Virtual Relationships in Social Media

How would you search for a romantic partner nowadays? Online would probably be most people's answer to that question. It’s more important than ever for psychologists to study virtual relationships in social media, how and why we form relationships online, and their pros and cons. 

Get started

Millions of flashcards designed to help you ace your studies

Sign up for free
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

McCutcheon came up with the ____-Addiction model of online relationships.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

According to Sproull and Kessler (1986), virtual interactions are as effective than face-to-face ones.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

A virtual relationship in social media can only be a friendship. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Ainsworth's (1970) attachment types can be used to explain parasocial relationships. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

_____ is the key to forming relationships. Fill in the blank.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Sproull and Kiesler (1986) suggest that online relationships may be less honest and open than face-to-face ones. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Virtual relationships have an absence of gates. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

The absence of gates in virtual relationships is negative. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

There will be individual differences in preferences for relationships.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

What counts as affectionate and intimate can vary for different people. 

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Romantic relationships typically involve intentional affectionate and intimate behaviour, which can be displayed in different ways both online and in person.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

McCutcheon came up with the ____-Addiction model of online relationships.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

According to Sproull and Kessler (1986), virtual interactions are as effective than face-to-face ones.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

A virtual relationship in social media can only be a friendship. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Ainsworth's (1970) attachment types can be used to explain parasocial relationships. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

_____ is the key to forming relationships. Fill in the blank.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Sproull and Kiesler (1986) suggest that online relationships may be less honest and open than face-to-face ones. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Virtual relationships have an absence of gates. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

The absence of gates in virtual relationships is negative. Is this true or false?

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

There will be individual differences in preferences for relationships.

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

What counts as affectionate and intimate can vary for different people. 

Show Answer
  • + Add tag
  • Immunology
  • Cell Biology
  • Mo

Romantic relationships typically involve intentional affectionate and intimate behaviour, which can be displayed in different ways both online and in person.

Show Answer

Need help?
Meet our AI Assistant

Upload Icon

Create flashcards automatically from your own documents.

   Upload Documents
Upload Dots

FC Phone Screen

Need help with
Virtual Relationships in Social Media?
Ask our AI Assistant

Review generated flashcards

Sign up for free
You have reached the daily AI limit

Start learning or create your own AI flashcards

Contents
Contents

Jump to a key chapter

    • We will define the study of virtual relationships in social media in psychology.
    • Then, we will explore virtual vs real-life relationships.
    • After we will examine the virtual relationship pros and cons.
    • Finally, we will look at evaluations of virtual relationships in social media.

    Virtual Relationships in Social Media in Psychology

    A virtual relationship in social media is formed via an online platform. It could be a friendship, romantic relationship, or parasocial relationship. But how and why do we create these relationships? What are the most important factors affecting our virtual relationships?

    Virtual relationships in social medai, man in yellow jumper is typing on a grey laptop, StudySmarter.Fig. 1: Virtual relationships occur online.

    Self-Disclosure

    Self-disclosure is when we share information about ourselves with another person. Psychologists such as Altman and Taylor (1973) state that this is the key to forming relationships (social penetration theory), and a gradual process of self-disclosure aids the formation of closeness.

    Others like Cooper and Sportolari (1997) state that oversharing can lead to the ‘boom and bust’ phenomenon.

    The boom and bust phenomenon is when people overshare without the proper grounding of trust, which makes self-disclosure an essential part of a relationship, leading to the breakdown of the relationship.

    They stated:

    Online relating can lead to destructive results when people act on or compulsively overindulge in a speeded-up, eroticized pseudo-intimacy.¹

    Virtual relationships are much more vulnerable to this phenomenon as self-disclosure tends to occur much faster because of the anonymity of online relationships. Psychologists such as Walther (1996, 2011) call this the ‘hyperpersonal model’ of virtual relationships.

    Those engaging in computer-mediated communication highlighted how the hyperpersonal model is advantageous, in that it gives the sense of more control over messaging and better outcomes from this perceived sense of increased control that face-to-face conversations cannot compete with.

    Asynchronous communication produces more desirable messages, according to those who engage in virtual relationships.

    Absence of Gating

    Gates refer to barriers that prevent us from being attracted to someone if we meet them in person, such as how they speak, smell or look. Virtual relationships have an absence of such gates, and thus, some psychologists suggest that we can form more meaningful relationships online.

    When appearance remains unknown and a person can interact with others without fearing rejection based on looks, they may be less shy, and the absence of gates allows for deeper developments of relationships that would have normally been dismissed in face-to-face situations.

    The absence of gates can also be positive for shy or socially anxious people:

    • Baker and Oswald (2010) investigated rates of shyness and loneliness and how they related to social media use, focusing particularly on the quality of friendships. 241 participants completed questionnaires on their shyness, loneliness, friendship qualities and social support, alongside a questionnaire on their Facebook use. They found that those showing higher levels of shyness had stronger associations with Facebook use and friendship quality compared to people with low levels of shyness. They suggested Facebook is a way for shy individuals to comfortably communicate with others.

    They can meet people without the anxiety of real-life interaction. Even if people meet later in the relationship, if an attraction has already been formed, gates rarely dampen this attraction due to the intimacy developed from self-disclosure.

    Reduced Cues Theory (Deindividuation)

    Deindividuation theory in the context of online relationships refers to the lack of physical cues we get in face-to-face interactions, such as facial expressions and body language, affecting interactions.

    Social rules dictate our interactions; we control our impulses and tend to speak more politely due to the potential for repercussions.

    We also navigate conversations in response to cues provided by those we are conversing with; if we say something that is not well perceived, we typically backtrack and attempt to resolve the conversation.

    According to Sproull and Kessler (1986), virtual interactions are much less effective than face-to-face ones, which leads to deindividuation, wherein people feel less responsible for their behaviour and become more hostile, as they lack the social inhibitions face-to-face communication provides. Interestingly enough, this prevents self-disclosure.

    Virtual Relationship vs Real Life Relationship

    Definitions of romantic relationships can be applied to both virtual and real-life relationships. Romantic relationships typically involve intentional affectionate and intimate behaviour, which can be displayed in different ways both online and in person.

    What counts as affectionate and intimate can vary for different people.

    Someone may think that someone else checking up on their health and well-being is affectionate and that intimacy comes from getting to know another person really well.

    Others may rely on physical interactions to define their intimate relations.

    There will be individual differences in preferences for relationships. Factors that distinguish virtual and face-to-face relationships, such as distance and a physical connection might be a pro for one person and a con for another.

    Would you prefer to connect with someone online or in person? Can you think of your own pros and cons for either?

    Virtual Relationships Pros and Cons

    Let's examine the strengths and weaknesses of virtual relationships, before evaluating the theories behind virtual relationships.

    Disadvantages of a Virtual Relationship

    First, the disadvantages of virtual relationships:

    • Dishonest partners: With the distance provided by virtual relationships, and the separation of consequences, there's an increased risk of dishonesty.
    • Risk of catfishing: Catfishing is a modern term referring to a person presenting themselves in a dishonest way, usually by providing a picture that looks different to them in real life.
    • Risk of cyber security or fraud: With virtual relationships comes the risk of scams, especially for those who are willing to trust others for the sake of developing a relationship.
    • Little physical presence or connection: Virtual relationships lack the physical presence face-to-face relationships provide.

    Advantages of a Virtual Relationship

    Now, let's highlight the advantages of virtual relationships.

    • Allows for easily accessible human connection: online conversations can be carried out from anywhere and can be a source of intimacy at any time.
    • Quick communication and fast response times: virtual responses can be instantaneous, which can be nice for people who want to connect with others.
    • Expectations can be different compared to in-person relationships: it may be less stressful than sharing physical space. People report turning to virtual relationships after challenges with face-to-face relationships.
    • They do not have to solely be online, they can lead to life changes and the development of in-person relationships. Relationships can grow to become more intimate by meeting and sharing experiences out in the world (Scott et al. 2007).

    Virtual Relationships in Social Media Evaluation

    Zhao et al. ❲2008❳ found that self-presentation on non-anonymous websites like Facebook was implicit rather than explicit. People show their identities implicitly through posts and pictures rather than explicitly stating their personality traits. This research indicates that social media sites are sources of self-presentation, helping relationship formation.

    Some psychologists suggest that reduced cues theory is flawed in its assumption that there are no cues in virtual relationships. They suggest different cues are present, such as time taken to reply and emojis. Research from Whitty and Johnson (2009) supports the idea of different cues.

    Tidwell and Walther (1995) examined how different uses of time affect non-verbal cues in computer-mediated communication (CMC), as many describe CMC as suffering from a lack of non-verbal cues. They found that both the time of day a message was sent and the length of time to receive a reply after a message was sent had significant interactions, suggesting cues do in fact exist and affect virtual relationships.

    Virtual Relationships in social media, a black phone on a wooden table, with a white screen with a heart, a kissy face and another heart emoji on, StudySmarter.Fig. 3 - Affection cues are different in virtual relationships.

    McKenna and Bargh (2000) stated, in reference to virtual relationships:

    one's greater anonymity, the greatly reduced importance of physical appearance and physical distance as “gating features” to relationship development, and one's greater control over the time and pace of interactions.²

    They found that romantic relationships that initially formed online were 70% more likely to last over two years longer than ‘offline’ relationships. The correlation between internet use and successful relationships is also supported by Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012).

    Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) found that over the last 15 years, the internet has displaced more traditional avenues of meeting potential partners (such as through school, work, friends or family). Those with internet access at home are more likely to have partners.

    However, it is flawed to assume relationships are either online or offline. Today, many real-life relationships also begin and develop online; this is a weakness of investigating so-called ‘virtual relationships’. The study of online relationships is culturally and economically biased.

    It does not consider that people in less developed countries and those with low income may not form online relationships. There is also evidence to suggest that the depth of self-disclosure differs in men and women, suggesting that virtual relationships and self-disclosure are not the same regardless of gender.


    Virtual Relationships in Social Media - Key takeaways

    • Virtual relationships are very common today and refer to relationships formed and maintained online.
    • Self-disclosure, the absence of gating, and reduced cues theory (deindividuation) can explain the increase in virtual relationships.

    • We can explain parasocial relationships using the absorption-addiction model or attachment theory.

    • There are pros and cons for both virtual and real-life relationships. Virtual relationships are becoming more accessible, and more adults with internet access at home have relationships than those who don't. The internet is beginning to displace traditional avenues of meeting a partner.

    • However, issues with scams and catfishing still exist, and lack of research into less developed countries and low-income families affects the reliability of research investigating virtual relationships.


    References

    1. Cooper, A., & Sportolari, L. (1997). Romance in Cyberspace: Understanding Online Attraction. Journal of Sex Education and Therapy, 22, 7-14.
    2. McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(1), 57–75.
    Frequently Asked Questions about Virtual Relationships in Social Media

    What is a virtual relationship in psychology?

    Virtual relationships are very common today and refer to relationships formed and maintained online.

    How do you create a virtual relationship?

    Psychologists theorise that the absence of gating, as well as greater self-disclosure, allows virtual relationships to form.

    What are the differences between virtual relationships compared to face-to-face relationships? 

    Virtual relationships are formed online, whereas face-to-face relationships occur in real life between people physically close.

    Why do people have virtual relationships? 

    People may form virtual relationships for a variety of reasons. Research speculates individuals who are shy or socially anxious turn to virtual relationships as the reliance on physical appearance is reduced, citing an absence of gating, deindividuation, and self-disclosure as factors affecting the development of virtual relationships.

    Are virtual relationships healthy? 

    Virtual relationships, just like face-to-face relationships,  vary in the experiences they provide. Relationships are a subjective experience, and research indicates virtual relationships have the potential to be healthy—McKenna and Bargh (2002) found online relationships were 70% more likely to last over two years than offline relationships—and unhealthy. The risk of catfishing and scams is present in virtual relationships, and Cooper and Sportolari (1997) referred to oversharing that occurs in virtual relationships as a boom and bust phenomenon. 

    Save Article

    Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

    McCutcheon came up with the ____-Addiction model of online relationships.

    According to Sproull and Kessler (1986), virtual interactions are as effective than face-to-face ones.

    A virtual relationship in social media can only be a friendship. Is this true or false?

    Next

    Discover learning materials with the free StudySmarter app

    Sign up for free
    1
    About StudySmarter

    StudySmarter is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.

    Learn more
    StudySmarter Editorial Team

    Team Psychology Teachers

    • 9 minutes reading time
    • Checked by StudySmarter Editorial Team
    Save Explanation Save Explanation

    Study anywhere. Anytime.Across all devices.

    Sign-up for free

    Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.

    Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App

    The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

    • Flashcards & Quizzes
    • AI Study Assistant
    • Study Planner
    • Mock-Exams
    • Smart Note-Taking
    Join over 22 million students in learning with our StudySmarter App
    Sign up with Email