essay dating apps

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

124 Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

Online dating has become increasingly popular in the digital age, with millions of people turning to the internet to find love and companionship. With the rise of dating apps and websites, the world of online dating has opened up a whole new realm of possibilities for singles looking to connect with others.

If you're considering writing an essay on online dating, here are 124 topic ideas and examples to get you started:

• The pros and cons of online dating
• How online dating has changed the way we meet and connect with others
• The impact of online dating on traditional dating practices
• The role of technology in shaping modern relationships
• The psychology of online dating: why do people turn to the internet to find love?
• The dangers of online dating: how to stay safe while looking for love online
• The stigma of online dating: is it still taboo?
• The rise of niche dating sites: catering to specific interests and preferences
• The science of online dating: how algorithms and data analysis are revolutionizing the matchmaking process
• The future of online dating: what trends can we expect to see in the coming years?
• Online dating versus traditional dating: which is more effective?
• The impact of social media on online dating
• The economics of online dating: how much does it really cost to find love online?
• The role of gender in online dating: do men and women approach online dating differently?
• The influence of culture and ethnicity on online dating preferences
• The psychology of attraction in online dating: what makes someone swipe right?
• The role of photos in online dating profiles: do looks really matter?
• The rise of ghosting in online dating: why do people disappear without a trace?
• The impact of online dating on mental health and self-esteem
• The phenomenon of catfishing in online dating: how to spot a fake profile
• The role of communication in online dating: how to keep the conversation flowing
• The dos and don'ts of online dating: tips for success in the digital dating world
• The impact of online dating on long-distance relationships
• The influence of age on online dating preferences
• The role of education and income in online dating choices
• The influence of religion on online dating practices
• The impact of physical appearance on online dating success
• The role of humor in online dating profiles
• The influence of hobbies and interests on online dating compatibility
• The impact of online dating on marriage and divorce rates
• The rise of virtual dating during the COVID-19 pandemic
• The impact of online dating on LGBTQ+ relationships
• The influence of social status on online dating choices
• The role of personality tests in online dating
• The impact of online dating on hookup culture
• The influence of peer pressure on online dating choices
• The role of family and friends in online dating success
• The impact of online dating on traditional gender roles
• The influence of ageism in online dating
• The rise of sugar daddy and sugar baby relationships in online dating
• The impact of body image on online dating success
• The role of honesty and transparency in online dating profiles
• The influence of technology addiction on online dating behavior
• The impact of online dating on societal norms and values
• The rise of online dating scams: how to protect yourself from fraud
• The influence of astrology and horoscopes on online dating compatibility
• The role of race and ethnicity in online dating preferences
• The impact of social class on online dating choices
• The influence of language and communication barriers in online dating
• The rise of virtual reality dating experiences in the online dating world
• The impact of online dating on mental health and well-being
• The role of trust and intimacy in online dating relationships
• The influence of physical proximity on online dating success
• The impact of past relationships on online dating behavior
• The role of vulnerability and authenticity in online dating profiles
• The influence of social media influencers on online dating trends
• The rise of polyamory and open relationships in online dating
• The impact of cultural differences on online dating compatibility
• The role of attachment styles in online dating behavior
• The influence of societal pressure on online dating choices
• The impact of age gaps in online dating relationships
• The rise of virtual speed dating events in the online dating world
• The influence of travel and adventure on online dating preferences
• The role of spirituality and mindfulness in online dating success
• The impact of socioeconomic status on online dating behavior
• The influence of body positivity and self-love in online dating profiles
• The rise of virtual reality dating apps in the online dating market
• The impact of online dating on sexual health and consent
• The role of consent and boundaries in online dating interactions
• The influence of attachment styles on online dating compatibility
• The impact of cultural norms and values on online dating behavior
• The role of communication styles in online dating success
• The influence of introversion and extroversion on online dating preferences
• The rise of ethical non-monogamy in online dating
• The impact of distance and time zones on online dating relationships
• The role of emotional intelligence in online dating interactions
• The influence of self-esteem and self-worth on online dating behavior
• The impact of mental health struggles on online dating experiences
• The rise of video dating in the online dating world
• The role of mutual interests and hobbies in online dating compatibility
• The influence of political beliefs on online dating choices
• The impact of online dating on hookup culture and casual relationships

With so many potential topics to choose from, writing an essay on online dating can provide valuable insights into the changing landscape of modern relationships. Whether you're exploring the psychological aspects of online dating or analyzing the impact of technology on romantic connections, there's no shortage of ideas to explore in this fascinating field. So grab your keyboard and start exploring the world of online dating through the lens of your chosen topic ''' you never know what you might discover along the way.

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2024 Pitchgrade

Online Dating Apps Essays

How do online dating apps affect social dynamics, popular essay topics.

• American Dream
• Artificial Intelligence
• Black Lives Matter
• Bullying Essay
• Career Goals Essay
• Causes of the Civil War
• Child Abusing
• Civil Rights Movement
• Community Service
• Cultural Identity
• Cyber Bullying
• Death Penalty
• Depression Essay
• Domestic Violence
• Freedom of Speech
• Global Warming
• Gun Control
• Human Trafficking
• I Believe Essay
• Immigration
• Importance of Education
• Israel and Palestine Conflict
• Leadership Essay
• Legalizing Marijuanas
• Mental Health
• National Honor Society
• Police Brutality
• Pollution Essay
• Racism Essay
• Romeo and Juliet
• Same Sex Marriages
• Social Media
• The Great Gatsby
• The Yellow Wallpaper
• Time Management
• To Kill a Mockingbird
• Violent Video Games
• What Makes You Unique
• Why I Want to Be a Nurse
• Send us an e-mail

Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

🏆 best online dating topic ideas & essay examples, 👍 good essay topics on online dating, 📌 simple & easy online dating essay titles.

• Online Dating Platforms, Sex, and Relationships The most popular dating websites claim that their rates of a successful pairing are high, as they allow for an in-depth assessment of potential partners.
• An Online Dating Service for College Students: Biff Targets Marketing The issue that has to be answered in the case is what the college students, as target customers for online dating service, ideadlly would like to be offered.
• The Pitfalls of Online Dating These include the very real potential for deceit, interpersonal elements of physical attraction are absent in the online world and the time involved in interfacing with the computer reduces the ability of the individual to […]
• Online Dating for Aging Adults Considering the benefactors of the relationships that aging people develop through dating sites and applications also helps to determine the actual value of the tools in question.
• Online Dating: An Advocacy Campaign The proposed advocacy campaign is designed with the purpose of protecting people from the illegal conduct of those who use online dating websites to deceive others.
• Online Dating Start-Up Business Plan Due to this, a large number of online dating project has emerged in recent years, and the level of competition has increased as well.
• Relationships and Online Dating The creation of online dating sites and applications was most likely intended to eliminate these issues and make the process of finding new partners easy and stress-free.
• Advantages and Disadvantages of Online Dating Essay Advantages Unlike offline dating, online dating allows the user to interact with millions of people without having to travel. Similarly, with the use of online dating some people have been able to lie about their […]
• Assessing and Quantifying Local Network Effects in an Online Dating Market
• Choosing the Right Online Dating Site
• Better Results With Online Dating in the Digital Age
• Can Online Dating Replace Meeting a Person
• Comparison Between Online Dating and Traditional Dating
• Definition, Advantages, and Disadvantages of Online Dating
• Education and Income Attraction: An Online Dating Field Experiment
• Exploring the Benefits and Risks of Online Dating
• Has the Emergence of Online Dating Changed the Dynamic of Relationships
• How Matches Are Made in Online Dating Sites
• Getting the Most Out of Online Dating
• How Online Dating Has Altered the Process of Relationships
• Online Dating: Advantages and Disadvantages
• How Online Dating Services Make It Easy to Date and Hookup
• Individual and Social Societal Dimensions of Online Dating
• Conventional Dating Versus Online Dating
• The Good and Bad Effects of Online Dating
• Online Dating and Its Effect on Society
• The Online Dating Market: Theoretical and Methodological Considerations
• Online Dating Has Made Connecting With People Easier and More Accessible
• The Truth About Lying in Online Dating Profiles
• Online Dating Mistakes Men Make That Put Women Off
• Influence of Compatibility by Percentages and Initial Attraction on Online Dating Websites
• Online Dating Scams and Identity Theft
• A Discussion on the Negative Aspects of Online Dating
• Online Dating Tips for Single Parents
• A Discussion on the 21ST Century Trend of Online Dating
• Online Dating and Its Effects on the Internet Dating World
• The Evolution of Courting Through Online Dating
• Online Dating as the Future of Finding Relationships
• The Principles of Online Dating and the Issues That Comes With It
• The Aspects of Online Dating and Mate Preferences
• The Concept and People’s Expectations From Online Dating
• How Online Dating Is Threatening Monogamy
• The Role of Uncertainty Reduction Theory in Online Dating
• Discussion of Whether Online Dating Is Safe and Productive
• Meeting Others Through Online Dating Services
• Hunting for Love Through Online Dating
• The Rising Popularity of Online Dating: Key Elements
• Things to Remember When Participating in Online Dating
• Social Norms Essay Ideas
• Relationship Research Ideas
• Twitter Topics
• Cyberspace Topics
• Data Mining Titles
• Identity Theft Essay Ideas
• Virtual Reality Topics
• Family Problems Questions
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, January 24). Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/online-dating-essay-topics/

"Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." IvyPanda , 24 Jan. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/online-dating-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples'. 24 January.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/online-dating-essay-topics/.

1. IvyPanda . "Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/online-dating-essay-topics/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Online Dating Essay Topic Ideas & Examples." January 24, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/online-dating-essay-topics/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Dating Apps and Their Sociodemographic and Psychosocial Correlates: A Systematic Review

Ángel castro, juan ramón barrada.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

Correspondence: [email protected] ; Tel.: +34-978618101

Received 2020 Aug 17; Accepted 2020 Sep 5; Issue date 2020 Sep.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ).

The emergence and popularization of dating apps have changed the way people meet and interact with potential romantic and sexual partners. In parallel with the increased use of these applications, a remarkable scientific literature has developed. However, due to the recency of the phenomenon, some gaps in the existing research can be expected. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the empirical research of the psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps. A search was conducted in different databases, and we identified 502 articles in our initial search. After screening titles and abstracts and examining articles in detail, 70 studies were included in the review. The most relevant data (author/s and year, sample size and characteristics, methodology) and their findings were extracted from each study and grouped into four blocks: user dating apps characteristics, usage characteristics, motives for use, and benefits and risks of use. The limitations of the literature consulted are discussed, as well as the practical implications of the results obtained, highlighting the relevance of dating apps, which have become a tool widely used by millions of people around the world.

Keywords: dating apps, Tinder, Grindr, systematic review

1. Introduction

In the last decade, the popularization of the Internet and the use of the smartphone and the emergence of real-time location-based dating apps (e.g., Tinder, Grindr) have transformed traditional pathways of socialization and promoted new ways of meeting and relating to potential romantic and/or sexual partners [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ].

It is difficult to know reliably how many users currently make use of dating apps, due to the secrecy of the developer companies. However, thanks to the information provided by different reports and studies, the magnitude of the phenomenon can be seen online. For example, the Statista Market Forecast [ 5 ] portal estimated that by the end of 2019, there were more than 200 million active users of dating apps worldwide. It has been noted that more than ten million people use Tinder daily, which has been downloaded more than a hundred million times worldwide [ 6 , 7 ]. In addition, studies conducted in different geographical and cultural contexts have shown that around 40% of single adults are looking for an online partner [ 8 ], or that around 25% of new couples met through this means [ 9 ].

Some theoretical reviews related to users and uses of dating apps have been published, although they have focused on specific groups, such as men who have sex with men (MSM [ 10 , 11 ]) or on certain risks, such as aggression and abuse through apps [ 12 ].

Anzani et al. [ 1 ] conducted a review of the literature on the use of apps to find a sexual partner, in which they focused on users’ sociodemographic characteristics, usage patterns, and the transition from online to offline contact. However, this is not a systematic review of the results of studies published up to that point and it leaves out some relevant aspects that have received considerable research attention, such as the reasons for use of dating apps, or their associated advantages and risks.

Thus, we find a recent and changing object of study, which has achieved great social relevance in recent years and whose impact on research has not been adequately studied and evaluated so far. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the empirical research of psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps. By doing so, we intend to assess the state of the literature in terms of several relevant aspects (i.e., users’ profile, uses and motives for use, advantages, and associated risks), pointing out some limitations and posing possible future lines of research. Practical implications will be highlighted.

2. Materials and Methods

The systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [ 13 , 14 ], and following the recommendations of Gough et al. [ 15 ]. However, it should be noted that, as the objective of this study was to provide a state of the art view of the published literature on dating apps in the last five years and without statistical data processing, there are several principles included in the PRISMA that could not be met (e.g., summary measures, planned methods of analysis, additional analysis, risk of bias within studies). However, following the advice of the developers of these guidelines concerning the specific nature of systematic reviews, the procedure followed has been described in a clear, precise, and replicable manner [ 13 ].

2.1. Literature Search and Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

We examined the databases of the Web of Science, Scopus, and Medline, as well as PsycInfo and Psycarticle and Google Scholar, between 1 March and 6 April 2020. In all the databases consulted, we limited the search to documents from the last five years (2016–2020) and used general search terms, such as “dating apps” and “online dating” (linking the latter with “apps”), in addition to the names of some of the most popular and frequently used dating apps worldwide, such as “tinder”, “grindr”, and “momo”, to identify articles that met the inclusion criteria (see below).

The selection criteria in this systematic review were established and agreed on by the two authors of this study. The database search was carried out by one researcher. In case of doubt about whether or not a study should be included in the review, consultation occurred and the decision was agreed upon by the two researchers.

Four-hundred and ninety-three results were located, to which were added 15 documents that were found through other resources (e.g., social networks, e-mail alerts, newspapers, the web). After these documents were reviewed and the duplicates removed, a total of 502 records remained, as shown by the flowchart presented in Figure 1 . At that time, the following inclusion criteria were applied: (1) empirical, quantitative or qualitative articles; (2) published on paper or in electronic format (including “online first”) between 2016 and 2020 (we decided to include articles published since 2016 after finding that the previous empirical literature in databases on dating apps from a psychosocial point of view was not very large; in fact, the earliest studies of Tinder included in Scopus dated back to 2016; (3) to be written in English or Spanish; and (4) with psychosocial content. No theoretical reviews, case studies/ethnography, user profile content analyses, institutional reports, conference presentations, proceeding papers, etc., were taken into account.

Flowchart of the systematic review process.

Thus, the process of refining the results, which can be viewed graphically in Figure 1 , was as follows. Of the initial 502 results, the following exclusion criteria were applied: (1) pre-2016 documents (96 records excluded); (2) documents that either did not refer to dating apps or did so from a technological approach (identified through title and abstract; 239 records excluded); (3) published in a language other than English or Spanish (10 records excluded); (4) institutional reports, or analysis of the results of such reports (six records excluded); (5) proceeding papers (six records excluded); (6) systematic reviews and theoretical reflections (26 records excluded); (7) case studies/ethnography (nine records excluded); (8) non-empirical studies of a sociological nature (20 records excluded); (9) analysis of user profile content and campaigns on dating apps and other social networks (e.g., Instagram; nine records excluded); and (10) studies with confusing methodology, which did not explain the methodology followed, the instruments used, and/or the characteristics of the participants (11 records excluded). This process led to a final sample of 70 empirical studies (55 quantitative studies, 11 qualitative studies, and 4 mixed studies), as shown by the flowchart presented in Figure 1 .

2.2. Data Collection Process and Data Items

One review author extracted the data from the included studies, and the second author checked the extracted data. Information was extracted from each included study of: (1) author/s and year; (2) sample size and characteristics; (3) methodology used; (4) main findings.

Table 1 shows the information extracted from each of the articles included in this systematic review. The main findings drawn from these studies are also presented below, distributed in different sections.

Characteristics of reviewed studies.

3.1. Characteristics of Reviewed Studies

First, the characteristics of the 70 articles included in the systematic review were analyzed. An annual increase in production can be seen, with 2019 being the most productive year, with 31.4% ( n = 22) of included articles. More articles (11) were published in the first three months of 2020 than in 2016. It is curious to note, on the other hand, how, in the titles of the articles, some similar formulas were repeated, even the same articles (e.g., Love me Tinder), playing with the swipe characteristic of this type of application (e.g., Swiping more, Swiping right, Swiping me).

As for the methodology used, the first aspect to note is that all the localized studies were cross-sectional and there were no longitudinal ones. As mentioned above, 80% ( n = 55) of the studies were quantitative, especially through online survey ( n = 49; 70%). 15.7% ( n = 11) used a qualitative methodology, either through semi-structured interviews or focus groups. And 5.7% ( n = 4) used a mixed methodology, both through surveys and interviews. It is worth noting the increasing use of tools such as Amazon Mechanical Turk ( n = 9, 12.9%) or Qualtrics ( n = 8, 11.4%) for the selection of participants and data collection.

The studies included in the review were conducted in different geographical and cultural contexts. More than one in five investigations was conducted in the United States (22.8%, n = 16), to which the two studies carried out in Canada can be added. Concerning other contexts, 20% ( n = 14) of the included studies was carried out in different European countries (e.g., Belgium, The Netherlands, UK, Spain), whereas 15.7% ( n = 11) was carried out in China, and 8.6% ( n = 6) in other countries (e.g., Thailand, Australia). However, 21.4% ( n = 15) of the investigations did not specify the context they were studying.

Finally, 57.1% ( n = 40) of the studies included in the systematic review asked about dating apps use, without specifying which one. The results of these studies showed that Tinder was the most used dating app among heterosexual people and Grindr among sexual minorities. Furthermore, 35% ( n = 25) of the studies included in the review focused on the use of Tinder, while 5.7% ( n = 4) focused on Grindr.

3.2. Characteristics of Dating App Users

It is difficult to find studies that offer an overall user profile of dating apps, as many of them have focused on specific populations or groups. However, based on the information collected in the studies included in this review, some features of the users of these applications may be highlighted.

Gender. Traditionally, it has been claimed that men use dating apps more than women and that they engage in more casual sex relationships through apps [ 3 ]. In fact, some authors, such as Weiser et al. [ 75 ], collected data that indicated that 60% of the users of these applications were male and 40% were female. Some current studies endorse that being male predicts the use of dating apps [ 23 ], but research has also been published in recent years that has shown no differences in the proportion of male and female users [ 59 , 68 ].

To explain these similar prevalence rates, some authors, such as Chan [ 27 ], have proposed a feminist perspective, stating that women use dating apps to gain greater control over their relationships and sexuality, thus countering structural gender inequality. On the other hand, other authors have referred to the perpetuation of traditional masculinity and femmephobic language in these applications [ 28 , 53 ].

Age. Specific studies have been conducted on people of different ages: adolescents [ 49 ], young people (e.g., [ 21 , 23 , 71 ]), and middle-aged and older people [ 58 ]. The most studied group has been young people between 18 and 30 years old, mainly university students, and some authors have concluded that the age subgroup with a higher prevalence of use of dating apps is between 24 and 30 years of age [ 44 , 59 ].

Sexual orientation. This is a fundamental variable in research on dating apps. In recent years, especially after the success of Tinder, the use of these applications by heterosexuals, both men and women, has increased, which has affected the increase of research on this group [ 3 , 59 ]. However, the most studied group with the highest prevalence rates of dating apps use is that of men from sexual minorities [ 18 , 40 ]. There is considerable literature on this collective, both among adolescents [ 49 ], young people [ 18 ], and older people [ 58 ], in different geographical contexts and both in urban and rural areas [ 24 , 36 , 43 , 79 ]. Moreover, being a member of a sexual minority, especially among men, seems to be a good predictor of the use of dating apps [ 23 ].

For these people, being able to communicate online can be particularly valuable, especially for those who may have trouble expressing their sexual orientation and/or finding a partner [ 3 , 80 ]. There is much less research on non-heterosexual women and this focuses precisely on their need to reaffirm their own identity and discourse, against the traditional values of hetero-patriate societies [ 35 , 69 ].

Relationship status. It has traditionally been argued that the prevalence of the use of dating apps was much higher among singles than among those with a partner [ 72 ]. This remains the case, as some studies have shown that being single was the most powerful sociodemographic predictor of using these applications [ 23 ]. However, several investigations have concluded that there is a remarkable percentage of users, between 10 and 29%, who have a partner [ 4 , 17 , 72 ]. From what has been studied, usually aimed at evaluating infidelity [ 17 , 75 ], the reasons for using Tinder are very different depending on the relational state, and the users of this app who had a partner had had more sexual and romantic partners than the singles who used it [ 72 ].

Other sociodemographic variables. Some studies, such as the one of Shapiro et al. [ 64 ], have found a direct relationship between the level of education and the use of dating apps. However, most studies that contemplated this variable have focused on university students (see, for example [ 21 , 23 , 31 , 38 ]), so there may be a bias in the interpretation of their results. The findings of Shapiro et al. [ 64 ] presented a paradox: while they found a direct link between Tinder use and educational level, they also found that those who did not use any app achieved better grades. Another striking result about the educational level is that of the study of Neyt et al. [ 9 ] about their users’ characteristics and those that are sought in potential partners through the apps. These authors found a heterogeneous effect of educational level by gender: whereas women preferred a potential male partner with a high educational level, this hypothesis was not refuted in men, who preferred female partners with lower educational levels.

Other variables evaluated in the literature on dating apps are place of residence or income level. As for the former, app users tend to live in urban contexts, so studies are usually performed in large cities (e.g., [ 11 , 28 , 45 ]), although it is true that in recent years studies are beginning to be seen in rural contexts to know the reality of the people who live there [ 43 ]. It has also been shown that dating app users have a higher income level than non-users, although this can be understood as a feature associated with young people with high educational levels. However, it seems that the use of these applications is present in all social layers, as it has been documented even among homeless youth in the United States [ 66 ].

Personality and other psychosocial variables. The literature that relates the use of dating apps to different psychosocial variables is increasingly extensive and diverse. The most evaluated variable concerning the use of these applications is self-esteem, although the results are inconclusive. It seems established that self-esteem is the most important psychological predictor of using dating apps [ 6 , 8 , 59 ]. But some authors, such as Orosz et al. [ 55 ], warn that the meaning of that relationship is unclear: apps can function both as a resource for and a booster of self-esteem (e.g., having a lot of matches) or to decrease it (e.g., lack of matches, ignorance of usage patterns).

The relationship between dating app use and attachment has also been studied. Chin et al. [ 29 ] concluded that people with a more anxious attachment orientation and those with a less avoidant orientation were more likely to use these apps.

Sociosexuality is another important variable concerning the use of dating apps. It has been found that users of these applications tended to have a less restrictive sociosexuality, especially those who used them to have casual sex [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 21 ].

Finally, the most studied approach in this field is the one that relates the use of dating apps with certain personality traits, both from the Big Five and from the dark personality model. As for the Big Five model, Castro et al. [ 23 ] found that the only trait that allowed the prediction of the current use of these applications was open-mindedness. Other studies looked at the use of apps, these personality traits, and relational status. Thus, Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 71 ] found that single users of Tinder were more outgoing and open to new experiences than non-user singles, who scored higher in conscientiousness. For their part, Timmermans et al. [ 72 ] concluded that Tinder users who had a partner scored lower in agreeableness and conscientiousness and higher in neuroticism than people with partners who did not use Tinder.

The dark personality, on the other hand, has been used to predict the different reasons for using dating apps [ 48 ], as well as certain antisocial behaviors in Tinder [ 6 , 51 ]. As for the differences in dark personality traits between users and non-users of dating apps, the results are inconclusive. A study was localized that highlighted the relevance of psychopathy [ 3 ] whereas another study found no predictive power as a global indicator of dark personality [ 23 ].

3.3. Characteristics of Dating App Use

It is very difficult to know not only the actual number of users of dating apps in any country in the world but also the prevalence of use. This varies depending on the collectives studied and the sampling techniques used. Given this caveat, the results of some studies do allow an idea of the proportion of people using these apps. It has been found to vary between the 12.7% found by Castro et al. [ 23 ] and the 60% found by LeFebvre [ 44 ]. Most common, however, is to find a participant prevalence of between 40–50% [ 3 , 4 , 39 , 62 , 64 ], being slightly higher among men from sexual minorities [ 18 , 50 ].

The study of Botnen et al. [ 21 ] among Norwegian university students concluded that about half of the participants appeared to be a user of dating apps, past or present. But only one-fifth were current users, a result similar to those found by Castro et al. [ 23 ] among Spanish university students. The most widely used, and therefore the most examined, apps in the studies are Tinder and Grindr. The first is the most popular among heterosexuals, and the second among men of sexual minorities [ 3 , 18 , 36 , 70 ].

Findings from existing research on the characteristics of the use of dating apps can be divided among those referring to before (e.g., profiling), during (e.g., use), and after (e.g., offline behavior with other app users). Regarding before , the studies focus on users’ profile-building and self-presentation more among men of sexual minorities [ 52 , 77 ]. Ward [ 74 ] highlighted the importance of the process of choosing the profile picture in applications that are based on physical appearance. Like Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ], Ward [ 74 ] mentions the differences between the “real self” and the “ideal self” created in dating apps, where one should try to maintain a balance between one and the other. Self-esteem plays a fundamental role in this process, as it has been shown that higher self-esteem encourages real self-presentation [ 59 ].

Most of the studies that analyze the use of dating apps focus on during , i.e. on how applications are used. As for the frequency of use and the connection time, Chin et al. [ 29 ] found that Tinder users opened the app up to 11 times a day, investing up to 90 minutes per day. Strubel and Petrie [ 67 ] found that 23% of Tinder users opened the app two to three times a day, and 14% did so once a day. Meanwhile, Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ] concluded that 23% of the users opened Tinder daily.

It seems that the frequency and intensity of use, in addition to the way users behave on dating apps, vary depending on sexual orientation and sex. Members of sexual minorities, especially men, use these applications more times per day and for longer times [ 18 ]. As for sex, different patterns of behavior have been observed both in men and women, as the study of Timmermans and Courtois [ 4 ] shows. Men use apps more often and more intensely, but women use them more selectively and effectively. They accumulate more matches than men and do so much faster, allowing them to choose and have a greater sense of control. Therefore, it is concluded that the number of swipes and likes of app users does not guarantee a high number of matches in Tinder [ 4 ].

Some authors are alert to various behaviors observed in dating apps which, in some cases, may be negative for the user. For example, Yeo and Fung [ 77 ] mention the fast and hasty way of acting in apps, which is incongruous with cultural norms for the formation of friendships and committed relationships and ends up frustrating those who seek more lasting relationships. Parisi and Comunello [ 57 ] highlighted a key to the use of apps and a paradox. They referred to relational homophilia, that is, the tendency to be attracted to people similar to oneself. But, at the same time, this occurs in a context that increases the diversity of intimate interactions, thus expanding pre-existing networks. Finally, Licoppe [ 45 ] concluded that users of Grindr and Tinder present almost opposite types of communication and interaction. In Grindr, quick conversations seem to take precedence, aimed at organizing immediate sexual encounters, whereas, in Tinder, there are longer conversations and more exchange of information.

The latest group of studies focuses on offline behavior with contacts made through dating apps. Differences have been observed in the prevalence of encounters with other app users, possibly related to participants’ sociodemographic characteristics. Whereas Strugo and Muise [ 2 ], and Macapagal et al. [ 49 ] found that between 60 and 70% of their participants had had an encounter with another person known through these applications, in other studies this is less common, with prevalence being less than 50% [ 3 , 4 , 62 ]. In fact, Griffin et al. [ 39 ] stated that in-person encounters were relatively rare among users of dating apps.

There are also differences in the types of relationships that arose after offline encounters with other users. Strugo and Muise [ 2 ] concluded that 33% of participants had found a romantic partner and that 52% had had casual sex with at least one partner met through an app. Timmermans and Courtois [ 4 ] found that one-third of the offline encounters ended in casual sex and one-fourth in a committed relationship. Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ], for their part, concluded that 18.6% of the participants had had sex with another person they had met on Tinder. And finally, the participants in the study of Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 71 ] indicated that: (1) they had met face-to-face with an average of 4.25 people whom they had met on Tinder; (2) they had had one romantic relationship with people met on Tinder; (3) they had had casual sex with an average of 1.57 people met on Tinder; and (4) they had become friends with an average of 2.19 people met on Tinder.

3.4. Motives for Dating App Use

There is a stereotype that dating apps are used only, or above all, to look for casual sex [ 44 ]. In fact, these applications have been accused of generating a hookup culture, associated with superficiality and sexual frivolity [ 2 ]. However, this is not the case. In the last five years, a large body of literature has been generated on the reasons why people use dating apps, especially Tinder, and the conclusion is unanimous: apps serve multiple purposes, among which casual sex is only one [ 1 , 4 , 44 ]. It has been found that up to 70% of the app users participating in a study [ 18 ] indicated that their goal when using it was not sex-seeking.

An evolution of research interest can be traced regarding the reasons that guide people to use dating apps [ 55 ]. The first classification of reasons for using Tinder was published by Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ], who adapted a previous scale, designed for Grindr, composed of six motives: hooking up/sex (finding sexual partners), friendship (building a social network), relationship (finding a romantic partner), traveling (having dates in different places), self-validation (self-improvement), and entertainment (satisfying social curiosity). They found that the reason given by most users was those of entertainment, followed by those of self-validation and traveling, with the search for sex occupying fourth place in importance. However, the adaptation of this scale did not have adequate psychometric properties and it has not been reused.

Subsequently, Sumter et al. [ 68 ] generated a new classification of reasons to use Tinder, later refined by Sumter and Vandenbosch [ 3 ]. They proposed six reasons for use, both relational (love, casual sex), intrapersonal (ease of communication, self-worth validation), and entertainment (the thrill of excitement, trendiness). The motivation most indicated by the participants was that of love, and the authors concluded that Tinder is used: (1) to find love and/or sex; (2) because it is easy to communicate; (3) to feel better about oneself; and (4) because it’s fun and exciting.

At the same time, Timmermans and De Caluwé [ 70 ] developed the Tinder Motives Scale, which evaluates up to 13 reasons for using Tinder. The reasons, sorted by the scores obtained, were: to pass time/entertainment, curiosity, socializing, relationship-seeking, social approval, distraction, flirting/social skills, sexual orientation, peer pressure, traveling, sexual experience, ex, and belongingness. So far, the most recently published classification of reasons is that of Orosz et al. [ 55 ], who in the Tinder Use Motivations Scale proposed four groups of reasons: boredom (individual reasons to use Tinder to overcome boredom), self-esteem (use of Tinder to improve self-esteem), sex (use of Tinder to satisfy sexual need) and love (use of Tinder to find love). As in the previous scales, the reasons of seeking sex did not score higher on this scale, so it can be concluded that dating apps are not mainly used for this reason.

The existing literature indicates that reasons for the use of dating apps may vary depending on different sociodemographic and personality variables [ 1 ]. As for sex, Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ] found that women used Tinder more for friendship and self-validation, whereas men used it more to seek sex and relationships. Sumter et al. [ 68 ] found something similar: men scored higher than women in casual sex motivation and also in the motives of ease of communication and thrill of excitement.

With regard to age, Ward [ 74 ] concluded that motivations change over time and Sumter et al. [ 68 ] found a direct association with the motives of love, casual sex, and ease of communication. In terms of sexual orientation, it has become commoner for people from sexual minorities, especially men, than for heterosexual participants to use these applications much more in the search for casual sex [ 18 ].

Finally, other studies have concluded that personality guides the motivations for the use of dating apps [ 3 , 72 ]. A line of research initiated in recent years links dark personality traits to the reasons for using Tinder. In this investigation, Lyons et al. [ 48 ] found that people who score high in Machiavellianism and psychopathy offer more reasons for use (e.g., get casual sex, acquiring social or flirting skills).

3.5. Benefits and Risks of Using Dating Apps

In the latter section, the benefits and advantages of the use of dating apps are analyzed. There is also an extensive literature on the risks associated with use. Many studies indicate that dating apps have opened a new horizon in how to meet potential partners, allowing access to many [ 3 , 6 , 8 ], which may be even more positive for certain individuals and groups who have been silenced or marginalized, such as some men from sexual minorities [ 80 ]. It has also been emphasized that these applications are a non-intimidating way to start connecting, they are flexible and free, and require less time and effort than other traditional means of communication [ 1 , 55 ].

On the other hand, the advantages of apps based on the technology they use and the possibilities they pose to users have been highlighted. Ranzini and Lutz [ 59 ] underlined four aspects. First is the portability of smartphones and tablets, which allows the use of apps in any location, both private and public. Second is availability, as their operation increases the spontaneity and frequency of use of the apps, and this, in turn, allows a quick face-to-face encounter, turning online interactions into offline relationships [ 70 , 77 ]. Thirdly is locatability, as dating apps allow matches, messages, and encounters with other users who are geographically close [ 77 ]. Finally is multimediality, the relevance of the visual, closely related to physical appearance, which results in two channels of communication (photos and messages) and the possibility of linking the profile with that of other social networks, such as Facebook and Instagram [ 4 ].

There is also considerable literature focused on the potential risks associated with using these applications. The topics covered in the studies can be grouped into four blocks, having in common the negative consequences that these apps can generate in users’ mental, relational, and sexual health. The first block focuses on the configuration and use of the applications themselves. Their emergence and popularization have been so rapid that apps pose risks associated with security, intimacy, and privacy [ 16 , 20 ]. This can lead to more insecure contacts, especially among women, and fears related to the ease of localization and the inclusion of personal data in apps [ 39 ]. Some authors highlight the paradox that many users suffer: they have more chances of contact than ever before, but at the same time this makes them more vulnerable [ 26 , 80 ].

This block can also include studies on the problematic use of apps, which can affect the daily lives of users [ 34 , 56 ], and research that focuses on the possible negative psychological effects of their use, as a link has been shown between using dating apps and loneliness, dissatisfaction with life, and feeling excluded from the world [ 24 , 34 , 78 ].

The second block of studies on the risks associated with dating apps refers to discrimination and aggression. Some authors, such as Conner [ 81 ] and Lauckner et al. [ 43 ], have argued that technology, instead of reducing certain abusive cultural practices associated with deception, discrimination, or abuse (e.g., about body types, weight, age, rural environments, racism, HIV stigma), has accentuated them, and this can affect users’ mental health. Moreover, certain antisocial behaviors in apps, such as trolling [ 6 , 51 ], have been studied, and a relationship has been found between being a user of these applications and suffering some episode of sexual victimization, both in childhood and adulthood [ 30 ].

The following block refers to the risks of dating app use regarding diet and body image. These applications, focusing on appearance and physical attractiveness, can promote excessive concerns about body image, as well as various negative consequences associated with it (e.g., unhealthy weight management behaviors, low satisfaction and high shame about the body, more comparisons with appearance [ 22 , 36 , 67 , 73 ]). These risks have been more closely associated with men than with women [ 61 ], perhaps because of the standards of physical attractiveness prevalent among men of sexual minorities, which have been the most studied collective.

The last block of studies on the risks of dating app use focuses on their relationship with risky sexual behaviors. This is probably the most studied topic in different populations (e.g., sexual minority men, heterosexual people). The use of these applications can contribute to a greater performance of risky sexual behaviors, which results in a higher prevalence of sexually transmitted illnesses (STIs). However, the results of the studies analyzed are inconclusive [ 40 ].

On the one hand, some studies find a relationship between being a user of dating apps and performing more risky sexual behaviors (e.g., having more sexual partners, less condom use, more relationships under the effects of alcohol and other drugs), both among men from sexual minorities [ 19 ] and among heterosexual individuals [ 32 , 41 , 62 ]. On the other hand, some research has found that, although app users perform more risky behaviors, especially having more partners, they also engage in more prevention behaviors (e.g., more sex counseling, more HIV tests, more treatment) and they do not use the condoms less than non-users [ 18 , 50 , 64 , 79 ]. Studies such as that of Luo et al. [ 46 ] and that of Wu [ 76 ] also found greater use of condoms among app users than among non-users.

Finally, some studies make relevant appraisals of this topic. For example, Green et al. [ 38 ] concluded that risky sexual behaviors are more likely to be performed when sex is performed with a person met through a dating app with whom some common connection was made (e.g., shared friends in Facebook or Instagram). This is because these users tend to avoid discussing issues related to prevention, either because they treat that person more familiarly, or for fear of possible gossip. Finally, Hahn et al. [ 40 ] found that, among men from sexual minorities, the contact time prior to meeting in person was associated with greater prevention. The less time between the conversation and the first encounter, the more likely the performance of risky behaviors.

4. Discussion

In a very few years, dating apps have revolutionized the way of meeting and interacting with potential partners. In parallel with the popularization of these applications, a large body of knowledge has been generated which, however, has not been collected in any systematic review. Given the social relevance that this phenomenon has reached, we performed this study to gather and analyze the main findings of empirical research on psychosocial content published in the last five years (2016–2020) on dating apps.

Seventy studies were located and analyzed, after applying stringent inclusion criteria that, for various reasons, left out a large number of investigations. Thus, it has been found that the literature on the subject is extensive and varied. Studies of different types and methodologies have been published, in very diverse contexts, on very varied populations and focusing on different aspects, some general and others very specific. Therefore, the first and main conclusion of this study is that the phenomenon of dating apps is transversal, and very present in the daily lives of millions of people around the world.

This transversality has been evident in the analysis of the characteristics of the users of dating apps. Apps have been found to be used, regardless of sex [ 59 , 68 ], age [ 49 , 58 , 71 ], sexual orientation [ 3 , 59 ], relational status [ 72 ], educational and income level [ 9 , 66 ], or personality traits [ 23 , 48 , 72 ].

Another conclusion that can be drawn from this analysis is that there are many preconceived ideas and stereotypes about dating apps, both at the research and social level, which are supported by the literature, but with nuances. For example, although the stereotype says that apps are mostly used by men, studies have concluded that women use them in a similar proportion, and more effectively [ 4 ]. The same goes for sexual orientation or relational status; the stereotype says that dating apps are mostly used by men of sexual minorities and singles [ 1 ], but some apps (e.g., Tinder) are used more by heterosexual people [ 3 , 59 ] and there is a remarkable proportion of people with a partner who use these apps [ 4 , 17 ].

A third conclusion of the review of the studies is that to know and be able to foresee the possible consequences of the use of dating apps, how and why they are used are particularly relevant. For this reason, both the use and the motives for use of these applications have been analyzed, confirming the enormous relevance of different psychosocial processes and variables (e.g., self-esteem, communication, and interaction processes), both before (profiling), during (use), and after (off-line encounters) of the use of dating apps.

However, in this section, what stands out most is the difficulty in estimating the prevalence of the use of dating apps. Very disparate prevalence have been found not only because of the possible differences between places and groups (see, for example [ 18 , 23 , 44 , 64 ]), but also because of the use of different sampling and information collection procedures, which in some cases, over-represent app users. All this hinders the characterization and assessment of the phenomenon of dating apps, as well as the work of the researchers. After selecting the group to be studied, it would be more appropriate to collect information from a representative sample, without conditioning or directing the study toward users, as this may inflate the prevalence rates.

The study of motives for the use of dating apps may contain the strongest findings of all those appraised in this review. Here, once again, a preconceived idea has been refuted, not only among researchers but across society. Since their appearance, there is a stereotype that dating apps are mostly used for casual sex [ 2 , 44 ]. However, studies constantly and consistently show that this is not the case. The classifications of the reasons analyzed for their use have concluded that people use dating apps for a variety of reasons, such as to entertain themselves, out of curiosity, to socialize, and to seek relationships, both sexual and romantic [ 3 , 59 , 68 , 70 ]. Thus, these apps should not be seen as merely for casual sex, but as much more [ 68 ].

Understanding the reasons for using dating apps provides a necessary starting point for research questions regarding the positive and negative effects of use [ 70 ]. Thus, the former result block reflected findings on the advantages and risks associated with using dating apps. In this topic, there may be a paradox in the sense that something that is an advantage (e.g., access to a multitude of potential partners, facilitates meeting people) turns into a drawback (e.g., loss of intimacy and privacy). Research on the benefits of using dating apps is relatively scarce, but it has stressed that these tools are making life and relationships easier for many people worldwide [ 6 , 80 ].

The literature on the risks associated with using dating apps is much broader, perhaps explaining the negative social vision of them that still exists nowadays. These risks have highlighted body image, aggression, and the performance of risky sexual behaviors. Apps represent a contemporary environment that, based on appearance and physical attractiveness, is associated with several negative pressures and perceptions about the body, which can have detrimental consequences for the physical and mental health of the individual [ 67 ]. As for assaults, there is a growing literature alerting us to the increasing amount of sexual harassment and abuse related to dating apps, especially in more vulnerable groups, such as women, or among people of sexual minorities (e.g., [ 12 , 82 ]).

Finally, there is considerable research that has analyzed the relationship between the use of dating apps and risky sexual behaviors, in different groups and with inconclusive results, as has already been shown [ 40 , 46 , 76 ]. In any case, as dating apps favor contact and interaction between potential partners, and given that a remarkable percentage of sexual contacts are unprotected [ 10 , 83 ], further research should be carried out on this topic.

Limitations and Future Directions

The meteoric appearance and popularization of dating apps have generated high interest in researchers around the world in knowing how they work, the profile of users, and the psychosocial processes involved. However, due to the recency of the phenomenon, there are many gaps in the current literature on these applications. That is why, in general terms, more research is needed to improve the understanding of all the elements involved in the functioning of dating apps.

It is strange to note that many studies have been conducted focusing on very specific aspects related to apps while other central aspects, such as the profile of users, had not yet been consolidated. Thus, it is advisable to improve the understanding of the sociodemographic and personality characteristics of those who use dating apps, to assess possible differences with those who do not use them. Attention should also be paid to certain groups that have been poorly studied (e.g., women from sexual minorities), as research has routinely focused on men and heterosexual people.

Similarly, limitations in understanding the actual data of prevalence of use have been highlighted, due to the over-representation of the number of users of dating apps seen in some studies. Therefore, it would be appropriate to perform studies in which the app user would not be prioritized, to know the actual use of these tools among the population at large. Although further studies must continue to be carried out on the risks of using these applications (e.g., risky sexual behaviors), it is also important to highlight the positive sexual and relational consequences of their use, in order to try to mitigate the negative social vision that still exists about dating app users. Last but not least, as all the studies consulted and included in this systematic review were cross-sectional, longitudinal studies are necessary which can evaluate the evolution of dating apps, their users and their uses, motives, and consequences.

The main limitations of this systematic review concern the enormous amount of information currently existing on dating apps. Despite having applied rigorous exclusion criteria, limiting the studies to the 2016–2020 period, and that the final sample was of 70 studies, much information has been analyzed and a significant number of studies and findings that may be relevant were left out. In future, the theoretical reviews that are made will have to be more specific, focused on certain groups and/or problems.

Another limitation—in this case, methodological, to do with the characteristics of the topic analyzed and the studies included—is that not all the criteria of the PRISMA guidelines were followed [ 13 , 14 ]. We intended to make known the state of the art in a subject well-studied in recent years, and to gather the existing literature without statistical treatment of the data. Therefore, there are certain criteria of PRISMA (e.g., summary measures, planned methods of analysis, additional analysis, risk of bias within studies) that cannot be satisfied.

However, as stated in the Method section, the developers of the PRISMA guidelines themselves have stated that some systematic reviews are of a different nature and that not all of them can meet these criteria. Thus, their main recommendation, to present methods with adequate clarity and transparency to enable readers to critically judge the available evidence and replicate or update the research, has been followed [ 13 ].

Finally, as the initial search in the different databases was carried by only one of the authors, some bias could have been introduced. However, as previously noted, with any doubt about the inclusion of any study, the final decision was agreed between both authors, so we expect this possible bias to be small.

5. Conclusions

Dating apps have come to stay and constitute an unstoppable social phenomenon, as evidenced by the usage and published literature on the subject over the past five years. These apps have become a new way to meet and interact with potential partners, changing the rules of the game and romantic and sexual relationships for millions of people all over the world. Thus, it is important to understand them and integrate them into the relational and sexual life of users [ 76 ].

The findings of this systematic review have relevant implications for various groups (i.e., researchers, clinicians, health prevention professionals, users). Detailed information has been provided on the characteristics of users and the use of dating apps, the most common reasons for using them, and the benefits and risks associated with them. This can guide researchers to see what has been done and how it has been done and to design future research.

Second, there are implications for clinicians and health prevention and health professionals, concerning mental, relational, and sexual health. These individuals will have a starting point for designing more effective information and educational programs. These programs could harness the potential of the apps themselves and be integrated into them, as suggested by some authors [ 42 , 84 ].

Finally and unavoidably, knowledge about the phenomenon of dating apps collected in this systematic review can have positive implications for users, who may have at their disposal the necessary tools to make a healthy and responsible use of these applications, maximizing their advantages and reducing the risks posed by this new form of communication present in the daily life of so many people.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Á.C. and J.R.B.; methodology, Á.C. and J.R.B.; formal analysis, Á.C. and J.R.B.; investigation, Á.C. and J.R.B.; resources, Á.C. and J.R.B.; data curation, Á.C. and J.R.B.; writing—original draft preparation, Á.C.; writing—review and editing, J.R.B. and Á.C.; project administration, Á.C.; funding acquisition, Á.C. and J.R.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research was funded by: (1) Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Government of Spain (PGC2018-097086-A-I00); and (2) Government of Aragón (Group S31_20D). Department of Innovation, Research and University and FEDER 2014-2020, “Building Europe from Aragón”.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

• 1. Anzani A., Di Sarno M., Prunas A. Using smartphone apps to find sexual partners: A review of the literature. Sexologies. 2018;27:e61–e65. doi: 10.1016/j.sexol.2018.05.001. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 2. Strugo J., Muise A. Swiping for the right reasons: Approach and avoidance goals are associated with actual and perceived dating success on Tinder. Can. J. Hum. Sex. 2019;28:93–104. doi: 10.3138/cjhs.2019-0010. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 3. Sumter S.R., Vandenbosch L. Dating gone mobile: Demographic and personality-based correlates of using smartphone-based dating applications among emerging adults. New Media Soc. 2019;21:655–673. doi: 10.1177/1461444818804773. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 4. Timmermans E., Courtois C. From swiping to casual sex and/or committed relationships: Exploring the experiences of Tinder users. Inf. Soc. 2018;34:59–70. doi: 10.1080/01972243.2017.1414093. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 5. Statista Market Forecast eServices Report 2019—Dating Services. [(accessed on 15 April 2020)]; Available online: https://www.statista.com/study/40456/dating-services-report/
• 6. Duncan Z., March E. Using Tinder® to start a fire: Predicting antisocial use of Tinder® with gender and the Dark Tetrad. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2019;145:9–14. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2019.03.014. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 7. Sevi B., Aral T., Eskenazi T. Exploring the hook-up app: Low sexual disgust and high sociosexuality predict motivation to use Tinder for casual sex. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018;133:17–20. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.053. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 8. Gatter K., Hodkinson K. On the differences between Tinder versus online dating agencies: Questioning a myth. An exploratory study. Cogent Psychol. 2016:3. doi: 10.1080/23311908.2016.1162414. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 9. Neyt B., Vandenbulcke S., Baert S. Are men intimidated by highly educated women? Undercover on Tinder. Econ. Educ. Rev. 2019;73:101914. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2019.101914. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 10. Wang H., Zhang L., Zhou Y., Wang K., Zhang X., Wu J., Wang G. The use of geosocial networking smartphone applications and the risk of sexually transmitted infections among men who have sex with men: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health. 2018;18:1178. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-6092-3. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 11. Wu S., Ward J. The mediation of gay men’s lives: A review on gay dating app studies. Sociol. Compass. 2018;12:e12560. doi: 10.1111/soc4.12560. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 12. Gillett R. Intimate intrusions online: Studying the normalisation of abuse in dating apps. Womens Stud. Int. Forum. 2018;69:212–219. doi: 10.1016/j.wsif.2018.04.005. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 13. Liberati A., Altman D.G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P.C., Ioannidis J.P.A., Clarke M., Devereaux P.J., Kleijnen J., Moher D. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 14. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G. The PRISMA Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 15. Gough D., Oliver S., Thomas J. An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. SAGE; New Park, CA, USA: 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• 16. Albury K., Byron P. Safe on my phone? Same-sex attracted young people’s negotiations of intimacy, visibility, and risk on digital hook-up apps. Soc. Media Soc. 2016;2:205630511667288. doi: 10.1177/2056305116672887. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 17. Alexopoulos C., Timmermans E., McNallie J. Swiping more, committing less: Unraveling the links among dating app use, dating app success, and intention to commit infidelity. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2020;102:172–180. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.009. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 18. Badal H.J., Stryker J.E., DeLuca N., Purcell D.W. Swipe Right: Dating Website and App Use Among Men Who Have Sex with Men. AIDS Behav. 2018;22:1265–1272. doi: 10.1007/s10461-017-1882-7. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 19. Boonchutima S., Kongchan W. Utilization of dating apps by men who have sex with men for persuading other men toward substance use. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2017;10:31–38. doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S121480. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 20. Smith Boonchutima; Sopon Sriwattana; Rungroj Rungvimolsin; Nattanop Palahan Gays dating applications: Information disclosure and sexual behavior. J. Health Res. 2016;30:231–239. doi: 10.14456/JHR.2016.32. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 21. Botnen E.O., Bendixen M., Grøntvedt T.V., Kennair L.E.O. Individual differences in sociosexuality predict picture-based mobile dating app use. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018;131:67–73. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.04.021. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 22. Breslow A.S., Sandil R., Brewster M.E., Parent M.C., Chan A., Yucel A., Bensmiller N., Glaeser E. Adonis on the apps: Online objectification, self-esteem, and sexual minority men. Psychol. Men Masc. 2020;21:25–35. doi: 10.1037/men0000202. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 23. Castro Á., Barrada J.R., Ramos-Villagrasa P.J., Fernández-del-Río E. Profiling Dating Apps Users: Sociodemographic and Personality Characteristics. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health. 2020;17:3653. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17103653. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 24. Chan L.S. The role of gay identity confusion and outness in sex-seeking on mobile dating apps among men who have sex with men: A conditional process analysis. J. Homosex. 2017;64:622–637. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2016.1196990. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 25. Chan L.S. Who uses dating apps? Exploring the relationships among trust, sensation-seeking, smartphone use, and the intent to use dating apps based on the Integrative Model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017;72:246–258. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.053. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 26. Chan L.S. Ambivalence in networked intimacy: Observations from gay men using mobile dating apps. New Media Soc. 2018;20:2566–2581. doi: 10.1177/1461444817727156. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 27. Chan L.S. Liberating or disciplining? A technofeminist analysis of the use of dating apps among women in urban China. Commun. Cult. Crit. 2018;11:298–314. doi: 10.1093/ccc/tcy004. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 28. Chan L.S. Paradoxical associations of masculine ideology and casual sex among heterosexual male geosocial networking app users in China. Sex Roles. 2019;81:456–466. doi: 10.1007/s11199-019-1002-4. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 29. Chin K., Edelstein R.S., Vernon P.A. Attached to dating apps: Attachment orientations and preferences for dating apps. Mob. Media Commun. 2019;7:41–59. doi: 10.1177/2050157918770696. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 30. Choi E.P.H., Wong J.Y.H., Fong D.Y.T. An emerging risk factor of sexual abuse: The use of smartphone dating applications. Sex. Abuse J. Res. Treat. 2016:107906321667216. doi: 10.1177/1079063216672168. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 31. Choi E.P.H., Wong J.Y.H., Lo H.H.M., Wong W., Chio J.H.M., Fong D.Y.T. The association between smartphone dating applications and college students’ casual sex encounters and condom use. Sex. Reprod. Healthc. 2016;9:38–41. doi: 10.1016/j.srhc.2016.07.001. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 32. Choi E.P.H., Wong J.Y.H., Lo H.H.M., Wong W., Chio J.H.M., Fong D.Y.T. Association between using smartphone dating applications and alcohol and recreational drug use in conjunction with sexual activities in college students. Subst. Use Misuse. 2017;52:422–428. doi: 10.1080/10826084.2016.1233566. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 33. Choi E.P.-H., Wong J.Y.-H., Lo H.H.-M., Wong W., Chio J.H.-M., Fong D.Y.-T. The impacts of using smartphone dating applications on sexual risk behaviours in college students in Hong Kong. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0165394. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165394. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 34. Coduto K.D., Lee-Won R.J., Baek Y.M. Swiping for trouble: Problematic dating application use among psychosocially distraught individuals and the paths to negative outcomes. J. Soc. Pers. Relatsh. 2020;37:212–232. doi: 10.1177/0265407519861153. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 35. Ferris L., Duguay S. Tinder’s lesbian digital imaginary: Investigating (im)permeable boundaries of sexual identity on a popular dating app. New Media Soc. 2020;22:489–506. doi: 10.1177/1461444819864903. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 36. Filice E., Raffoul A., Meyer S.B., Neiterman E. The influence of Grindr, a geosocial networking application, on body image in gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men: An exploratory study. Body Image. 2019;31:59–70. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2019.08.007. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 37. Goedel W.C., Krebs P., Greene R.E., Duncan D.T. Associations between perceived weight status, body dissatisfaction, and self-objectification on sexual sensation seeking and sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men using Grindr. Behav. Med. 2017;43:142–150. doi: 10.1080/08964289.2015.1121130. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 38. Green S.M., Turner D., Logan R.G. Exploring the effect of sharing common Facebook friends on the sexual risk behaviors of Tinder users. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2018;21:457–462. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0581. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 39. Griffin M., Canevello A., McAnulty R.D. Motives and concerns associated with geosocial networking app usage: An exploratory study among heterosexual college students in the United States. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2018;21:268–275. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0309. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 40. Hahn H.A., You D.S., Sferra M., Hubbard M., Thamotharan S., Fields S.A. Is it too soon to meet? Examining differences in geosocial networking app use and sexual risk behavior of emerging adults. Sex. Cult. 2018;22:1–21. doi: 10.1007/s12119-017-9449-3. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 41. Hart M.M., Zdravkov J., Plaha K., Cooper F., Allen K., Fuller L., Jones R., Day S. Digital sex and the city: Prevalent use of dating apps amongst heterosexual attendees of genito-urinary medicine (GUM) clinics. Sex. Transm. Infect. 2016;92:A1. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2016-052718.1. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 42. Kesten J.M., Dias K., Burns F., Crook P., Howarth A., Mercer C.H., Rodger A., Simms I., Oliver I., Hickman M., et al. Acceptability and potential impact of delivering sexual health promotion information through social media and dating apps to MSM in England: A qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1236. doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-7558-7. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 43. Lauckner C., Truszczynski N., Lambert D., Kottamasu V., Meherally S., Schipani-McLaughlin A.M., Taylor E., Hansen N. “Catfishing,” cyberbullying, and coercion: An exploration of the risks associated with dating app use among rural sexual minority males. J. Gay Lesbian Ment. Health. 2019;23:289–306. doi: 10.1080/19359705.2019.1587729. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 44. LeFebvre L.E. Swiping me off my feet: Explicating relationship initiation on Tinder. J. Soc. Pers. Relatsh. 2018;35:1205–1229. doi: 10.1177/0265407517706419. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 45. Licoppe C. Liquidity and attachment in the mobile hookup culture. A comparative study of contrasted interactional patterns in the main uses of Grindr and Tinder. J. Cult. Econ. 2020;13:73–90. doi: 10.1080/17530350.2019.1607530. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 46. Luo Q., Wu Z., Chen Z., Ma Y., Mi G., Liu X., Xu J., Rou K., Zhao Y., Scott S.R. App use frequency and condomless anal intercourse among men who have sex with men in Beijing, China: A cross-sectional study. Int. J. STD AIDS. 2019;30:1146–1155. doi: 10.1177/0956462419860293. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 47. Lutz C., Ranzini G. Where dating meets data: Investigating social and institutional privacy concerns on Tinder. Soc. Media Soc. 2017;3:205630511769773. doi: 10.1177/2056305117697735. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 48. Lyons M., Messenger A., Perry R., Brewer G. The Dark Tetrad in Tinder: Hook-up app for high psychopathy individuals, and a diverse utilitarian tool for Machiavellians? Curr. Psychol. 2020 doi: 10.1007/s12144-019-00589-z. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 49. Macapagal K., Kraus A., Moskowitz D.A., Birnholtz J. Geosocial networking application use, characteristics of app-met sexual partners, and sexual behavior among sexual and gender minority adolescents assigned male at birth. J. Sex. Res. 2019:1–10. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2019.1698004. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 50. Macapagal K., Moskowitz D.A., Li D.H., Carrión A., Bettin E., Fisher C.B., Mustanski B. Hookup app use, sexual behavior, and sexual health among adolescent men who have sex with men in the United States. J. Adolesc. Health. 2018;62:708–715. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.01.001. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 51. March E., Grieve R., Marrington J., Jonason P.K. Trolling on Tinder® (and other dating apps): Examining the role of the Dark Tetrad and impulsivity. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2017;110:139–143. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.025. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 52. Miller B. A picture is worth 1000 messages: Investigating face and body photos on mobile dating apps for men who have sex with men. J. Homosex. 2019:1–25. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2019.1610630. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 53. Miller B., Behm-Morawitz E. “Masculine Guys Only”: The effects of femmephobic mobile dating application profiles on partner selection for men who have sex with men. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016;62:176–185. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.088. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 54. Numer M., Holmes D., Joy P., Thompson R., Doria N. Grinding against HIV discourse: A critical exploration of social sexual practices in gay cruising apps. Gend. Technol. Dev. 2019;23:257–276. doi: 10.1080/09718524.2019.1684022. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 55. Orosz G., Benyó M., Berkes B., Nikoletti E., Gál É., Tóth-Király I., Bőthe B. The personality, motivational, and need-based background of problematic Tinder use. J. Behav. Addict. 2018;7:301–316. doi: 10.1556/2006.7.2018.21. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 56. Orosz G., Tóth-Király I., Bőthe B., Melher D. Too many swipes for today: The development of the Problematic Tinder Use Scale (PTUS) J. Behav. Addict. 2016;5:518–523. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.016. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 57. Parisi L., Comunello F. Dating in the time of “relational filter bubbles”: Exploring imaginaries, perceptions and tactics of Italian dating app users. Commun. Rev. 2020;23:66–89. doi: 10.1080/10714421.2019.1704111. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 58. Queiroz A.A.F.L.N., de Sousa A.F.L., Brignol S., Araújo T.M.E., Reis R.K. Vulnerability to HIV among older men who have sex with men users of dating apps in Brazil. Braz. J. Infect. Dis. 2019;23:298–306. doi: 10.1016/j.bjid.2019.07.005. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 59. Ranzini G., Lutz C. Love at first swipe? Explaining Tinder self-presentation and motives. Mob. Media Commun. 2017;5:80–101. doi: 10.1177/2050157916664559. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 60. Rochat L., Bianchi-Demicheli F., Aboujaoude E., Khazaal Y. The psychology of “swiping”: A cluster analysis of the mobile dating app Tinder. J. Behav. Addict. 2019;8:804–813. doi: 10.1556/2006.8.2019.58. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 61. Rodgers R.F., Campagna J., Attawala R., Richard C., Kakfa C., Rizzo C. In the eye of the swiper: A preliminary analysis of the relationship between dating app use and dimensions of body image. Eat. Weight Disord. Stud. Anorex. Bulim. Obes. 2019 doi: 10.1007/s40519-019-00754-0. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 62. Sawyer A.N., Smith E.R., Benotsch E.G. Dating Application Use and Sexual Risk Behavior Among Young Adults. Sex. Res. Soc. Policy. 2018;15:183–191. doi: 10.1007/s13178-017-0297-6. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 63. Schreurs L., Sumter S.R., Vandenbosch L. A prototype willingness approach to the relation between geo-social dating apps and willingness to sext with dating app matches. Arch. Sex. Behav. 2020;49:1133–1145. doi: 10.1007/s10508-020-01671-5. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 64. Shapiro G.K., Tatar O., Sutton A., Fisher W., Naz A., Perez S., Rosberger Z. Correlates of Tinder use and risky sexual behaviors in young adults. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2017;20:727–734. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0279. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 65. Solis R.J.C., Wong K.Y.J. To meet or not to meet? Measuring motivations and risks as predictors of outcomes in the use of mobile dating applications in China. Chin. J. Commun. 2019;12:204–223. doi: 10.1080/17544750.2018.1498006. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 66. Srivastava A., Rusow J.A., Holguin M., Semborski S., Onasch-Vera L., Wilson N., Rice E. Exchange and survival sex, dating apps, gender identity, and sexual orientation among homeless youth in Los Angeles. J. Prim. Prev. 2019;40:561–568. doi: 10.1007/s10935-019-00561-4. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 67. Strubel J., Petrie T.A. Love me Tinder: Body image and psychosocial functioning among men and women. Body Image. 2017;21:34–38. doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2017.02.006. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 68. Sumter S.R., Vandenbosch L., Ligtenberg L. Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telemat. Inform. 2017;34:67–78. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2016.04.009. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 69. Tang D.T.-S. All I get is an emoji: Dating on lesbian mobile phone app Butterfly. Media Cult. Soc. 2017;39:816–832. doi: 10.1177/0163443717693680. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 70. Timmermans E., De Caluwé E. Development and validation of the Tinder Motives Scale (TMS) Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017;70:341–350. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.028. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 71. Timmermans E., De Caluwé E. To Tinder or not to Tinder, that’s the question: An individual differences perspective to Tinder use and motives. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2017;110:74–79. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.01.026. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 72. Timmermans E., De Caluwé E., Alexopoulos C. Why are you cheating on tinder? Exploring users’ motives and (dark) personality traits. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018;89:129–139. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.040. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 73. Tran A., Suharlim C., Mattie H., Davison K., Agénor M., Austin S.B. Dating app use and unhealthy weight control behaviors among a sample of U.S. adults: A cross-sectional study. J. Eat. Disord. 2019;7:16. doi: 10.1186/s40337-019-0244-4. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 74. Ward J. What are you doing on Tinder? Impression management on a matchmaking mobile app. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2017;20:1644–1659. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1252412. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 75. Weiser D.A., Niehuis S., Flora J., Punyanunt-Carter N.M., Arias V.S., Hannah Baird R. Swiping right: Sociosexuality, intentions to engage in infidelity, and infidelity experiences on Tinder. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2018;133:29–33. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.025. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 76. Wu O. Tinder y conductas sexuales de riesgo en jóvenes españoles [Tinder and sexual risk behaviors in Spanish youth] Aloma. 2019;37:35–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• 77. Yeo T.E.D., Fung T.H. “Mr Right Now”: Temporality of relationship formation on gay mobile dating apps. Mob. Media Commun. 2018;6:3–18. doi: 10.1177/2050157917718601. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 78. Zervoulis K., Smith D.S., Reed R., Dinos S. Use of ‘gay dating apps’ and its relationship with individual well-being and sense of community in men who have sex with men. Psychol. Sex. 2020;11:88–102. doi: 10.1080/19419899.2019.1684354. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 79. Kachur R., Copen C., Strona F., Furness B., Bernstein K., Hogben M. Poster Presentations. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.; London, UK: 2019. P509 Use of internet/mobile dating apps to find sex partners among a nationally representative sample of men who have sex with men; p. A234. [ Google Scholar ]
• 80. Goldenberg D. Disconnected connectedness: The paradox of digital dating for gay and bisexual men. J. Gay Lesbian Ment. Health. 2019;23:360–366. doi: 10.1080/19359705.2019.1620071. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 81. Conner C.T. The Gay Gayze: Expressions of inequality on Grindr. Sociol. Q. 2019;60:397–419. doi: 10.1080/00380253.2018.1533394. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 82. Rowse J., Bolt C., Gaya S. Swipe right: The emergence of dating-app facilitated sexual assault. A descriptive retrospective audit of forensic examination caseload in an Australian metropolitan service. Forensic Sci. Med. Pathol. 2020;16:71–77. doi: 10.1007/s12024-019-00201-7. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 83. Wu S., Ward J. Looking for “interesting people”: Chinese gay men’s exploration of relationship development on dating apps. Mob. Media Commun. 2019:205015791988855. doi: 10.1177/2050157919888558. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 84. Eleuteri S., Rossi R., Tripodi F., Fabrizi A., Simonelli C. How the smartphone apps can improve your sexual wellbeing? Sexologies. 2018;27:139–143. doi: 10.1016/j.sexol.2018.04.003. [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• View on publisher site
• PDF (692.0 KB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections

Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science

Read the Full Text

Although the authors find that online dating sites offer a distinctly different experience than conventional dating, the superiority of these sites is not as evident. Dating sites provide access to more potential partners than do traditional dating methods, but the act of browsing and comparing large numbers of profiles can lead individuals to commoditize potential partners and can reduce their willingness to commit to any one person. Communicating online can foster intimacy and affection between strangers, but it can also lead to unrealistic expectations and disappointment when potential partners meet in real life. Although many dating sites tout the superiority of partner matching through the use of “scientific algorithms,” the authors find that there is little evidence that these algorithms can predict whether people are good matches or will have chemistry with one another.

The authors’ overarching assessment of online dating sites is that scientifically, they just don’t measure up. As online dating matures, however, it is likely that more and more people will avail themselves of these services, and if development — and use — of these sites is guided by rigorous psychological science, they may become a more promising way for people to meet their perfect partners.

Hear author Eli J. Finkel discuss the science behind online dating at the 24th APS Annual Convention .

About the Authors

Editorial: Online Dating:  The Current Status —and Beyond

By Arthur Aron

I agree wholeheartedly that so-called scientific dating sites are totally off-base. They make worse matches than just using a random site. That’s because their matching criteria are hardly scientific, as far as romance goes. They also have a very small pool of educated, older men, and lots more women. Therefore they often come up with no matches at all, despite the fact that women with many different personality types in that age group have joined. They are an expensive rip-off for many women over 45.

Speaking as someone who was recently “commoditized” by who I thought was a wonderful man I met on a dating site, I find that the types of people who use these services are looking at the wrong metrics when they seek out a prospective love interest. My mother and father had very few hobbies and interests in common, but because they shared the same core values, their love endured a lifetime. When I got dumped because I didn’t share my S.O.’s interests exactly down the line, I realized how dangerous this line of thinking truly is, how it marginalizes people who really want to give and receive love for more important reasons.

I met a few potential love interests online and I never paid for any matching service! I did my own research on people and chatted online within a site to see if we had things in common. If we had a few things in common, we exchanged numbers, texted for a while, eventually spoke on the phone and if things felt right, we’d meet in a public place to talk. If that went well, we would have another date. I am currently with a man I met online and we have been together for two years! We have plans to marry in the future. But there is always the thought that if this doesn’t work out, how long will it take either of us to jump right back online to find the next possible love connection? I myself would probably start looking right away since looking for love online is a lengthy process!

I knew this man 40 years ago as we worked in the same agency for two years but never dated. Last November 2013 I saw his profile on a dating site. My husband had died four years ago and his wife died 11 years ago. We dated for five months. I questioned him about his continued online search as I had access to his username. Five months into the friendship he told me he “Was looking for his dream women in cyberspace”. I think he has been on these dating sites for over 5 years. Needless to say I will not tolerate this and it was over. I am sad, frustrated and angry how this ended as underneath all of his insecurities, unresolved issues with his wife’s death he is a good guy. I had been on these dating sties for 2 and 1/2 years and now I am looking at Matchmaking services as a better choice in finding a “Better good guy”.

I refer to these sites as “Designer Dating” sites. I liken the search process to ‘Window Shopping’. No-one seems very interested in making an actual purchase or commitment. I notice that all the previous comments are from women only. I agree with the article that says essentially, there are too many profiles and photos. Having fallen under this spell myself…”Oh, he’s nice but I’m sure there’s something better on the next page…” Click. Next. And on it goes. The term Chemistry gets thrown around a lot. I don’t know folks. I sure ain’t feelin’ it. Think I’ll go hang out with some friends now.

Stumbling upon this article during research for my Master thesis and I am curious: Would you use an app, that introduces a new way of dating, solely based on your voice and who you are, rather than how you look like? To me, we don’t fall in love with someone because of their looks (or their body mass index for that matter) or because of an algorithm, but because of the way somebody makes you feel and the way s.o. makes you laugh. At the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter if someone has blue or brown eyes and my experience is, that most people place fake, manipulated or outdated pictures online to sell someone we don’t really are. And we are definitely more than our looks. I found my partner online and we had no picture of each other for three months – but we talked every night for hours…. fell in love and still are after 10 years… We met on a different level and got aligned long before we met. So, the question is, would you give this way of meeting someone a chance… an app where you can listen in to answers people give to questions other user asked before and where you can get a feeling for somebody before you even see them?

APS regularly opens certain online articles for discussion on our website. Effective February 2021, you must be a logged-in APS member to post comments. By posting a comment, you agree to our Community Guidelines and the display of your profile information, including your name and affiliation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations present in article comments are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect the views of APS or the article’s author. For more information, please see our Community Guidelines .

Please login with your APS account to comment.

New Report Finds “Gaps and Variation” in Behavioral Science at NIH

A new NIH report emphasizes the importance of behavioral science in improving health, observes that support for these sciences at NIH is unevenly distributed, and makes recommendations for how to improve their support at the agency.

APS Advocates for Psychological Science in New Pandemic Preparedness Bill

APS has written to the U.S. Senate to encourage the integration of psychological science into a new draft bill focused on U.S. pandemic preparedness and response.

APS Urges Psychological Science Expertise in New U.S. Pandemic Task Force

APS has responded to urge that psychological science expertise be included in the group’s personnel and activities.

Privacy Overview

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Dating on Apps, and the Old-Fashioned Way

More from our inbox:.

• Donald Trump and Louis XIV
• At Stake in the Election
• The Music Business: Tough for New Talent
• Killing Animals: Avoid the Euphemisms
• Memo to Liberals

To the Editor:

Re “ It’s Not You: Dating Apps Are Getting Worse ,” by Magdalene J. Taylor (Opinion guest essay, nytimes.com, March 16):

With more people on online dating platforms than ever, we have entered a new era rife with hot takes and opinions based on a narrow set of experiences. Recent surveys say that dating apps are the No. 1 way people meet today, and nearly 70 percent of individuals who met someone on a dating app said it led to a romantic, exclusive relationship.

I am not here to question individual experiences, or pretend that every date will lead to success. Matching two people is an imperfect science and rests on shared interests, complex personalities, timing and more. It’s an age-old axiom for a reason: You have to kiss a few frogs before you find your prince or princess.

But lately, we’ve been building to an environment where critiques of apps are presented as a monolith and pessimism over a bad date is taken to signal the end to a generation’s romantic future. There’s this false notion suggesting that dating apps don’t work. The numbers tell us that broadly speaking and for more people than ever: They work.

Bernard Kim Los Angeles The writer is chief executive officer of Match Group.

Re “ With Lackluster Growth, Dating Apps Are in Need of a Spark ” (front page, March 13):

There was a time when finding a partner was an adventure that played out in public spaces: the park while walking your dog, the bar while calming down from a hectic week, the art class that opened you up to new experiences and people.

Now apps let you sit on your sofa in your slippers and shop, viewing only what the app reveals. Are they kind? Would their smile make you look twice?

We used to live somewhere, interact with people we found there who had our approach to life — and would actually move if we found no synergy (why live somewhere that is like that?). These were all actions that led to personal connections.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Dating and Relationships in the Digital Age

From distractions to jealousy, how Americans navigate cellphones and social media in their romantic relationships

Table of contents.

• Acknowledgments
• Methodology

How we did this

Pew Research Center has long studied the changing nature of romantic relationships as well as the role of digital technology in people’s lives. This particular report focuses on the patterns, experiences and attitudes related to digital technology use in romantic relationships. These findings are based on a survey conducted Oct. 16 to 28, 2019, among 4,860 U.S. adults. This includes those who took part as members of Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP), an online survey panel that is recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses, as well as respondents from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel who indicated that they identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB). The margin of sampling error for the full sample is plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

Recruiting ATP panelists by phone or mail ensures that nearly all U.S. adults have a chance of selection. This gives us confidence that any sample can represent the whole U.S. adult population (see our Methods 101 explainer on random sampling). To further ensure that each ATP survey reflects a balanced cross-section of the nation, the data is weighted to match the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education and other categories.

For more, see the report’s Methodology . You can also find the questions asked, and the answers the public provided in the topline .

Amid growing debates about the impact of smartphones and social media on romantic relationships, a Pew Research Center survey conducted in October 2019 finds that many Americans encounter some tech-related struggles with their significant others.

For instance, among partnered adults in the U.S. – that is, those who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship, roughly half (51%) say their partner is often or sometimes distracted by their cellphone while they are trying to have a conversation with them, and four-in-ten say they are at least sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their mobile device.

Partnered adults under the age of 50 are particularly likely to express the feeling that their partner is distracted by their phone, with those ages 30 to 49 most likely to report this. Fully 62% of 30- to 49-year-olds and 52% of 18-to 29-year-olds who are in a romantic relationship say their partner is at least sometimes distracted by their phone when they’re trying to talk them. Still, this issue is not confined to younger age groups: 41% of partnered Americans ages 50 and older say they have encountered this in their relationship at least sometimes.

With phones being such a distraction, people might be tempted to look through their partner’s phone. However, there is widespread agreement among the public that digital snooping in couples is unacceptable. Seven-in-ten Americans – regardless of whether they are in a relationship – say it is rarely or never acceptable for someone to look through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge. Still, 34% of partnered adults say they have looked through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge, with women being more likely than men to say they have done this (42% vs. 25%).

For many adults, social media plays a role in the way they navigate and share information about their romantic relationships. Roughly eight-in-ten social media users (81%) report that they at least sometimes see others posting about their relationships, including 46% who say this happens often, but few say that seeing these posts affects how they feel about their own love life.

Moreover, social media has become a place where some users discuss relationships and investigate old ones. Roughly half of social media users (53%) say they have used these platforms to check up on someone they used to date or be in a relationship with, while 28% say they have used social media to share or discuss things about their relationship or dating life. For adult users under the age of 30, those shares who have used social media to checked-up on a former partner (70%) or posted about their own love life (48%) are even higher.

But social media can also be a source of annoyance and conflict for some couples. Among those whose partner uses social media, 23% say they have felt jealous or unsure of their relationship because of the way their current partner interacts with others on these sites, and this share rises to 34% among those ages 18 to 29.

Still, some users view these platforms as an important venue for showing love and affection. This is especially true for younger users who are partnered: 48% of 18- to 29-year-old social media users say social media is very or somewhat important for them in showing how much they care about their partner.

These are some of the main findings from a nationally representative survey of 4,860 U.S. adults conducted online Oct. 16 to 28, 2019, using Pew Research Center’s American Trend Panel.

Terminology

Several terms are used in this report to describe people’s current relationship status. This reference guide explains each term. Single is used to describe people who are not currently in a committed relationship but may be casually dating (31% of the sample). Single and looking refers to people who are not in a committed relationship (but may be casually dating) and are looking for dates or a relationship (15% of the sample). Casually dating refers to single people who are casually dating someone but are not in a committed relationship (4% of the sample). Partnered refers to adults who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship (69% of the sample). Cohabiting is used to describe people who currently live with their partner but are not married (11% of the sample). Committed relationship is used to describe people who are in a relationship but are not married or cohabiting (8% of the sample). Unmarried is used to refer to any adults who are not currently married – single, cohabiting or in a committed relationship (50% of the sample). This term is sometimes used in conjunction with the term “partnered” to refer to those who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship (for example, unmarried partnered adults constitute 19% of the sample).

40% of partnered adults say they are bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone

At the time of the survey, four-in-ten Americans who are married, living with a partner or who are in a committed relationship say they are often or sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone, including 12% who say they feel this way often. 1

In addition, 24% of partnered Americans report that they are at least sometimes bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on social media, while a somewhat smaller share (15%) say they feel this way about their partner playing video games.

There are certain groups who are more likely to express annoyance over their partner’s digital activities than others. Among partnered adults, women are more likely than men to say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their cellphone (16% vs. 8%) or playing video games (7% vs. 3%). 2

Beyond gender differences, people’s attitudes also vary by age. Some 18% of partnered adults ages 18 to 49 say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on their phone, compared with 6% of those ages 50 and older. Younger adults in romantic relationships also are more likely than their older counterparts to say they are often bothered by the amount of time their partner spends on social media (11% vs. 4%) and playing video games (7% vs. 3%).

Roughly half of partnered people say their significant other is distracted by their phone at least sometimes when they try to talk to them

While relatively few Americans are familiar with the term “phubbing” – which is the practice of snubbing others in favor of their cellphones – notable shares say they have encountered that behavior in their romantic relationships.

When asked to reflect on their partner’s cellphone use, 51% of Americans in a romantic relationship say their partner is at least sometimes distracted by their cellphone when they are trying to have a conversation with them, including 16% who say their significant other is often distracted by their mobile device.

This pattern differs by age: Roughly six-in-ten partnered adults ages 30 to 49 say their significant other is at least sometimes distracted by their cellphone when they are trying to hold a conversation with them, compared with 52% of those ages 18 to 29 and even smaller shares for those ages 50 and older (41%). Among those in relationships, younger adults also are more likely than older adults to assert that their partner is often distracted by their phone when they are trying to have a discussion (20% vs. 10%).

Women who are in a relationship are more likely than men to say their partner is often distracted by their phone while they are trying to hold a conversation, but this gender difference is most pronounced among younger adults. Three-in-ten partnered women ages 18 to 29 say their significant other is often distracted by their phone while they are trying to hold a conversation, compared with 15% of men in this age group who say this.

About one-in-three partnered adults say they have looked through their current spouse or partner’s phone without their knowledge, but there’s strong public consensus this is unacceptable

Americans – regardless of whether they are in a relationship – were asked in the survey about their views about some issues related to technology and relationships. For example, they weighed in on the acceptability of looking through a significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge. Seven-in-ten U.S. adults say it is rarely (28%) or never (42%) acceptable to look through a significant other’s cellphone without their knowledge. Smaller shares – about three-in-ten (29%) – view this behavior as at least sometimes acceptable.

Majorities across major demographic groups view these actions as unacceptable, but there are some Americans who are more accepting of this behavior than others.

Women are more likely than men to think it is at least sometimes acceptable for someone to look through their partner’s cellphone without their knowledge (35% vs. 24%). And about one-third of adults under the age of 65 (33%) view this as acceptable, compared with 16% of those 65 and older.

Americans’ views on the acceptability of looking through a partner’s phone varies by current relationship status. Americans who are married or cohabiting are more likely than those who are single or in a committed relationship to say that looking through a significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge is sometimes or always acceptable.

Despite the overall public uneasiness with this type of digital snooping, there are some Americans who report that they have looked through their significant other’s phone without that person’s knowledge. Roughly one-third of partnered adults (34%) say they have done this, but there are substantial differences by gender, age and relationship status when it comes to looking through a significant other’s phone.

Among adults who are partnered, women are far more likely than men to report that they have looked through their current partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge (42% vs. 25%). And while 52% of partnered adults ages 18 to 29 say they have done this, those shares are 41% among those ages 30 to 49, 29% among those ages 50 to 64 and 13% among those 65 and older.

These actions also vary by the type of relationship. Roughly four-in-ten Americans (41%) who are living with a partner report that they have looked through their current partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge, compared with 27% of those who are in committed relationship and 34% of those who are married. However, this pattern is largely due age differences in relationship status, as twice as many adults under 50 live with a partner than do those 50 and older. While 48% cohabiters under 50 report having gone through their partner’s phone without that person’s knowledge, only 18% of cohabiters ages 50 and older say the same.

There also are some differences by race and ethnicity. About half of Hispanic adults who are in a relationship say they have looked through their partner’s phone, compared with a third among their black or white counterparts.

Those in partnered relationships also are more likely to look through their partner’s cellphone without that person’s knowledge if they think it is acceptable to do so (61% say they have done this). Smaller shares of partnered adults who deem this unacceptable say they have personally gone through their current partner’s phone – though still about one-in-five say they have done this.

It is fairly common for partners to share the password or passcode to their cellphone

Overall, sharing passwords to digital devices or accounts is a fairly common practice in romantic relationships. In the October 2019 survey, a majority of Americans who are married, cohabiting or in a committed relationship say they have given their spouse or partner the password for their cellphone (75%), their email account (62%) or any of their social media accounts (42%). 3

Still, experiences do vary depending on the type of relationship partnered people have. Married or cohabiting adults are much more likely to share their cellphone or social media passwords with their partner than those who are in a committed relationship but are not living with their partner. Roughly three-quarters or more of married adults (79%) or those who live with a partner (74%) say they have given their partner the password to their cellphone, compared with 58% of those who are in a committed relationship. A similar pattern is present among partnered social media users when they are asked about whether they have shared their login information for any of their social media accounts. When it comes to email password sharing, married adults are the most likely group to say they have given their email password to their partner: 70% say this, compared with 50% of cohabiting internet users and just 22% of those in a committed relationship.

There also are some differences by age. Among partnered adults, those ages 18 to 49 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to say they have given their cellphone password to their spouse or partner (81% vs. 69%). On the other hand, older adults are more likely than younger adults to say they have shared their email password with their significant other (70% vs. 59%).

Most social media users see other people post about their relationship or dating life, but relatively few say these posts affect how they feel about their own relationship

This survey conducted last fall also examined how social media might be affecting the way people think about their own love lives. More specifically, does seeing relationship posts on social media affect the way people think about their own relationships?

Overall, eight-in-ten social media users see others post about their relationship on social media often or sometimes. This differs by both age and gender. Women are slightly more likely than men to see these posts (84% vs. 77%). In addition, 90% of social media users ages 18 to 49 say they see these types of post at least sometimes, compared with 68% of those ages 50 and older.

A majority of social media users who are in a relationship (81%) say they see posts about other people’s relationships when using social media. Among these partnered social media users, 78% of those who are married say they at least sometimes see posts about other people’s relationships, compared with 89% of those who are living with partner and 86% of those in a committed relationship.

Overall, seeing these posts appears to have little effect on how people view their own romantic relationships. A large majority of partnered adults (81%) who at least sometimes see posts about other people’s relationships say that these posts have not made much of difference in how they feel about their own relationship. On the other hand, relatively few say these posts make them feel better (9%) or worse (9%) about their relationship.

When it comes to social media users who are single and looking, 87% see other people making posts about their relationships on social media platforms at least sometimes. Social media users who are single and not looking for a relationship or dates are less likely to report seeing these types of posts at least sometimes (78%).

A third of the social media users who are single and looking and who say they see others’ posts about their love life say that seeing these posts makes them feel worse. This compares with 62% who report that such posts by others do not make much of a difference in how they feel about their own dating life. Just 4% say it makes them feel better.

These relationship-focused posts tend to have a bigger impact on women than men. Among social media users who are single and looking, women who see relationships posts at least sometimes are more likely to report that seeing these posts on social media makes them feel worse about their dating lives than are their male counterparts (40% vs. 28%).

About three-in-ten social media users say they have discussed their love life on social media

While it is fairly common for social media users to come across other people posting things about their love lives, only a minority of Americans who use these platforms (28%) say they have ever shared or discussed things about their relationship or dating life. About four-in-ten adults who are living with their partner (39%) and nearly half of those in a committed relationship (48%) but not living together say they have ever posted about their relationship on social media. Conversely, married and single adults are the least likely to post about their love lives (24% and 26%, respectively).

About four-in-ten social media users who are either Hispanic or lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB) say they have ever posted about their dating life or relationship on social media, while around one-quarter of white, black and straight social media users say the same.

Younger social media users also are more likely to have posted about their love lives on social media previously. While about half of social media users ages 18 to 29 have ever posted on social media about their dating life or relationship, a third of 30- to 49-year-olds say the same. By comparison, far fewer social media users ages 50 and older (11%) say they ever post about their relationship or dating life.

Roughly half of social media users have used these sites to check up on an ex-romantic partner

Using social media to check up on former romantic partners is a fairly common practice among social media users. About half of social media users (53%) say they have used these sites to check up on someone with whom they were in a relationship or whom they used to date.

Social media users ages 18 to 49 are far more likely than those ages 50 and older to report using social media to check up on an ex-romantic partner. Seven-in-ten 18- to 29-year-olds report that they have used these platforms to check up on someone they used to date or be in a relationship with. That share is lower – though still a majority – among users ages 30 to 49 and falls sharply among those ages and 50 and older.

There also are some notable differences, depending on a person’s relationship status. About two-thirds each of social media users who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship say they have used social media to check up on someone they used to date. Meanwhile, 56% of single people, and even fewer married people (45%), say the same. In addition, social media users who have a high school degree or less education are less likely to report that they have used to social media to check up on an ex-romantic partner than those with a bachelor’s or advanced degree or who have some college experience.

Younger Americans in relationships are especially likely to view social media as having an important role in connecting and keeping up with their partner

Overall, about three-in-ten partnered adults who use social media say that these sites are at least somewhat important in showing how much they care about their partner (33%) or keeping up with what is going on in their partner’s life (28%). But the level of importance that these users place on social media varies substantially by age. Among partnered social media users, 48% of 18- to 29-year-olds say these platforms are very or somewhat important in how they show how much they care about their partner, compared with 28% of those ages 30 and older who say this.

There also are age differences when it comes to the importance social media users place on these platforms for keeping up with their significant other’s life. About four-in-ten partnered users ages 18 to 29 say social media is somewhat or very important when it comes to keeping up with what’s going on in their partner’s life, compared with 29% of those ages 30 to 49 and only 17% of those ages 50 and older.

Married social media users are more likely than those who are cohabiting or in a committed relationship to say they do not see social media as important for keeping up with what’s going on in their partner’s life or for showing how much they care about their partner.

The level of importance that partnered adults place on social media also varies by race and ethnicity as well as by sexual orientation. Nonwhite social media users are more likely than white users to say these platforms are a very or somewhat important for keeping up with their partner’s life and showing how much they care. 4 Among partnered social media users, LGB adults are more likely than those who are straight to say social media is at least somewhat important for keeping up with their partner’s life or showing how much they care.

Even when controlling for age, racial and ethnic differences persist when it comes to the likelihood of saying social media is a personally important way to keep up with one’s partner or show how much they care. Similarly, marital status and sexual orientation are significant predictors of how important it is for people to use social media to keep up with one’s partner, even after controlling for age differences.

Social media can be a source of jealousy and uncertainty in relationships – especially for younger adults

Even as younger Americans value social media as a place to share how much they care about their partner or to keep up with what’s going on in their partner’s life, they also acknowledge some of the downsides that these sites can have on relationships.

Overall, 23% of partnered adults whose significant other uses social media say they have felt jealous or unsure about their relationship because of the way their current spouse or partner interacts with other people on social media. But this share is even higher among those in younger age groups.

Among partnered adults whose significant other uses social media, 34% of 18- to 29-year-olds and 26% of those ages 30 to 49 say they have felt jealous or unsure in their current relationship because of how their partner interacted with others on social media, compared with 19% of those ages 50 to 64 who say this and 4% of those ages 65 and up. Nearly four-in-ten unmarried adults with partners who are social media users (37%) say they have felt this way about their current partner, while only 17% of married people say the same.

Women also are more likely to express displeasure with how their significant other interacts with others on social media. Women who say their partner uses social media are more likely than men to say they have felt jealous or unsure of their relationships because of how their partner interacts with others on social media (29% vs. 17%).

Among those whose partner uses social media, about three-in-ten nonwhite adults who are in a relationship report having felt jealous or uncertain in their current relationship based on their partner’s social media interactions, compared with 19% of white adults who say the same. About one-third of LGB partnered adults whose significant other uses social media report that they have felt jealous or unsure in their current relationship because of how their partner interacted with others on social media, while 22% of straight people say this. College graduates are less likely to report having felt this way than those with some college experience or a high school degree or less.

• These items were only asked among those whose partner uses these digital technologies, but are presented here among all partnered adults. This group does include portions of those who say their partner does not own a cellphone (4%), use social media (27%) or play videos games (47%). Please read the Methodology section for full details on how these questions were asked. ↩
• Prior research from 2019 shows that the majority of both men (84%) and women (79%) in the U.S. report owning a smartphone . In addition, about three-in-ten U.S. adults say they are online almost constantly , and this does not differ by gender. Prior work in 2018 found that men under 50 are more likely than women under 50 to report playing video games at least sometimes. ↩
• These items were only asked among those who use these digital technologies, but are presented here among all partnered adults. This group does include portions of those who say they do not use the internet or use social media. Please read the Methodology for full details on how these questions were asked. ↩
• Nonwhite includes those who identify as black, Asian, Hispanic, some other race or multiple races; these groups could not be analyzed separately due to sample size limitations. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Age & Generations
• LGBTQ Attitudes & Experiences
• Online Dating
• Platforms & Services
• Romance & Dating
• Social Media
• Stresses & Distraction Online

5 facts about student loans

U.s. adults under 30 have different foreign policy priorities than older adults, across asia, respect for elders is seen as necessary to be ‘truly’ buddhist, teens and video games today, as biden and trump seek reelection, who are the oldest – and youngest – current world leaders, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 56

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan, nonadvocacy fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, computational social science research and other data-driven research. Pew Research Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts , its primary funder.

© 2024 Pew Research Center

How To Write A Dating Profile Bio: Templates, Examples, And Words To Avoid

• What To Include
• Words To Use
• Words To Avoid

Dating apps make it easy to meet new people any time, but they also add a stressful element to the mix: having to describe yourself in a dating profile bio. Even for the most charming and witty person, having to come up with a bio that shows off your best qualities and attracts attention from people you might like is a big ask. Luckily, there are specific words and strategies you can use to make the process easier and help your profile stand out from the crowd. Here are 10 words to use (and 5 you should avoid) to write the most compelling dating profile bio and find your next match.

What to include in a dating profile

First, let’s talk about what kinds of information you need to include in a good dating profile. Ideally, you want to make sure you have these three areas covered:

Quality photos

Space is limited on a dating profile; however, as the old saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. A great photo isn’t just about looking attractive; it’s also a way to show your personality or what you’re interested in. Choose one that is of high quality and that captures you at your best.

What’s interesting and lovable about you

What makes you tick? What are the unique qualities you bring to your relationships? What makes you a good friend or partner? These are things to think about as you write your dating profile. Your bio should give people a sense of who you are and what you have to offer. Much like when writing a resume ( and we’ve got a guide for that, too ), it’s important to sell yourself and really focus on what makes you stand out.

What you’re looking for

Ultimately, your dating profile is intended to help you meet people, so don’t be afraid to talk about the types of people you’d like to meet. Focus on the positive attributes you admire in other people, which qualities you enjoy in the people you spend time with, and interests or hobbies that you might like to share with someone else. 

Remember: a successful dating profile is one that gives people a more complete picture of who you are and what you’re looking for, so put effort and care into creating a profile that feels like it truly represents you.

Everyone brings unique qualities to the table. Learn how to play up your strongest attributes on your dating profile.

Words to use in your dating profile bio

If you struggle to find the right words to use in your dating profile bio, you certainly aren’t alone. Here are some words that real people say stand out to them when they’re perusing new profile bios on dating apps.

To be honest means to be truthful, ethical, and fair. It’s a key value that many people prioritize in relationships. That also makes it a good one to mention when you’re talking up the attractive qualities you possess or explaining the traits and values you seek in the people who catch your eye.

A review of the most successful profiles on Match.com showed that most of them mention music . Whether you make it or just enjoy listening to it, mentioning music and finding common ground on the types of music you enjoy can help you find harmony with potential dates.

3. optimistic

Are you the kind of person who takes a favorable view of things and always expects a good outcome? If so, a lot of people are into that! Optimistic is one of the most popular words used on successful dating profiles according to eHarmony , and it’s a good one to add to your bio if you’re someone who always seeks the bright side.

4. spontaneous

Plans may not be your thing, but you should plan to mention your spontaneous nature in your dating profile bio. Spontaneity, or acting on natural impulse and being unconstrained, can be a fun quality in relationships, especially while dating. Adding this word to your bio increases the odds that you’ll catch the eye of someone just as fun and exciting as yourself.

Like honesty, kindness is one of the major traits many people value in a significant other. It means being “of a good or benevolent nature or disposition.” You can include the word kind in your descriptions of yourself, and you can also talk about the things you do that put your kindness on display.

Make Your Writing Shine!

• By clicking "Sign Up", you are accepting Dictionary.com Terms & Conditions and Privacy policies.
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

6. outgoing

Outgoing people are those who are interested in and responsive to others, friendly, and sociable. They have a certain magnetism, and they’re a lot of fun to be around. That explains why using this word in your dating profile can help fuel a boost in your matches.

A part of dating is finding someone to laugh and have fun with. That’s why it’s a good idea to mention both looking for and being someone funny in your profile bio. Funny means different things to different people, but no matter what, it’s a promise that you can provide fun, laughter, and amusement.

Don’t underestimate the importance of letting others know that you’re the type of person who shows care and compassion to others. Mentioning that you’re caring in your bio is a simple way to help your good qualities stand out and attract the attention of people looking for meaningful connection.

9. perceptive

It can be easier to connect with people who are intuitive, insightful, and understanding. One strong word to describe those qualities is perceptive . According to one analysis of successful profiles , perceptive is one of the five most popular descriptors.

10. ambitious

Being ambitious , or having the desire to achieve and succeed, can be a really attractive quality. If that describes you, be sure to mention it. And remember, the word ambitious doesn’t only apply to professional goals. You may have ambitions to be a better cook or to improve your physical fitness. Whatever your ambition, talking about it in your bio will help you find someone whose goals match yours.

Want more inspiring and uplifting ways to describe yourself to the dating pool? Check out our list of positive words from A to Z.

Words to avoid

There are also words you shouldn’t use when you’re updating your dating profile, either because they’re too vague or they might send up red flags. Here are five things to edit out as you write:

We all have personal turn-offs and dislikes, but avoid using your profile bio as a space to share a list of things you don’t want. Surveys show many people are turned off by this type of negativity. Plus, this is your chance to talk about what you do want in a partner, so focus on the positives.

To explore means to traverse for the purpose of discovery. The problem with expressing your desire to explore the dating landscape in your dating profile bio is that it’s vague for the person reading it. Are you open to something serious? Wanting to keep it casual? Aren’t sure? Instead of saying you want to explore, dating experts suggest being specific about what you want.

3. good vibes 

The phrase “good vibes only” has started to pop up on some dating profile bios, but according to some surveys, people tend to see it as a red flag. If you’re only open to good vibes , or positive feelings, how well do you handle disagreement? Are you mature enough for a relationship? It’s hard to tell from this phrase, so it’s better to avoid it.

Sarcasm can be funny sometimes, but it’s also defined as bitter derision or using irony to point out deficiencies or flaws. Not exactly great date behavior, right? Mentioning your love of sarcasm on your profile may cause potential dates to wonder if you’ll be rude or subscribe to a brand of mean humor. Until you know each other better, it’s probably better to avoid phrases like “fluent in sarcasm.”

 A Winking Face emoji 😉  or a Red Heart emoji ❤️ can be a cute addition to your dating profile bio, but proceed with caution. Overuse of emojis tends to come off as juvenile and immature. Instead, think of emojis as a little extra pizzazz you can add to sections that need it, but let your words do the majority of the talking.

Examples of successful dating profile bios

Now that you know what words to use in your dating profile, here are some ideas for how to write it, whether it’s a longform bio on a website or a shorter profile for an app.

Simple and engaging

I’m a teacher by day and a music lover and fine dining enthusiast by night. I value honesty and kindness just as much as a great sense of humor. My ideal partner is caring and ambitious and loves dancing in the kitchen or watching old episodes of Parks and Rec just as much as a night checking out a new bar with friends. I’m a romantic, and I’m looking for someone who’s as interested in a long-term relationship as I am.

Pick three words

Three words to describe me: adventurous, optimistic, spontaneous. I work in tech, so I’m always open to new possibilities. Seeking casual dates and lots of fun. First drink’s on me if you can make me laugh.

Choose a theme

I’m a video game addict looking for my Player 2. I also like great conversation, long hikes, and going to the movies. Hoping to level up my love life with someone kind, honest, and caring. Must love cats or it’s game over.

Found a match but not a lasting connection? Check out some breakup words to use and avoid.

Ways To Say

Synonym of the day

Feeld, the Polyamory Dating App, Made a Magazine. Why?

Yet another reminder of how good writing jobs are hard to come by.

A lover of magazines may find a few good reasons to pay attention to AFM , a new publication about sex and relationships. It’s visually fun and full of excellent writing. It’s also the latest in a long line of magazines to exist only because of the largesse of a tech company.

AFM stands for both “A Fucking Magazine” and “A Feeld Magazine”—that second one a reference to the dating app that is funding the enterprise. Feeld started its life in 2014 specifically to facilitate threesomes. It was originally called 3nder, pronounced “Thrinder,” which quickly led the company to receive a trademark-infringement complaint from Tinder. (Rebranding might have been a good idea anyway, as some initially perceived both the name and the app itself to be corny and embarrassing .) Feeld got a chic makeover last year, then worked through some major technical glitches and is now known as an all-purpose dating app with a uniquely broad range of options for identifying one’s sexual and relationship preferences. It remains especially popular with people seeking nonmonogamous connections.

Read: The woman who made online dating into a “science”

To expand its cultural cachet, the app is now joining many other tech companies and venture-capital-funded start-ups that have spun up media outlets in recent years. Previously, these publications have tended not to have protracted life spans. The buzzy, VC-funded luggage start-up Away had a magazine, Here , that quietly stopped publishing in 2020. The direct-to-consumer mattress brand Casper launched Woolly (after folding another online publication, Van Winkle’s ); it did not last. Dollar Shave Club funded the popular website MEL until 2021 and then just stopped ; Snapchat funded the popular website Real Life until 2022 and then just stopped . There were magazines by Airbnb and Uber and Bumble , and now there are not. Tech gets into magazines for a good time, not a long time.

Still, for journalists who are staring down a crumbling media business—one that teeters on the edge of “extinction” because of anemic traffic, a poor ad market, and burned-out readers, as Clare Malone argued in The New Yorker earlier this year—this arrangement is better than nothing.

AFM is co-edited by Maria Dimitrova, a longtime Feeld employee who previously created the company’s U.K.-based literary journal , Mal , which ran for five issues, and by Haley Mlotek, who has held many jobs in media, including as the editor of The Hairpin, a feminist website that folded in 2018, and as an editor at The Village Voice , the legendary alt weekly that collapsed in 2017 but recently has been resurrected as a mostly online property. Mlotek applied for a copywriting job at Feeld in the fall of 2022 to supplement her freelance-writing income, and the company emailed her back to ask her to edit a magazine instead.

“I have a lot of experience working for really wonderful, beloved, in my opinion excellent publications that just no longer exist,” she told me. AFM is two things at once: a magazine and an advertising campaign for Feeld. Mlotek said she’s hopeful that this model is at least as sustainable as anything else. She gestured at a history of publications being funded by single businesses or brands, citing European department stores that produced their own magazines beginning in the late 1800s. AFM ’s title is also a direct reference to the frustrating state of the media industry, Mlotek explained. Obviously it’s about sex, but it is also a reference to how wild starting a magazine, of all things, is right now: It reflects “the frustrations and the risks and the thrill of trying to produce a print publication at this moment in time,” she said. “It’s a joke, but it’s so serious.”

Read: The “dating market” is getting worse

Feeld has no plans for AFM to make any of its own money. The only ads in the first issue are in-kind ads for other magazines, including n+1 and The Drift . The idea is more that it will “bring back a bit of romance to dating,” Dimitrova told me, which might naturally help Feeld’s business. This is a task that a lot of dating apps are struggling with: The experience of using a smartphone to look for sex and love has started to feel numbing and hopeless to many people. The dating app Hinge also recently debuted an online zine that is more explicitly a marketing campaign —love stories written by cool writers, including R. O. Kwon and Brontez Purnell, accessible via QR code on the subway—presumably with the same goal. In so much as AFM can be a successful ad for Feeld, it will suggest to its readers that Feeld is the app for creative people who are deeply thoughtful, imaginative, funny, and smart—that using the app will not make a person feel as though every potential match might be a bot, an idiot, or a freak.

The first issue of AFM has contributions from a number of prominent writers, including Tony Tulathimutte, Hanif Abdurraqib, and Allison P. Davis. Many of the contributors, the editors said, are Feeld users themselves; some of the poetry in the issue, including “Self Portrait as the Tree of Knowledge (a.k.a. Trans Poetica),” by Delilah McCrea, was selected from open submissions solicited directly in the app. A reported feature on masculinity and bisexuality, written by the novelist Fan Wu, sourced interview subjects from Feeld. It’s a healthy combination of sexy stuff, sweet stuff, and serious stuff—one photo essay of people in their homes getting ready for dates and one accompanying a guide to making your own latex.

A funny work of fiction by the writer Ashani Lewis is made up of several distinct “breakup fantasies,” including one about ending a relationship with someone by tossing a sex toy they gave you into a body of water and watching it drift away. An essay by the 96-year-old filmmaker James Ivory, about coming of age in Palm Springs and later spending an evening hanging out around Truman Capote, is both gossipy and moving. The standout piece is a dead-eyed essay by the writer Merritt Tierce, recounting her years of attempts to get a TV show made about abortion. (“The executive vice president of television said, Well , ‘abortion anthology’ is not one but two words no studio wants to hear .”)

The first AFM cover star is the artist and musician Juliana Huxtable, who will DJ at a launch party in Brooklyn this week. The magazine will be distributed in the U.S. and the U.K. in the same places where you can buy any other highbrow cultural or literary magazine, and it will also be available for purchase online. Asked whether people could subscribe to it, Dimitrova said no.

She and Mlotek already have plans to start working on issue two. Yet, though she didn’t state as much, Dimitrova seemed aware that you never can tell how long the money will keep coming. Things often change. “You know,” she said, “each issue is its own miracle.”

About the Author

More Stories

The End of Parallel Parking

What’s With All the Trumpy VCs?

Noah Lyles and fellow Olympian Junelle Bromfield announce engagement

Olympians Noah Lyles and Junelle Bromfield are ready to sprint down the aisle .

The couple, who have been dating for about two years, shared their engagement news in a sweet  Instagram  post Sunday. The joint post featured a romantic video set to Snoh Aalegra’s “Do 4 Love”

In the video, which was filmed Saturday, Team USA's Lyles and Team Jamaica's Bromfield walked through the doorway of a home and were greeted with pink rose petals covering the floor.

Lyles, wearing a black suit, and Bromfield, dressed to the nines in a sparkly silver dress, held hands as he led her outside. There, they found a candle display and some of their loved ones standing beside an illuminated sign that read, “Will you marry me?”

Bromfield covered her face in shock as Lyles knelt on one knee and popped the question. He slipped the ring on her finger, and they shared a kiss.

The couple laughed as Bromfield showed off her ring to the camera.

In the caption, Lyles wrote, “To My Future Wife I Will Love You Forever,” and added a ring emoji.

On her page, Bromfield uploaded a  video  of her celebrating the engagement with her friends. She stood in the middle of her friends, who danced around her, before strutting toward the camera and giving a better look at the sparkler on her finger.

“ENGAGED,” she simply captioned the post.

Celebrities and friends celebrated the couple beneath Lyles’ post.

Lily Collins commented, “Congratulations you both!!!!”

Taylor Lautner wrote, “LETS GO” and included a raising hands emoji and a red heart.

Fellow Team USA star Coco Gauff said, “congratulations !!!”

The happy couple’s news comes after they spent the summer supporting each other at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Lyles ran for Team USA and  brought home gold in the men’s 100-meter final  and bronze in the men’s 200-meter final  after testing positive for COVID-19.

Bromfield competed in track and field events for Jamaica but did not medal.

How did Lyles and Bromfield meet?

In his Aug. 21 appearance on TODAY, Lyles said about their initial connection: “Somebody slid into somebody’s DMs.”

“It wasn’t me,” he answered when asked who sent the first message.

They shared more details about their virtual connection in a June 2024  joint interview on the “Fast Lane Lifestyle “ podcast.

Lyles, forewarning it would be a long story, said Bromfield first “slid into his DMs” in 2017, though it took them until 2022 to become a couple.

Lyles said he was protective when they first met.

“I’m young to the scene. I’m over here thinking, as she puts it, ‘I just broke the 300 indoor record. I can’t be, you know, just be giving my number out to nobody.’ You never know who be trying to take advantage of you,” Lyles said in between laughs.

They finally exchanged numbers a few weeks later, but couldn’t meet up because their practice schedules conflicted.

Finally, in 2018, Lyles and Bromfield went on a first date — but “it didn’t click,” Lyles said.

“It didn’t click at all,” Bromfield echoed. “Let’s just be friends.”

Later in the year, they reconnected when Lyles and his teammates went to Jamaica for a track meet. He asked Bromfield for a recommendation for a place to go out.

She met them there, and they danced “the whole night,” Lyles said. “Maybe there is something there,” he remembered thinking.

Scheduling conflicts continued to pose an obstacle for the couple. Lyles invited Bromfield to his mom’s wedding in Jamaica, but she couldn’t make it.

They both entered into other relationships. “We knew we liked each other, so we would stop texting whenever anybody got into a relationship,” Lyles said.

Still, they would continue to run into each other, including at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. When his long-term relationship ended, Lyles reached out to Bromfield. Eventually, he said, “I’m going to ask her to be my girlfriend.”

He asked her. On the podcast Bromfield said she responded, “I don’t want to ruin our friendship. It’s going to be a long-distance relationship.”

Lyles proposed that they date for three months and then check in about if they wanted to keep going. “Every month from then, we would have a reassessment,” he said. 

She said yes and they’ve been together ever since.

Bromfield is a fellow medalist and has a law degree

Both Lyles and Bromfield have medals. Bromfield won bronze at the 2020 Tokyo Games  in the women’s 4x400 meter relay.

After the 2024 Paris Olympics, Lyles gushed about Bromfield in an interview on TODAY in August. During the sit-down, Bromfield also appeared on air to support Lyles.

“Hey, baby!” he said live on TV, as she waved at him from another area of the set.

When TODAY’s Craig Melvin asked Lyles to share more about her, he started showering Bromfield with compliments.

“Junelle, a two-time Olympian, Olympic bronze medal winner, multi-world championship medalist. She’s been running since she was 8 years old, making teams for Jamaica, so she’s very talented in her own right,” he said.

“She ran at the Olympics this year in the open 400-meters, and I’m so proud of her,” he added. “She’s a survivor. She’s a fighter. She’s savvy. As my mom would say, ‘She has a bounce-back ability.’ No matter what happens, she’ll be able to get up and come back. Those are similar qualities I find in myself that I think we relate to.”

Bromfield graduated in 2020 with a bachelor’s degree in law from University of Technology in Kingston, Jamaica,  her 2024 Paris Olympics page says.

They’ve been friends for 8 years

In a  post from August 2023,  Bromfield and Lyles celebrated seven years of friendship, six months of dating and one year of being partners, she wrote on Instagram at the time.

The couple appears in “Sprint,” a Netflix docuseries that follows track and field athletes as they prepared for 2024 Paris Games. Their banter-filled dynamic also unfolds in Bromfield’s Instagram series “Mic’d Up Junelle.”

Bromfield  posted a video earlier this year  of Lyles pulling back a cover from what appeared to be a new car. She clapped as the SUV became visible.

“First car,” she captioned the post. “Paper work took so long my excitement ran out. Thank you baby.”

Lyles encouraged Bromfield to go to therapy

Bromfield has been competing while managing the loss of some family members, including her mother in 2021.

After qualifying for the Paris Olympics in July,  she told outlet The Inside Lane  that advancing took a weight off her shoulders.

“It means a lot because it feels as if a burden has been lifted off my shoulders. For the past couple of years, it’s been very hard mentally because I have a lot of loss in my family and I’m just recovering,” she said.

What has helped “a lot,” she said, was therapy.

“I started therapy like two years ago because my boyfriend is big on therapy, and he felt as if I needed it, too. Honestly, it has helped a lot because I feel as if I’ve been suffering with survival guilt, and it was basically laying on my shoulders,” she said.

“And now I’m like, you know, I’ve got to live my life and just enjoy every moment of it cause life is short,” she added.

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Dating — The Benefits of Online Dating to Society

The Benefits of Online Dating to Society

• Categories: Dating Online Dating Society

About this sample

Words: 1297 |

Published: Oct 2, 2020

Words: 1297 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 710 words

1 pages / 616 words

2 pages / 727 words

1 pages / 304 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Dating

In contemporary society, the quest for a life partner often feels daunting and overwhelming. Amidst the myriad of dating advice books, Gary Thomas’s Sacred Search stands out for its unique perspective rooted in Christian [...]

Throughout human history, spanning over 30,000 years, communication has been the cornerstone of our evolution and dominance as a species. From rudimentary cave art to smoke signals, carrier pigeons to telephones, and now the era [...]

The 21st century has introduce a new way of life in the dating world. Traditionally, whenever a person was interested in dating, he/she would have to actually meet the other person first then plan for a date from there on [...]

Getting on that first date can be particularly intimidating, especially when you are just starting to get to know each other better. This is also often true for couples who have gotten used to the presence of one another. What [...]

Abusive dating violence is a serious human rights issue that affects millions of teens worldwide regardless of age, economic status, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or educational background. Violence and abuse in [...]

Mormon’s have a lot of wives. That’s what always popped into my head when I thought about the religion of Mormonism. Most American’s don’t really know much, if anything, about this religion, even though it’s considered to be [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free