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

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 54 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating

Heino, Rebecca D., Ellison, Nicole B., Gibbs, Jennifer L.·2010·Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
DOI 10.1177/0265407510361614
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

Overview

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.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Business Wire., 2008, Jupiter research sees steady growth for online personals, despite explosion of social networking
  2. Charmaz, K. ( 1994). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. Denzin & Y.S. Lincold (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (1st ed., pp. 507-535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  3. Culnan, M.J. & Markus, M.L. ( 1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 420-443). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  4. Gottlieb, L., 2006, The Atlantic, 297, 58
  5. Heath, A., 1976, Rational choice & social exchange: A critique of exchange theory
  6. 10.2307/1251147 · DOI
  7. Hitsch, G.J., 2006, MIT Sloan Research Paper
  8. Madden, M., 2006, Online dating. Pew Internet & American Life Project
  9. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02822.x · DOI
  10. Walther, J.B. & Parks, M.R. ( 2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd edn, pp. 529-563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 284

Related

See all

Metadata

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.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2010-06
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
427-447
ISSN
  • 0265-4075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-3608
DOI
10.1177/0265407510361614
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
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › 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