To
or not to
?
Quantitative research about the extent to which Tinder has an influence on
emerging adults’ body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness.
Name
Beau Feijen
Student number
10699295
E-mail address
beaufeijen91@gmail.com
Date
January 30, 2015
Lecturer
dr. S.R. Sumter
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine to what extent the popular dating application Tinder has an influence on emerging adults’ body image. In this study body image consisted out of two components; body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness. Gender and rejection sensitivity were taken into account as moderators. Regression analyses show that people who use Tinder engage in more cross-sex comparison and therefore will experience more body dissatisfaction than people who do not use Tinder, however Tinder use does not have an effect on objectified body consciousness. Suggestions and limitations are discussed. Future research is needed to understand why and how Tinder users experience more body dissatisfaction. A longitudinal study with a pretest and posttest might help in understanding this relationship.
Table of contents
Online Dating………. 7
Theoretical Background………. 9
Mass Media and Body Image………. 9
Body Dissatisfaction………... 11
Objectified Body Consciousness……… 12
Rejection Sensitivity………... 12
Current study………... 13
Method………... 13
Participants………. 14
Materials………. 15
Design and Procedure………. 17
Results……… 17
Descriptive of main variables………. 17
Does Tinder use predict body dissatisfaction? ……….. 18
Does Tinder use predict objectified body consciousness? ……… 20
Discussion……….. 22
Important Findings………. 22
Body Dissatisfaction……….. 23
Objectified Body Consciousness………... 23
Rejection Sensitivity……….. 24
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research……… 25
Online Dating
The way we live has significantly changed since the introduction of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). These technologies are used on a daily basis and for various purposes among many people, especially among youth. Nowadays, people use their mobile phones for a wide variety of tasks ranging from calling and texting to playing games, navigation, and social networking. Although mobile phones are very popular and bring lots of benefits to their users, various social issues have arisen during their adoption.
Online social networking services (SNSs) have gained rapid popularity in recent years. Social media helps in making and maintaining friendships online as well as offline
(Koutamanis, Vossen, Peter, & Valkenburg, 2013). However not only friendships grow online but also romantic relationships occur since online dating was introduced (Rosenfeld &
Thomas, 2012). It has become increasingly common for individuals to find their partners online, a trend which started in the mid-1990’s (Madden & Lenhart, 2006).
In the Netherlands there are about 200 online dating sites. 15 % of the Dutch Internet users, about 2 million, visit dating sites every now and then (CBS, 2014). In 2013, from the couples that started living together, 13% of them met each other on the Internet, from which half of them actually met on an online dating site (CBS, 2014). Recent Dutch statistics show that Lexa.nl, eDarling.nl, Badoo.nl, and Relatieplanet.nl are among the most popular online dating websites (Klaassen, 2014). Although most of these website also have mobile
applications, Tinder is the only smartphone based dating app. It is most the popular dating app for iOS and Android (Klaassen, 2014). Tinder was launched at the University of Southern California in September 2012 and already has more than 1,2 million users in the Netherlands (Nutech, 2014). In general, apps are becoming more and more popular than websites among emerging adults, since they have the urge to always be connected, their phone is considered as most important part of their life (Bank of America, 2014).
Tinder is maybe one of the most interesting and unique ways to engage in online dating. First of all, this is because it mainly focuses on appearance. This app lets you swipe through pictures of the sex you are interested in, by swiping to the left (not) or swiping to the right (hot). Second, when you both liked each other’s pictures, you already have a match, without knowing that many other characteristics of the other person. Third, this app has the opportunity to use GPS in order to find someone in a certain distance from where you are at that moment.
Often we worry about the effects of media on young children and adolescents.
However, emerging adults are also vulnerable to perceive negative effects of media. For them, the persuasive impact of the meaning of their peers is big, though they will not know or admit this (Nolan, Schultz, Cialdini, Goldstein, & Griskevicius, 2008). Emerging adults are
characterized by the feeling of in-between (too old for being an adolescent and too young for being a grown-up). For them it is the time of self-involvement and possibilities, this results in for instance having various (romantic) relationships and various jobs. Also identity
exploration and emotional instabilities are common among emerging adults (Arnett, 2004). Though there are lots of studies that show the positive impact of social media, e.g. improved social skills and educational outcomes (Koutamanis et al., 2013; Cao, Ajjan, & Hong, 2013), also a lot studies are published about the negative impact of online media. Topics concerning this negative impact are for instance Cyberbullying and body image. Especially media exposure in combination with people’s body image has been researched a lot (Tiggemann & Slater, 2013; Slevec & Tiggemann, 2011).
The studies above investigate exposure to media such as magazines, television and websites. However not much studies show the effects of online dating sites and so far, no one has examined the effect of the dating application Tinder. In contrast to traditional dating websites there are some differences with the mobile app Tinder: the most striking one is that
Tinder matches are based mainly on someone’s looks whereas other dating websites or apps focus on common interests. This feature increases the focus on body image and most
importantly it focuses on the body image of the sex you’re interested in.
As a Tinder-user, you are exposed to thousands of pictures of people from the sex you are interested in. This might raise the awareness of your body being objectified by others. The Objectification Theory (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997) explains that girls and women are typically acculturated to view their physical selves the way an observer would view them. This perspective on self can lead to habitual body monitoring, which, in turn, can increase women's opportunities for shame, anxiety and a distorted body image. Since Tinder really focuses on physical appearance, this might have an effect on one’s body image. In this study body image consists of two components: body dissatisfaction and objectified body
consciousness. The theoretical background will explain these components. The research question for this study is: To what extent does Tinder have an influence on emerging adults’ body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness?
Theoretical Background
Mass Media and Body Image
The mass media play a big role in one’s body image. Different communication theories tried to understand this relationship. In particular the social cognitive theory (Bandura, 2001), and the sociocultural perspective on body image (Thompson et al., 1999; Slevec & Tiggemann, 2011) focus on this relationship. Thompson et al. (1999) evaluated the role of appearance-based social comparison processes between developmental factors and levels of body dissatisfaction, eating disturbance and, global psychological functioning. They emphasize that exposure to media messages can give unrealistic images of female beauty.
These unrealistic images may lead to body dissatisfaction since people start to compare themselves to those images (Smolak & Thompson, 2009).
A study that emphasizes the effects that media has on body image is from Becker et al. (2002). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the recent introduction of Western television on indicators of disordered eating among ethnic Fijian adolescent girls. Fiji was selected as a study site because of its extremely low prevalence of eating disorders and for its lack of exposure to television until mid-1995. A multi-wave cross-sectional design in which two separate samples of ethnic Fijian adolescent girls were assessed. The first wave occurred in 1995, just a few weeks after the introduction of television. The second wave occurred in 1998, three years after the introduction of television. Results show that key indicators of disordered eating were significantly more prevalent following television exposure.
These studies all focus on females, however, a study by Calado et al. (2010) shows that men also experience body dissatisfaction due to (unrealistic) media exposure (Calado, Lameiras, Sepulveda, Rodríguez, & Carrera, 2010). Calado et al. (2010) showed that female and male adolescents with disordered eating showed an increased exposure to TV and magazine sections related to body image.
In this research body image consists of two components, body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness. These concepts will be further explained below.Men and women both experience effects on their body image due to media exposure. However, Calado et al. (2010) state that there is a bigger effect on a female’s body image than on a male’s body image. Therefore it is expected that females have a more negative body image than males, which leads to the first hypothesis: Females experience a more negative body image than males.
Body Dissatisfaction
The first component of body image is body dissatisfaction. Grogan (2008) describes body dissatisfaction as “A person’s negative thoughts and feelings about his or her body”. Research on body dissatisfaction shows different factors (i.e. body surveillance, appearance pressure from mass media) for people to feel dissatisfied with their body (Mercurio & Rima, 2011; Chen & Jackson, 2012). Body dissatisfaction is the top ranked issue of concern for young people (Mission Australia, 2011). This is important to pay attention to because it appears that most of the time this dissatisfaction leads to disordered eating behaviours (Forbes, Jung, Vaamonde, Omar, Paris, & Formiga, 2012).
It is important to study body dissatisfaction in combination with a social medium, especially Tinder, because Tinder is really focused on body appearance and looks. Previous mentioned studies looked at social comparison, with a focus on same sex comparison
(Mercurio & Rima, 2011; Chen & Jackson, 2012). With Tinder the emphasis is on pictures of the opposite sex. This gives the opportunity for cross-sex comparison (Gulas & McKeage, 2000). Cross-sex comparison has some negative effects on body image. Women (or men) might think they will not make a chance with men (or women) since there are a lot other good looking women (or men) active on online dating websites. As for Tinder you do not get to see your ‘competitors’ but only people of the sex you are interested in. Therefore it is possible that cross-sex comparison occurs even more than on a regular online dating site (Gulas & McKeage, 2000). Thus, even though you are not exposed to same sex pictures, you might feel less satisfied with your body. Therefore the second hypothesis will be: a) People who use Tinder engage in more cross-sex comparison and therefore will experience more body
dissatisfaction than people who do not use Tinder. And b) female Tinder users will experience more body dissatisfaction than male users.
Objectified Body Consciousness (OBC)
The second component of body image is objectified body consciousness. OBC is derived from the Objectification Theory (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). This theory explains that girls and women are typically acculturated to view their physical selves the way an observer would view them. Objectified body consciousness describes the event of
objectification of one's body because of experiences of body surveillance, body shame, and appearance control beliefs (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). Kahumoku et al. (2011) used body surveillance, body shame, and appearance control beliefs to measure OBC. They provided support for a latent OBC construct across cultures.
Most studies have looked at same sex comparisons, however cross-sex comparison is also really important. Evidence for this is given by Gulas and McKeage (2000). Cross-sex comparison is an important mechanism to declare why Tinder may have an effect on the user’s body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness. Because the way Tinder is designed you will (unconsciously) engage in cross-sex comparison and therefore you may become more conscious of the fact that people objectify your body (McKinley & Hyde, 1996). Therefore the third hypothesis is: a) People who use Tinder perceive more objectified body consciousness than people who do not use Tinder. And b) female Tinder users will experience more objectified body consciousness than male users.
Rejection Sensitivity
There are several reasons why people do or do not engage in online dating. Rejection sensitivity is one of the predictors of online dating websites use whereby those higher in rejection sensitivity are more likely to use online dating sites than those lower in rejection sensitivity (Blackhart, Fitzpatrick, & Williamson, 2014). In this study rejection sensitivity will be taken into account as a moderator, since not everyone perceives this rejection
Body image Tinder use
Rejection Sensitivity Gender
sensitivity at the same level and this might explain differences in perceived body image. Finally, the fourth hypothesis will be: Tinder users with a high rejection sensitivity will experience a more negative body image than Tinder users with a low rejection. The next figure will show schematically how the hypotheses are constructed.
_
Figure 1: Schematic representation of the hypothesis of this study
Current Study
The aim of the current study is to understand to what extent Tinder has an influence on emerging adult’s body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness. Rejection sensitivity is taken into account as a moderator. In designing apps and in understanding emerging adults’ online behavior and their body image it is important to know what the effects are of using dating-apps like Tinder.
Method
Participants
In this study a survey was conducted among 217 people aged 18 till 30 years. The average age was 23.78 (SD = 2.39). The gender distribution of the sample was quite even, 47 % of the respondents were female. The education level was quite divers, 12% did MBO, 29.5% did HBO, 20.3 % did University Bachelor and 27.6% did University Master. Among the participants 40 % reported using Tinder or having used Tinder.
Materials
Sexual media use. A questionnaire was designed by using other questionnaires.
Sexual media use was measured by 28 items from Nikken’s (2007) media use survey which assesses how much time young adults spend on media. There are three different types of media that are measured within these 28 items: porn, beauty TV and magazines focused on beauty. Sample items are “In the last six months, how often have you watched Beauty & the Nerd?” and “In the last six months, how often have you watched a porn website?”. The response scale ranged from 1 (daily) to 5 (never). The scales were reverse computed so that a low score meant low exposure to media. A Cronbach’s alpha (see table 1) was done to test if the three subscales measure Sexual Media Use. Table 2 shows the means and standard
deviations of sexual media use. On average, respondents reported hardly ever watching any of the three types of media.
Table 1
Cronbach’s alpha for Porn use, Beauty TV and Beauty Magazines
Media use Cronbach’s alpha
Porn Beauty TV Beauty Magazines .62 .68 .74
Table 2
Descriptive statistics of the media use of the respondents (N=217) by three subscales
Media use Mean (SD)
Porn 1.96 (.78)
Beauty TV 1.58 (.51)
Beauty Magazines 1.17 (.20)
Tinder use. We assessed Tinder use by simply asking whether or not the respondents
used Tinder. Three options were given “Yes, I use Tinder”, “Yes, I have used Tinder but do not use it anymore” and “No, I do not use Tinder and I have never used it before”. On average, 40 % of the respondents reported using Tinder or have used Tinder and 60% have never used Tinder. If the respondents said they have used or use Tinder, they were asked how often they used it. The response scale ranged from 1 (only a couple times) to 5 (daily).
Self-objectification. Self-objectification (OBC) was measured with nine items from
Cash’s (1994) Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ), which
assesses to what extent young adults experience self-objectification. Sample items are “Before I leave the house, I always check how I look”, “It is important to me that I look good”, and “I spent much time on my hair”. The response scale ranged from 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). On average, respondents reported feeling pretty objectified (M = 3.12, SD = 0.69). Cronbach’s alpha for the OBC-scale is 0.87.
Body dissatisfaction. Body dissatisfaction was measured by twelve items from a
survey about sexualization among youth (de Graaf, Nikken, Felten, Janssens, & van Berlo, 2008), which assesses to what extent young adults experience body dissatisfaction. Sample items are “How satisfied are you about your hair?”, “How satisfied are you about your face” and “What do others think about your appearance?”. The response scale ranged from 1 (not
satisfied at all) to 5 (very satisfied). And for the questions about what others think about your appearance the response scale ranged from 1 (not beautiful at all) to 5 (very beautiful). Cronbach’s alpha is .82. The variable was reverse recoded so that the higher the score, the higher the body dissatisfaction. On average, respondents reported feeling pretty satisfied with their body (M = 2.42, SD = 0.48).
Rejection sensitivity. Rejection sensitivity was measured with a short version of the
Rejection Sensitivity Scale of Downey and Feldman’s (1996). Although the full questionnaire consists of 18 items, in the current study only the 7 items that reflected rejection sensitivity in a romantic setting were included. The questions measure to what extent young adults
experience rejection sensitivity. The respondents were shown seven situations they had to imagine they were in. In each situation the same two questions were asked: How concerned or anxious would you be about how the other person would respond?” and “How do you think the other person would be likely to respond?”. For the first question the response rate ranged from 1 (very unworried) to 5 (very worried). For the second question the response rate ranged from 1 (very unlikely) to 5 (very likely), these data had to be reverse computed so that a low score means a low rejection sensitivity. Cronbach’s alpha was .68. To calculate the score of rejection sensitivity for each item, the a-situations were multiplied by the reversed
b-situations and these were made into 7 new variables. For the overall rejection sensitivity score, the mean of the 7 new variables were measured. The scale range is from 1 (low) to 25 (high). On average, respondents reported not being very sensitive for rejection (M = 6.68, SD = 2.73). Table 3 shows the statistics of the behaviors of male and female respondents for self-objectification, body dissatisfaction and rejection sensitivity.
Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the behaviors of male (n =102) and female (n =115) respondents
Behavior Mean (SD)
Male Female
Objectified Body Consciousness 2.93 (.71) 3.29 (.64) Body Dissatisfaction 2.39 (.54) 2.44 (.41) Rejection Sensitivity 2.51 (.41) 6.68 (2.73)
Design and Procedure
All survey questions were in Dutch; therefore only Dutch speaking participants within the age range could fill in the survey. Participants were recruited mainly via social media, on Facebook and Twitter. Some people shared the link with their friends. Participants
individually filled in the questionnaire, which took them on average ten minutes. The ethical committee approved the research and participation was anonymous. All questionnaires were recorded and processed through SPSS. The survey used a between groups design, whereas Tinder-users and non-Tinder users were compared. The independent variable was Tinder use and the dependent variables were objectified body consciousness and body dissatisfaction.
Results
Descriptive of main variables
In table 4 you will see the correlations of Tinder use, body dissatisfaction, objectified body consciousness and rejection sensitivity.
Table 4.
Correlations between main variables
TU BD OBC RJ Mean (SD)
1. Tinder use (TU) .01 .80 .01 2.05 (1.91)
2. Body Dissatisfaction (BD) .01 .62 .00 2.42 (.48)
3. Objectified Body Consciousness (OBC) .80 .62 .34 3.12 (.69)
4. Rejection Sensitivity (RS) .01 .00 .34 6.68 (2.73)
Does Tinder use predict body dissatisfaction?
To test the influence of Tinder use on body dissatisfaction, I conducted a regression analysis using the PROCESS macro of Andrew Hayes (2013). The regression model with Tinder use as independent variable and body dissatisfaction as dependent variable is
significant, F (5, 206) = 6.21, p < .001. The regression model can therefore be used to predict body dissatisfaction, but the strength of the prediction is moderate: 13 per cent of the variation in body dissatisfaction can be predicted on the basis of gender, rejection sensitivity and
Tinder use (R² =.1310). Tinder use, b*=-.19, t = -2.60, p = 0.010, has a significantly strong association with body dissatisfaction, while gender, b*=-.02, t = -.19, p = .851, and rejection sensitivity, b*=.02, t = 1.08, p = .281, have no significant association with body
Table 5
Predicting body dissatisfaction
Body Dissatisfaction, b
Tinder use -.1878* CI[-.3304; -.0453]
Gender (Female=0, male=1) -.0167 CI[-.2023; .1671]
Rejection Sensitivity .0215 CI[-.0177; .0607]
Interaction: Tinder use x Gender .0300 CI[-.0358; .0960] Interaction: Tinder use x RS .0128 CI[-.0001; .0257]
R² .1310
Note. The values reflect the standardized regression coefficients with accompanying confidence interval. * p < .05
Tinder use has a significant effect on body dissatisfaction (p = .010) this means that the more participants use Tinder, the less satisfied they are with their body. The next figure shows this schematically.
Figure 2: Body dissatisfaction in relation to Tinder use 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 0 1 2 3 4 5 Tinder use
BD
BDFor gender there is no significant effect on body dissatisfaction (p=.85), this means that gender has no influence on the extent to which the participants experience body dissatisfaction. There is no interaction effect between Tinder use and gender (p=.370), this means that for men and women Tinder use has the same effect on body dissatisfaction. Rejection sensitivity has no significant effect on body dissatisfaction (p=.281). This means that the extent to which participants perceive rejection sensitivity does not influence body dissatisfaction. Finally, there is no interaction effect between Tinder use and rejection sensitivity (p=.052), this means that participants with either low or high rejection sensitivity Tinder use has the same effect on body dissatisfaction.
Does Tinder use predict objectified body consciousness?
To test the influence of Tinder use on objectified body consciousness, I conducted a regression analysis using the PROCESS macro of Andrew Hayes (2013). The regression model with Tinder use as independent variable and objectified body consciousness as dependent variable is significant, F (5, 206) = 3.31, p = .0068. The regression model can therefore be used to predict objectified body consciousness, but the strength of the prediction is moderate: 7 per cent of the variation in objectified body consciousness can be predicted on the basis of gender, rejection sensitivity and Tinder use (R² =.07). Gender, b*=-.37, t = -3.81, p < 0.001, has a significantly strong association with objectified body consciousness, while Tinder use, b*=.02, t = .80, p = .429, and Rejection Sensitivity, b*=.003, t = .17, p = .867, have no significant association with objectified body consciousness. In addition, no interaction effects were observed. See Table 6 for these results.
Table 6
Predicting objectified body consciousness
Objectified Body Consciousness
Tinder use .0203 CI[-.0299; -.0706]
Gender (Female=0, male=1) -.3714* CI[-.5635; -.1793]
Rejection Sensitivity -.0031 CI[-.0331; .0393]
Interaction: Tinder use x Gender .0502 CI[-.0487; .1491] Interaction: Tinder use x RS .0007 CI[-.0186; .0201]
R² .0743
Note. The values reflect the standardized regression coefficients with accompanying confidence interval. * p < .05
For gender there is a significant effect on objectified body consciousness (p < .001), this means that gender has an influence on the extent to which the participants experience objectified body consciousness. The next figure will show schematically that women perceive more objectified body consciousness.
Figure 3: Objectified body consciousness among males (n = 102) and females (n = 115) 0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 Female Male OBC
Tinder use has no significant effect on objectified body consciousness (p = .423) this means that the amount of Tinder use has no influence on the extent to which participants experience objectified body consciousness. There is no interaction effect between Tinder use and gender (p = .318), this means that for men and women Tinder use has the same effect on objectified body consciousness. Rejection sensitivity has no significant effect on objectified body consciousness (p = .867). This means that the extent to which participants perceive rejection sensitivity does not influence objectified body consciousness. Finally, there is no interaction effect between Tinder use and rejection sensitivity (p = .940), this means that for participants with either low or high rejection sensitivity Tinder use has the same effect on objectified body consciousness.
Discussion
Important Findings
The aim of this study was to examine to what extent Tinder has an influence on emerging adults’ body image. Body image was divided into two components, namely body dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness. This study is the first study to investigate the effects of Tinder use and is therefore unique and fills a gap in the literature. The
participants were divided in 40 % Tinder users and 60 % non-Tinder users.
Important findings showed that females who use Tinder experience more body dissatisfaction than females who do not use Tinder. However, for objectified body
consciousness this was not found. This means that people who use Tinder engage in more cross-sex comparison and therefore will experience more body dissatisfaction than people who don’t use Tinder, however Tinder use does not have an effect on objectified body consciousness. These results will be further explained below.
Body Dissatisfaction
As expected, Tinder users experience more body dissatisfaction than non-Tinder users. Hypothesis 2a, people who use Tinder engage in more cross-sex comparison and therefore will experience more body dissatisfaction than people who do not use Tinder, is therefore approved. As Gulas & McKeage (2000) claimed, cross-sex comparison occurs, and this may lead to body dissatisfaction, because when comparing yourself to the opposite sex you might feel that you are not good enough for the opposite sex. Tinder users are more exposed to cross-sex comparison and therefore experience more body dissatisfaction.
In contrast to my expectation, there was no significant difference in body
dissatisfaction between female and male Tinder users, meaning that hypothesis 2b, female Tinder users will experience more body dissatisfaction than male users, is rejected. Calado et al. (2010) claimed that men as well as women experience body dissatisfaction due to media exposure. Moreover, Smolak & Thompson (2009), say that women will experience more body dissatisfaction than men. The results show no significant difference between males and females; an explanation for this unexpected result could be that the sample size was too small.
Objectified Body Consciousness
As expected, female participants experienced more objectified body consciousness than male participants (Fredrickson & Roberts, 1997). This result was only found for objectified body consciousness and not for body dissatisfaction. Therefore hypothesis 1, females experience a more negative body image than males, is partially approved.
Cross-sex comparison (Gulas & McKeage, 2000) is an important mechanism that explains how objectified body consciousness arises. Especially when using Tinder, this cross-sex comparison occurs. In contrast to my expectations, the results showed no significant
difference in objectified body consciousness between people who use and do not use Tinder. Also, female Tinder users do not experience more objectified body consciousness than male Tinder users. Hypotheses 3a and 3b, (female) Tinder users experience more objectified body consciousness than (male) Tinder users, are therefore rejected. An explanation for these results could be that today’s media exposure is already making you feel objectified and therefore Tinder will not amplify this effect.
Rejection Sensitivity
Most researchers study direct effects of media exposure on body image, but also moderators are important to take into account. Therefore in this study rejection sensitivity was considered as a moderator. According to Blackhart, Fitzpatrick, & Williamson (2014),
rejection sensitivity is one of the predictors of online dating websites use, whereby those higher in rejection sensitivity are more likely to use online dating sites than those lower in rejection sensitivity. We expected that people with a higher rejection sensitivity will
experience a more negative body image than people with a low rejection sensitivity, however this result was not found, meaning that hypotheses 4 is rejected. An explanation for this result could be that biggest part of the respondents had a low rejection sensitivity and therefore no big differences were measured.
In sum, this study showed that Tinder use predicts body dissatisfaction, however Tinder use does not predict objectified body consciousness. Females did experience more objectified body consciousness than males, this is however not the result of Tinder use. Gender and rejection sensitivity were taken into account as moderators, in contrast to my expectations they did not have an interaction effect and therefore do not influence the extent to which participants perceive body dissatisfaction or objectified body consciousness. The research question, to what extent does Tinder have an influence on emerging adults’ body
dissatisfaction and objectified body consciousness, can be answered as: Tinder does have an influence on emerging adults body dissatisfaction, however Tinder does not have an influence on emerging adults’ objectified body consciousness. Gender and rejection sensitivity are not moderating this effect.
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
This study had some interesting findings, however there are some limitations that hamper definitive conclusions. Below I will discuss three limitations.
Firstly, the findings were based on a sample of 217 participants; these participants were recruited via a snowball method in my personal network, the participants might therefore not be representative for the entire Dutch population.
Secondly, the survey was conducted cross-sectional, which means that there is no possibility to draw causal conclusions about the results. A longitudinal study with a pretest (before using Tinder) and a posttest (after using Tinder) would have given the possibility of drawing causal conclusions. Thus, I recommend for future research to conduct a longitudinal study.
Lastly, in this study gender and rejection sensitivity were taken into account as moderating variables. However, there are other variables that could have a moderating effect on body image. For example, body mass index (BMI) could be a direct predictor of a negative body image, or a moderating variable between Tinder use and body image (Presnell, K., Bearman, S. K., & Stice, E., 2004). BMI would probably have a negative influence on positive body image, meaning that the higher one’s BMI, the lower one’s positive body image.
Future research is needed to understand why and how Tinder users experience more body dissatisfaction. A study with a pretest and posttest might help in understanding this
relationship. Also a bigger and more divers sample will enhance the generalizability of the results.
References
Arnett, J. (2004). A longer road to adulthood. In: Emerging adulthood: the winding road from late teens through the twenties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: an agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology (52), 1-26. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1
Bank of America. (2014, 07 1). Trends in Consumer Mobility Report. Retrieved 10 11, 2014, from Paybefore:
http://paybefore.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2014_BAC_Trends_in_Consumer_Mobility.pdf
Blackhart, G., Fitzpatrick, J., & Williamson, J. (2014). Dispositional factors predicting use of online dating sites and behaviors related to online dating. Computers in Human Behavior , 33, 113-118. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.022
Bolton, R., Parasuraman, A., Hoefnagels, A., Migchels, N., Kabadayi, S., Gruber, T. (2013). Understanding Generation Y and their use of social media: a review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management , 24 (3), 245-267. doi:
10.1108/09564231311326987
Calado, M., Lameiras, M., Sepulveda, A., Rodríguez, Y., & Carrera, M. (2010). The mass media exposure and disordered eating behaviours in Spanish secondary students. European Eating Disorders Review , 18 (5), 417-427. doi: 10.1002/erv.1024 Cao, Y., Ajjan, H., & Hong, P. (2013). Using Social Media Applications for Educational
Outcomes in College Teaching: A Structural Equation Analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44 (4), 581-593. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12066
Cash, T. (1994). The Mulidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire users'manual. Norfolk, VA: Old Dominion University.
CBS. (2014, 6 18). Steeds vaker relatie via Internet. Retrieved 10 19, 2014, from CBS:
http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/bevolking/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2014/2014-4087-wm.htm Chen, H., & Jackson, T. (2012). Gender and Age Group Differences in Mass Media and
Interpersonal Influences on Body Dissatisfaction Among Chinese Adolescents. Sex Roles , 66 (1), 3-20. 10.1007/s11199-011-0056-8
de Graaf, H., Nikken, P., Felten, H., Janssens, K., & van Berlo, W. (2008). Seksualisering: Reden tot zorg? Een verkennend onderzoek onder jongeren. Utrecht: Nederlands Jeugdinstituut.
Forbes, G., Jung, J., Vaamonde, J., Omar, A., Paris, L., & Formiga, N. (2012). Body Dissatisfaction and Disordered Eating in Three Cultures: Argentina, Brazil, and the U.S. Sex Roles , 66 (9), 677-694. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0105-3
Fredrickson, B., & Roberts, T. (1997). Objectification Theory: Toward Understanding Women's Lived Experiences and Mental Health Risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 21 (2), 173-206. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x
Gulas, C., & McKeage, K. (2000). Extending Social Comparison: An Examination of the Unintended Consequences of Idealized Advertising Imagery. Journal of Advertising , 29 (2), 17-28. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2000.10673606
Grogan, S. (2008). Body Image: Understanding Body Dissatisfaction in Men, Women, and Children. London: Routledge.
Klaassen, E. (2014, 9 14). TOP DATINGSITES EN APPS IN NEDERLAND (SEPTEMBER 2014). Retrieved 10 11, 2014, from datinginsider: http://www.datinginsider.nl/
Koutamanis, M., Vossen, H., Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. (2013). Practice makes perfect: The longitudinal effect of adolescents’ instant messaging on their ability to initiate offline friendships. Computers in Human Behavior , 29 (6), 2265-2272. doi:
10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.033
Madden, A., & Lenhart, M. (2006). Online dating. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Magrina, E. (2014, 9 8). Online dating: growth, regulation, and future challenges. Retrieved
10 11, 2014, from Inline Policy: http://inlinepolicy.com/2014/online-dating-growth-regulation-and-future-challenges/
McKinley, N., & Hyde, J. (1996). The objectified body consciousness scale Development and Validation. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 20 (2), 181-215. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1996.tb00467.x
Mercurio, A., & Rima, B. (2011). Watching My Weight: Self-Weighing, Body Surveillance, and Body Dissatisfaction. Sex Roles , 65 (1), 47-55. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-9980-x Mission Australia. (2011). National Survey of Young Australians: key and emerging issues.
Mission Australia.
Nutech. (2014, 1 20). NuTech: Hoe werkt Tinder. Retrieved 10 11, 2014, from NuTech: http://www.nutech.nl/apps/3680128/werkt-tinder.html
Nikken, P. (2007). Jongeren, media en Seksualiteit. Hoe media-interesses en -gebruik samenhangen met fantasieën, opvattingen en gedrag. Nederlands Jeugd instituut. Utrecht: NJi.
Nolan, J., Schultz, P., Cialdini, R., Goldstein, N., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality & social psychology bulletin , 34, 913-923. doi: 10.1177/0146167208316691
Oosterveen, D. (2014, 01 13). De laatste cijfers van het social media gebruik in Nederland. Retrieved 09 20, 2014, from marketingfacts:
http://www.marketingfacts.nl/berichten/socialmediagebruik-in-nederland-update-maart-2014
Presnell, K., Bearman, S. K., & Stice, E. (2004). Risk Factors for Body Dissatisfaction in Adolescent Boys and Girls: A Prospective Study. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 36 (4), 389-401. doi: 10.1002/eat.20045
Slevec, J., & Tiggemann, M. (2011). Media Exposure, Body Dissatisfaction, and Disordered Eating in Middle-aged Women. Psychology of Women Quarterly , 34 (4), 617-627. doi: 10.1177/0361684311420249
Smolak, L., & Thompson, J. (2009). Body image, eating disorders, and obesity in youth: Assessment, prevention, and treatment. (2nd ed). Washington: American
Psychological Association.
Rosenfeld, M., & Thomas, R. (2012). Searching for a Mate: The Rise of the Internet as a Social Intermediary. American Sociological Review , 77 (4), 523-547. doi: 10.1177/0003122412448050
Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2013). NetGirls: The Internet, Facebook, and body image concern in adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders , 46 (6), 630-633. doi: 10.1002/eat.22141
Thompson, J. K., Coovert, M. D., & Stormer, S. M. (1999). Body image, social comparison, and eating disturbance: a covariance structure modeling investigation. The
International journal of eating disorders , 26 (1), 43-51. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-108X(199907)26:1<43::AID-EAT6>3.0.CO;2-R
