Coye Cheshire & Andrew Fiore June 30, 2015 // Computer-Mediated Communication Intimate relationships

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore1 Romantic love — a timeless tradition?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore2 (Gupta & Singh 1982)

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore3 Styles of love Eros: passionate love Ludus: game-playing love (flirtation?) Storge: companionate love (deep friendship) Pragma: storge + ludus — practical love Mania: eros + ludus — intense, jealous love Agape: eros + storge — unselfish, giving love

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore4

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore5 63m know someone who has used a dating site 16m have used a dating site themselves 53m know someone who has gone on a date 7m have gone on a date themselves 29% of online adults think online daters desperate (but only 20% of those single and looking) 64% of online dating users think the large pool helps people find a better date 47% of all online adults concur

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore6 ? Individuals Dyads Populations

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore7

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore10 7 seeks 10 for an awkward time “Marriage markets” — exchange theory  Opportunity cost of staying with current mate Some points to ponder:  Why wouldn’t a 7 want a 10?  What stops us from trading up repeatedly?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore11

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore12 Gourmet jam is not a date

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore13

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore14 Online dating profiles  Combination of categorical descriptors, free text self-description, and photos  Highly optimized self-presentations  Carefully selected detail  Unlimited time to craft  Exaggerations? Lies?  A lot of people lie a little (Hancock et al. 2007)  Do they reflect actual self? Ideal self?

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore15

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore16

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore17 Attractiveness of whole profiles Men + Photo attractive + Free-text attractive + Masculine – Warm and kind in photo + Genuine/trustworthy in photo + Photo attractive x fixed-choice attractive x free-text attractive Women + Photo attractive + Free-text attractive – Masculine + Extraverted + Self-esteem in photo + Feminine in photo

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore18 Men’s profile attractiveness

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore19

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore20

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore21

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore22 Most people are not startlingly beautiful or magically attractive. But someone who seems just moderately nice — to most people — can flower under the imaginative attention of a lover’s eye. Not … because the lover is somehow gilding the other with fictitious charms; but because the kind of attention the lover brings allows less obvious qualities to be seen and appreciated. — Armstrong (2002)

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore23

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore24

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore25

6/30/2015Computer-Mediated Communication — Cheshire & Fiore26