Master Thesis, 26 June 2019
TINDER, A TRUE MATCHMAKER: AN
INVESTIGATION INTO MILLENNIALS’
INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
New Media and Digital Culture Master Ó https://www.bustle.com
Table of Content
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ... 5
I-INTRODUCTION ... 6
1.1EVOLUTION OF THE MEETING PLACE ... 6
1.2DEVELOPMENT AND SPREAD OF DATING APPS ... 6
1.2.1 Undeniable Success with Millennials ... 7
1.2.2 Technology Modifies Relationships’ Construction ... 7
1.3PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SUB QUESTIONS ... 8
1.4WHY TINDER?WHY MILLENNIALS? ... 8
1.5METHOD ... 9
1.5.1 Another method ... 9
1.6APPROACH ... 10
1.7FINDING RESPONDENTS ... 10
1.8AGLIMPSE ON RESULTS ANALYSIS ... 10
1.9WHAT IS TINDER? ... 11
1.9.1 Creating a Profile on Tinder ... 11
1.9.2 The Operation of Tinder ... 11
1.9.3 The Interface of Tinder ... 12
1.10OUTLINE ... 12
II-LITERATTURE REVIEW ... 13
2.1TINDER’S FEATURES ... 13
2.1.1 Log In Through Facebook ... 13
2.1.2 Super Like ... 13
2.1.3 A Straightforward Interface ... 14
2.1.4 A Simplified Online Dating Experience ... 14
2.2THE AFFORDANCES OF TINDER ... 15
2.2.1 What is an Affordance? ... 15
2.2.2 The Affordances of Tinder ... 15
2.3THE CRITICS OF TINDER ... 16
2.3.1 Popularization of the Hookup Culture ... 16
2.3.2 The Addictive Aspect of Tinder ... 17
2.4THE RECIPE FOR SUCCESS ... 19
2.5RESULTS OF PREVIOUS STUDIES ... 20
2.5.1 Motivations for using Tinder ... 20
2.5.2 Tinder and Millennials ... 21
2.5.3 Sexuality and Technology ... 21
2.5.5 Impression management ... 24
2.6THE KNOWLEDGE GAP ... 25
III-METHODOLOGY ... 27
3.1WHAT IS AN INTERVIEW? ... 27
3.1.1 Benefits and Limitations of the Interview ... 27
3.2POSSIBLE OTHER METHODS TO COLLECT DATA ... 28
3.3QUALITATIVE APPROACH ... 29
3.4SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS ... 30
3.5CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEWS ... 30
3.5.1 Prior to the Interviews: Organization ... 30
3.5.2 Step by Step ... 31
3.5.3 After the Interview: Results Analysis ... 31
3.5.3.1 Content Analysis ... 32
3.5.3.2 Benefits and Limitations of Content Analysis ... 32
3.5.3.3 Another Analytical Method ... 33
3.6IMPLEMENTING THE ANALYSIS METHOD ... 34
IV-CASE STUDY ... 36
4.1WHY ONLINE DATING? ... 36
4.2TINDER:PROS AND CONS ... 37
4.3TIME MANAGEMENT ... 38
4.4MAIN MOTIVATIONS ... 39
4.4.1 Casual Relation ... 39
4.4.2 Group Effect ... 39
4.4.3 Use for Improvement ... 40
4.4.3.1 Improving Sexual Relation ... 40
4.4.3.2 Improving Self-Confidence ... 40
4.4.3.3 Going Out of the Comfort Zone ... 40
4.4.4 Other Motivations ... 40
4.5THE EVALUATION MOMENT ... 41
4.6TINDER PRACTICES ... 43
4.6.1 Male Users and Female Users: Different Practices ... 43
4.6.2 Common Practices ... 45
4.7EXPERIENCING TINDER ... 46
4.7.1 Dating on Tinder ... 46
4.7.2 Tinder Date vs Regular Date ... 47
4.7.3 Bad Experiences ... 49
4.8CHANGES IN RELATIONSHIP CONSTRUCTION ... 50
4.8.1 Tinder, Just a Tool ... 50
4.8.3 Casualness ... 51
4.8.4 Interchangeability: Plenty of Fish in the Sea ... 51
4.8.5 New Ways of Dating ... 51
4.9MAJOR FINDINGS ... 52
4.10DISCUSSION ... 54
V-CONCLUSION ... 60
SOURCES ... 63
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Melis Bas, Lecturer of New Media and Digital Culture at the
University of Amsterdam, who helped and supported me through the writing of this Master thesis by providing me with regular and consistent feedback. I would also like to thank the respondents who took the time to participate in this research.
Key words: Dating App, Tinder, Millennials, Relationships, Experiences, Practices
I-INTRODUCTION
1.1 Evolution of the Meeting Place
Between 1945 and 1974, the ball was the first meeting place for individuals. Up to 25%
of couples met there in the sixties (Réju). Today, new meeting places exist. As smartphones are nowadays widely used, new practices have come along. Among these new practices, came the
possibility to meet someone via dating apps1. Indeed, if smartphones are of great help on a daily
basis to find places to go, to follow the news or to buy items online, they now can help the user find love too. Or at least this is the promise of many dating apps whose mantra is that if love is just around the corner, tracking it by geolocation certainly multiply our chances of finding it (Levesque). While ‘classic’ meeting practices such as the work place or through a mutual friend are still prevalent, meeting someone via an app is becoming more common. In fact, a study has shown that since the late 90’s, the number of meetings that take place through dating apps has exploded (Moreira). As Enrique Moreira wrote in Les Echos, the latest statistics on the subject revealed that more than 20% of heterosexual couples reported having met online. A statistic that is even higher among same sex couples since 70% of these couples would have met online (Moreira). Only meetings through a common friend (28%) or in restaurants or bars (24%) surpass those online for heterosexual couples (Moreira). One can then note that there is a drastic change in the way people meet.
1.2 Development and Spread of Dating Apps
From Tinder to Grindr, there is an application for everyone. Actually, there are more
than 2000 dating apps available on the market (Litaud). As the society evolves, mentalities are changing, and these practices which may have been seen as taboo a few years back, are now becoming common and more natural. Digital Trends journalist, Mark Jansen points out: “The stigma toward dating apps is fading, and these apps are quickly becoming the normal way to meet and connect with other single people” (Jansen). In France, 20% of single people use dating apps (Litaud). This shows how wide the broadcast of dating apps is.
1.2.1 Undeniable Success with Millennials
The success of dating apps appears to be indisputable, especially for the Generation Y.
In fact, according to a survey conducted in 2015 by the Pew Research Center, the use by young adults of online dating sites or mobile apps has nearly tripled since 2013 (Anderson and Smith). Indeed, in 2013, 10% of the 18-24 years old had already used at least once, an online dating site and, or a mobile dating app. In 2015, they were 27% (Anderson and Smith). Also called the ‘digital natives’, people born between 1980 and 2000 are part of the Generation Y. According to community manager Géraldine Gomaere, who is specialized in digital marketing and digital transformation, “they are the first generation to have grown up with computer screens, video games and Internet” (Gomaere). Gomaere wrote a comparison between the generations X, Y and Z, where she defines and sets out the main characteristics of each generation. According to her, people who belong to the Generation Y are, in general, open minded, autonomous with a strong capacity of adaptability and they are comfortable with new technologies (Gomaere). Generation Y is also described as highly materialistic: “they are hyper consumer and open to the outside world thanks to new information technologies” (Gomaere). In another article, journalist Clémence Boyer lists the numerous cliché that harm the image of millennials. Indeed, they are often described as lazy, self-centered, narcissist, unfocused and impatient with no sense of effort compared to the generation of their parents (Boyer). Boyer’s article is based on the work of Simon Sinek, author of The Millennial Question, who explains that the millennials are accustomed to immediacy: “You want to buy something? Go on Amazon, it arrives the next day. You want to watch a TV show? Binge. You want to go on a date? Swipe right.” (Boyer). Tinder offers this instantaneity that is much sought by millennials (nlto.fr). In fact, the Generation Y has grown up in a world of instant gratification where the engagement with social media and smartphone is constant. In some cases, it even creates an addiction (Boyer).
1.2.2 Technology Modifies Relationships’ Construction
According to video game specialist David Knox, technology occupies an increasingly
important place in our everyday lives (Knox): “It is now an uncontested fact that technology is pervasive throughout our lives” (huffpost.com). We use it for many things and it has an impact on our relationships with others: “It has undoubtedly changed the way in which we interact with other people” (Knox). These observations make Knox curious about questions such as: “Are we are forgetting how to have a real conversation, interact properly, even communicate? Are we losing the courage to bare our vulnerability – a key component to developing meaningful,
human connections?”. If technology impacts one’s relationships, dating apps are a piece of this puzzle and they are often involved in the process as well.
Indeed, the success of dating apps has created a new societal phenomenon that cannot
be denied: “It has become a huge thing in recent years” (Knox). According to Knox, lots of people find it “in busy modern life, the best way to meet the ‘right’ people and socialize” (Knox). But while it is a new and modern way to connect to other people, is it free of consequences in terms of relationships’ construction? Anthropologist Helen Fisher gave a first answer by saying in a televised debate on dating applications that “technology is changing the way we are courting” (Polverini). An idea confirmed by the Huffington Post: “Technology has put our relationships in beta, redefining how we communicate our desires and trust one another” (huffpost.com). These statements prove that technology through online dating and other social platforms has changed the way individuals shape relationships. That is why it is interesting to query this new and little studied phenomenon, and to evaluate the changes dating apps have brought.
1.3 Problem Statement and Sub Questions
One can wonder to what extent has Tinder changed interpersonal relationships among millennials? This question is the main research question that this Master thesis
investigates.
However, in order to answer such a question, this thesis also attempts to answer the
following questions: What is Tinder and how does it work? How was Tinder contextualized
by previous research? What is the best method to carry out this research? What are the practices of millennials on the app? What has changed in the dating experience of millennials since Tinder emerged?
1.4 Why Tinder? Why Millennials?
In order to bring an answer to this research question, this thesis looks at the experiences
of Tinder users under 30 years old through conducting semi-structured open-ended interviews. The focus is made on Tinder because of its popularity among millennials – “Millions of men and women, mostly millennials, have flocked to the Tinderverse” (Diedrich) –, and also because this app has trivialized and opened the dating app market (numerama.com). Indeed, this dating app is ranked among the most popular ones and occupies the first place in many rankings. For instance, the online magazine Digital Trends has ranked Tinder as the top one dating app for
2019 (Jansen). On its website, Tinder released figures showing that the dating app had already made more than 20 billion matches possible and that among its more than 50 million active users, 26 million matches were taking place each day (Bowles). These numbers show the great popularity of Tinder. If we compare them with the results of other dating apps, it is clear that Tinder dominates the millennial dating market. For instance, the dating app Happn counts only 6.5 million active members and OkCupid, 5 million (datingsitesreviews.com) that is to say 10 times less than Tinder. In addition, “Tinder is not only one of the most popular dating apps, it is one of the most popular apps of any kind” (Gertz 125). Furthermore, if we take into account the limitations of a Master thesis, it is more fruitful for analysis to focus on a single application, just as it makes sense to focus on a specific category of people. As I am part of Generation Y, it is more reasonable to talk about people under 30 years old than another group of people. In addition, as a 21 years old student, the growing popularity of dating apps is noticeable among my peers. Moreover, often qualified aptly as the leader of mobile dating, Tinder has a marketing strategy that specifically aims for millennials (Louis). This last element constitutes another good reason to focus this thesis on this age group with this specific application.
1.5 Method
To conduct this research and achieve the goal of understanding the change in
interpersonal relationships of the Tinder user, an analysis of the user’s experiences and practices on Tinder has been conducted. This analysis is based on data collection. These data were gathered through the results of several interviews. Collecting data via interview presents several benefits. First of all, in the field of qualitative studies, individual interview is the most used method for its simplicity of implementation (Fabien). The interview method allows not only to choose the questions asked but also their format according to the type of interview one decides to conduct (structured, structured, not structured). In this research, I opted for the semi-structured interview format. Based on a main theme, the semi-semi-structured interview allows the ‘discussion’ to evolve freely and spontaneously using open-ended questions instead of a very straightforward question and answer format (Fabien). In the methodology chapter, the reasons for this choice are discussed in more detail, as well as all the advantages that demonstrate that the individual interview is the best option to carry out this investigation.
1.5.1 Another method
Other forms of inquiry could have been chosen to conduct this research. For instance, a
perception of the app. As millennials are very active on social media – 63% of them use social media daily (tns-sofres.com) –, the survey could have been shared on Facebook to reach potential respondents. However, for a survey analysis to be successful, one has to gather a very large number of participants which can be complicated in the context of a Master thesis. Moreover, this method does not allow an in depth analysis as an interview does which will be needed since the object of this thesis is to understand user experience. A section to this point as well as the observation method that is used are explained further in the methodology chapter.
1.6 Approach
Having a qualitative approach results in a description and in an analysis of Tinder users’
experience from the point of view of those being interrogated. This approach allows to establish a captivating insight into millennials’ practices on Tinder and elaborate on how the app modifies relationships’ construction between them. Indeed, “qualitative research is useful to deepen the understanding of the human experience” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). In the methodology chapter, this insight is further developed by minutely explaining what exactly a qualitative approach is and why it is a better approach to have than a quantitative one for this particular research.
1.7 Finding Respondents
Now that the method adapted to conduct this research is spelled out, I explain how I
looked for interviewees before briefly lighten how I analyzed the results of the interviews. Firstly, being a student at the University of Amsterdam gives me a wide range of possibilities and groups of people to contact. In addition to that, most of my classmates, friends and colleagues fall within the age category I want to query. Millennials are very active on dating apps as mentioned earlier. In fact, according to the magazine Vice, 70% of Tinder users are aged between 18 and 24 years old (Motherboard Staff). My close circle is no exception to this rule. Therefore, it was logical to ask them if they wanted to participate in this study.
1.8 A Glimpse on Results Analysis
To analyze the results of the interviews, I followed several steps. First of all, in addition
to recording the conversations, I took notes during the interviews. After each interview, I wrote a short report to summarize what has been said. To help myself doing so, I listened to the records and used my notes. Subsequently to this first step and once all the interviews had been done, I
created a spreadsheet to shed light on the most important themes addressed by the respondents. This not only helped me to visualize the data I collected, but also to see what were the key points I needed to focus on. With this information in hand, I was able to complete the analysis. The method of analysis is explained in the methodology chapter. Needless to say that I also compared the answers of the different respondents to see what were the divergences and the similarities in their experiences. Once the main ‘trends’ were identified, I was capable to draw general conclusions about the experiences of Generation Y on Tinder. But before getting to the heart of the subject, let us first focus on what is Tinder and how does it work?
1.9 What is Tinder?
Founded in 2012 by Whitney Wolfe, this platform is easily accessible as it is available
on IOS and Android (numerama.com) in almost 200 countries, from France to Burundi (Purvis). It can also be used on the Internet at tinder.com.
1.9.1 Creating a Profile on Tinder
To enter the application and create a profile, the user needed to log in via his or her
Facebook account. Indeed, all the basic information about users such as the name, the age or the job/study used to come from Mark Zuckerberg’s social network. However, it is now also possible to log in on Tinder via phone number since 2018 (lacse.fr). One can then enter his or her information (name, birth date, sex, valid email address, photos) by hand. The dating app company realized that by allowing users to sign in only through Facebook, it was depriving itself of certain customers: those who do not have a Facebook account. This aspect is further elaborated on in the literature review chapter.
1.9.2 The Operation of Tinder
Once the user profile has been set and the preferences determined (male or female, age,
distance), the ‘swiping process’ can begin. Tinder uses geographical proximity and reciprocal attraction between users (Ward). Based on the geographical position of the user, diverse profiles that are located in the same area are going to be presented to him or her. The application, just like its interface, is very intuitive and simple to use: the user has to swipe right if he or she likes a profile, left if he or she does not (Zap et al.). If two users liked each other’s profile, it is a match. Only then can they start talking to each other via the Tinder chat, in order to perhaps plan a date (Zap et al.).
1.9.3 The Interface of Tinder
If we compare Tinder to traditional dating sites such as Meetic or OkCupid, the dating
app looks much more innovative and modern than these websites and their app versions (Zap et al.). One of the reasons behind this is that unlike these dating sites, Tinder was first designed for mobile (Zap et al.). Ph.D. student Leah E. LeFebvre investigates adaptations and modifications in romantic relationship initiations and dissolution practices through new technologies such as ‘ghosting’ on Tinder. She points out that the popularity of Tinder is further supported by the “app’s simplistic card-playing user-friendly interface design” (LeFebvre). Through its interface, Tinder encourages users to regularly spend time on the app. This last point regarding the Tinder interface is further highlighted in the literature review chapter, as well as Tinder’s critics and its potential addictive aspect. Now that I have promptly situated my research topic in a broader context and gave explanations regarding the operation of Tinder, I begin the literature review which develops these two aspects, but first I present the outline of this Master thesis.
1.10 Outline
After the introduction, this thesis draws up in a second chapter an inventory of the
subject by providing a literature review which explains in detail how Tinder works and summarizes the research that have already been done on this subject. A third chapter is dedicated to the methodology. In this chapter I explain my method: how I collected data, how I analyzed these data and what approach I used. In the fourth chapter, the purpose is to understand the change in interpersonal relationships of the Tinder user through an analysis of his or her experience and practices on the app. This chapter is the case study and presents the results of this research. Finally, a fifth chapter comes to conclude this study, states the major findings that have been made, leaves room for discussion, and opens possibilities for further research.
II-LITERATTURE REVIEW
As mentioned earlier, several studies have previously been conducted on Tinder. In
order to give an overview of the current knowledge and substantive findings that have formerly been found, this chapter is devoted to the literature review. This literature review provides the reader with a much needed context. Indeed, after briefly explaining what Tinder is in the introduction, I explain in this chapter how it works in more detail. This literature review situates the current research within the body of relevant literature.
2.1 Tinder’s Features
2.1.1 Log In Through Facebook
The connection via Facebook was presenting several benefits for Tinder. First of all, it
was a way for the company to ensure its clients of the quality of the profiles presented on the application (lacse.fr). Indeed, with the regulation work done by Facebook, many fake profiles are quickly eliminated from the social media platform. In addition, photos on Facebook are subject to some censorship. As the profile photos on Tinder were directly imported from the user’s Facebook photos, the risk of having ‘incorrect’ photos on the app was lower (lacse.fr). One could say that the connection via Facebook was acting as a regulator for the dating app and that it was a way to select reliable and serious users. Still, the risk of being catfished by a fake profile has always existed on Tinder and remains on the app and online in general. Allowing users to log in on the app with a phone number is a small revolution for Tinder (lacse.fr). Not only does this change allows Tinder to target another category of users that may not have a Facebook account, but it also secures and strengthen even more its position as number one of mobile dating (lacse.fr). On the user side, this change allows more privacy. Indeed, when they connect via Facebook, the social media platform receives a bunch of information about users and their Tinder account (lacse.fr). In addition, Tinder users can see whether or not they have common Facebook friends with other users. Perhaps it is not something that all users are willing to share publicly on the dating app. On the other hand, if not logged in via Facebook, the last 100 pages one liked on Facebook, that is to say potential common interests, become invisible and the conversation can be more difficult to start (swipehelper.com).
2.1.2 Super Like
Among recent features, there is also the possibility since 2015 to send a ‘super like’
simply swiping up (newsmonkey.be). It allows the user to notify another user that his or her profile stands out (tinder.com). The person to whom a user has sent a ‘super like’ will be informed of it once the profile of the user in question is displayed on their screen (newsmonkey.be). Indeed, profiles that have sent a ‘super like’ will be highlighted in blue and will display a blue star (newsmonkey.be). The user who has received a ‘super like’ can then choose to like, dislike or ‘super like’ the profile in return. Newsmonkey, which defines itself as the Generation Y media, describes the ‘super like’ feature as follows: “The ‘super like’ means that you over like the person and clearly send the signal that you fell in love with his profile” (newsmonkey.be). According to the dating app company itself, by sending a ‘super like’ one is three times more likely to match with the profile in question. Additionally, conversations that start with a ‘super like’ are 70% longer (newsmonkey.be). Nevertheless, it is important to note that the app allows users to send only one ‘super like’ a day, unless they have subscribed to one
of the two paid versions of Tinder: Tinder Plus or Tinder Gold (newsmonkey.be).
2.1.3 A Straightforward Interface
On top of its innovative features, Tinder presents a simple and easy-to-use interface.
Indeed, the authors of a post about online dating on Masters of Media Blog wrote: “Tinder’s interface is very straightforward and presents only basic information”. As an example, users can write on their profile a biography of 500 words maximum and they can upload up to 9 profile photos (Zap et al.). Since recently, “Tinder’s initial platform interface has expanded as it is now possible for one to link his or her profile to Instagram and Spotify” (Zap et al.). If one links his or her profile, other users can then see his or her latest posts on the photo social media and his or her favorite artists and favorite music tracks on Spotify.
2.1.4 A Simplified Online Dating Experience
Everything is made easier in order to facilitate the experience of the user (Zap et al.).
For instance, if logged in via Facebook, the user is connected to other people via suggestions based on their shared interests and common friends determined through the blue F network (Zap et al.). As mentioned earlier, Tinder also relies on geographic location and proximity between its users as “the app uses the latest location data stored in the user's smartphone” (Zap et al.). Thereby, the more the dating app is used, the more the experience of the user is improved (Zap et al.). In Masters of Media’s blog post, the authors argue that “swipe, match, talk and repeat” is the right formula for summarizing what the dating app expects from its users (Zap et al.). Indeed, at first glance, this is what the design of the app allows and affords.
2.2 The Affordances of Tinder
2.2.1 What is an Affordance?
Social psychologist and technology theorist Jenny L. Davis and sociology instructor
James B. Chouinard define an affordance as the set of functions and constraints that an object provides for (241). The mechanisms of affordance as artifacts take place through interconnected circumstances such as the dexterity, the perception, or the cultural and institutional legitimacy. The circumstances and the mechanisms form together a structurally situated and active model that addresses how artifacts afford, for whom and under what circumstances (241). In their attempt to theorize affordances, Davis and Chouinard came up with several types of affordances ranging from request to refuse. Among these different types of affordances, one can find the affordance that encourages certain practices. This specific affordance will be my main focus. This form of affordance is defined by the two authors as follows: “Artifacts encourage when they foster, breed, and nourish some line of action, while stifling, suppressing, and dissuading others” (243). Davis and Chouinard illustrate their idea through the example of a large dinner plate that, by its size, encourages people to consume large quantities of food, while a smaller plate encourages people to better control their portion (243).
2.2.2 The Affordances of Tinder
By applying the analysis of Davis and Chouinard on the Tinder object, one could argue
that Tinder’s swipe interface encourages users to examine a lot of different profiles and gives them the opportunity to simultaneously pursue numerous relationship (Zap et al.). If we hark back to the large plate metaphor, Tinder and the countless options it offers its users, encourage them to ‘eat more’ by giving them the possibility to pursue several relationships. Whether as if the amount of visible profiles on the app was limited to a lower number, maybe one would be less tempted to have so many ‘conquests’. The plate would be smaller. For Davis and Chouinard, ““Like” and “Share” buttons on Facebook encourage network interaction, generating easy and regular network connections” (243). On Tinder, one can say that the swipe interface and the ‘super like’ button are also elements that encourage interaction between users. Using Facebook as an example of affordance that encourages, Davis and Chouinard wrote: “For those who wish to socially engage, the propensity to do so is encouraged on these platforms; in contrast, those who wish to glance at the platforms in passing, are instead encouraged to stay awhile” (243). This quotation is relevant to Tinder as well.
2.3 The Critics of Tinder
This propensity proposed by Tinder, to pursue simultaneously many relationship
initiations may be one of the reasons why the app is often described as a platform for hookups. (Jo Sales). After being criticized and accused of killing romance by the Vanity Fair, the community manager of Tinder ensured on Twitter that “many users are looking for meaningful relationships” (Ballet). Indeed, Tinder has been severely criticized in a Vanity Fair article that talks of the dating app as the “the dawn of the dating apocalypse” (Jo Sales).
2.3.1 Popularization of the Hookup Culture
Nancy Jo Sales describes the app as a platform that popularizes hookup culture and
compares it to an online food delivery service, except that the user can order a person: “The comparison to online shopping seems an apt one. Dating apps are the free-market economy come to sex” (Jo Sales). By interviewing students who use Tinder, she highlights that it is not rare nor surprising to receive very straightforward messages on the app such as “Wanna fuck?” or “Come over and sit on my face” (Jo Sales). John, a 26 years old interviewee explains in this article that Tinder has made sex become easy: “I’ve gotten numbers on Tinder just by sending emojis, without actually having a conversation – having a conversation via emojis” (Jo Sales). Another interviewee added: “You can meet somebody and fuck them in 20 minutes” (Jo Sales). These quotes suggest that Tinder facilitates hookups. There is an extreme casualness of sex and an abundance of options says Jo Sales deploring that this leads to leave many women feeling devalued and downgraded. Indeed, some say that women on Tinder struggle to find men who are willing to commit seriously and treat them as a priority (Jo Sales). According to the journalist, commitment is not the biggest priority of men using Tinder: “When asked if they have been arranging dates on the apps they have been swiping at, all say not one date, but two or three” (Jo Sales). In fact, by reading the words transcribed by Jo Sales, it is clear that the men she interviewed do not seek a serious relationship on the app: “You cannot be stuck in one lane… There is always something better. If you had a reservation somewhere and then a table at Per Se opened up, you would want to go there” (Jo Sales). Here, the fact that this interviewee compares lanes and restaurant tables with women shows the respect he has for them. This also depicts the lack of respect that some men have for women on those platforms but also in general (Croquet and Signoret). He goes on by saying that on these apps “you are always sort of prowling. You could talk to two or three girls at a bar and pick the best one, or you can swipe a couple hundred people a day. It is setting up two or three Tinder dates a week and, chances are, sleeping with all of them, so you could rack up 100 girls you have slept with in a year” (Jo
Sales). The claims of this man can be referred to an idea of interchangeability of women, as if they could be replaced and exchanged on command (Jo Sales). But if men tend to turn towards short term dating, Jo Sales explains that this may also be the case for some young women who prefer to focus on their studies or career rather than to seriously commit to someone (Jo Sales). Jason, another 26 years old Tinder user interviewed for this article, says about the app that “it is instant gratification and it is really addicting” (Jo Sales). In the next section, this aspect is elaborated.
2.3.2 The Addictive Aspect of Tinder
Indeed, on top of its inventive interface, Tinder has a really addictive aspect. Social
psychologist, Jeanette Purvis uses the expression “evilly satisfying” to describe the effect Tinder can have. Indeed, users are given the possibility to gauge other user’s attractiveness after just a one second glance (Purvis). Not only can this process become addictive, but it also shows at what point physical appearance matters on the app: “Matches are made using sparse criteria: Looks, availability and location” (Purvis). Just like Davis and Chouinard whom I mentioned earlier, Purvis talks of an ‘encouragement’ affordance. She explains that the interface of the application is constructed in a way that encourages rapid swiping. Indeed, Tinder’s interface ensures its own success with the ergonomics of the ‘swipe’ which is a design that encourages and promotes interaction (Zap et al.). In a very detailed article, Anne-Sophie Bertier explains how Tinder built its explosive growth. She argues that while the interface of the app can provide the user with a fun experience and a new form of casual flirting, it can also become addictive in some cases. As Purvis mentioned in her report, a study on the brain of drug addicts has shown that what release the most feel-good neurotransmitter dopamine is the expectations of the drug, not the actual drug itself. On Tinder, it is the expectation of the next reward, the next match. Therefore, “serial swiping can start to look and feel a lot like addiction” (Purvis). The story of Kathryn Kattalia illustrates well this last point.
After deleting all dating apps from her phone, Kattalia wrote an article to share her
experience and explain how she overcame her addiction. She tells the reader about her story with Tinder and how she stopped using dating apps. In her article, she wrote: “I was emotionally ready to rid myself of a relationship I feared had turned toxic” (Kattalia). The word ‘toxic’ emphasizes how Tinder and other dating apps can become harmful for some users. Even though dating apps had been the source of pleasant dates for Kattalia, it was also the source of “unbridled rage” (Kattalia). She also mentions the mood swings that were coming along while swiping. The process of finding love on an online space comes with a lot of frustration says
Kattalia in her article. She explains that some people even encounter “dating app burnout” (Kattalia). While Kattalia’s experience highlights the potential of Tinder becoming addictive, what is interesting is that, the design of the app was in a way, developed to turn into an addiction.
Indeed, Tinder uses a psychological method developed originally around gambling and
money bets. This technique is known as the ‘variable rewards’ (Zap et al.). Purvis argues that “Tinder uses a variable ratio reward schedule”, the same reward system as in video games and slot machines (Purvis). This variable psychologically conditions the user and implies that rewards increase as he or she spends more time on the platform (Zap et al.). On Tinder, as the matches happen in random order, this means that the user will tend to swipe constantly to maximize his or her chances to get a new match (Bertier). What if one stops swiping? What if the next swipe is the one and only love of the user’s life and he or she is missing it out? Maybe it is the fate of millennials to find love online and if the user logs off, he or she may spoil his or her chance of ever finding it. According to Kattalia, this is what one tells himself or herself as a user. Even though she admits that she also increasingly used dating apps as a way to pass time rather than to actually find people with whom she truly shares common things. And if Tinder is used as a pass time it may be because of its gamification.
Gamification consists in transposing game mechanisms and game design elements in
non-game services and applications (Rocha). It aims to develop and improve user experience and user engagement (Rocha). For Polyanna Rocha, who wrote her Master thesis on the gamification of love, Tinder has a design inspired by games and is popular “not only because it introduced a new style of dating application, but also because game mechanics are incorporated” (Rocha). Indeed, one can say that the dating app presents a very engaging
interface which can affect the behavior of users.The pleasure users have while swiping may
not become the same enjoyable experience in real life (Purvis). For Business Psychology Professor Tomas Chamorror-Premuzic, the action of ‘tindering’ is then on the same level of importance than the potential date itself (Chamorror-Premuzic). The playful side of Tinder’s interface coupled with the user’s fear of “missing out on the coveted ‘prize’” push the user to come back on the app regularly, thus guaranteeing its long-term success (Zap et al.). Journalist Issie Lapowsky wrote in Wired that “it is not uncool to scroll through Tinder with friends, and your non-single friends are all dying to ‘play’ for you”. The fact that she used the term ‘play’ really depicts how Tinder can look just like a game. In another Wired article, online culture specialist Louise Matsakis explains how satisfying Tinder can be. In doing so, she mentions
Jessica James, a lecturer at Texas State University, who has studied user behavior on dating apps, and who said: “A lot of the gratification itself is from just using the app and playing with it” (Matsakis). Indeed, as Meghna Pant explained, the increasing use of Tinder can be seen as a form of escapism. She argues that “in this fantasy world we have become cavemen, where every ‘match’ becomes a hunt that triggers a transitory feeling of victory” (Pant). According to her, this is the reason behind the fact that more than the half of Tinder matches never end up in a message conversation. She continues by saying that “we enjoy the hunt, but not the cutting, slicing and cooking that is required after the hunt is over” (Pant). Pant’s metaphor illustrates well the phenomenon. If Tinder can look like a game, it is often taken as so by users (Ward). Therefore, one can say that it is logical that they only seek immediate pleasure by ‘playing’ and do not invest more in it by taking matches to the next step: conversations. The interface reinforce this process.
2.4 The Recipe for Success
The efficiency of Tinder’s interface has also been proven by the fact that many other
applications copied and reproduced its playful strategy and its swipe navigation (Zap et al.). It is for instance, the case for Jobr, SomHome or Pitcher (Zap et al.). Other components are making Tinder special. Here follows a list of these components: “Users do not need to create an extensive profile as they would have on classical dating sites, the large number of profiles visible in a short amount of time, the low risk of frontal rejection since two people can only come into contact in the case of mutual approval, the balanced presence of men and women on the service and the possibility of cutting off a conversation by deleting a match” (Zap et al.). However, despite its many benefits, it should be noted that Tinder decided in 2015 to limit the amount of daily right swipes to around 100 swipes per users for those who did not purchase the Tinder premium service (Purvis).
As mentioned before, there are two premium services to which users can subscribe
directly on the app: Tinder Plus and Tinder Gold. These two subscriptions offer premium features for users. For instance, one can swipe to the right as much as he or she wants to, send up to five ‘super likes’ a day, see profiles that are not in his or her geographic location, cancel an “accidental swipe” by going back on the last swipe, benefit of one monthly free boost to be the top profile of a specific location for half an hour or being deprived of advertisements while swiping (tinder.com). Tinder Gold offers the same features as Tinder Plus with one extra option: the possibility for users to see who liked their profile. This feature called ‘Likes You’ is
qualified by Tinder itself as a “personal concierge service” (tinder.com). Without paying one of these tow subscriptions $14,99 a month, it is still possible for users to occasionally buy additional features that are not available on the free version of Tinder such as extra ‘super likes’.
2.5 Results of Previous Studies
Now that certain important aspects of Tinder have been clarified and some of its features
explained in more detail, I present the results of existing researches.
2.5.1 Motivations for using Tinder
In 2016, Sindy R. Sumter, Loes Ligtenberg both from the University of Amsterdam and
Laura Vandenbosch from the University of Leuven conducted a research on the motivations behind the use of Tinder (Motherboard Staff). They interrogated Dutch people aged between 18 and 30 years old. To do so they used an online survey to collect data about their practices on Tinder. 266 person took part in their study by participating in the survey. Out of these 266 person 61.3% had used Tinder at least once (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch) meaning that 163 people were part of the analytical sample for this study.
The analysis of this sample revealed a hierarchical order among the six main
motivations to use Tinder which are according to this study, love, casual sex, ease of communication, self-worth validation, thrill of excitement, and trendiness. In fact, Love me
Tinder: Untangling emerging adults' motivations for using the dating application Tinder was
the first study to suggest that Tinder goes beyond meaningless sex (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch). Indeed, the results have shown that casual sex is not, as some would say, the first motivation for questioned users to go on the app. In contrast to what have been previously proposed by other researches (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch) this study showed that casual sex is not a stronger motivation to use the app than love: “Our study suggests that Tinder goes beyond the hookup culture. […] Tinder should not be seen as merely a fun, hookup app without any strings attached, but as a multifunctional tool that satisfies various needs among emerging adults” (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch).
Conducted in 2016, this research is according to Vice, the very first study on motivations
to use Tinder. Nevertheless, as pointed out by Vice, given the small size of the sample and its homogeneity, it is difficult to generalize these observations to all 18-30 years olds (Motherboard Staff).
2.5.2 Tinder and Millennials
Another study, conducted this time on a bigger sample (3852 millennial college
students), showed that 70,8% of those who regularly use Tinder never went on a ‘Tinder date’ to meet another user (Motherboard Staff). Only 29,2% of the sample did (Brown). Therefore, a vast majority of Tinder users are satisfied by just swiping and chatting with their matches, probably “to test the subtleties of their seduction power” (Motherboard Staff). This fact can be related to the gratification which I already mentioned earlier, generated only by using and playing with the app and not necessarily by taking the process to the next step with a date in real life.
This study conducted by Lendedu, a company that helps consumers learn about and
compare financial products, indicates that the main motivations millennials have for using Tinder are “improving self-confidence / procrastination” (44,44%) and “other reasons” (29,16%) (Brown). Once again, the quest for sex which can be seen as an obvious motivation in some people’s minds is far from being the main reason for using Tinder. Indeed, in this study only 22,22% of respondents said they were “looking for a hookup” (Brown). However, this study also underlines the fact that more users are on Tinder to find a hookup rather than a serious relationship with only 4,16% of respondents “looking for a serious relationship commitment” (Brown). On this point, the Lendedu’s study differs from that of Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch who argue that love is a more important motivation than sex: “Tinder is more often used to find a steady relationship rather than merely sexual encounters (Love > Casual Sex)” (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch).
2.5.3 Sexuality and Technology
In 2018, a study was published by the Kinsey Institute, a research organization for
human sexuality and relationships, in partnership with Clue, a female health app (Motherboard Staff). Although this research does not focus on Tinder exclusively, it is still relevant to mention it in this Master thesis as it questions the role of technology to find a date, learn about sex or improve relationships. In order to better understand the link between sexuality and the use of new technologies, researchers questioned through an online survey 140 000 persons of 18 years old or more from 198 countries (Kinsey Institute and Clue).
The results that came out are similar to those found in previous studies. Of all
respondents 30% use dating apps. Among dating apps users, only 10%, all nationalities combined, use these apps to find a one-night stand. 15% of respondents use them to find a partner (Kinsey Institute and Clue). Among Americans dating app users, 18% were looking for
a long term relationship and 9% for regular sex with no romantic connection (Kinsey Institute and Clue). In this study sex is again not the most important reason that conduct people to use dating apps.
Besides that, it is also important to note that, as Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch
rightly remarked, Tinder motivations may variate depending on the person one matches with: “Tinder motivations were meaningfully related to offline encounters with Tinder matches” (Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch). In other words, it can be said that some users adapt their behavior and desires (one-night stand, serious commitment) according to the person in front of them. Research scientist at the Kinsey Institute Amanda Gesselman added that “using apps to find either long-term or short-term partners, but not friends with benefits, may signal a reliance on tech/apps for either commitment or spontaneity, but not for regular sex with no romantic connection” (Kinsey Institute and Clue). “Friend with benefits” is then the least desired relationship (Kinsey Institute and Clue).
The Kinsey Institute has also shed light on the use of apps to improve sexual
relationships. Indeed, according to this study, 12% of all respondents use apps to improve their sexual relationships and 23% of men are likely to use an app to improve their sexual relationships. These results are presented with a strong statement: “Technology is changing the way we live, and a big part of that includes the way we navigate our intimate relationships and sexuality” (Kinsey Institute and Clue). This shows how technologies like Tinder can interfere in the way one shapes relationships.
2.5.4 User Activity
In the study A First Look at User Activity on Tinder, one of the first quantitative studies
on the subject, Gareth Tyson, Hamed Haddadi, both from the Queen Mary University of London, Vasile C. Perta from Sapienza University of Rome and Michael C. Seto from the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group have had a different analytical approach than the other existing studies previously mentioned. Indeed, in order to analyze activity on Tinder, they chose to combine several data collection methods. First of all, they used and observed a set of curated profiles (men and women): “We have created a number (14) of curated profiles, which we have injected into London and New York. We have used these profiles to monitor the way others react to them, specifically in terms of matches and subsequent messaging” (Gareth et al.). In order to validate and expand their findings, they also perform an online survey.
The goal of their study was double: first, they ask how gender impacts matching and
messaging rates for Tinder profile and second, they ask what profile characteristics are common in Tinder and which can impact matching and messaging rates. Their results revealed differences in the way men and women use the dating app: “Through data on almost half a million users, we show that the two genders exhibit quite different matching and messaging trends” (Gareth et al.). Indeed, they pointed out that women tend to be much more selective in the profiles they like on Tinder. On the other hand, men tend to be less regarding in whom they like, liking a large proportion of profiles “in the hope of attaining a match. […] In the most extreme case this could involve clicking like for all users encountered” (Gareth et al.). This phenomenon leads to a starvation of matches for men, while women are safe in the idea that almost every profiles they like will probably end up in a match (Gareth et al.). Indeed, the matching rate for men amounts to only 0.6% while women have a far higher matching rate, 10.5% (Gareth et al.).
The online questionnaire of this study revealed and confirmed a trend: not engaging a
conversation or a date after a match is very common (Gareth et al.). As already mentioned, a lot of users are satisfied enough with the swipe process and do not wish to be more involved. However, according to this research, women are more prone to engage conversation than men with 21% of female matches sending a message and only 7% of male matches sending a message (Gareth et al.). Although this pattern can be considered logical if we take into consideration the fact that women are more selective than men: “They are more careful with whom they like and therefore consider it more worthwhile to send a message” (Gareth et al.). Nevertheless, men tend to be faster in sending the first message after a match took place: “The median delay for sending messages is just 2 minutes for men, compared to 38 minutes for women” (Gareth et al.). With this element, one can assume that women users may prefer to wait in the hope of receiving a message first (Gareth et al.). On top of that, the median message sent by men is only 12 characters against 122 for women (Gareth et al.). This can be explained by the fact that women may be more prompt to engage.
This study also examined at what time of the day users go on the app and revealed that
users both male and female, tend to use the app throughout the whole day with a peak of activity at 9:00 am and 18:00 pm: “Clearly, users have a tendency to use Tinder to pass the time during their commute” (Gareth et al.). As mentioned previously, Tinder is indeed often used as a distraction or entertainment.
2.5.5 Impression management
In 2016, Dr. Janelle Ward, an Assistant Professor at the Department of Media and
Communication of Erasmus University of Rotterdam, published a research on Tinder that offers an insight into user experiences and perceptions. Ward made an attempt in answering the following question: “What are the pre-match impression management practices of Tinder users?” (Ward). In order to understand the motivations of Tinder users to download and use the app and to observe how they create their profiles, Ward conducted 21 interviews with Tinder users (11 men and 10 women between 19 and 52 years old) in the Netherlands.
In the results chapter of her research, one can read that “all but two of the interviewees
described their use as entertainment or an ego-boost” (Ward). Indeed, a 34 years old respondent named Erwin stated that “it’s more like a game” and explained that the app was in the game folder of his phone next to Candy Crush (Ward). Other respondents said similar things such as Sergio, 46: “I started just for fun, you know, it was a thing to pass the time” or Colin, 21: “Why do I use Tinder? In the first place, I think for attention” (Ward). These quotes demonstrate that some users are not looking for a partner or a serious relationship, but more for a way to pass the time, entertain and boost their self-esteem. However, Ward pointed out that the user’s motivations can evolve and change: “Yet these motivations also changed over time. I heard from users who revealed a hope for finding love, after initially using it for entertainment or ego-boost” (Ward). The change of motivations can be illustrated with the words of Sergio: “If I find someone I want to live with on Tinder it’s ideal. But it’s not something that I’m really looking for” or those of Reinout, a 27 years old user: “At first I was really looking for a girlfriend. And now it’s more like yeah, I just enjoy dating” (Ward). These last quotes can be said to prove how one’s motivations can change.
In this study, one can also observe that the perception users have of Tinder can vary. As
an example, Ward has transcribed the words of Aya, a 22 years old user who does not feel very comfortable with searching and finding love online: “I still feel it’s strange to search for people online when there are so many real people out there... I know some people who have a relationship from Tinder but... I actually think I would feel ashamed” (Ward). The feeling of shame is shared with Colin who said “I have friends who have relationships from Tinder but I think it is more shameful than something to be proud of... Yes, you are a lovely couple but you met on an application on your phone” (Ward). Therefore, one can say that there is a “stigma of technologically mediated dating” (Ward).
The Assistant Professor also focused on how one presents himself or herself on the app,
looking at the process of choosing a profile photo and writing a biography. She describes this “impression construction” stage as a “carefully chosen process” (Ward). She continues by explaining that the selection of profile photos are made “in an attempt to present an ideal yet authentic self, and chosen as an illustration of not only one’s desirability but also of other indicators such as education level” (Ward). Not only do users hope to show the kind of person they are, but also the kind of person they want to attract (Ward). Ward insists on the authenticity idea which is, according to her study, an important aspect for many users. It is for instance, the case for Erwin who said: “Your Tinder profile should be realistic. There is nothing more annoying than someone saying ‘I expected you to be different’” (Ward) or Johanna who said: “Yes I have pictures with my children. This is me, this is the total package, take it or leave it” (Ward). Ward also pointed out that users were not fond of certain appearances when creating their profiles: “Profiles were constructed with the aim to avoid certain appearances. According to one woman, seeming too sexual was one look to avoid” (Ward). One can then note that there is a multitude of elements taken into account by users when creating their profiles.
In addition, when swiping users tend to focus on superficial details and reject potential
matches for subjective trait of unattractiveness: “This one? No. He has a round face and I really hate sunglasses said Johanna while swiping” (Ward). ‘Race’ and age, interpretable on the photos, are also taken into account by users when examining other profiles (Ward). Some of the interviewees of Ward also said that there are signs from which one can draw conclusions about another user. For instance, duck face selfies or spelling mistakes are a way to detect low education (Ward). To conclude, one can say that the process in which Tinder users choose who to swipe right is not only driven by physical attraction but also by perceived similarities (Ward).
2.6 The Knowledge Gap
As Tyson, Haddadi, Perta, and Seto pointed out in their research “despite Tinder’s
growing popularity and unconventional matching style, it has received limited attention from the research community” (Gareth et al.). An argument confirmed by Ward who talks of a “still under researched area of inquiry” (Ward). Although there has still not been a big scientific study conducted on an important sample of respondents, researches about Tinder follow each other, look alike, and start to mark a trend (Motherboard Staff).
The above studies were focusing on users’ motivations, the link between sexuality and
These studies form a significant body of research looking at online dating services in a broad way. This Master thesis aims to be more specific by looking at what is different in the construction of relationships among millennials with Tinder in the process. For instance, compared to the Kinsey Institute study, this research is focused on a single app and on people between 18 and 30 years old. Narrowing down the subject of research allows for more in-depth analysis.
To the best of my knowledge, an analysis as to how Tinder transforms interpersonal
relationships has not been encountered so far. By querying this aspect, my research completes what has already been found about this dating app. Now that the major findings of several studies about Tinder have been exposed, I explain in detail in the methodology chapter how I conducted my own research, partly by stating what analytical method I used.
III-METHODOLOGY
3.1 What is an Interview?
As I briefly explained in the introduction, this Master thesis is achieved through
individual interviews. Before naming the benefits and limitations of this method, I first explain what is an interview. Scientifically the interview is a method of research and investigation (Toumert). T. Toumert, who wrote a comparison article between interview and survey, argues that the interview method allows through a series of questions prepared beforehand, the researcher to seek information on behaviors, attitudes and/or representations of one or more individuals in society (Toumert). Toumert points out that interviews allow to analyze “the meaning that actors give to their practices and to the events they are confronted with” (Toumert). Therefore, using this method enables me to observe how Tinder users view themselves on the app.
3.1.1 Benefits and Limitations of the Interview
In addition to the previous benefits mentioned in the introduction, I now present in more
detail all the advantages brought by the interview method. To begin with, one advantage is that once that mutual trust has been established between the interviewer and the interviewee, the individual interview method can help the person questioned to be spontaneous and to give sincere and free responses (Fabien). This may not be the case in a group interview which can be more intimidating for some people. Perhaps everyone is not comfortable in sharing out loud his or her experiences on Tinder in front of a group. With an individual interview there is no psychological pressure that interferes with the collection of information (Fabien) nor the risk for the interviewee to be judged by others. This method also allows the interviewer to choose a fairly heterogeneous sample (Fabien). In this thesis research case for instance, it is relevant to interview people who are between 18 and 30 years old, but who do not have the exact same age in order to have a large window. It is also interesting to question people of different sex. Varying the profile of respondents permits to get different information which provide a better overview of millennials’ Tinder experiences. Additionally, unlike an online questionnaire, interview offers more opportunities to assess the respondent’s understanding and interpretation of the questions. The interview method as well permit, if needed, to clarify any ambiguity about the meaning of a question or an answer (Fabien). Indeed, the interviewee can ask for clarification if he or she did not understand a point, and the interviewer can request further explanation on an answer (oag.ca). Furthermore, if the respondent gives fuzzy answers, this method provides
the interviewer with the opportunity to guide the interviewee by asking some additional questions, as needed, in order to obtain more precise and satisfactory answers (oag.ca). However, as conducting interviews and re-transcribing them can be very time consuming, the limitations of a Master thesis does not allow me to interview a lot of people. Nevertheless, it gives me the opportunity to go further and deeper in my analysis than with an online questionnaire, which can be too superficial. Indeed, the interviews allow me to obtain a glimpse of real life experiences of the respondents rather than statistics about them. Therefore, the results which come out of this process are more accurate and representative of the experience of millennials on Tinder because they are based on real experiences but also partly because interviews allow the collection of non-verbal data (Green). Indeed, non-verbal data such as nervousness or lack of eye contact cannot be collected and taken into account with an online questionnaire (Green). As a consequence, the results brought by the interview method provide a more precise and elaborated insight into the practices of respondents than those resulting from a survey. The many benefits I have just mentioned make the individual interview method the best option to conduct this research.
3.2 Possible Other Methods to Collect Data
To carry out this research, other methods would also have been possible. For example,
despite the disadvantages mentioned in the introduction and above, a survey analysis would have been an interesting way to study the object of this research. Indeed, a survey is one of the most efficient ways to collect a large set of data in a small amount of time, but in order to gather a large amount of data to analyze the results, one needs to have a very large number of participants in the survey.
Moreover, several studies that were mentioned in the literature review have already used
the survey method. For example, it is the case of Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch's study that examined the motivations to use Tinder. As mentioned earlier, they focused on Dutch people aged between 18 and 30 years old. To investigate users’ motivation, Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch's method was to make them complete an online survey. The Kinsey Institute also used this method to collect data to study the link between sexuality and the use of new technologies. This research focused on romantic and sexual behavior among 18 years olds and more. Just like Sumter, Ligtenberg and Vandenbosch’s research, my own study is also focusing on Tinder users aged between 18 and 30 years old. But while this former study looked at the reasons that motivate millennials to use Tinder, my research aims to determine how Tinder
modifies interpersonal relationships between them. In other words, this thesis investigates not only the user’s reasons and motivations to use the app, but also how the app affects the way he or she shapes new relationships. So far and to the best of my knowledge, no studies on Tinder focused on this specific aspect yet. I believe that the results that emerged from my research can make a contribution in the sense that they come complete and broaden the theoretical knowledge that has already been found about Tinder.
Furthermore, this previous study questioned only Dutch people. In order to have a larger
glimpse, I do not limit this research to only one country as it was there the case with the Netherlands. In order to have a more global vision, I interviewed people of different nationalities. To do so and as I said in the introduction, I relied on the encounters I have made during my studies to take part in this research.
3.3 Qualitative Approach
Even though many studies about Tinder that have been conducted in the past are
qualitative, I decided to adopt the same approach in this Master thesis. A qualitative study makes it possible, thanks to various methods, to group together and analyze so-called qualitative data, that is to say described, non-measurable information (Decoeur). In the field of marketing and publicity, qualitative studies provide information whose analysis serves to better understand consumer behavior. In this specific case of research, conducting a qualitative study helps me to do the same: analyzing a data collection in order to better understand the practices and the experience of Tinder users. This approach results in a description and in an analysis of Tinder users’ experience from the point of view of those being questioned. In other words, this study provides an accurate transcription of the experience of Tinder users based on how respondents view their own behavior on the app. Thus, one can better understand the changes that Tinder has brought in the construction of relationships. The outcome of this research will then be a captivating insight into millennials’ practices.
Nonetheless having a qualitative approach also entails some downsides. Indeed, the
methods used in qualitative approach such as conducting interviews are sometimes “not very representative since the samples studied are usually small” (Mathieu). It is the case in this research.
However, the data collected are more exploitable than with a quantitative approach
which does not give the same freedom of analysis. Indeed, a quantitative approach is less suitable as it is limited by the fact that the questions are usually closed or preformed.
Consequently, it does not allow and make it difficult to take into account more open answers (Mathieu).
3.4 Semi-Structured Interviews
Now that I presented the interviews’ benefits and limitations, that I explained why I
want to use this method to carry out this research and what approach I followed, I explain what kind of interviews I conducted. There are several types of interviews, each with its own method of application. Among them, the structured interview, the semi-structured interview and the unstructured interview (Fabien). Each one of them comes with a different structure. For example, the structured interview is constructed in advance and is very detailed with themes and subthemes to address, as on the other hand, the unstructured interview is solely based on a main theme which allows the ‘discussion’ to evolve freely (Fabien). In his article, Fabien defines the semi-structured interview as “semi-directive” (Fabien). He explains that the ‘interview guide’ is not very detailed and that if the interviewee does not address all the subthemes in his or her answers, they will not be addressed by the interviewer either, unless it is a main theme. The interviews that I conducted were semi-structured, that is to say that, as the interviewer I did not strictly follow a rigorous list of questions as it would have been the case with a structured interview. On the contrary, I rather asked more open-ended questions. This structure allowed me to have a more natural ‘discussion’ with interviewees rather than a very straightforward question and answer format (Fabien). I also believe that this brought more spontaneity during the interviews from both sides: the interviewees and myself.
3.5 Conducting the Interviews
3.5.1 Prior to the Interviews: Organization
Before starting the actual interviews, I carefully prepared a written ‘guide’ that helped
me structure my conversation and time with the interviewees. This document summarized the main axes around which I wanted the interviews to take place. It as well highlighted the main themes I wanted to address and the topics I wanted to fly over as well as a list of questions I wanted to ask. It was not as detailed as in a structured interview, but it was an indispensable tool to organize my work because it helped me to stay on the right track and avoid dispersion. Afterwards, I arranged a date and a meeting place in agreement with the first interviewee. Once we decided on a time and a place to meet, I prepared my equipment to conduct the interview properly. My equipment consisted of a pad of paper, a pen and my phone. Indeed, as mentioned
