Virtual Relationships in Social Media

How would you search for a romantic partner nowadays? Online would probably be most people's answer to that question. It’s more important than ever for psychologists to study virtual relationships in social media, how and why we form relationships online, and their pros and cons.

• We will define the study of virtual relationships in social media in psychology.
• Then, we will explore virtual vs real-life relationships.
• After we will examine the virtual relationship pros and cons.
• Finally, we will look at evaluations of virtual relationships in social media.

Virtual Relationships in Social Media in Psychology

A virtual relationship in social media is formed via an online platform. It could be a friendship, romantic relationship, or parasocial relationship. But how and why do we create these relationships? What are the most important factors affecting our virtual relationships?

Fig. 1: Virtual relationships occur online.

Self-Disclosure

Self-disclosure is when we share information about ourselves with another person. Psychologists such as Altman and Taylor (1973) state that this is the key to forming relationships (social penetration theory), and a gradual process of self-disclosure aids the formation of closeness.

Others like Cooper and Sportolari (1997) state that oversharing can lead to the ‘boom and bust’ phenomenon.

They stated:

Virtual relationships are much more vulnerable to this phenomenon as self-disclosure tends to occur much faster because of the anonymity of online relationships. Psychologists such as Walther (1996, 2011) call this the ‘hyperpersonal model’ of virtual relationships.

Those engaging in computer-mediated communication highlighted how the hyperpersonal model is advantageous, in that it gives the sense of more control over messaging and better outcomes from this perceived sense of increased control that face-to-face conversations cannot compete with.

Asynchronous communication produces more desirable messages, according to those who engage in virtual relationships.

Absence of Gating

Gates refer to barriers that prevent us from being attracted to someone if we meet them in person, such as how they speak, smell or look. Virtual relationships have an absence of such gates, and thus, some psychologists suggest that we can form more meaningful relationships online.

The absence of gates can also be positive for shy or socially anxious people:

• Baker and Oswald (2010) investigated rates of shyness and loneliness and how they related to social media use, focusing particularly on the quality of friendships. 241 participants completed questionnaires on their shyness, loneliness, friendship qualities and social support, alongside a questionnaire on their Facebook use. They found that those showing higher levels of shyness had stronger associations with Facebook use and friendship quality compared to people with low levels of shyness. They suggested Facebook is a way for shy individuals to comfortably communicate with others.

They can meet people without the anxiety of real-life interaction. Even if people meet later in the relationship, if an attraction has already been formed, gates rarely dampen this attraction due to the intimacy developed from self-disclosure.

Reduced Cues Theory (Deindividuation)

Deindividuation theory in the context of online relationships refers to the lack of physical cues we get in face-to-face interactions, such as facial expressions and body language, affecting interactions.

Social rules dictate our interactions; we control our impulses and tend to speak more politely due to the potential for repercussions.

According to Sproull and Kessler (1986), virtual interactions are much less effective than face-to-face ones, which leads to deindividuation, wherein people feel less responsible for their behaviour and become more hostile, as they lack the social inhibitions face-to-face communication provides. Interestingly enough, this prevents self-disclosure.

Virtual Relationship vs Real Life Relationship

Definitions of romantic relationships can be applied to both virtual and real-life relationships. Romantic relationships typically involve intentional affectionate and intimate behaviour, which can be displayed in different ways both online and in person.

There will be individual differences in preferences for relationships. Factors that distinguish virtual and face-to-face relationships, such as distance and a physical connection might be a pro for one person and a con for another.

Virtual Relationships Pros and Cons

Let's examine the strengths and weaknesses of virtual relationships, before evaluating the theories behind virtual relationships.

Disadvantages of a Virtual Relationship

First, the disadvantages of virtual relationships:

• Dishonest partners: With the distance provided by virtual relationships, and the separation of consequences, there's an increased risk of dishonesty.
• Risk of catfishing: Catfishing is a modern term referring to a person presenting themselves in a dishonest way, usually by providing a picture that looks different to them in real life.
• Risk of cyber security or fraud: With virtual relationships comes the risk of scams, especially for those who are willing to trust others for the sake of developing a relationship.
• Little physical presence or connection: Virtual relationships lack the physical presence face-to-face relationships provide.

Advantages of a Virtual Relationship

Now, let's highlight the advantages of virtual relationships.

• Allows for easily accessible human connection: online conversations can be carried out from anywhere and can be a source of intimacy at any time.
• Quick communication and fast response times: virtual responses can be instantaneous, which can be nice for people who want to connect with others.
• Expectations can be different compared to in-person relationships: it may be less stressful than sharing physical space. People report turning to virtual relationships after challenges with face-to-face relationships.
• They do not have to solely be online, they can lead to life changes and the development of in-person relationships. Relationships can grow to become more intimate by meeting and sharing experiences out in the world (Scott et al. 2007).

Virtual Relationships in Social Media Evaluation

Zhao et al. ❲2008❳ found that self-presentation on non-anonymous websites like Facebook was implicit rather than explicit. People show their identities implicitly through posts and pictures rather than explicitly stating their personality traits. This research indicates that social media sites are sources of self-presentation, helping relationship formation.

Some psychologists suggest that reduced cues theory is flawed in its assumption that there are no cues in virtual relationships. They suggest different cues are present, such as time taken to reply and emojis. Research from Whitty and Johnson (2009) supports the idea of different cues.

Tidwell and Walther (1995) examined how different uses of time affect non-verbal cues in computer-mediated communication (CMC), as many describe CMC as suffering from a lack of non-verbal cues. They found that both the time of day a message was sent and the length of time to receive a reply after a message was sent had significant interactions, suggesting cues do in fact exist and affect virtual relationships.

Fig. 3 - Affection cues are different in virtual relationships.

McKenna and Bargh (2000) stated, in reference to virtual relationships:

They found that romantic relationships that initially formed online were 70% more likely to last over two years longer than ‘offline’ relationships. The correlation between internet use and successful relationships is also supported by Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012).

Rosenfeld and Thomas (2012) found that over the last 15 years, the internet has displaced more traditional avenues of meeting potential partners (such as through school, work, friends or family). Those with internet access at home are more likely to have partners.

However, it is flawed to assume relationships are either online or offline. Today, many real-life relationships also begin and develop online; this is a weakness of investigating so-called ‘virtual relationships’. The study of online relationships is culturally and economically biased.

It does not consider that people in less developed countries and those with low income may not form online relationships. There is also evidence to suggest that the depth of self-disclosure differs in men and women, suggesting that virtual relationships and self-disclosure are not the same regardless of gender.