Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Do Women Pick Up Lies before Men? The Association between Gender, Deception Patterns, and Detection Modes in Online Dating

Journal Name:

  • Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies

Publication Year:

  • 2013

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Due to its particular conditions, the Internet increases opportunities for lies and deception compared to offline interactions. In online dating, misrepresentation of the self is an issue of particular relevance. Previous studies have shown that searching for a mate online is accompanied by a high risk of being deceived. This paper focuses on the rarely-considered perspective of the receivers of deception. Our study will first investigate deception patterns of men and women in online dating profiles. In a second step, modes of detecting deception (e-mail, telephone, face-to-face, etc.) are analyzed. Using online survey data of 3,535 users of a German dating site, results show (1) gender-specific deception patterns: Women are more likely to misrepresent their physical attractiveness; men are more likely to misrepresent information on marital status, intended relationship, and height. (2) These gender-specific deception patterns are associated with specific detection modes. Women are more likely to detect specific male deceptions during e-mail communication in an early stage of dating, whereas men are more likely to detect specific female deceptions at the first face-to-face meeting. These results highlight the link between different kinds of deception, characteristics of the receiver and its detection via different communication technologies. Implications of the results for the mating process are discussed.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-do-women-pick-lies-men-association-between-gender-deception-patterns-and-detection-modes-online-dating.pdf
  • 3
52
73
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Benzécri, J.-P. et collaborateurs. (1973). L’analyse des données. L’analyse des correspondances. Paris: Dunod.
Biernat, M., Manis, M., & Nelson, T. E. (1991). Stereotypes and Standards of Judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 60(4): 485–499.
Blasius, J. ( 1994). Correspondence Analysis in Social Science Research. In: Greenacre, M., & Blasius,
B. (Eds.) Correspondence Analysis in the Social Science. Recent Developments and Applications, 23–52. London: Academic Press.
Blasius, J. (2001). Korrespondenzanalyse. München: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag.
Carlson, J. R., George, J. F., Burgeon, J. K., Adkins, M., & White, C. (2004). Deception in computer-mediated communication. Group Decision and Negotiation 13(1): 5–28.
DePaulo, B. M., Zuckerman, M., & Rosenthal, R. (1980). Humans as Lie Detectors. Journal of Communication 30(2): 129– 139.
Donath, J. S. (1999). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In: Smith, M. A., & Kollock, P. (Eds.) Communities in Cyberspace, 29–59. New York: Routledge.
Ekman, P. (1996). Why don‟t we catch liars? Social Research 63(3): 801–817.
Ekman, P. (1992). Telling Lies: Clues to Deceit in the Marketplace, Politics, and Marriage. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Ekman, P., & O‟Sullivan, M. (1991). Who Can Catch a Liar? American Psychologist 46(9): 913–920.
Ellison, N. B., Heino, R. D., & Toma, C. (2012). Profile as Promise: A Framework for Conceptualizing Veracity in Online Dating Self-Presentations. New Media & Society 14 (1), pp. 45-62.
Ellison, N. B., Hancock, J. T. , & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11(2): 415–441.
Gambetta, D., & Hamill, H. (2005). Streetwise. How Taxi Drivers Establish Their Customers’ Trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies
Volume: 3 – Issue: 3 – July - 2013
© Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies 71
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Heino, R. D. (2006). Self-presentation in online personals - The role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in Internet dating. Communication Research 33(2): 152–177.
Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C. (2011). First comes love, then comes Google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Communication Research 38(1): 70–100.
Gillis, J. S., & Avis, W. E. (1980). The male-taller norm in mate selection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 6(3): 396– 401.
Hancock, J. T., & Thom-Santelli, J. (2004). Deception and design: the impact of communication technology on lying behavior. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 130-136. New York: ACM.
Hancock, J. T., Toma, C., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). The Truth about Lying in Online Dating Profiles. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 449–452. San Jose, Calif.: ACM.
Hancock, J. T., Woodworth, M., & Goorha, S. (2010). See no evil: The effect of communication medium and motivation on deception detection. Group Decision and Negotiation 19(4): 327–336.
Lynn, M., & Shurgot, B. A. (1984). Responses to Lonely Hearts Advertisements: Effects of Reported Physical Attractiveness, P hysique, and Coloration. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 10(3): 349–357.
Lucid, L. (2009). (Mis)Representing the Self in Online Dating. Mind Matters: The Wesleyan Journal of Psychology Vol. 4: 37-49.
McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship Formation on the Internet: What‟s the Big Attraction? Journal of Social Issues 58(1): 9–31.
Merkle, E. R., & Richardson, R. A. (2000). Digital Dating and Virtual Relating: Conceptualizing Computer Mediated Romantic Relationships. Family Relations 49(2): 187–192.
O'Sullivan, M. (2003). The Fundamental Attribution Error in Detecting Deception: The Boy-Who-Cried-Wolf Effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29 (10): 1316-1327.
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies
Volume: 3 – Issue: 3 – July - 2013
© Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies 72
Pawlowski, B., & Koziel, S. (2002). The impact of traits offered in personal advertisements on response rates. Evolution and Human Behavior 23(2): 139–149.
Pratt, T. C., Holtfreter, K., & Reisig, M. D. (2010). Routine Online Activity and Internet Fraud Targeting: Extending the Generality of Routine Activity Theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 47(3): 267–296.
Rege, A. (2009). What‟s Love Got to Do with It? Exploring Online Dating Scams and Identity Fraud. International Journal of Cyber Criminology 3(2): 494–512.
Schmitz, A. (2009). Virtual relationships between the sexes in the context of relational methodology. Reflections on a sociology of digital mate choice.
http://www.partnerwahlforschung.de/ UserFiles/File/papers/Schmitz_2009_en.pdf. Published in German as: Schmitz, A. (2010). Virtuelle Zwischengeschlechtlichkeit im Kontext relationaler Methodologie. Überlegungen zu einer Soziologie der digitalen Partnerwahl. In: Soeffner, H.-G. (Eds.) Unsichere Zeiten. Herausforderungen gesellschaftlicher Transformationen. Verhandlungen des 34. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Jena 2008, 1–12. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Schmitz, A., Sachse-Thürer, S., Zillmann, D., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2011). Myths and facts about online mate choice. Contemporary beliefs and empirical findings. In: Blossfeld, H-P., & Schmitz, A. (Eds.) Online dating: social innovation and a tool for research on partnership formation. Journal of Family Research 23(3): 358–381.
Shepperd, J. A., & Strathman, A. J. (1989). Attractiveness and height: The role of stature in dating preference, frequency of dating, and perceptions of attractiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 15(4): 617–627.
Skopek, J. (2012). Partnerwahl im Internet – Eine quantitative Analyse von Strukturen und Prozessen der Online-Partnersuche. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Skopek, J., Schmitz, A., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2011). The gendered dynamics of age preferences – Empirical evidence from online dating. In: Blossfeld, H-P., & Schmitz, A. (Eds.) Online dating: social innovation and a tool for research on partnership formation. Journal of Family Research 23(3): 267–290.
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies
Volume: 3 – Issue: 3 – July - 2013
© Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies 73
Toma, C., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating Fact From Fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating Profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(8): 1023–1036.
Toma, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2010). Looks and Lies: The Role of Physical Attractiveness in Online Dating Self-Presentation and Deception. Communication Research 37(3): 335-351.
Walther. J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research 23(1): 1–43.
Whitty, M. T. (2002). Liar, liar! An examination of how open, supportive and honest people are in chat rooms. Computers in Human Behavior 18 (4), 343-352.
Whitty, M. T., & Joinson, A. N. (2009). Truth, lies and trust on the Internet. New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Zillmann, D., Schmitz, A., & Blossfeld, H.-P. (2011). Lügner haben kurze Beine. Zum Zusammenhang unwahrer Selbstdarstellung und partnerschaftlicher Chancen im Online-Dating. In: Blossfeld, H-P., & Schmitz, A. (Eds.) Online dating: social innovation and a tool for research on partnership formation. Journal of Family Research 23(3): 291–318.
Zillmann, D., & Schmitz, A. (2012). Extent and Patterns of Deceptive Behavior in Online Dating. A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Questioning Using Geometric Data Analysis. Working Paper. Bamberg: Bamberg University.
Zimbler, M. & Feldman, R.S. (2011) Liar, Liar, Hard Drive on Fire: How Media Context Affects Lying. Behavior Journal of Applied Social Psychology.Volume 41 (10): 2492–2507.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com