to balance out the difference.
3.2 APPLYING OLD THEORIES TO ONLINE RELATIONSHIPS
New theories have been developed to explain how people initiate, develop and maintain relationships in cyberspace and how those relationships progress to offline spaces. Before outlining these new theories, however, this chapter considers how some of the above theories have been applied to explain online relationships.
3.2.1 Social evolutionary theory
Some of the gender differences that social evolutionary theory predicts in attraction to the opposite sex are evident online. Dawson and McIntosh (2006), for example, found that in online personal ads men were more likely to write ads that emphasized wealth while women were more likely to place emphasis on physical attributes. With respect to online dating (a topic we consider in more detail in Chapter 4), researchers have found that women are more likely to go to greater efforts to have an attractive photograph representing themselves on their profile (Whitty, 2008a; Whitty & Carr, 2006). Moreover, women, more than men, lie about their looks or use outdated photographs, while men are more likely to exaggerate or lie about their social status. Whitty and Buchanan (2010), in their study of online dating screen names, found that men more than women were attracted to screen names that indicated physical attractiveness, and women more than men were attracted to screen names that indicated intelligence or were neutral. Similarly, men were more motivated than women to contact screen names that indicated physical attractiveness, and women were more motivated than men to contact screen names that indicated intellectual characteristics.
3.2.2 Social penetration theory
Researchers have found that, when individuals are online, they are likely to self‐disclose depth and breadth aspects about themselves more quickly than they might face to face (e.g., Joinson, 2001). Given that self‐disclosure can be different online compared with traditional settings, new theories have been developed to explain this type of relating (see the sections Disinhibition Effect and Hyperpersonal Theory later in this chapter). It is important, however, to understand, as this chapter demonstrates, that one theory cannot be applied to explain the whole of online communications; for example, as will be demonstrated in Chapter 4, social penetration theory cannot be applied to explain relationships initiated from an online dating site (Whitty, 2008a).
3.2.3 Exchange theory and equity theory
Researchers have described the characteristics online daters look for in others as an exhaustive shopping list (Whitty, 2008a; Whitty & Carr, 2006). These researchers have argued that, on online dating sites, people treat themselves and others as commodities. Exchange theory and equity theory can be applied here to explain the seeking out of a balance between attractive qualities (e.g., looks, hobbies, personality) in others and oneself. We will examine these notions further in Chapter 4.
3.3 NEW THEORIES TO EXPLAIN ONLINE RELATING
Despite the utility of the above theories, scholars have learnt that how people interact and relate online can sometimes be very different from how they interact and relate in more traditional spaces. Given this difference in relating, new theories have been devised to explain some of the unique interactions that take place in some online spaces. This chapter now considers these theories.
3.3.1 Disinhibition effect
Researchers have found that, in some online spaces, individuals are more likely to open up about aspects of themselves in cyberspace and act out behaviours they might not otherwise manifest in traditional face‐to‐face settings (Joinson, 2001). This is known as the ‘disinhibition effect’ (Suler, 2004). Suler (2004) describes this as a double‐edged sword, as some people reveal secret emotions, fears and wishes or show unusual acts of kindness and generosity, which Suler refers to as ‘benign disinhibition’. Barak, Boniel‐Nissim and Suler (2008) found that, because of the online disinhibition effect, individuals are able to open up more in online support groups. This, they argue, fosters personal empowerment, control, self‐confidence, and improved feelings. In contrast, there are times when people are ruder, more critical, angry or threatening than they typically are face to face. This Suler (2004) calls ‘toxic disinhibition’. Cyberharassment is an example of this type of toxic disinhibition (we examine this topic in more detail in Chapter 13).
3.3.2 Social presence theory
Social presence theory was one of the first theories to be applied to online settings. Notably, this theory was first devised when individuals were communicating online exclusively via textual exchanges. The theory posits that social presence is the feeling one has that other individuals are involved in a communication exchange. Since online communication involves fewer nonverbal cues (such as facial expression, posture, dress and so forth) and auditory cues in comparison to face‐to‐face communication, it has been said to be extremely low in social presence (Hiltz, Johnson & Turoff, 1986). According to this theory, as social presence declines, communication becomes more impersonal. In contrast, when more information is available about how one physically looks, this leads to greater positive regard. Hence, given that there is less social presence online compared with on other media, online communication has been said to be less personal and intimate. The problem with this theory, with regards to online relationships, is that genuine and intimate relationships form online. Given the evidence contradicts what this theory predicts, other theories have subsequently emerged to explain how real relationships are formed via text in online environments.
3.3.3 Social information processing theory
Walther (1995) criticized the early theories, such as social presence theory. While he still subscribed to the reduced social cues view, he believed that many of these studies did not account adequately for time. Given the shortcomings of previous research, Walther and his colleagues sought to develop a more thorough understanding of the exchanges that take place in online environments. In doing so, Walther came up with the ‘social information processing theory’. This theory proposes that the main difference between face‐to‐face communication and CMC is the pace at which relationships develop in each space, rather than the capability to develop relationships. Walther argued that, although CMC may be more aggressive at first, with time this dissipates. Walther (1992, 1995, 1996) stressed in this theory that many of the differences between online relationships and face‐to‐face relationships diminish over time, and, although restricted bandwidth may limit the rate of information exchange, this problem can be alleviated by allowing longer and/or more frequent communication.
3.3.4 Hyperpersonal communication
Walther extended his social information processing theory to develop a hyperpersonal communication framework. This theory posits that ‘CMC users sometimes experience intimacy, affection, and interpersonal assessments of their partners that exceed those occurring in parallel face‐to‐face activities or alternative CMC contexts’ (Walther, Slovacek & Tidwell, 2001, p. 109). Walther (1996) argues that people use the technical capacities of the Internet to assist in impression development. According to this theory, receivers idealize partners because of the messages they receive, which they believe demonstrate similarities between themselves and their online partner as well as the latter’s highly desirable character. In contrast, senders exploit technology to selectively self‐present aspects about themselves that the other is assumed to deem socially desirable. The features of CMC allow individuals to be strategic in their presentation of self and the CMC environment creates a space where the outside world is filtered out and cognitive resources are instead employed to focus on the online communications. As Walther (2007) explains, ‘The CMC channel facilitates editing, discretion, and convenience, and the ability to tune out environmental distractions and re‐allocate cognitive resources in order to further enhance one’s message composition’ (p. 2539). Walther argues that, once this cycle of communication has begun, ‘CMC may create dynamic feedback loops wherein the exaggerated expectancies are confirmed and reciprocated through mutual interaction via the bias‐prone communication processes’ (p. 2539).
Researchers have found support for this theory in both dyads and groups. In a study by Hancock and Dunham (2001), for example, participants were assigned to either a text‐based conversation condition or a face‐to‐face dyadic interaction. In this study, 80 participants rated their partner’s personality profile on breadth and intensity. They found, just as the hyperpersonal theory would predict, that impressions formed in the CMC environment were less detailed but more intense than those formed face to face. In more recent research, Jiang, Bazarova and Hancock (2013) found that partners’ initial self‐disclosures via text‐based CMC were more intimate than disclosures made face to face. The communications that followed via CMC continued to be higher in intimacy.
3.3.5 Real Me
As outlined in Chapter 2, in the early 2000s researchers (e.g., Bargh, McKenna & Fitzsimons, 2002; McKenna & Bargh, 2000; McKenna, Green & Gleason, 2002) proposed that the Internet was the ideal space to present what Rogers termed the ‘real self’. They replaced the term with the idea of the ‘Real Me’, understanding this term to be equivalent to Rogers’ (1951/2003, 1961/2004) ‘real self’. They use the term ‘Real Me’ to mean the traits or characteristics that an individual possesses and would like to but is typically unable to express to most people. It is a construct that refers to the aspects of a person’s inner core (or who they ‘really are’). The researchers argued that this was because cyberspace was anonymous and that it is easier to express oneself to unknown individuals where the traditional gating features evident in face‐to‐face interactions are absent.
In Chapter 2 we highlighted how McKenna et al. (2002) went about developing the Real Me scale. As a reminder, the Real Me scale consists of four questions. The first two require a yes/no response. First, participants are asked whether they reveal more about themselves to people they know on the Internet than to people they know in real life (‘non‐Net friends’). Second, they are asked whether there are aspects that their Internet friends knew about them that they feel they could not share in ‘real life’ with non‐Net friends. The following two questions ask participants to rate on a seven‐point scale the extent to which their family and friends would be surprised if they were to read the participants’ emails and newsgroup postings. The study provided clear evidence for their theory.
These researchers employed an additional method to measure the Real Me. Bargh et al. (2002) asked participants to list a maximum of 10 traits that they believed they possessed and expressed to others in social settings (actual self) and a maximum of 10 traits they possessed and would like to express but typically felt unable to express (true self). They also created a reaction‐time self‐description task, where words appeared on a computer screen every few seconds and participants were asked to press keys signifying ‘yes’ and ‘no’ as quickly as possible to determine whether the word described them or not. In the experiments that used the reaction‐time task, the researchers found that the true‐self concept was more accessible in memory during Internet interactions and the actual self was more accessible during face‐to‐face interactions. In their final study they again found that participants were more likely to express their true‐self qualities to their partners over the Internet compared to in face‐to‐face interactions.
With regard to online relationships, these researchers have argued that some individuals are able to develop more intimate relationships online, given that many feel more comfortable opening up about themselves in this space – and self‐disclosure brings people closer together. They believe this is especially the case for those who are shy and socially anxious.
3.4 A BRIEF HISTORY OF ONLINE RELATING
It is almost impossible to imagine that less than 15 years ago most online romantic activities involved purely textual exchanges. New ways needed to be found to overcome the lack of nonverbal cues in online interactions (e.g., in the form of emoticons). It is important to understand the history of how the Internet looked around the turn of the millennium. In this section we outline some of the online spaces that emerged where online relationships began to be initiated and to form.
3.4.1 Bulletin board systems: Line‐by‐line relationships
Bulletin board systems were an especially popular space in the early days of the Internet, and many were quite sexual in nature. They were a precursor to the World Wide Web; however, they looked very different from spaces currently available on the Internet. They were typically single‐line systems, which meant that only one user could be online at a time. Individuals could only communicate using text. Even in the early days, they were social spaces where people met, had discussions, published articles, downloaded software and perhaps managed to play games. A systems operator would sometimes censor the messages on these sites, but in the main they were fairly liberal. Users could leave both public and private messages. Some bulletin board systems were especially designed for people to meet others who shared their sexual interests and to live out their sexual desires online or offline (as we will see in Chapter 5).
3.4.2 MUDs and MOOs: A place for real relationship formation
MUDs and MOOs were text‐based online virtual systems in which multiple users are connected at one time. These were spaces where interactive role‐playing games (very similar to the table‐top game Dungeons and Dragons) could be played. MUDs and MOOs were a form of synchronous communication. Participants took on a chosen character and communicated with other characters online.
In the early days, researchers were divided over whether real friendships and romantic relationships could actually form in these spaces. The empirical work suggested that they did and sometimes moved successfully from these spaces to the offline world. Parks and Roberts (1998), for instance, examined relationships developed in MOOs and found that most of the participants they surveyed (93.6%) formed at least one ongoing personal relationship during their time on MOOs. A variety of kinds of relationships were identified, including close friendships (40.6%), friendships (26.3%) and romantic relationships (26.3%). Parks and Roberts (1998) concluded that ‘the formation of personal relationships on MOOs can be seen as the norm rather than the exception’ (p. 529). Interestingly, the majority of the online relationships were with members of the opposite sex. This finding was consistent across ages and relationship status. As Parks and Roberts point out, this result is quite different from ‘real life’, where same‐sex friendships are far more common than cross‐sex friendships.
Utz (2000) examined the interactions that take place in MUDs. In her study, she found that 76.7% of her respondents reported forming a relationship online that developed offline. Of these, 24.5% were reported to be romantic. In addition, Utz found that, with time, people do learn how to ‘verbalize nonverbal cues’. The MUDders she surveyed typically used emoticons to denote feelings and emotions.
3.4.3 Chat rooms: Less means more
Chat rooms involve synchronous communication or, according to Whitty, Buchanan, Joinson and Meredith (2012), ‘near synchronous’ communication. Most chat rooms have a particular theme, although this is not necessary. When a user enters a chat room, they can type a message that will be visible to all other individuals. Hundreds of people can be in the same virtual room at the same time typing messages to the group. Chat rooms are similar to instant messaging, except with more than two people. Sometimes these rooms are moderated. Chat rooms were very popular in the early days of the Internet and were text‐only. In more recent times individuals often represent themselves as an avatar. Moreover, individuals share photographs and videos and use webcams.
In the past, researchers found that romantic relationships and friendships were initiated and developed in chat rooms. Whitty and Gavin (2001), for instance, learnt from interviewing 60 Internet users that ideals that are important in traditional relationships, such as trust, honesty and commitment, are just as important in relationships formed in these spaces. Rather than finding evidence of less ‘real’ or less satisfying relationships online, Whitty and Gavin found that some of the participants in their study reported that their relationships seemed to work better solely on the Internet.
Whitty and Gavin also found that chat room users reported feeling less self‐conscious and less aware of being socially evaluated, which in turn allowed them to reveal intimate details about themselves while maintaining distance and personal space. Ironically, many of the male participants believed that by disguising their identity they could be more emotionally honest and open.
3.4.4 Discussion groups and Usenet newsgroups: A place for the ‘Real Me’
A discussion group or Usenet newsgroup is a continuous public discussion about a particular topic. This is a form of asynchronous communication. Sometimes these groups are moderated. They were very popular in the early days of the Internet. These groups still exist today and are often still in text‐based form only, although pictures and video can also be posted. With regard to personal relationships, Parks and Floyd (1996) found in their research on newsgroups that almost two thirds of their sample (60.7%) admitted to forming a personal relationship with someone they had met for the first time in a newsgroup. Of these, 7.9% stated that the relationship was romantic. They found that women were more likely than men to have formed a personal relationship online. It is also noteworthy that those who participated in more newsgroups were more likely to have developed personal relationships. Parks and Floyd also found that many of the relationships that began online also moved to interactions in other channels, including, for some, face to face.
As explained earlier in this chapter, McKenna et al. (2002) were interested in what they refer to as the ‘Real Me’, which they define as traits or characteristics that individuals possess and would like to express but are usually unable to demonstrate to others. In this study the authors were interested in learning whether individuals who are better able to disclose their Real Me online than offline are more equipped to form close relationships online and then take these relationships offline successfully. The authors randomly selected 20 Usenet newsgroups to include in their study. Over a three‐week period, questionnaires were emailed to every fifth poster in each of the newsgroups (excluding spam). The first study found that, when people conveyed their Real Me online, they developed strong Internet relationships and took these relationships offline. Two years after this initial study, 354 of the 568 participants were emailed a follow‐up survey (the remainder of the sample had email addresses that were no longer valid). In line with the researchers’ prediction, these relationships remained relatively stable and durable over the two‐year period. McKenna et al. (2002) concluded from this research that
rather than turning to the Internet as a way of hiding from real life and from forming real relationships, individuals use it as a means not only of maintaining ties with existing family and friends but also of forming close and meaningful new relationships in a relatively nonthreatening environment. The Internet may also be helpful for those who have difficulty forging relationships in face‐to‐face situations because of shyness, social anxiety, or a lack of social skills. (p. 30)
3.5 CONTEMPORARY ONLINE SPACES
In modern times, the Internet has become a more popular place for couples to meet. Dutton, Helsper, Whitty, Buckwalter and Lee (2008) sampled married couples in Australia, Spain and the UK and found that 9% of married couples in Australia 6% in the UK and 5% in Spain had first met their partner online. The largest proportion of married couples that met online ranged from 26 to 55 years old. Of interest was the finding that using CMC is likely to introduce people to others whom they likely would not have met through other means; that is, the Internet opens people up to more diversity in their choice of partner, for example by introducing individuals with greater differences in age or education but with more similar interested and values. In more recent research on the same project (Oxford Internet Institute, 2011), researchers found that, in a pan‐European study that also included Australia, Brazil, Japan and the US, 15% of married couples had met their partner online. The most common places included online dating sites, followed by chat rooms and then SNSs. Other places included a personal website, an online community, an online gaming site and being directly contacted via email or instant messaging.
The modes of CMC previously discussed in this chapter mainly employed text‐based exchanges. However, today, many spaces are not visually anonymous. The features of the space might affect how we interact with one another and how we perceive each other. Walther et al. (2001) evaluated the timing of presenting a physical image of oneself online in short‐term and long‐term virtual international groups. They found that seeing a photograph of members of the virtual group prior to and during computer conferencing had a positive effect on intimacy/affection and social attractiveness for short‐term, unacquainted groups. Virtual groups who saw photographs after having known each other for some time experienced less affection and social attraction once the photograph was introduced compared with long‐term users who never saw each other’s photographs.
In a more recent trend, we often link up online with people who we already know offline. Subrahmanyam and Greenfield (2008), for example, found that adolescents use electronic communication, such as instant messaging, email, text messaging, blogs and SNSs, to reinforce existing relationships, both with friends and romantic partners. Moreover, they contend that adolescents are increasingly integrating these tools into their offline worlds. For example, SNSs are used to garner information about new people they meet in their offline world. This section next turns to consider more contemporary online spaces and the ways in which relationships are developed within these spaces (one of these spaces, online dating sites, will be examined in detail in Chapter 4).
3.5.1 MMORPGs: Still a very social space
Earlier in this chapter, we wrote about MUDs and MOOs. MMORPGs have largely taken over from these earlier spaces. In MMORPGs, players take on the role of a fictional character, typically in a fantasy world, and have agency over many of their character’s actions. MMORPGs differ from MUDS and MOOS in that they are not solely text‐based; they also have sophisticated graphics. In addition to playing the game, individuals can write text to one another and be social in these spaces. The worlds created in these games continue to evolve even when the player is absent from the game – examples include EverQuest, the Final Fantasy series, World of Warcraft and, more recently, Warhammer. The popularity of these games continues to grow. More recently, the nature of this interaction with some MMORPGs has become more ‘adult’ based. Age of Conan, Requiem: Bloodymare, 2Moons and Warhammer, for example, provide increased opportunities for extreme violence and more graphic depictions of violent outcomes.
Researchers have found that players are still drawn to these games, in part, for their social element. Yee (2006) has identified five motivations for why individuals play MMORPGs, including achievement, relationships, immersion, escapism and manipulation. In his work he found that male players are more likely to be driven by the achievement and motivation factors, while female players are more likely to be driven by the relationships factor. He also found that players developed meaningful relationships with others they met in MMORPGs. Interestingly, Yee (2001) found that 60% of male players and 75% of female players believed that some of their EverQuest friendships were comparable with or better than their offline friendships. He also found that 3% of male players and 15% of female players formed offline relationships (i.e., married, dating or engaged to) with someone they first met in Norrath (the realm depicted in EverQuest).
Second Life is another example of a MMORPG. It is an online virtual world developed by Linden Lab and was launched in 2003. Second Life users, known as residents, interact with each other through avatars. Unlike other MMORPGs, there is no game objective. Instead residents meet other residents, explore and help to create the virtual environment. Participants can socialize, participate in individual and group activities, and create and trade virtual property. Romantic relationships and friendships have been known to be initiated and develop in Second Life. Gilbert, Murphy and Avalos (2011) surveyed 199 participants who had been involved in intimate relationships in Second Life. They found that the majority of participants viewed their Second Life relationships as real rather than as a form of game‐playing.
3.5.2 Social networking sites: Face‐to‐face and virtual friends
Boyd and Ellison (2007) define SNSs
as web‐based services that allow individuals to (1) construct a public or semi‐public profile within a bounded system, (2) articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and (3) view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system. The nature and nomenclature of these connections may vary from site to site.
Friendster, which emerged in 2002, was one of the first mainstream SNSs, and was followed by Myspace and LinkedIn. Facebook was launched in 2004 and is currently the largest SNS in the world.
Research into SNSs has found that adolescents and young adults use these sites to strengthen various aspects of their offline connections (Pempek, Yermolayeva & Calvert, 2009; Subrahmanyam, Reich, Waechter & Espinoza, 2008). (We will consider adolescents and online relationships further in Chapter 7.) However, researchers have found that SNSs are also being used to find new friends (Raacke & Bonds‐Raacke, 2008). Interestingly, Pempek et al. (2009) found that Facebook users spend more time observing content than posting content.
Researchers have found that there are specific social benefits derived from being a member of an SNS (Ellison, Steinfield & Lampe, 2007, 2011; Steinfield, Ellison & Lampe, 2008). Ellison et al. (2007), for instance, found a strong association between use of Facebook and three types of social capital: bridging social capital, bonding social capital and maintained social capital, the strongest relationship being with bridging social capital. Moreover, it was found that Facebook usage might have greater benefits for users with low self‐esteem and low life satisfaction.
Not all experiences on SNSs are positive. Muise, Christofides & Desmarais (2009) found that increased Facebook use significantly predicted Facebook‐related jealousy. Utz and Beukeboom (2011) examined SNS jealousy and SNS relationship happiness and the consequences of SNS use for romantic relationships. Overall, they found that participants experienced more happiness than jealousy in reaction to their partner’s activities on SNSs. However, individuals low in self‐esteem experienced more jealously related to SNSs than those high in self‐esteem. Self‐esteem also moderated the effects of SNS use and the need for popularity on SNS‐related jealousy and SNS‐related relationship happiness.
How you present yourself on an SNS can have implications. Tong, Van der Heide, Langwell and Walther (2008), for example, examined the relationship between the number of friends on a Facebook profile and observers’ ratings of attractiveness and extroversion. The study found a curvilinear relationship between the number of friends on an individual’s SNS and the individual’s social attractiveness. In the condition where the profile indicated the fewest friends (102), ratings of social attractiveness were the lowest and the highest ratings were for the profile that had approximately 300 friends. However, any profile that had more than 300 friends declined to a level approaching the profile with 102 friends. Furthermore, these authors found that individuals with profiles that had more friends were more likely to be judged as extroverted; however, the greatest degree of extroversion was associated with a moderate number of friends and declined with large numbers of friends. Therefore, individuals with profiles that had the largest number of friends were more likely to be judged as introverted.
Getting to know a person through a SNS can be potentially different from knowing someone via other online spaces or in face‐to‐face interactions. Antheunis, Valkenburg and Peter (2010), for example, looked at the uncertainty reduction process in initial online interactions on a Dutch SNS. They found that participants used three types of uncertainty reduction strategies: passive, active and interactive. Passive strategies were the most commonly used, followed by interactive and active strategies. Importantly, these authors point out that,
In contrast to text‐based CMC environments, social network sites have more auditory and visual cues available and are relatively open systems. Apparently, this allows CMC participants not only to use interactive [uncertainty reduction strategies] (i.e., direct questioning and self‐disclosure), but also to observe their target persons (passive strategy), or to ask other participants for information about the target persons (active strategy). (p. 106)
These researchers, however, also found that, although the passive strategy was the most frequently used, the interactive strategy was the only one that reduced the information seeker’s level of uncertainty. As is to be expected, they also found that a low level of uncertainty led to social attraction. More importantly, however, they found that the relationship between level of uncertainty and social attraction is not direct but is rather moderated by the perceived valence of the information (i.e., the extent to which an individual perceives the information of the target person to be positive or negative, regardless of its credibility or quality).
3.6 INTERACTING IN VARIOUS SPACES
As discussed in Chapter 2, scholars need to be more cognisant of the fact that people communicate and develop and maintain friendships and romantic relationships across various spaces. No longer can researchers refer to the offline realm as the ‘real world’. As also discussed in Chapter 2, this means that individuals may well have multiple presentations of self across multiple spaces. What implications might this have for relationship maintenance?
De Andrea and Walther (2011) examined the above question by investigating the ways in which observers explain discrepancies between Facebook self‐portrayals and impressions formed through other interpersonal interactions. Participants were easily able to identify online self‐presentations that were misleading among both friends and acquaintances; however, they rated online self‐presentations of acquaintances to be more misleading than friends’ presentations. Moreover, misleading presentations of self were more likely to lead to judgements of untrustworthiness and hypocrisy when an acquaintance made the misleading presentation. Although acquaintances were given harsher judgements, friends were not let off the hook. Friends who posted dishonest self‐portrayals were rated as untrustworthy (with the friend, rather than the act, being judged as immoral and dishonourable) and hypocritical. The results of this study suggests that individuals are unforgiving of discrepancies between online and offline self‐presentations.
3.7 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE FIELD
As already acknowledged in this chapter, the Internet will continue to grow and new fads will arise, and so it is difficult to confidently predict what psychologists will be researching with regard to relationships in the future. No doubt connection speeds will become quicker and there will be even more bandwidth available. Most scholars, to date, have considered the differences between online spaces and offline spaces when it comes to initiating, developing and maintaining relationships. However, the reality is that individuals use a variety of media together with traditional communication. When getting to know someone in the early days of a relationship, no longer is it typically the case that individuals get to know each other in one space online, switching between media until they finally meet face to face. Instead, individuals incorporate various media into their relationship formation and development. New research about relationships needs to take these changes in media usage into account.
3.8 CONCLUSIONS
The world has changed very quickly since the 1990s. However, as this chapter has pointed out, not everything we do when it comes to forming relationships is completely different from how it was before the advent of the Internet. New theories have been developed to explain online relating; however, many of the theories developed to explain traditional forms of dating and relationship development still provide a useful lens. New theories have found that sometimes the relationships people form online are closer and more intense (hyperpersonal) compared with those formed face to face. Researchers are also looking into the difference between knowing someone visually online compared with being visually anonymous. Moreover, studies have found that individuals are unforgiving when there is a lack of consistency in self‐presentation across different spaces. In the future, psychologists might not use the binary view of online and offline relationships that many scholars currently take. Moreover, in considerations of relationship development, we would recommend that scholars take into account the features of each space and the unique rules govern those spaces.
In Chapter 4, we look at one type of online space in more detail, considering environments where individuals seek out potential romantic partners – online dating. As in this chapter, you will learn that there are problems with self‐presentation on these sites, which sometimes makes it difficult for daters to decide whether they want to know more about a particular person. Nonetheless, many people do successfully form relationships after meeting on these sites.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
- Do you have any friends who you exclusively interact with on an SNS? Are these any different from the ones you know face to face?
- Consider Walther’s hyperpersonal theory. Have you ever formed relationships online that felt closer than your face‐to‐face relationships?
- Consider McKenna’s notion of the Real Me. Have you found it is easier to self‐disclose your true self online?
- How do you envisage the future when it comes to meeting friends and romantic partners via digital technologies?
SUGGESTED READINGS
- De Andrea, D. C. & Walther, J. B. (2011). Attributions for inconsistences between online and offline self‐presentations. Communication Research, 38(6), 805–825.
- Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C. & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: Exploring the relationship between college students’ use of online social networks and social capital. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12, 1143–1168.
- Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self‐disclosure in computer‐mediated communication: The role of self‐awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177–192.
- McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S. & Gleason, M. E. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9–31.
- Tong, S. T., Van der Heide, B., Langwell, L. & Walther, J. B. (2008). Too much of a good thing? The relationship between number of friends and interpersonal impressions on Facebook. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 13, 531–549.
- Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self‐presentation in computer‐mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538–2557.
- Whitty, M. T. & Carr, A. N. (2006). Cyberspace romance: The psychology of online relationships. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.