The reply that never came : exploring the influencing factors of ghosting among emerging adults

The reply that never came

Exploring the influencing factors of ghosting

among emerging adults

Master’s Thesis by

Hanna Melcher

(11821019)

Graduate School of Communication

Communication Science – Entertainment Communication University of Amsterdam

Dr Susanne Baumgartner 1 February 2019

Abstract

Ghosting is commonly understood as the practice of abruptly terminating all

communication with another person via social media or other forms of online communication. It usually leads to a complete cessation of contact, and for the non-initiator it is entirely unexpected and seems inexplicable. The goal of this qualitative study is to explore the main factors that influence ghosting among emerging adults (aged 18 – 25). It extends the very limited body of existing literature on ghosting, which is still a widely under-researched phenomenon, and aims to gain a deeper scientific understanding of this practice. Individual face-to-face interviews were conducted with a diverse sample of emerging adults (N=10), who had prior experience with ghosting. The results revealed four main influencing factors of ghosting. It was found that the motivations and perceived motivations for ghosting were avoidance for emotional reasons and avoidance for rational reasons. Closeness of the relationship also emerged as an influencing factor, showing that participants were more inclined to ghost when they had a distant relationship with another person. Other influencing factors of ghosting were the social media platform and gender. The results suggest that ghosting could be more likely to happen on dating apps than on other social media platforms. With regards to gender, it was found that men and women are assumed to have different levels of emotional investment in the ghosting process and its consequences.

Keywords: ghosting, influencing factors, emerging adults, qualitative research,

interview study

Introduction

With the rise of social media, online communication became a central and essential part of many young people’s lives (Coyne, Padilla-Walker, & Howard, 2013). The use of social networking sites, such as Facebook or Instagram, and instant messaging services like

hours a day. However, while these platforms provide ample possibilities to converse, they also seem to facilitate the cessation of communication. Every platform that allows for online communication also includes an option to block other people, which will prevent them from sending messages or viewing content of the other person’s profile. Contrary to a face-to-face conversation, online communication also gives people the option to read a message but not reply to it, or to ignore it completely. For many people, this might seem like an easy way to end a conversation, or in some cases even a relationship, since they do not have to go through the trouble of explaining their motives and dealing with the other person’s reaction.

This manner of abruptly terminating all online communication with another person has been named ‘ghosting’, and considering the high number of popular press articles and blogposts that exist on this subject, it appears to be a widespread phenomenon on the Internet. Well known newspapers, such as Time Magazine, The New York Times, and Huffington Post have published articles talking about the psychology of ghosting and possible reasons behind it (Steinmetz, 2016; Safronova, 2015; Borgueta, 2016). Other popular press articles focus on describing the experience of being ghosted, for example by interviewing the involved parties (Page, 2015; Vilhauer, 2015; Stevenson, 2015). Another indicator for why ghosting should be considered a relevant topic is the increasing amount of Google searches that have been

conducted over the past years. The popularity of the search term ‘ghosting’ (in connection to relationships) has risen significantly since 2004, with a particular increase in searches from 2015 onwards (“Google Trends”, n.d.). Furthermore, a survey study conducted on ghosting found that 47% of the 554 participants (75% Caucasian, Mage = 34 years) have had experiences

with ghosting before (Freedman, Powell, Le, & Williams, 2018).

While the above-mentioned evidence clearly indicates that ghosting is a common phenomenon on social media and a relevant topic of discussion in the popular press, so far very little academic research has been conducted to explore this method of communication

termination. There is a definite gap in academic research and literature on the topic of ghosting and its intricacies. This research aims to make a first step in closing this gap, by taking a qualitative exploratory approach. Since ghosting has not been investigated thoroughly, the origins of this practice are still uncertain. When reading the popular press articles and blog posts, one question occurred very frequently: why do people do it, or in other words, what are the factors that influence this behaviour? While many articles approached this question by speculating or asking ex-partners, this research will try to give a more scientific answer. Therefore, the principal research question of this study is:

RQ: What are the main factors that influence ghosting among emerging adults?

Theoretical Background Ghosting

In order to facilitate the description of the ghosting process the terms ‘ghoster’ and ‘ghostee’ will be used. ‘Ghoster’ refers to the person terminating the communication, i.e. the one that initiates ghosting. ‘Ghostee’ will be used to describe the person on the receiving end, i.e. the person that is being ghosted by someone else.

As mentioned earlier, ghosting arose with the popularity of social media and the consequently increasing amount of online communication. Since there is not much academic literature, no official definition of the term exists. The “Oxford Dictionary” (n.d.) defines it as: “The practice of ending a personal relationship with someone by suddenly and without

explanation withdrawing from all communication”. In the scarce scientific literature ghosting is conceptualised as a new – entirely technology-mediated – form of a relationship dissolution strategy (LeFebvre, 2017). Since the younger generations communicate frequently via technological devices, e.g. their smartphones, they also increasingly initiate and maintain relationships (i.e. romantic relationships or friendships) with the help of technology and new media (Morey, Gentzler, Creasy, Oberhauser, & Westerman, 2013). However, these

relationships can just as easily be terminated, which might involve just the click of one button on social media (Freedman et al., 2018).

Another peculiarity that differentiates ghosting from other relationship dissolution strategies, is the fact that it can occur without the ghostee immediately realising what is

happening (Freedman et al., 2018). Since ghosting is initially perceived simply as an ambiguous absence of communication, the ghostee might not realise right away that the relationship with the other person has just ended (Freedman et al., 2018). There is also a high chance that all of the ghostee’s attempts to reconnect with the other person will be purposely ignored. Therefore, ghosting can also be described as the avoidance or refusal to communicate with another person that one has had some kind of relationship with (Freedman et al., 2018).

Since ghosting is conceptualised as a relationship dissolution strategy, it is important to clarify which types of relationships are commonly taken into account in this context. The main focus in the popular press seems to be on romantic relationships (e.g. Safronova, 2015;

Samakow, 2014). And while part of the academic literature is also solely focused on romantic relationships (LeFebvre, 2017), another source suggests that friendships should be included in the investigation as well (Freedman et al., 2018). Intrinsically, friendships and romantic relationships are not that different from each other. Both constitute for intimate personal relationships. Furthermore, both involve the stages of initiation, maintenance, and dissolution, and for both types of relationships these stages can be accomplished through technology (e.g. social media). Thus, it is entirely possible to ghost friends as well. And it can also be expected that in both cases (romantic relationships and friendships) the consequences of being ghosted will be of equal gravity for the affected person (Freedman et al., 2018).

Emerging adults

Emerging adulthood has been defined as a transitional period between adolescence and adulthood, and ranges approximately from the age of 18 to 25 (Arnett, 2004). It is a

period that is characterised by five common features: identity exploration, instability, a high amount of self-focus, feeling in-between, and the perception of endless possibilities (Arnett, 2004). It seems likely that some of these characteristics might encourage ghosting among this age group.

Identity exploration is very important to people of this age (Arnett, 2004). By

exploring as many options as possible, they try to find out who they are and what they want to achieve in their lives. This period is used by young people to form their identities and learn more about themselves. The process of exploration is not limited to themselves, but extends to many areas of their lives, such as work experiences and relationships. With regard to relationships, the desire to explore and find the best suited partner for oneself also makes emerging adults more prone to dissolving relationships (Arnett, 2004). Since they might want to explore many different relationships, they may stay in existing relationships for a shorter period of time and use ghosting – the shortest and easiest way to terminate current

connections.

Instability is similarly common among emerging adults (Arnett, 2004). Members of this age group do not like to make definite plans, or having to stick to them. They try to keep their options as open as possible, which is also due to the fact that they might not have found out what they want yet. In line with the goal of identity exploration and seeking out new possibilities, emerging adults tend to move around frequently (Arnett, 2004). This instability and frequent change of residence can impact the relationships (and friendships) in their lives and therefore might increase the likelihood of relationship termination in form of ghosting.

Finally, emerging adulthood is a period of high self-focus (Arnett, 2004). Since these young people are about to enter the stage of adulthood, they are trying to learn how to be self-sufficient and independent. In order to do so, they have to develop important daily-life skills, but also understand what defines them as a person and what their goals in life are (Arnett,

2004). This feeling of having to focus on oneself and one's own needs can make the termination of relationships more likely, especially in a selfish way like ghosting, which prioritizes the own feelings over those of the other person.

Apart from the developmental traits, emerging adulthood is also characterised by a very high media use. New media dominate the life of this age group, with the Internet being the place where these young people spend the most of their media time (Coyne et al., 2013). Not surprisingly, most of their time on the Internet is dedicated to social media. A recent study found that 88% of U.S. emerging adults make use of social media, and between 60% and 74% visit these sites on a daily basis (Smith & Anderson, 2018). This frequent use of social media impacts the way relationships are formed and handled among this age group. Communicating online makes it easier to initiate a relationship or friendship, but it also makes it easier to end one. Since emerging adults are among the highest social media users, they could also be the most likely to engage in ghosting.

Motivations

Motivations can be generally defined as incentives that prompt a certain action, or as “the key driving forces behind behaviour” (Muntinga, Moorman, & Smit, 2011). Based on the existing literature (LeFebvre, 2017; Freedman et al., 2018), one possible motivation for ghosting can be assumed: avoidance. In general, ghosting is described as a modern way of ending a relationship, facilitated through the increased depersonalization that occurs while communicating online (LeFebvre, 2017). Since ghosting is conceptualised as a relationship dissolution strategy, it seems obvious that the main goal people are trying to achieve is to end relationships they are no longer interested in pursuing. However, it seems worth investigating why people tend to choose this particular relationship dissolution strategy.

According to existing research, it is possible that ghosting occurs because it provides the possibility to avoid unpleasant conversations or interactions with the other person when

ending the relationship (LeFebvre, 2017; Freedman et al., 2018). It can provide the

opportunity to terminate the relationship without having to deal with the consequences, e.g. difficult discussions or conflicts (Freedman et al., 2018). However, to the researcher’s knowledge no study has been conducted yet to investigate directly what the motivations for ghosting are. Therefore, the first sub question is:

1. What are the main motivations for emerging adults to ghost others?

While primarily considering the motivations of the ghosters themselves, it might also be interesting to see if their own motivations differ from the motivations they attribute to other people who have ghosted them. This can be tied back to the idea of the self-concept, which has been researched mainly in the field of social psychology (Markus, Smith, & Moreland, 1985; Markus, 1977; Rogers, 1981). The self-concept is the perception that people have of themselves, and how they see and understand themselves and their behaviour (Markus et al., 1985). In connection with the self-concept and the perception of others, two effects are prominent. One is the false consensus effect, where people tend to believe that others are similar to them, have similar opinions and would act in a similar way as they themselves would. The other one is quite the opposite, where people tend to believe that others have drastically different opinions or attitudes from themselves (Markus et al., 1985). In the context of ghosting it would be interesting to see whether people tend to attribute similar motivations to people who have ghosted them, or imagine their own motivations to be completely different from everyone else’s. Therefore, the second sub question is:

2. What do ghostees perceive the motivations of ghosters to be?

Relationship dissolution strategies

Relationship dissolution strategies have been subject to various investigations in the fields of psychology and communication science for quite some time. Baxter (1982) was among the

first to explore and conceptualise the different strategies that can be used to end a relationship. Since breakups are rarely a mutual decision (Collins & Gillath, 2012), Baxter (1982) found that people use various strategies to break up with a partner, and that they display different levels of concern towards their partner’s feelings during this process. In particular, the closeness of the relationship seems to play a role for whether a direct or less direct termination strategy (such as ghosting) is employed (Baxter, 1982). Direct termination strategies, i.e. openly and honestly communicating one’s wish to end the relationship to the partner, have been found to have fewer negative outcomes for the recipient as opposed to indirect strategies, which can lead to more negative feelings for the affected person (Collins & Gillath, 2012). Baxter (1982) found that the closer a relationship was, the higher was the likelihood of a direct breakup strategy being used. Since the closeness of a relationship seems to influence its termination, it would be interesting to confirm this finding in the context of ghosting. Therefore, the third sub question is:

3. Does the closeness of the relationship influence whether ghosting will be utilised?

Relationship dissolution in the age of social media

With the development of new media and technologies, relationship dissolution strategies and their employment have undergone numerous changes as well. Several researchers have investigated the impact of social media platforms on relationships, such as Papp, Danielwicz, and Cayemberg (2012), who found that changing the Facebook relationship status or profile picture can predict relational satisfaction for both partners. Furthermore, other studies found that frequent social media use can lead to surveillance behaviour and jealousy, which in turn can be linked to negative relational outcomes (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009; Elphinston & Noller, 2011). Moreover, Rus and Tiemensma (2017) point out that social media also enable greater and faster access to potential alternative partners, which in turn might lead to more infidelity or faster relationship dissolution. In general, it seems like the use

of social media can influence relationships and their dissolution. Since nowadays relationships are maintained on various social media platforms which all have their own characteristics and patterns of use, the way a relationship is ended might also depend on the platform that is used to communicate. For example, since dating apps are based on the concept that many new potential partners are just a swipe away, ghosting might be more likely to happen on this platform than on WhatsApp. Therefore, the fourth sub question is:

4. Is the employment of ghosting behaviour related to the main social media platform that is used to communicate with a partner?

Relationship dissolution and gender

Direct links between gender and the employment of different relationship dissolution strategies have not been made yet. However, several studies have found gender differences concerning social media use in romantic relationships. For example, Rus and Tiemensma (2017) suggest that women might perceive their relationship to be more threatened by social media than men. Also, females have been found to portray higher levels of jealousy on Facebook as well as on Snapchat, when confronted with a threat to their relationship

(Muscanell, Guadagno, Rice, & Murphy, 2013; Utz, Muscanell, & Khalid, 2015). Unrelated to social media, another study found that men and women have different conflict-management strategies, which have been developed in early childhood due to socialization with their peers (Keener, Strough, & Di Donato, 2012). The researchers found that women are more likely to utilize agentic strategies (i.e. strategies that are focussed on their own needs) in opposition to communal strategies (which focus on meeting the needs of others) during a conflict with a romantic partner. The fact that gender differences exist in social media behaviour as well as in conflict management makes it seem likely that gender differences could also exist in

that women are more likely to use agentic, indirect termination strategies, and are therefore more likely to ghost. Therefore, the fifth sub question is:

5. Does gender have an influence on the likelihood to ghost others?

Method

It seems appropriate to investigate the practice of ghosting with a qualitative approach because it is a topic that has not been researched yet and therefore an explorative and open mindset is necessary (Bryman, 2012). Furthermore, the practice of ghosting seems to be complex and can therefore only be fully understood by having a personal conversation (Muntinga et al., 2011). A survey or any other quantitative method would not provide the opportunity to obtain deep and meaningful insights into people’s reasoning.

Moreover, the fact that ghosting is commonly considered to be a rather unethical practice (Borgueta, 2016; Safronova, 2015; Samakow, 2014), might make it a sensitive topic for people to talk about. It was therefore decided to conduct semi-structured personal interviews instead of focus groups, because it was assumed that people would be more willing to share their experiences with ghosting in a one-on-one conversation rather than among a big group of people who could potentially form negative opinions about them. Furthermore, previous qualitative research has suggested that semi-structured interviews make the discovery of underlying factors more likely than fully structured interviews or other research methods, and can provide meaningful insights into the motivations for certain behaviours (Muntinga et al., 2011).

Sample

In order to collect meaningful data, all participants of this study had to be emerging adults who have ghosted before. Additionally, it was beneficial if they had also been ghosted themselves so that they could talk about both experiences. This was achieved via purposive

sampling, where only participants were selected who fulfilled the mentioned criteria.

According to Coenen, Stamm, Stucki, & Cieza (2012) approximately ten personal interviews are needed to reach saturation. The participants were recruited out of the researchers circle of friends and acquaintances and were either asked in person or messaged on social media to participate in the study. Only participants that belonged to the correct age group were asked to participate. Before the interview, participants were asked if they had ever ghosted someone before and could remember a specific incident. They were also asked if they had ever been ghosted. While the majority of participants was familiar with the term ghosting, several individuals had not heard of this expression and needed clarification before recognising that they had had experience with this practice. Out of the eleven approached participants only one individual was excluded from the sample due to not having ghosted anyone before.

Ultimately, the sample consisted of ten emerging adults from various countries, and contained the same number of males and females to prevent gender bias (see Table 1).

Table 1. - Participants

Name (Pseudonym) Age Country of Origin

Linda 24 Germany

Rocco 25 Italy

Rick 24 United Kingdom

Christopher 25 India

Tina 19 Germany

Marie 23 The Netherlands

Daniele 24 Italy

Jessica 25 United States

Chloe 21 United Kingdom

Angelo 23 Italy

In order to facilitate the participation in this study, the interviews were conducted wherever the participants felt most comfortable talking about this topic. Six participants decided that it would be most convenient for them to be interviewed at the University of Amsterdam, since they were students there. Two interviews were conducted at the

researcher’s home, and two further interviews had to be conducted via Skype, due to personal availability problems. All of the participants signed an informed consent form and were asked for permission to record the conversation. They were assured that their anonymity would be guaranteed and no actual names or other information that could clearly identify a person would be used in this study. The process of data gathering began with conducting one pilot interview in order to test the suitability of the interview guide. As a consequence, several questions were added and their structure was revised in order to obtain the most relevant data possible. Based on this pilot interview, the main research question, and the five sub questions, a final interview guide was created and used for each interview (see Appendix 1). Depending on the participants’ answers, sometimes additional questions were asked in order to gain a deeper understanding. In other instances, questions were skipped because the participants already answered them without having been prompted.

To start the conversation and get each participant accustomed to the interview, some questions about social media use and online communication habits were asked. The goal was to find out which apps or platforms they use most to communicate online and who they communicate with most frequently. This also functioned as a way to get the participants used to talking and therefore make it easier for them to reveal their personal experiences further on in the interview. After that, participants were asked if they had ever been ghosted by anyone and their experience with this. The goal was to understand their attitude about ghosting and their experience on the receiving end. Finally, the conversation revolved around their experience of ghosting someone else. The goal was to find out which factors influence this

practice and how the participants felt about it. Towards the end the participants were asked to add anything they felt had been left out. The average duration of the interviews was 35 minutes, ranging from 15 minutes to 55 minutes.

During the whole interview process it was important for the researcher to keep an open mind and not to expect certain answers or concepts to come up in the conversations. Even though motivations, perceived motivations, closeness of relationship, social media platform, and gender were assumed to be influencing factors of ghosting, it was important to remember that new concepts could potentially emerge during each interview. In order to ensure the credibility of the research, member checking was employed by showing each participant a summary of their interview to ensure that the researcher had understood everything correctly and nothing had been missed.

Data analysis

After the interview process was completed, all recorded interviews were transcribed in Microsoft Word and thoroughly analysed using the programme ATLAS.ti. Due to the

explorative nature of this research, the grounded theory approach was chosen since it entails the possibility of developing a theory which explains the main factors that influence ghosting (Strauss & Corbin, 1994). As an end result, these main factors were visualized in form of a concept indicator model (see Figure 1). Throughout the whole process of data gathering and analysing, peer debriefing was employed with fellow researchers. The process of memo writing was also employed during analysis in order to be able to organise and cluster the data. Making use of these methods ensured the credibility and trustworthiness of this research, as did the use of CAQDAS (Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software), here in form of ATLAS.ti.

In line with the guidelines for a grounded theory approach, and to ensure that the developed theory would be deeply rooted in the data, the analysis was carried out in three

steps (Strauss & Corbin, 1994). The first step was open coding, where codes were assigned to the different fragments of each interview. While the sub questions were kept in mind and used as guidance throughout the entire coding process, it was essential to keep an open mind and to look for other concepts that could emerge. The coding was done line by line to stay as close to the data as possible. Coding all interview transcripts resulted in a total of 1197 codes.

The second step was axial coding, where the codes were re-analysed to find

connections between them and combine them into groups. Before creating the groups, codes that described the same topic but were formulated differently were merged. The groups were formed based on the data itself as well as the concepts and sub questions mentioned in the theoretical background section. This focused coding resulted in six groups: ‘gender differences’, ‘social media platform’, ‘motivations’, ‘perceived motivations’, ‘cultural differences’, and ‘sporadic ghosting’ (see Appendix 2). To give an example of this process: a code with the name ‘ghosting on Facebook’ was assigned to the group ‘social media

platform’. Codes that did not fit into any of these groups were deemed irrelevant for the purpose of answering the research question and were not considered any further.

The final step was selective coding, which led to the development of a concept indicator model (CIM) that displays the connection between the main concept (factors that influence ghosting), its different dimensions, and the indicators for each dimension (see Figure 1). Out of the six initial groups only four were considered directly relevant to answering the research question or could be backed up sufficiently by the gathered data. ‘Sporadic ghosting’ emerged during the data gathering process as a potential concept. However, it appears to be a different form of ghosting that could also be called short-term ghosting, where people do not reply to others online for a certain period of time (several days, weeks, or even months) without any mal-intent and eventually always resume contact. Since this behaviour differs from the way ghosting is defined in this research, the concept of

sporadic ghosting cannot be taken into account as an influencing factor for ghosting, and was therefore not considered further. Moreover, possible cultural differences in ghosting

behaviour were suggested by one participant, which seemed to be an interesting concept. However, since this concept was only mentioned in one interview there was not enough data to suggest whether this could actually influence ghosting. ‘Cultural differences’ was therefore not included in the CIM.After analysing the data thoroughly, it was found that the groups ‘motivations’ and ‘perceived motivations’ had exactly the same indicators, which is why they were combined into one dimension.

Figure 1. – CIM of main factors that influence ghosting behaviour

Results Factors that influence ghosting

Ultimately, the analysis of the data produced a CIM that consisted of four dimensions. In other words, four main factors that influence ghosting among emerging adults were found: the motivations and perceived motivations of ghosting, the closeness of the relationship, the social media platform, and gender. In the following, each dimension of the CIM and its indicators will be discussed in detail.

Motivations / Perceived Motivations. The participants’ own motivations for

amount of the collected data. As mentioned in the beginning, ‘avoidance’ was an expected motivation for ghosting. And after the data analysis it became apparent that it was mentioned consistently by the participants. For example, Daniele described his reasons for ghosting as follows:

I really didn't want to have that conversation. (…) facing it is something that I

absolutely don't want to go through because it's long, because like she's right, because it's not that (…) talking to her is a problem, but I also don't really want to go deep into this.

While some participants directly mentioned avoiding a person, a conversation, or a situation as a motivation for ghosting, other participants gave more precise answers, naming also the reasons for why they were trying to avoid further communication with someone. These answers led to the further distinction into emotional and rational reasons.

Avoidance for emotional reasons. When describing their reasons for avoiding

communication in more detail, some participants explained that they were trying not to hurt the other person’s feelings and that in their opinion ghosting would be less hurtful than having a conversation and delivering bad news.

I just wasn't really interested in meeting again. And I thought to get my point across without having to tell him that I thought he was like too fat, not attractive, I just wouldn't say anything. (…) I mean, I guess I could have told him like sorry no, I don't really feel like meeting you again. But I feel like it's kind of mean and (…) it's a hard thing to hear.” (Chloe)

Other participants were more concerned about their own feelings and were avoiding

communication to not experience negative emotions or, as Daniele explained, because he did not want to get involved in an argument: “I don't want to get into the argument. Because if I

get too into the argument, then she'll get upset. I don't want to get upset, so this way I feel like it's more balanced”. When assuming the motivations of other people, many participants also mentioned emotional reasons, such as assuming the ghoster was not enjoying the conversation or relationship anymore, or that the ghoster might be annoyed or offended in some way. This was presumed, for example, by Rocco: “Maybe I have offended her in some way that I'm not aware of. (…) Maybe she felt offended or she's not proud of what she's done. Or she doesn't enjoy talking about these things”.

Avoidance for rational reasons. On the other hand, several of the mentioned

motivations did not concern anyone’s feelings and were therefore termed rational reasons. Numerous interviewees explained that they were simply too busy or had other things to do. A good example of this was given by Angelo: “I mean, I just ghosted her because I had other things to do. (…) It just happened because I was very busy”. Trying to reduce the time spent on the phone or time management were other stated reasons. Daniele, for example, said: “Because like I have so many things to do. And I don't want to stay at the phone all the time. I also want my time to rest and so on”. Jessica also mentioned a similar motive: “Because sometimes you just spend too much time. If you got like a large number of messages then responding... it gets to where how much time are you going to dedicate?” When asked about perceived motivations, explanations such as the ghoster did not feel like replying or did not want to make an effort, were mentioned several times as well, for example by Rocco: “She read the text and she didn't feel like making the effort to reply. That’s it.”

Closeness of relationship. Every participant mentioned that the type and importance

of the relationship they had with another person had a big impact on whether they decided to ghost someone or not. This was summarised nicely by Rick, who said:

I mean, this really depends on like, proximity of friendship. Like if I'm closer to them and I wanted to cut ties for some reason, I wouldn't ghost them. But if they were (…) more acquaintances, (…) I would. Because I feel like it's less of like an obligation.

When discussing this topic in further detail, it appeared that participants differentiated either between a distant relationship with someone or a fading relationship, one that was once strong but had become more distant over time.

Distant relationship. Several interviewees explained that they ghosted someone

because they did not have a close relationship and therefore did not really care about the other person or their feelings. Jessica described her experience like this:

I met him after dinner and then like ended up going out to a club. (…) I didn't care to be friends with him, so... To be honest, I just felt like it [ghosting] was the easiest. (…) I just wasn't thinking about his feelings at all.

Many interviewees also stated that they did not expect their actions to have a big impact on the ghostee due to the relationship being rather distant. This was mentioned, for example, by Chloe: “I thought well, he's like only met me once and he's got all these plans to go to India or whatever. So, you know, I'm sure he's going to get over it pretty soon”, and Jessica: “I think because our relationship was so temporary, I was like he's going to get over this probably in two days”. When asked about their experiences with being ghosted, many participants also mentioned a distant relationship and therefore the ghoster not caring about them as an

influencing factor. A very unvarnished example for this was given by Tina, who answered the question of why she thinks she got ghosted with: “Not important enough for him to reply because like we had never met.”

Fading relationship. Many participants told stories about ghosting someone who they

became more distant. For example, Marie described her reasons for ghosting a childhood friend that tried to stay in contact with her after she moved away:

Because I think I was like a teenager. I was like, you know, being occupied with other stuff and yeah, I was like not interested in being friends with her anymore. Because I had other friends and... I just didn't need her in my life at that moment. And I didn't understand why she wanted to be friends so badly. Because for me it was just a friendship when we were little but like people change and I was bigger so it was like I had another life going on.

Rocco also told a story about a former friend and housemate that he ghosted eventually:

We used to be friends for a couple of years. Then in the last year of University we became more distant. He started doing drugs. He was misbehaving. So, we all stopped talking to him and I didn't enjoy his presence, so I stopped replying on social media, too.

Being on the receiving end, a nice example of a fading relationship was given by Chloe, who assumed that her ghoster did not see a point in continuing their relationship after she moved away and they were unable to see each other very often: “Maybe like because obviously, I'm now in a different city and stuff so we can't really see each other so maybe he's just, you know, it kind of... doesn't make sense.”

Social media platform. Another factor that seems to influence ghosting among

emerging adults is the social media platform where the communication takes place in the instance of ghosting. While giving account of their own ghosting experiences, many different social media platforms or just simply text messages were mentioned as the medium through which ghosting occurred. However, a great number of participants shared the belief that

dating apps were a place where ghosting happened very frequently. The factor ‘social media platform’ was therefore divided into the indicators ‘dating apps’ and ‘other social media’.

Dating apps. Dating apps were mentioned in the majority of interviews. Many

participants expressed concerns about the shallowness of the connections made on dating apps which in turn could lead to more ghosting. Dating apps were the only social media platform that was mentioned consistently by participants in connection with ghosting. Angelo described it this way:

Using dating apps on which ghosting happens in, I would say, 70% of cases, I mean, it's not even a relationship, honestly. It's not a communication. It's just hey - nothing, hey - nothing. It's just like looking for a house in Amsterdam.

Many participants also said that social media in general, and dating apps in particular, provide so many options for relationships with different people that they might incentivise users to make less of an effort to build deep connections. Instead, they give people the impression that they can just find someone new in a matter of seconds. Linda voiced her opinion about communication on dating apps as follows: “You can just constantly change your mind about people. You don't even have to try. If it's too hard for you to like stay in touch with someone, why do that? You can just meet someone else”. And Rick also shared a similar opinion: “You can kind of ghost your way through people, potential relationships, until you find the right one.”

Other social media. While dating apps were named by the majority of participants,

other social media were mentioned less consistently. When asked about which social media platform they had experienced ghosting on, the interviewees listed various types of social media. Linda, for example, described how she got ghosted on WhatsApp. Christopher ghosted an old acquaintance on Facebook, and Tina named Instagram as the platform where she got

ghosted. Marie even mentioned the instant messaging service MSN as the medium she used to ghost her childhood friend. Apart from text messages that were listed as another medium for ghosting, two participants also mentioned LinkedIn as the platform where they ghosted someone or got ghosted themselves. One of them was Rocco, who explained: “Last month, she texted me on LinkedIn. I accepted the request, I responded and I asked the same questions that she had asked me and she didn't reply”. Based on the answers in the interviews, it seems that ghosting can happen on any possible social media platform that two people communicate on. Apart from dating apps, there was no tendency towards any social media platform being mentioned more frequently than others.

Gender. During the interviews, participants were asked whether they can imagine or

have experienced any gender differences concerning ghosting. When specifically asked about the frequency of ghosting, there seemed to be no consensus among the interviewees.

However, many participants expressed the belief that women have more empathy than men which is why ghosting could be harder for them. At the same time women were also believed to take ghosting more seriously than men. The dimension ‘gender’ was therefore divided into the two indicators ‘frequency of ghosting’ and ‘level of emotional investment’.

Frequency of ghosting. The interviewees did not give consistent answers about which

gender ghosts more frequently in their opinion. Several female participants, such as Chloe, assumed that men ghost more: “I feel like men definitely do it more. Because I think I have been ghosted more times than I've ghosted someone for sure”. On the contrary, some of the male participants suspected women to ghost more because they think that women get approached more often and therefore have more chances to ghost others. Christopher explained it like this:

I guess women (…) do it more often because they get more interest, possibly. I don't know. Even men can be in the same boat, but from what I have seen I think it's the women who can... who have the chance to ghost.

However, there were also several participants who assumed members of both genders to ghost equally often. Angelo, when asked about the frequency of ghosting, said: “No, I don't think so. I think maybe girls might be seen as they ghost more than men. But I don't think it's the case in real life”. Daniele expressed his disbelief in a gender difference even more clearly: “No, I don't really think so. I mean why should there be?”

Level of emotional investment. The more interesting aspect about gender differences

was the varying level of emotional investment between men and women, which was brought up by many participants. Several interviewees stated that they assume women to have more empathy and generally be emotionally more invested than men which is why ghosting might be more difficult for them to execute and to handle. Jessica explained this as follows:

I think (…) women in general have higher empathy. Because when you ghost someone... Like I said, even when I did it (…) I still thought about, you know, like how he's going to feel a little weird. And I think women think about that more, how the other person is going to feel. I don't think men do as much.

Chloe expressed a very similar opinion:

I feel like for men it's easier just to cut off any feelings and emotions and just go. But I feel like with women, maybe they get more like emotional connections and it's harder for them. (…) I feel like if you have been talking for a while and you've met many times it's harder for girls because they get more emotionally attached. But I feel like boys, if they're just in it for sex or whatever, (…) it's easier for them to just get bored and go.

But it was not only the female participants that assumed this difference between the genders. Daniele also explained how he experienced personally with his male friends that men seem to take ghosting less seriously than women. He thinks that men spend less time thinking about whether it is appropriate to ghost someone, and they also care less about the potential consequences of ghosting:

I think a man will have his ego unfortunately like pumped up of ghosting, while I feel like a woman would do it in a situation that is a bit more like... where she feels that it's a bit more necessary. (…) I feel like there is more of a process behind ghosting from a woman. Like they would take it more serious then maybe a man. (…) Men will consider this not such a big deal, that in the end they will not have second thoughts about doing that. And also in certain situations it could even be that you're like the coolest guy in the group, and it's crazy, but you know like, when you’re like oh, yeah, she's texting me but who cares, you know? And not reply to her.

Conclusion and Discussion

The goal of this study was to enlarge the very small body of existing research on ghosting. Ghosting has become a very prominent phenomenon in our society, yet it has not been thoroughly researched and many of its intricacies cannot be scientifically explained yet. In order to shed more light on this practice, this exploratory study focussed on investigating the main factors that influence ghosting among emerging adults. To answer this relatively broad research question, five sub questions were developed which involved: the motivations and perceived motivations for ghosting, the closeness of the relationship, the social media platform, and gender differences. After analysing the data, the majority of these concepts could be confirmed as influencing factors. The four main factors that emerged were:

motivations / perceived motivations, closeness of relationship, social media platform, and gender.

First of all, the analysis of the data showed that there was no difference between the motivations and perceived motivations named by the participants, which shows that in the case of ghosting the false consensus effect seems to apply, i.e. people tend to assume that others have similar motivations to their own. The main motivation / perceived motivation for ghosting was avoidance. It seems that ghosting is employed as a relationship dissolution strategy when people do not want to or feel unable to deal with certain situations or conversations, either for emotional or for rational reasons.

Closeness of the relationship was also found to have an impact on ghosting. Therefore, the findings by Baxter (1982) concerning the use of breakup strategies can be confirmed for ghosting, as the closeness of the relationship definitely seems to influence whether ghosting will be employed or not. It was found that people tend to ghost others when they do not have a close relationship or their once close relationship has faded. In this case, they care more about themselves than about the other person, which is why they feel less incentivised to make an effort to communicate when ghosting seems like a much easier option.

The closeness of the relationship also seems to play a role in the context of ghosting on different social media platforms, which was the topic of the fourth sub question. The gathered data suggests that ghosting is more likely to happen on dating apps than on any other social media platform. Since dating apps provide the user with ample options for possible relationships, interviewees suspected that this would lead to people making less of an effort to build deep and meaningful connections with another person, because a new relationship could be just a swipe away. Existing research about Dutch emerging adults’ motivations to use dating apps found that looking for love was a stronger reason than casual sex or excitement (Sumter, Vandenbosch, & Ligtenberg, 2017). This would contradict the assumption that

people are unlikely to make deep connections on dating apps. However, a survey study among American college students found that, since they are picture based, dating apps can facilitate the formation of shallow connections because they are made for superficial reasons, such as physical appearance (Bryant & Sheldon, 2017). Overall, it becomes apparent that the factors ‘closeness of relationship’ and ‘social media platform’ are related in the sense that social media (specifically dating apps) can lead to a high number of superficial relationships, and superficial relationships in turn can increase the likelihood of ghosting.

The final sub question concerned gender differences. There was no unison among participants as to which gender ghosts more frequently. Interestingly, several female participants assumed men to ghost more often, while some male participants suspected women to ghost more frequently. Other participants believed there to be no difference between the sexes, which is why no clear pattern emerged. However, it seems like there is a difference in the emotional and potentially also in the cognitive processes that take place when men and women ghost. Numerous participants expressed the believe that women are emotionally much more invested than men, and that they also give more thought to whether ghosting is justified and what the consequences could be. This result stands in contrast to the findings of Keener et al. (2012), who found that women are more likely to use self-focussed strategies during a conflict. While their study is not directly related to ghosting, it does look at gender differences in handling conflicts. The findings suggest that women are more likely to employ indirect conflict resolution strategies and focus more on their own needs than those of the other person. The participants in this study believed that the opposite was the case:

women care more about the other person while men are more self-focussed.

Limitations and suggestions for future research

While this study adds to the scarce body of existing literature on ghosting and the factors that influence this behaviour, it has several limitations that should be mentioned.

A general limitation of this study is that ghosting is seen as negative behaviour (Borgueta, 2016; Safronova, 2015; Samakow, 2014) and can therefore be considered a rather sensitive topic. This can lead to participants being unwilling to share information that might damage their reputation. Even though the researcher tried to avoid this by conducting one-to-one personal interviews, it is still possible that the interviewees did not share certain

information and therefore the collected data does not perfectly reflect the participants’ actual experiences.

Another limitation of this study is that the results only concern emerging adults and cannot be transferred to other age groups. While emerging adults were chosen because they are heavy social media users, teens and increasingly also older adults use social media frequently and might therefore also have experiences with ghosting (Smith & Anderson, 2018). Especially since one participant mentioned a generational difference in ghosting behaviour between herself and her younger sister who is a teenager, the inclusion of participants of different age groups could have produced interesting results as well. Future research should therefore explore generational differences in social media use, and

specifically ghosting, to find out if younger or older age groups handle and experience it differently.

A final limitation concerns the interview process. Based on the existing literature, the interview guide contained questions about the expected influencing factors. Consequently, the majority of factors mentioned by the participants did not emerge freely but was prompted by the interviewer. However, in order to find additional factors that did not appear in the

literature, participants were asked for further input and additional information about their experiences with ghosting. This led to the suggestion of possible cultural differences in ghosting behaviour by one participant. It was proposed that there might be different norms of communicating between cultures, which could make ghosting more likely to happen in certain

cultures than in others. Subsequently, future research could try to establish whether culture is another factor that influences ghosting. Furthermore, a different form of ghosting, here named sporadic ghosting, was mentioned in several interviews. Future studies could examine this behaviour more closely to be able to define and distinguish it from what is commonly understood as ghosting today.

Lastly, future research should also aim to study ghosting using quantitative methods. For example, a survey study could be conducted with questions based on the findings of this research, further investigating the influencing factors of ghosting, or focussing on one of the here found factors in particular, e.g. the motivations of ghosting. Since survey studies usually have large sample sizes they are able to produce representative and generalizable data. This could help to conceptualise ghosting in its entirety and turn it into an acknowledged scientific term in the field of communication science.

References

Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood: the winding road from the late teens through the

twenties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baxter, L. A. (1982). Strategies for ending relationships: Two studies. Western Journal of

Speech Communication, 46(3), 223-241.

Borgueta, M. (2016). The psychology of ghosting: Why people do it and a better way to break up. Huffington Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/lantern/the-psychology-of-ghostin_b_7999858.html

Bryant, K., & Sheldon, P. (2017). Cyber Dating in the Age of Mobile Apps: Understanding Motives, Attitudes, and Characteristics of Users. American Communication Journal,

19(2), 1-15.

Coenen, M., Stamm, T. A., Stucki, G., & Cieza, A. (2012). Individual interviews and focus groups in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of two qualitative methods.

Quality of Life Research, 21(2), 359–370.

Coyne, S., Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Howard, E. (2013). Emerging in a digital world: A decade review of media use, effects, and gratifications in emerging adulthood.

Emerging Adulthood, 1, 125-317.

Elphinston, R. A., & Noller, P. (2011). Time to face it! Facebook intrusion and the

implications for romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 14, 631–635.

Freedman, G., Powell, D. N., Le, B., & Williams, K. D. (2018). Ghosting and destiny: Implicit theories of relationships predict beliefs about ghosting. Journal of Social and

Personal Relationships. 1-20.

Google Trends (n.d.). Ghosting (Relationships). Retrieved from

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=%2Fg%2F11b7_r92z7 Keener, E., Strough, J., & Di Donato, L. (2012). Gender differences and similarities in

strategies for managing conflict with friends and romantic partners. Sex Roles,

67(1-2), 83-97.

LeFebvre, L. (2017). Ghosting as a Relationship Dissolution Strategy in the Technological Age. In N. M. Punyanunt-Carter & J. S. Wrench (Eds.), The impact of social media in

modern romantic relationships (pp. 219-235). New York, NY: Lexington Books.

Markus, H. (1977). Self-schemata and processing information about the self. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 63–78.

Markus, H., Smith, J., & Moreland, R. L. (1985). Role of the self-concept in the perception of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(6), 1494-1512.

Young adults’ use of communication technology within their romantic relationships and associations with attachment style. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1771– 1778.

Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 12, 441–444.

Muntinga, D. G., Moorman, M., & Smit, E. G. (2011). Introducing COBRAs: Exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising,

30(1), 13-46.

Muscanell, N. L., Guadagno, R. E., Rice, L., & Murphy, S. (2013). Don’t it make my brown eyes green? An Analysis of Facebook use and romantic jealousy. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, 237-242.

Oxford Dictionary (n.d.). Definition of ghosting. Retrieved from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/ghosting

Page, D. (2015). I was ghosted by one of my closest friends. Cosmopolitan. Retrieved from https://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/a45446/friend-ghosted-me/

Papp, L. M., Danielwicz, M. A., & Cayemberg, C. C. (2012). Are we Facebook official? Implications of dating partners’ Facebook use and profiles for intimate relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 85–90.

Rogers, T. B. (1981). A model of the self as an aspect of the human information processing system. In N. Cantor & J. F. Kihlstrom (Eds.), Personality, cognition, and social

intervention (pp. 193–214). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Rus, H. M., & Tiemensma, J. (2017). It’s complicated. A systematic review of associations between social network site use and romantic relationships. Computers in Human

Safronova, V. (2015). Exes explain ghosting, the ultimate silent treatment. The New York

Times. Retrieved from

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/26/fashion/exes-explain-ghosting-the-ultimate-silent-treatment.html

Samakow, J. (2014). ‘Ghosting’: The 21st-century dating problem everyone talks about, but no one knows how to deal with. Huffington Post. Retrieved from

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/30/ghosting-dating-_n_6028958.html Smith, A. & Anderson, M. (2018). Social Media Use in 2018. Pew Research Center.

Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/ Steinmetz, K. (2016). This new text bot will do your ghosting for you. Time Magazine.

Retrieved from http://time.com/4373561/how-to-ghost-burner-app/ Stevenson, A. (2015). I asked men why they ghosted me. Vice. Retrieved from

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/vdxxej/i-asked-men-why-they-ghosted-me-511 Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K.

Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.

Sumter, S. R., Vandenbosch, L., & Ligtenberg, L. (2017). Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder. Telematics and

Informatics, 34(1), 67-78.

Utz, S., Muscanell, N., & Khalid, C. (2015). Snapchat elicits more jealousy than Facebook: A comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social

Networking, 18, 141-146.

Vilhauer, J. (2015). This is why ghosting hurts so much. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-forward/201511/is-why-ghosting-hurts-so-much

Appendices Appendix 1: Interview guide

Introduction

 Explain the aim of the research: find out which factors influence ghosting  Answers will be completely anonymised

 Ask for permission to record  Sign informed consent form

 Start the conversation: obtain general information about participants (e.g. name, age, nationality)

Topic 1: Social media use

Goal: Make participants feel comfortable with being interviewed, start with easy questions to break the ice, find out via which apps/platforms they communicate online

Initial question: How do you communicate online? Which

apps or platforms do you use?

 Which apps or social media platforms do you use to communicate with others online?

 Which one would you say you use the most?  Why do you prefer this app/platform to the others?  Who do you communicate with on this app / platform?  Do you ever use social media to communicate with

people you're romantically interested in?  Do you use any dating apps?

Topic 2: Being ghosted

Goal: Make them feel comfortable talking about ghosting by first asking not about their own actions but their experiences, find out their attitude towards ghosting, if they have ever been ghosted, how they experienced it, thoughts and opinions about ghosting

Initial question: Have you ever heard of the term ghosting?

What does it mean to you?

 What are your general thoughts and opinions towards ghosting?

 Do you think it's an acceptable thing to do?  Have you ever been ghosted by anyone?

 What was your relationship with that person? Romantic, friends, acquaintances?

 How did you meet them? (Online/offline)  On which platform was that?

 Have you ever met in person?

 How long had you been communicating for when you got ghosted?

 How frequently did you communicate?

 Can you describe the situation when they ghosted you? How did it happen?

 When they ghosted you, did you feel like that came out of nowhere?

 Did you expect them to reply to you eventually?  How did it make you feel when they ghosted you?  How do you think they felt about ghosting you?  Did you come up with any reasons for why you think

that person ghosted you?

 Do you think if you had met in person they wouldn’t have ghosted you?

 Any other reasons you came up with?

Topic 3: Ghosting and

influencing factors

Goal: Find out what are the main factors that influence ghosting

Possible components:

 Motivations

 Perceived motivations  Closeness of relationship  Social media platform  Gender

 Other:

Initial question: Can you think of an instance where you

ghosted someone?

 How or why did you start talking to that person in the first place? Tell me the story of how you met that person.

 Who initiated the first contact / conversation?  On which platform did you communicate?  Have you ever met that person in real life?  What was your connection with that person?  Were you potentially interested in that person

romantically? (Was it a man or a woman?)  How come you ghosted them in the end?

 What specifically made you stop replying to them?  When you stopped replying did you have the intention

of replying later or contacting that person again in the future?

 How long had you been communicating for when you ghosted them?

 Did you feel like ghosting was the only way to end the relationship with that person?

 How would you describe your motivation to ghost them in one term?

 Would you say that it was that person’s fault that you ghosted them? Why / Why not?

 Did / do you expect to ever see that person again in real life?

 Would you ever ghost someone if you knew that you'd still have to see them every day?

 How did ghosting that person make you feel? What were your emotions?

 Do you think the other person saw it coming that you would ghost them?

 How do you think the other person felt when you ghosted them?

 Imagine a situation in which you have the choice of either telling the person that you want to end the relationship / the friendship or just ghosting them and never replying to their texts again. What would you do? Why?

 Do you think you're more likely to ghost someone that you've never met in person?

 How likely are you to ghost close friends or someone you were actually in a relationship with?

 What would be a scenario in which you would ghost a close friend or a romantic partner?

 Can you think of any other instances in which you have ghosted someone?

If yes go back to beginning of topic 3.

 What do you think are the reasons other people ghost in general?

women in terms of how often they ghost people?  Do you think ghosting is more likely to happen with

romantic interests / partners or with friends?

Conclusion of the interview

 Is there anything else that you would like to add?

 Are there other aspects of ghosting that you would like to talk about?  Thank you for your participation!

Appendix 2: Code list

ATLAS.ti Report Ghosting Code groups

Report created by Hanna Melcher on 22. Jan 2019

Cultural Difference

Members:

○ English people ghost because they fail to give an answer right away ○ English people tend to sit on a message instead of replying straight away

Gender Differences

Members:

○ ghosting depends more on personality than gender ○ men and women have different reasons for ghosting ○ men ghost more than women ○ women and men ghost the same amount ○ women ghost more than men ○ women take ghosting more seriously than men

Motivations

Members:

○ acquaintances ○ affinity ○ avoidance ○ avoidance of ghostee's reaction ○ avoiding a required action ○ avoiding the person ○ avoiding the situation ○ bad / fading relationship ○ being very busy ○ close relationships deserve conversation ○ conflict / conversation avoidance ○ did not see benefit of having a conversation ○ did not see benefit of relationship ○ did not want to hurt ghostee's feelings ○ financial reasons ○ friends ○ ghostee at fault for getting ghosted ○ ghostee is not depending on me ○ ghosting a result of prioritizing ○ ghosting can save time ○ ghosting depends on strength of relationship ○ ghosting is a way to get the message across ○ ghosting is the easy way out ○ ghosting was the best solution ○ ghosts when message is too far in the past to reply ○ having other more promising options ○ if has nothing to give ○ it just happened ○ not caring ○ online communication is not real communication ○ people don't want to make the effort to explain on dating apps ○ reasonated that ghosted for their both wellbeing ○ reasons for ghosting ○ relationship dissolution ○ since they have the possibility to ghost people use it ○ strangers ○ would ghost friends / partner if they did something awful ○ you ghost people when something bad happens

Perceived Motivations

Members:

○ ghoster did not want to share information ○ ghoster didn't want to face the argument ○ ghoster doesn't care about me ○ ghoster found someone else ○ ghoster may have felt offended ○ ghoster saw no point in relationship ○ ghoster was avoiding uncomfortable conversation ○ thinks ghoster wanted a clear cut from the relationship

Social Media Platform

Members:

○ ghosting is frequent on dating apps ○ ghosting on facebook ○ ghosting on instagram ○ ghosting on linkedin ○ ghosting on MSN ○ ghosting on telegram ○ ghosting on tinder ○ ghosting on whatsapp ○ ghosting via text message

Sporadic Ghosting

Members:

○ assumed little or no impact ○ can't think of an immediate answer ○ eventually replies to everyone but might take a long time ○ ghosting friends sporadically is ok because you still have a relationship ○ ghosts unintentionally ○ having other things to do ○ real ghosting is rare ○ serial ghoster ○ sporadic ghosting ○ would rather not talk for a while but then have meaningful real life conversation