Cited by 284Language, Metaphor, and CognitionAttachment and Relationship DynamicsInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating

Heino, Rebecca D., Ellison, Nicole B., Gibbs, Jennifer L.·2010·Journal of Social and Personal Relationships

Abstract

In this manuscript we explore the ways in which the marketplace metaphor resonates with online dating participants and how this conceptual framework influences how they assess themselves, assess others, and make decisions about whom to pursue. Taking a metaphor approach enables us to highlight the ways in which participants’ language shapes their self-concept and interactions with potential partners. Qualitative analysis of in-depth interviews with 34 participants from a large online dating site revealed that the marketplace metaphor was salient for participants, who employed several strategies that reflected the assumptions underlying the marketplace perspective (including resisting the metaphor). We explore the implications of this metaphor for romantic relationship development, such as the objectification of potential partners.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0265407510361614

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Apart from increased control of self-presentation, users of online dating sites also have access to a considerable number of potential dating partners, regardless of their proximity to each other.

    “Apart from increased control of self-presentation, users of online dating sites also have access to a considerable number of potential dating partners (Finkel et al., 2012; Heino et al., 2010), regardless of their proximity to each other (Valkenburg & Peter, 2007).”

    From Mobile Sexuality: Presentations of Young Filipinos in Dating Apps (2020) · cites this paper as Heino et al., 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Heino, R. D., Ellison, N. B., & Gibbs, J. L.
Affiliations
  • Georgetown University (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
Heino, Rebecca D.
Venue
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
Published
2010-06
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
427-447
ISSN
  • 0265-4075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3608
OpenAlex
W2126921554
Cited by
284
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 2
FWCI
11.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
online dating, market metaphor, romantic relationships, self-concept, relationship decision-making, metaphor use

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review