Master Thesis, 26 June 2019

TINDER, A TRUE MATCHMAKER: AN INVESTIGATION INTO MILLENNIALS’ INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS

Ó https://www.bustle.com

New Media and Digital Culture Master

Table of Content

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 5 I-INTRODUCTION ...... 6

1.1 EVOLUTION OF THE MEETING PLACE ...... 6

1.2 DEVELOPMENT AND SPREAD OF DATING APPS ...... 6 1.2.1 Undeniable Success with Millennials ...... 7 1.2.2 Technology Modifies Relationships’ Construction ...... 7

1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SUB QUESTIONS ...... 8

1.4 WHY TINDER? WHY MILLENNIALS? ...... 8

1.5 METHOD ...... 9 1.5.1 Another method ...... 9

1.6 APPROACH ...... 10 1.7 FINDING RESPONDENTS ...... 10

1.8 A GLIMPSE ON RESULTS ANALYSIS ...... 10

1.9 WHAT 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

1.10 OUTLINE ...... 12 II-LITERATTURE REVIEW ...... 13

2.1 TINDER’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

2.2 THE AFFORDANCES OF TINDER ...... 15 2.2.1 What is an Affordance? ...... 15 2.2.2 The Affordances of Tinder ...... 15

2.3 THE CRITICS OF TINDER ...... 16 2.3.1 Popularization of the Hookup Culture ...... 16 2.3.2 The Addictive Aspect of Tinder ...... 17

2.4 THE RECIPE FOR SUCCESS ...... 19

2.5 RESULTS 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 2.5.4 User Activity ...... 22

2 2.5.5 Impression management ...... 24

2.6 THE KNOWLEDGE GAP ...... 25 III-METHODOLOGY ...... 27

3.1 WHAT IS AN INTERVIEW? ...... 27 3.1.1 Benefits and Limitations of the Interview ...... 27

3.2 POSSIBLE OTHER METHODS TO COLLECT DATA ...... 28 3.3 QUALITATIVE APPROACH ...... 29

3.4 SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS ...... 30

3.5 CONDUCTING 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 3.6 IMPLEMENTING THE ANALYSIS METHOD ...... 34 IV-CASE STUDY ...... 36

4.1 WHY ONLINE DATING? ...... 36 4.2 TINDER: PROS AND CONS ...... 37

4.3 TIME MANAGEMENT ...... 38

4.4 MAIN 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

4.5 THE EVALUATION MOMENT ...... 41

4.6 TINDER PRACTICES ...... 43 4.6.1 Male Users and Female Users: Different Practices ...... 43 4.6.2 Common Practices ...... 45

4.7 EXPERIENCING TINDER ...... 46 4.7.1 Dating on Tinder ...... 46 4.7.2 Tinder Date vs Regular Date ...... 47 4.7.3 Bad Experiences ...... 49

4.8 CHANGES IN RELATIONSHIP CONSTRUCTION ...... 50 4.8.1 Tinder, Just a Tool ...... 50 4.8.2 Meeting Place: An Impact on Relationship’s Construction? ...... 50

3 4.8.3 Casualness ...... 51 4.8.4 Interchangeability: Plenty of Fish in the Sea ...... 51 4.8.5 New Ways of Dating ...... 51

4.9 MAJOR FINDINGS ...... 52

4.10 DISCUSSION ...... 54 V-CONCLUSION ...... 60 SOURCES ...... 63 INTERVIEW QUESTIONS ...... 71

4 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.

5 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 I use the words ‘app’ and ‘application’ interchangeably throughout this whole thesis.

6 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,

7 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

8 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, semi-structured, not structured). In this research, I opted for the semi- structured interview format. Based on a main theme, the 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 survey analysis would have been an interesting way to observe Tinder users’ experience and

9 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

10 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.).

11 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.

12 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’ (newsmonkey.be). This feature is accessible via the button representing a little blue star or by

13 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.

14 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.

15 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

16 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

17 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

18 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

19 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).

20 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

21 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.

22 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.

23 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).

24 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 new technologies or the ‘pre-match’ phase of Tinder profile construction and match selection.

25 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.

26 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

27 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

28 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.

29 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

30 earlier, all interviews were recorded so that the respondents’ answers could be fully transcribed. To record the interviews, I used the Dictaphone application of my phone. Taking notes helped me to re-transcribe what has been said during the interviews but also to bounce back and not lose any information.

3.5.2 Step by Step Once that the interview was about to start, I began by presenting the objectives of my study and the course of the interview. I made sure that the interviewee has read and signed the consent form. I then continued with a second phase called by some the ‘purge phase’ (Fabien). According to Fabien, the goal of this phase is to put the respondent at ease and in confidence. During this phase, I made sure that all the potential fears of the interviewee were gone. To do so, I for example, reassured him or her about the confidential nature of what he or she may say during the interview or about the fact that none of his or her personal details will be revealed in this study by insisting on the private characteristic of this meeting. Indeed, as it is stated in the consent form, all information about the interviewees are anonymized. No names or email addresses are kept. The private information of the respondents are not visible nor any other element allowing to identify them. What has been discussed or mentioned during the interviews is strictly anonymous and confidential. The data (interviews’ records) are stored on an encrypted hard disk to avoid any leak. The data gathered with these interviews can only be used for the analysis of this Master thesis.

Once the purge phase was over, we started the interview and got to the heart of the subject. I asked questions, listened and took notes. According to Fabien, for an interview to be successful, the interviewer must remain neutral and objective (Fabien). Therefore, and in addition to having an active listening throughout the whole interview, I made sure to remain neutral all along. I did not share nor let appear my personal thoughts and opinions. In order not to skew the interview and remain objective, I did not ask closed or oriented questions. To obtain representative and unbiased results, it was important that I guide the interviewee without ever influencing him or her. This whole process gave the interviewee the illusion of a dialogue but under no circumstances it became one. I repeated the exact same schema for all respondents so that they all give their answers under the same conditions.

3.5.3 After the Interview: Results Analysis Now that I detailed the way in which I conducted the interviews, it is important to explain how I analyzed the results and drew conclusions out of them. There are several

31 qualitative methods to analyze data and interpret its meaning (Schreier). For this research, I chose to analyze the interviews’ data through content analysis.

3.5.3.1 Content Analysis Content analysis is one of the most used qualitative method in social sciences and humanities and can be defined as a research method for investigating documents and communication artifacts (Banuta). The University of Georgia presents a more complex definition: “Content analysis is a research technique used to make replicable and valid inferences by interpreting and coding textual material” (University of Georgia). Professor of Empirical Research Methods at Jacobs University Margrit Schreier wrote a book about qualitative content analysis to take students step by step through this method. She portrays qualitative content analysis as “a method for describing the meaning of qualitative material in a systematic way” (Schreier). In order to do this, she explains that one must assign successive parts of material to the categories of a coding frame. According to her, “this frame is at the heart of qualitative content analysis, and covers all those meanings that feature in the description and interpretation of material” (Schreier). As advised by Schreier in her book, to implement this method I had to focus my analysis on selected aspects of my materials.

According to Christen Erlingssona and Petra Brysiewicz, who wrote a guide about content analysis, an ordinary starting point for qualitative content analysis is often transcribed interview texts (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). It has been the case in this study. The goal of this analytical method is to “systematically transform a large amount of text into a highly organized and concise summary of key results” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). If we transpose this to this research, it means that the results of the interviews should be condensed in a summary that highlights only the most important elements mentioned by the respondents. I explain how I applied this method later but first I present the benefits and limitations of this analytical method.

3.5.3.2 Benefits and Limitations of Content Analysis This method of analysis presents several benefits. First of all, it gives an insight into complex models of human thought and language use (The Writing Studio). In addition, according to Communication Professor Mike Allen, whose primary research interest is in the area of social influence, content analysis is helpful “in describing communicative messages” (Allen). Applied to my research case, this method is a good way to analyze the results of my interviews. Indeed, qualitative content analysis is recommended when dealing with verbal data: “The method is suitable for all material that requires some degree of interpretation” (Schreier). Additionally, the process of content analysis is quite unobtrusive and the examination of

32 communicative messages is relatively safe (Allen). Moreover, content analysis allows one to take into consideration the attitudinal and behavioral responses to communication (Banuta). Additionally, if we take into accounts the limitations imposed by a Master thesis, content analysis allows the researcher to reduce the material by limiting the analysis to relevant aspects of the material (Schreier).

However, like any other analytical methods, content analysis also presents some disadvantages. For instance, this method can be highly time consuming and can bring a few methodological challenges (Allen). Content analysis is more descriptive than explanatory and is a method that cannot be automated (Banuta). Moreover, it can also be difficult to be fully aware of how one’s own previous knowledge can influence the analysis and its results (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). This is why it is important to keep in mind and acknowledge this point in order to prevent one’s pre-understanding to bias the results: “In qualitative methodology, it is imperative to vigilantly maintain an awareness […] This is the difficult balancing task of keeping a firm grip on one’s assumptions, opinions, and personal beliefs, and not letting them unconsciously steer your analysis process while simultaneously, and knowingly, utilising one’s pre-understanding to facilitate a deeper understanding of the data” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). In addition, content analysis like any other qualitative analysis, is a reflective process and does not follow a linear progression: “There is no “1, 2, 3, done!”” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona).

3.5.3.3 Another Analytical Method To conduct this analysis other methods could have been used. For instance, discourse analysis would have been an interesting method to conduct this analysis. Discourse analysis can be widely defined as the examination of the ways in which language is used in texts and contexts (Hasa). This method is often used in the disciplines of human and social sciences (Hasa). In an article, Hasa shows the differences between content analysis and discourse analysis, and argues that discourse analysis “always refers to the analysis of real life discourse or naturally occurring language; the data for discourse is taken from written texts or tape recordings” (Hasa). In this research case the transcribed text of my interviews – “real life discourse or naturally occurring language” (Hasa) – would then have been a good base for discourse analysis. This method not only allows one to look at several dimensions of discourse, such as style, tone, syntax, idioms and gestures, but also to examine the relationship between the discourse and the context (Hasa). However, content analysis remains the best option for conducting this research because it focuses more on the content compared to discourse analysis

33 which focuses more on examining the language and the semiotic (Hasa). Indeed, this research is not intended to study language, but to look at real-life experiences.

3.6 Implementing the Analysis Method

Even though there is no “1, 2, 3, done!” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona), I here make an attempt to point out the different steps I followed in my analysis process in order to facilitate the understanding of my method by the reader.

The first step in the implementation of this method was to closely read the interviews in order to have a sense of the whole and to get a global understanding of what respondents talked about (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona).

Applying this method to the results of the interviews enabled me to cover different themes mentioned by respondents. To determine the main themes I needed to discuss in this thesis, content analysis helped me to spot the presence of specific words or concepts within the results of the interviews (The Writing Studio). Spotting these words and concepts was the second step of my analysis.

From there I was able to break down the content of my interview results into several “meaning units” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). This was the third step of my analysis. Each unit represents a theme and gather all the words and sentences mentioned by the respondents that can be related to that theme. As mentioned in the introduction, I created a spreadsheet based on the interview records and on the notes I took during the interviews. This spreadsheet gathered the principal points that came out of the interviews and allowed me to visualize the data I collected. It was an indispensable tool to achieve this third analytical step.

I then condensed these meaning units while ensuring that the core meaning was still preserved. As written by Erlingssona and Brysiewicz in their content analysis guide, the next step was “to label condensed meaning units by formulating codes and then grouping these codes into categories” (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona). These categories identified the main ‘trends’ characteristic of Tinder users respondents from which I was able to draw conclusions out.

As mentioned in the benefits and limitations section, identifying meaning units, condensing, coding, and categorizing them is a long process and not one-time events with linear advancement: “You must mould the clay of the data […] It is a continuous process of coding and categorizing then returning to the raw data to reflect on your initial analysis” wrote

34 Erlingssona and Brysiewicz. Now that the method of analysis has been explicitly detailed, I present my results.

35 IV-CASE STUDY

As explained earlier the goal of this research is to see if and to what extent Tinder has changed the way interpersonal relationships are being shaped among millennials. I examined this query through interviews with Tinder users. I conducted 6 semi-structured interviews with 3 men and 3 women under 30 years old: one man of 21 years old from the Netherlands, one woman of 22 years old from Ireland, one man of 29 years old from France, one man of 27 years old from France, one woman of 23 years old from the United Kingdom and one woman of 22 years old from Germany. As previously mentioned in the methodology chapter, choosing people of different nationalities is a way to differentiate this research from other studies that have been conducted in the past and that only covered one country.

In order to respect the private life of respondents I have named them consecutively respondent 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 in the order in which I conducted the interviews. All respondents reported being heterosexual except one (respondent 4) who is homosexual. The interviews were all face to face and lasted about half an hour.

As it was mentioned before, the aim of qualitative content analysis is to describe the meaning of the material in a systematic way (Schreier). This method requires the researcher to focus his or her analysis on selected aspects of the material (Schreier). Therefore, I selected specific facets of my material. Indeed, after the analysis (coding and grouping), several themes emerged from the content of the interviews: reasons to turn to online dating, advantages and disadvantages of Tinder, time management, main motivations, evaluation of other users, common practices, Tinder experiences, and changes in relationship construction. These are the themes I had to reflect on in this Master thesis. I now present each of these themes in separated sections.

4.1 Why Online Dating?

First, I questioned the motivations for downloading Tinder. All respondents had similar reasons. Respondent 1 explained: “I guess to have fun and to get the appreciation but also just to play the game Tinder actually”. Respondent 6 downloaded it out of boredom: “I was just bored, I had kinda watched all the YouTube videos I wanted to watch, and I was of course single […] It was also to get some validation”. Respondent 2 also downloaded the app because she was bored. Moreover, she had just gotten out of a long relationship that she wanted to get her mind off of it: she wanted “to meet new people”. The answer of respondent 5 was very

36 alike: “I was single and I wanted to go on a date […] I was not really looking for something serious. I was out of a longer term relationship and Tinder gave me the opportunity to have something more casual”. The casualness offered by Tinder also attracted respondent 3 who downloaded the app to find new sex partners: “I was between 19 and 20 years old back then, I didn’t want to commit, I wanted to enjoy life and have sex”. Respondent 4 was the only one looking for something serious on the app. Downloading Tinder was also a way for him to accept his homosexuality. Clearly one can see that Tinder is considered something very casual by the large majority of respondents. If we look at the terms that come back often in the respondent’s answers (‘appreciation’, ‘validation’, ‘fun’, ‘game’, ‘casual’, ‘bored’), we can say that Tinder is mostly used as a distraction and a game but also as a way to boost one’s self-esteem: “It is helping my ego in some ways to see that the photos and the information I put out there are working” said respondent 1. As explained in the literature review, Tinder can indeed turn into an ego boost.

Moreover, it is interesting to point out that as Tinder was first launched in 2012 and that respondent 3 is currently 29 years old, he did not give the correct age he was at the time he started to use the app. Perhaps it is unconsciously that respondent 3 gave a false number. As mentioned in the literature review with the study of Ward, Tinder is sometimes the victim of technology mediated dating stigmatization and can be linked to a notion of shame.

4.2 Tinder: Pros and Cons

Respondent 1 explained being attracted by the “simple and direct design” of the app: “There is not a lot of things that can distract you from the main purpose of the app: to swipe right and left but what I dislike about it is that it has this strong connection with Facebook”. On the other hand respondent 3 regretted that social media connection, apart from Facebook, took such a long time before arriving on the app. As he used Tinder at its very beginning, there were not a lot of opportunities to get more information about a person than what was already presented on the profile: “In 6 years the application has evolved a lot. At the beginning there was very little information whereas now we can develop lots of things about ourselves by for example sharing our Instagram”. A feature particularly appreciated by respondent 6: “I really like that the interface connects to Spotify and Instagram because it tells a lot about the person […] I like to listen to the music people highlighted on their profiles”. Even though the possibility to find more details about a person is important for respondent 3, he also pointed out that these recent features are double edged: “On the one hand, it’s good because you can quickly

37 find the Instagram of a girl but on the other hand, I find it quite perverse because Tinder has access to more private information about you and can store these data”. As on many social media applications the treatment of personal data remains problematic: “There are indeed risks in having so much personal data circulating around without user’s controlling or even knowing what’s going on. This is especially the case when services like Tinder state in their privacy policy that you should not expect your data to be totally secured, some of the data can be shared with third parties, and you accept that your data is transferred to countries with data protection rules lower than those of your home country” (Jerome G). Data treatment was reported by several respondents as one of the major downside of the application.

Respondent 5 and 6 both mentioned liking the casualness of Tinder. Not having to “spend a lot of time until you swipe and get a date” is a big advantage for respondent 6 who also mentioned that Tinder is designed to “make the whole dating experience very quick” and “to go through as many people as possible in a very short time”. Moreover, compared to Bumble, another dating app, respondent 5 feels that there is not a lot less pressure to talk and meet on Tinder: “I prefer the ‘game feel’ of Tinder” she said. However, that is also what she does not like about the app: “It goes so fast and it reduces people to one or two photos […] I can completely dismiss them based on their appearance. I could easily be swiping pass the love of my life”. On the other hand, respondent 4 likes the “catalog aspect” of Tinder: “You are just quickly zapping” but he hates the addictive side of it: “Whenever I had 3 minutes I would go on Tinder to swipe, even at the toilet”. Respondent 2 as for her mostly talked about the downsides of the app after giving just one advantage: “The swiping is fun but sometimes it is a bit depressing because the whole Tinder experience is so superficial and you can get very creepy messages from people”. The term ‘depressing’ is not chosen randomly and can be related to the phenomenon of dating burnout that was mentioned earlier in the literature review.

4.3 Time Management

Another theme that emerged from the content of the interviews is the time spent on the application. Most of the respondents are using or used to use the app on a daily basis. Although he has found love thanks to the app, our young Dutch swiper reported that he used to go on Tinder every night before sleeping. Same scenario for respondent 4 who also met his boyfriend through the app and who was using it “daily, several times a day”. Respondent 3 as for him, was using the app till reaching the maximum amount of daily swipes. On the other hand, women (respondents 2, 5 and 6) reported using Tinder a few times a week, not necessarily to swipe but

38 to talk to their matches. Here the results reveal two things. First, the addictive aspect of Tinder is confirmed. This can be due to the gamification of Tinder and the variable rewards that were discussed earlier in the literature review. Second, male respondents and female respondents do not have the same use of the app. This may be the result of men being less likely than women to get a match (Gareth et al.). Therefore, they may need to spend more time on Tinder.

4.4 Main Motivations

When asked about their main motivations to use Tinder, all respondents had similar answers. What came out of the interviews in terms of motivation was the desire to meet new people, to have “casual relations” (respondent 5) and to “have fun” (respondent 3). In this section, all the motivations have been grouped by category.

4.4.1 Casual Relation First, the search for casual relationships was a strong incentive in interviewees’ responses. Respondent 2 described Tinder as “the perfect place to be when looking for occasional relationships”. According to her, “Tinder is more for casual things than real commitment”. A statement with which respondent 3 would agree: the search for “pure and simple fun” was his only purpose. Respondent 5 shared the same vision: “Tinder is for casual dates”. However, she pointed out that she is ready to change her mind according to how the person is: “If something more promising came along, I would jump on it”. As shown by Ward’s study, motivations are not fixed and can evolve (Ward). This aspect is further elaborated on in the major findings section.

4.4.2 Group Effect Second, there is an undeniable group effect. Indeed, several respondents mentioned being attracted to Tinder through the influence of their friends. The main motivation to use the app for respondent 1 was to meet new people, but he also mentioned what he called “a side reason”: “To be able to talk about it with friends who are also using it”. This ‘group effect’ pattern was also underlined by respondent 3 who talked about “a game between buddy” and respondent 2 who said: “Everyone else was on Tinder so I got influenced to do the same”. It is the same for respondent 4 who thought: “If everyone meet people via Tinder, why not me?”. He wanted “new experiences” even though, “the ultimate idea was to find a partner”. On the other hand, respondent 6 rejected the idea of any kind of influence: “I don’t think I’ve got other influences than my own desires. It was more like: “I have a free evening on Friday””. Except for her, all respondents were introduced to Tinder through friends.

39 4.4.3 Use for Improvement Third, the use of Tinder as a way to improve oneself came back regularly in interviewees’ responses.

4.4.3.1 Improving Sexual Relation Some of the interviewees reported to use Tinder to improve their sexual relations and to gain experience such as respondent 4: “I’ve had a lot of hookups on Tinder and it definitely helped me to get better in the bedroom” and respondent 6: “The more intimate relations you have, the better you know yourself and what you want. That’s why I keep being on Tinder: I can figure out what I like and dislike”. In this case, Tinder becomes a way for one to develop his or her ‘intimate skills’, but also to get to know oneself better. However, sex is not the only thing that the use of Tinder can ameliorate.

4.4.3.2 Improving Self-Confidence Others saw in Tinder a way to feel accepted such as respondent 6: “At first, I was using Tinder for confidence, I needed validation”, respondent 3: “It is reassuring to see that you can be liked, it helps your ego” or respondent 5: “It’s a confidence boost to go on a Tinder date. I was in a long relationship and I did not know how to go in the dating world. Tinder was the easiest way for me to start doing that”. As already mentioned earlier, Tinder is used to strengthen the ego and build self-confidence. Not only can the app boosts egos but its effect is immediate. The only fact of getting a match can feel extremely rewarding and release dopamine in users’ brains (Purvis).

4.4.3.3 Going Out of the Comfort Zone According to some respondents, Tinder can also become a tool to overcome one’s fears. As mentioned earlier, respondent 2 reported to have social anxiety. Tinder then became a way to step out of her comfort zone and face her fears: “I am shy so I use Tinder as a way to experiment. It helps me to push myself trying new things”. This example shows that Tinder truly has multiple facets and can be used differently by each user to achieve various goals.

4.4.4 Other Motivations Lastly, other motivations were also underlined by respondents. For instance, respondent 6 said: “Sometimes, I use Tinder to ask very serious questions and to have deep conversations […] I got tired of small talks”. By asking a question where the other user first needs to think before replying, she gets a sense of who that person actually is: “It helps me to get to know the person way faster, and it shows me how intelligent the person is… or not […] The questions

40 can be: “What is you biggest fear?” or “Why did your last relation ended?””. If this shows the desire to express deep thoughts and share interesting conversations, it can also depict the desire to act quickly, to get to know the person quickly and to date quickly. A fast-paced model promoted by Tinder’s interface as claimed by Jo Sales and the authors of Masters of Media’s blog post.

As I attempted to go more in depth and asked “What are you looking for exactly on Tinder?”, several respondents showed signs of hesitation and incertitude. Respondent 1, for instance, had a little moment of wavering and repeated the question out loud before coming with an answer: “To have fun, I don’t know… To have funny conversations and to see what tactics are effective or not, what kind of words are working the best to get a date, but also to present myself in the best way I can”. In this case, one can conclude that respondents do not know for sure what they are looking for, but the search for matches is helping to understand what is the best way to present oneself and how to approach other users in order to attract them.

4.5 The Evaluation Moment

The process of evaluating the profiles of other users clearly emerged from the content of the interviews. To examine the profiles of other users, respondents claim that they need on average, 10 seconds to a few minutes. 29 years old French man explained that if a woman’s profile is very attractive and matches his expectations, he can spend more time on her profile: “If I really like the girl and the way she looks, I will stay longer to stalk her”. It is the same for respondent 5: “It depends on what the first few photos are like. I need a few seconds, but if someone looks intriguing I might spend up to a minute before I decide” and respondent 2: “Sometimes it’s immediate no and sometimes I hesitate a bit longer”. If we transpose that to a non-virtual context that is ‘real life’, I argue that it is safe to say that the process is usually the same: if one finds someone attractive at first sight, one may want to spend more time to get to know that person.

For the vast majority of respondents, the first thing to look at on a profile is the photo(s). Indeed, respondent 1 and 4 reported to first focus on the photos and the age before looking at the rest of the information. Respondent 1 mentioned looking at the hobbies as well, if there are any. Similarly, respondent 5 said: “I look if I find them attractive, if I like their style, if they have anything in their bio and if it seems interesting or funny. […] So photos first, and then the bio, but that’s I guess part of the way that Tinder is designed”. Respondent 2 as for her, stated that if there are only photos and no biography it pushes her to swipe left: “The content of the

41 bio is not even that important but if there is no bio, it’s immediate no. I think you can have a tell by the writing what types of person they are”. On the other hand, the biography is not essential for respondent 3 who said: “The little texts that girls write on Tinder explain more or less what they are looking for, not what I am looking for. They are hardly very concrete. To focus on the photo is a safer option”. And if focusing on the photo is more safe, it is even safer for respondent 6 to focus on the number of photos that are displayed. Indeed, she grants a lot of importance to this number: “The number of pictures is very significant for me. If it’s only one or two pictures, I am less likely to swipe right”. Respondents tend to focus on the photos first. Therefore, one can note that they have a shallow way of evaluating and approaching others. It can be seen as superficial because it is mainly based on looks.

To the question “Would you say you pay a lot of attention in the physical part or are you more interested in what the person has to say?”, respondents gave various answers which is quite paradoxical since they all said to be looking first at the photos as I just mentioned before. Some respondents were hesitating such as respondent 5: “It depends…”, when it was really clear for others such as respondent 4: “I am more into the physical”, and respondent 6: “The swiping is physical”. Similarly to respondent 5, respondent 1 explained that the interface of Tinder is triggering its users to look first at the physical part, that is to say the photos: “I think it depends about the order in which things come. Tinder offers you to see the photos and the names first. There you are already triggered by the physical part, and then you go look into the profile only if it attracts you”. The interface of Tinder would then be responsible of this ‘photos first’ pattern because of its design. To the same question respondent 2 replied in a similar way: “With Tinder it’s always photos first. It’s the interface presentation”. However, she also said that “even if the personality comes in a second place, it is still important in order to have a proper conversation or a date”. This last idea can be related to what respondents 3 and 5 have said: “If the girl is stupid, there is no point” (respondent 3), “If I find them super attractive and then after talking, really strange, I would just un-match them, ghost them” (respondent 5). However, this also works backward: “If I find them ‘okay attractive’ but super interesting, I would give them a chance” said respondent 5. Here we see that the personality can sometimes weaken the ‘power’ of good looking appearance, but by looking at the words and expressions that came out of the interviews (‘triggering’, ‘triggered by the physical part’, ‘order in which things come’, ‘Tinder offers you’, ‘always photos first’, ‘interface presentation’, ‘personality comes in a second place’, ‘the way that Tinder is designed’), one can conclude that respondents feel driven by the design of the app to behave in a superficial way

42 by looking first at the photos, and then only if they like what they see, to go search for more information. “The interface makes it that way. If you first had the caption presented then maybe things would be different” explained respondent 6. Therefore, it can be said that the perception one has of other users can be slightly modified by the interface of Tinder.

In addition to the presentation of Tinder’s interface, some respondents confessed being more focused on the physical part than the personality: “Obviously, initially it is about the physical appearance” said respondent 6. It is also the case of respondent 1 who reported that he would probably not like a profile just for a funny or intriguing biography: “Without a photo? No. With a photo? It depends, but probably I would not look further to be honest”. However, on the women’s side this is something more common to do with 2 women (respondents 2 and 6) who reported doing it: “If I hesitate about someone and that the caption is meaningful, I would like the profile” said respondent 6. Once again, one can notice different practices between men and women users.

As for respondent 3, he does not seem to be aware of what is most important to him. On the one hand, he said he puts physical appearance and personality on the same level: “For me it’s 50-50” but on the other hand, he described later on in the interview, the physical aspect as “a first step”, and the personality as “something secondary”. He added that he enjoys being shocked: “I like it if a girl shocks me. If a girl is completely offbeat, I want to know more about her”. Although he did not mention if the appearance of that “offbeat girl” matters to him. But as mentioned earlier, the personality can sometimes be more valuable than a good looking appearance. With Tinder, one can discover great personalities that he or she would have maybe just passed by in the street without paying attention.

4.6 Tinder Practices

4.6.1 Male Users and Female Users: Different Practices As mentioned earlier, the results of the interviews showed that there are differences in the practices one has on Tinder according to its gender. Male respondents were several to report that they feel like they have to send the first message after a match. It is the case of respondent 1 who said: “Most of the time you need to start the conversation, otherwise you don’t get a text”. Respondent 3 not only sent the first message, but also developed with his friends what he calls the “donut theory”. According to him, 8 women out of 10 would reply to the following opening phrase: “Chocolate donut or strawberry donut?”. Women on Tinder are not used to receive this kind of message according to him: “The girl is intrigued, there is a bit of sweetness

43 and greed, as well as an humoristic side… All the conditions are gathered for the conversation to start well. […] The goal is to attract the girl by arousing her curiosity”. Here, one can say that respondent 3 creates a pattern and tries to anticipate the responses of other users. This technique of sending over and over the exact same message to different profiles can be seen as a lack of respect in the sense that it reduces other users. It also reduces the one who sends the message, as if he or she was a machine trained to repeat the same thing over and over, without being able to elaborate (Gertz). This is, according to my results, something more common among male respondents than female respondents. However, when asked about this aspect respondent 1 did not agree: “If you keep on sending the same message to all the girls out there, I don’t find it very respectful towards them. I prefer to approach a girl with a personal message that says something about her, like something I spotted in the background of her photo or a hobby she shared. […] I think that girls prefer this because that way they can feel special”. On the other hand, female users reported never or rarely engaging the conversation: “I have never sent the first message” said respondent 2. Respondents 5 and 6 confirmed this trend: “I would probably expect the guy to message first. But sometimes I do” (respondent 5), “Of course I don’t send the first message. I get so many matches, there will be for sure a guy messaging me. I don’t need to message, I will have a conversation anyway” (respondent 6). This phenomenon can partly be explained by the fact that women tend to have a higher matching rate than men (Gareth et al.). The more matches they have, the more chances they have to get a message. One can also assume that women may prefer to wait in the hope of receiving a message first (Gareth et al.). In addition, historically men have always been expected to do the first step (Vieira).

As pointed out by Tyson, Haddadi, Perta, and Seto in their study, on top of getting more matches, women tend to be more selective than men (Gareth et al.). A trend that I was able to observe during my analysis too: “As a girl, I am more picky and I pay a lot of attention in which profiles I like. I rarely swipe right and I mostly get the match. I am more picky from the beginning and guys get picky afterwards” explained respondent 6. On the other hand, male respondents stated to be less selective: “I am not overly picky” said respondent 3.

Results analysis highlighted another difference between male and female respondents: it is easier for male to bring on certain topics in chat conversation than it is for female: “Women do not act the same way as we do. As a man, you ask for a date more easily and it’s easier to speak explicitly about sex” said respondent 3. For respondent 5, this is the consequence of “social pressure on women”. She argued that women may not feel comfortable talking about certain things in the fear of being labeled “easy girls”.

44 4.6.2 Common Practices Other patterns came out of the analysis: multiple respondents explained that once the conversation has made a good start on the Tinder chat, they rather switch to another messaging app such as WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger because it is more “personal”: “After a while you want that person’s number, plus the Tinder chat’s functionalities suck” said respondent 1. He added that he had been talking online for a very long time with his girlfriend before meeting her in real life: “We whatsapped a lot, then after a couple of weeks we started to video chat on Skype, and then finally I went from Holland to France to see her”. According to journalist Alison Segel, a good way to “move the conversation off Tinder and into real life” is to give a phone number: “A perfect way to save an app conversation is to move it straight to text, which can then, hopefully, be moved to real life” (Segel). Moving on to another platform such as WhatsApp then gives a sense of reality. One can say that it allows more intimacy as it is less impersonal than the Tinder chat. Moreover, 55% of active WhatsApp users are between 18 and 35 years old (Iqbal).

Another similarity between respondent’s practices is that many of them decide what they want according to the person they match with: “According to the girl, I adapt my behavior. If she’s just hot then I just want to have sex with her, and if she’s smart and stuff, I can change my mind and look for something more serious” said respondent 3. This can be related to what Ward has pointed out: the motivations of users can evolve and change.

The last point worth mentioning is the ‘ghosting’ practice. Respondent 5 reported doing it “quite often” on Tinder. According to the Urban Dictionary, ghosting refers to cutting off all communication and ties with a person without any warning or notice before hand (SunnyDoll). 74% of women and 56% of men have already ghosted someone on online dating platforms (Landry). Respondent 5 explained that this is not something she would do in real life: “I wouldn’t do it in another context, but on Tinder it’s easier”. It can then be noted that the virtual part of Tinder facilitates certain actions. Moreover, ghosting is a practice often associated with Tinder (Arbrun). Journalist Clément Arbrun portrays this phenomenon as a “Tinder generation syndrome” (Arbrun). In order to rethink online dating practices, movie maker and journalist Ariane Picoche founded asv-stp.fr. She describes her website as “a space for reflection and sharing” (asv-stp.fr). Picoche sees in the act of ghosting “the fear of hurting, the difficulty to engage, the desire to protect oneself, the pursuit of the ideal being, the quest for ‘always more, always better’, cowardice, laziness or the lack of consideration for others” (Arbrun). As for philosopher and essayist Vincent Cespedes, ghosting is “the consequence of ‘smooth talks’

45 where the dates follow each other according to a consumerist logic” (Arbrun). For him, ghosting would be the “laziness to love” (Arbrun). This consumerist logic can be related to the previously mentioned desire to act quickly. If there is a desire to act quickly when it comes to dating, there may also be a desire to move on quickly. Ghosting is then a good solution. One could also say that ghosting is a sign of hesitation or a way to counter loneliness. Indeed, the ‘ghoster’ can always resume contact with the ‘ghosted’ a few weeks, months or years later. Since no words sealed the end of the story, the story never ended: “It's a door that's left open” (Arbrun).

Now that I finished listing common practices, it is important to mention that it can be hard to observe one’s own behavior. Indeed, several respondents said that they cannot be fully aware of their gender conditioning, if there is one. For instance, when asked about gender- related practices, respondent 5 replied that it was “things she might do not consciously but maybe subconsciously”, and respondent 3 said that it was “a conditioning one is not aware of”. That is why it is complicated for respondents to remain fully objective in their answers. As a consequence, the results on that point may be biased.

4.7 Experiencing Tinder

All respondents reported meeting people via Tinder, some for casual flirting and some for serious commitment. Indeed, half of the respondents have met their current partner on the app, and are now involved in serious relationships with them. For instance, respondent 1 has met his girlfriend on the app: “It has worked really well for me in the end”. It is also the case of respondents 3 and 4 who have both multiplied casual hookups before finding “the right person” (respondent 4). On the other hand, respondents 2, 5, and 6 only had casual dates through the dating app.

4.7.1 Dating on Tinder When asked about their dating experiences, respondents expressed various feelings: “I felt a little nervous and excited beforehand, but then you have a few drinks, you talk and it ends up being fine” said respondent 5 before specifying that this was not exclusive to Tinder dates. Similarly, respondent 2 explained being very stressed beforehand, “especially for the first date”, and admitted that she was doing it to get out of her comfort zone. Tinder became a way to fight her social anxiety. She then started to pursue several relations at the same time, something she would have never done before she said: “I would have never dated more than one person at the same time before Tinder”. In that sense one can say that Tinder is highlighting new – or at least less conventional – relationship models by facilitating their implementations. Unlike

46 respondents 2 and 5, some respondents were very comfortable on Tinder dates. Indeed, respondent 3 said: “I am very confident on dates. I can make the girl laugh and make her feel at her ease”. Respondent 4 also reported not being afraid to go to these dates before saying: “You have to sell yourself, and if it works it’s very flattering and it boosts your ego”. Selling oneself as on a market place makes the comparison of Jo Sales between Tinder and online shopping an appropriate one. In this case, one can say that dating turns into an economy. In the dating market, like in any other market, supply meets demand: each user present himself or herself like one would present a product in an advertisement campaign in order to attract others: “The dating market is also similar to the idea of competition and differentiation within a monopolistically competitive market” (Money). Users, by possessing different amounts of attractiveness, stand out of the crowd or not. Of course, as in the economic market, there are inequalities: just as everyone does not have the same income, everyone does not have the same level of attractiveness (Tuckfield).

Out of the 3 male users interviewed, only one has declared that it was relatively rare to go on Tinder dates: “Considering the amount of matches, it is pretty rare to go on a date. Plus, I need to have a good connection with the person, and it does not happen so often. I want to know more about the girl before having a drink with her when other may prefer to just experience the person in real life straight away”. Indeed, this is the case of respondent 6 who explained that she would rather meet the person right away instead of texting for a month and be disappointed. The two other male respondents were more used to go on Tinder dates: “It’s common, we are the generation 2.0. Going on Tinder dates is part of the deal” said respondent 3. As for respondent 6, she is the most experienced user of all respondents with more than 35 Tinder dates. Here we can see that unlike former studies have shown, the match itself is not an end to all users, and that going on Tinder dates is not so rare, and actually a very common thing to do for some respondents.

4.7.2 Tinder Date vs Regular Date When asked about the differences with a ‘normal date’, respondents brought different answers. Before naming these answers, I give a definition of a normal date that is adopted by the respondents as well: a non-technology assisted date with someone from one’s everyday life or close circle. Respondent 1 explained that on a normal date, one already knows the person, on Tinder, however, “there always is a surprise effect” he said. Respondent 6 underlined the same aspect: “The pressure of seeing someone for the first time, you only saw a few photos of”. One can then say that Tinder dates can be more stressful than regular dates. However, if there

47 is a stressful aspect, respondent 6 also mentioned what she calls an “advantage”: “I don’t need to be liked by the guy because I can always find another one on the app […] With a colleague or someone from another context, I would probably see that person again. It’s a very different dynamic”. This statement can be analyzed through the lens of Jo Sales’ article: on Tinder, one can think it is easy to find another partner because there is an idea of interchangeability (Jo Sales). Indeed, in addition to immediate gratification (Jo Sales), Tinder offers instantaneity (nlto.fr) and countless options to its users (Money). Therefore, finding a new partner may not seem complicated for respondents. This aspect is further elaborated on in the changes in relationship construction section. On the other hand, other respondents did not see any differences between the two types of dates: “I did not notice massive differences” said respondent 5. As for respondent 3, he qualified Tinder as “just another way to meet a person”. One can say that for some users, Tinder is just a tool to connect to people and does not involve a new kind of dating. Indeed, for most respondents, the Tinder date itself is not so different from a normal date: “Most of the time and in both cases, it is about having a drink together” explained respondent 5. However, the analysis of the interviews revealed that it is almost mandatory to talk about previous Tinder experiences on Tinder dates: “Talking about your previous dates on the app happens on every single Tinder dates” (respondent 2), “The ‘Tinder questions’ will always come up: “Why are you on Tinder?”, “When was your last Tinder date?”. This kind of question does not come up on a date with a colleague or a friend. […] I think you do it to find a common ground through Tinder” (respondent 6). One can then conclude that as it is the very first time two people meet, there may not be many topics to talk about as it would be the case with someone from another context. Therefore, talking about previous Tinder experiences can be considered a way to break the ice.

Moreover, according to respondents 2 and 4, there may be more expectations on a Tinder date than on a normal date: “When you meet through Tinder, you know why you are here, there are some sort of expectations” said respondent 2 with a suggestive tone. Respondent 4 added: “The Tinder context conditions me to act a certain way”. One can say that this may add on some stress. On a regular date, things may be more implicit.

Another point which was already mentioned but worth reflecting on longer is the fast pace of Tinder. Indeed, respondent 4 pointed out that “once a Tinder date is over, one knows whether he scored or not”. However, on a normal date, “things can take more time to happen” he said. This shows two things: first of all, the verb ‘score’ indicates how much Tinder can be considered a game by its users. Second of all, one may need more than one date to concretize

48 things on a non-Tinder date, however, on Tinder, the process is faster. We could then talk of fast dating.

4.7.3 Bad Experiences When asked about their bad experiences on Tinder several respondents said that they have been sometimes disappointed about the shift between the virtual and the reality: “People can look and act very differently than behind their phones” said respondent 1. Almost all respondents mentioned being disappointed at least once because the person in front of them did not match the photos: “He did not look like on the photos at all so I found an excuse to leave earlier” explained respondent 6. A technique also used by respondent 3 who faked his way out of a date where he found himself with a woman who had different expectations than him. As for respondent 4, he explained that his worst experience was to get attached too quickly before finding out later that he had been used: “You meet someone, it’s very passionate during a month or two, and then you start seeing each other less and less until you realize that your expectations were different: he just wants sex and you don’t”. Thereby, one can note that different expectations give rise to disappointment. However, some respondents pointed out that since it is a person met online, it is easier to be detached and not to feel pressured: “If I don’t like the boy, that’s fine I may never see him again” (respondent 2), “You go there and you know you don’t have to meet a standard because there is none” (respondent 6).

Respondent 4 included the addictive side of Tinder in his bad experiences: “After a year on dating apps, I still had not met ‘the one’. I needed a break and I needed to do a swipe detox”. The word ‘detox’ shows at what point Tinder can be double sided: on the one hand, it can be a modern, innovative way to meet people, but on the other, it can turn into something harmful.

Another common bad experience highlighted in the interviews was just an overall awkward situation: “The talk was not going smoothly” (respondent 1), “I have never had a bad date, just very awkward dates” (respondent 5). In addition, respondent 2 pointed out the very rude messages she received on the app. Already pointed out by Jo Sales, this pattern is well illustrated on the Instagram account Bye Felipe, where Alexandra Tweten denounces two trends: rejection and ignorance, by posting screenshots of rude messages sent by male users after being rejected or ignored on online dating platforms (Shaw). 420 000 people follow this account (Croquet and Signoret). By showing some examples of types of discourse – rude messages –, the goal is to demonstrate a repeated discourse pattern, and thus to draw attention to harassment in online dating (Shaw). Researcher Frances Shaw argues that Bye Felipe and other similar accounts constitute good examples of feminist discursive activism through the

49 highlighting of oppressive discourses in online dating: “Through the juxtaposition of a variety of different online behaviors, it draws together common threads of sexual entitlement and harassment in women’s experience” (Shaw). This shows that there can be a lack of safety for women on dating apps. Indeed, 42% of women using dating sites or apps have already felt “uncomfortable or harassed” by the way another user contacted them (Croquet and Signoret). For male users, the statistic drops to 17% (Croquet and Signoret). Not only harassment is a banalized practice on dating apps and “is part of the daily lives of female users”, but it is also tolerated by apps who allow these behaviors in the sense that they do not take action against it (Croquet and Signoret). If the management team of Tinder ensures to apply a very strict policy with zero tolerance, there is “nothing more than a simple report button” on the app to denounce abusive behavior (Croquet and Signoret). For journalists Pauline Croquet and Perrine Signoret, this does not have enough effect and does not prevent harassment (Croquet and Signoret). Thus, one can say that Tinder, among other dating apps, is allowing the perpetuation of this type of messages by its inaction.

4.8 Changes in Relationship Construction

Analyzing the results of the interviews allowed me to make several conclusions about changes in relationship’s construction. This is the last theme that stood out of my analysis.

4.8.1 Tinder, Just a Tool First of all, something that came back in all the interviews, was how Tinder is only a tool to meet someone. Indeed, respondent 3 said that Tinder was “just another way to meet a person”. Similarly, respondent 4 said “it’s just a tool to meet people”, and respondent 5 explained that she does not see Tinder as “this whole new way of going about dating”, but rather as “just another tool to meet someone”. One can conclude that Tinder is only seen as a medium through which two people meet.

4.8.2 Meeting Place: An Impact on Relationship’s Construction? Looking at what the interviewees said, it seems that this way of meeting is quickly forgotten. Indeed, respondent 1 explained: “The fact that I met my girlfriend on Tinder is not that important to me. We quickly moved to WhatsApp to chat, and I guess that this is what I would have done as well with someone from another context”. Respondent 6 argued that “a relationship is not affected by the way you met”, and according to respondent 4, it did not change anything to have met his current boyfriend on Tinder. He added: “Tinder just made things easier by putting him on my path”. One can then conclude that once things made a good

50 start between two Tinder users, the context of their meeting may not hold a lot of importance and does not necessarily interfere with the way they build their relationship.

4.8.3 Casualness However, if Tinder can be the right tool to find a significant other without impacting relationship’s construction, it can also be a way to find casualness, or at least this is what came out of the results of the interviews. In fact, respondent 2 believes that Tinder may change the way she shapes relationships “in the sense that it promotes casualness”. She explained that one does not need to commit right away, but “just go with the flow and see where things go”, before saying that “in real life”, she has “a tendency to commit more seriously in the first place”. One can say that this is not a pattern exclusive to Tinder as it may depend on each individual. However, it is reinforced by the dating app features and interface. Moreover, the gamification of the app can come strengthen this lighthearted aspect: “It’s a virtual game” said respondent 3. Once again, the comparison with a game depicts with what little seriousness respondents view Tinder. In addition, it appears that the design of the dating app creates a ‘desire’ for some respondents to pursue informal relationships.

4.8.4 Interchangeability: Plenty of Fish in the Sea As mentioned before, on top of offering casualness, Tinder offers unlimited options: “If it does not work with someone, it’s no problem. I can find someone else on the app […] You don’t fight a lot for the relation because you know there are plenty of fish in the sea” explained respondent 6. Here is again the interchangeability that I mentioned previously. Indeed, Tinder provides users with countless possibilities: “Instead of the handful of people you might meet in person within a limited vicinity, dating apps offer access to “singles in your area”, and therefore increases the supply of potential partners” (Money). Because of that, one may not feel the need to invest himself or herself a lot in a relation as other options are always available, awaiting on the app.

4.8.5 New Ways of Dating Looking at the results, one can assume that casualness and interchangeability create new ways of dating. For instance, respondent 2 reported that she would never have dated several person at the same time before Tinder: “One day you meet someone and the next day someone else, it’s a whole new way of dating for me”. Moreover, listening to respondent 4 describing his multiple Tinder dates: “Every time we meet in a bar. We have a few beers. We talk, it goes well. And then at the end we split the bill, and then 50 meters further we end up kissing each other”, gives the impression of a very repetitive process. One could say that Tinder trivializes

51 dates and relationships, and they end up being something common when some say it should be something special: “That feeling of “butterflies in the stomach” when you first enter a new relationship, it’s something of clear value that before had been scarce” (Money). With Tinder, entering a new relationship does not appear to be something rare and the action of dating can be compared to the repetition of a production line.

However, one should bear in mind that whether or not Tinder changes the way one shapes relationships, it can be done through subconscious mechanisms and not be noticed by users.

4.9 Major Findings

Through 6 semi-structured interviews, this research looked at different aspects of Tinder users’ experience. As explained in the methodology chapter, interviewing users was the best option to conduct this research as it allowed me to get an overview of the respondents’ real life experiences and not statistics about them. Once the interviews have been conducted, I analyzed the results through content analysis. This method allows the researcher to transform systematically large amounts of text into a concise and organized summary of key results (Brysiewicz and Erlingssona) by reducing the analysis to relevant aspects of the material (Schreier). With the collected data, several conclusions were drawn. I now state the new insights my research has yielded.

First, I wanted to know what pushes one to download Tinder. Several reasons were pointed out by respondents, but to summarize one can say that Tinder is used as a distraction, as a game but also to boost one’s self-esteem.

Then I queried what respondents liked and disliked about Tinder. What came out is that the simple and direct design of the app is highly appreciated because it makes the dating experience a quick and easy process. The casualness of Tinder was also mentioned as a major advantage by interviewees: there is no pressure, it is “fun” (respondent 5), and feels like a “game” (respondent 3). However, the treatment of personal data is problematic to many respondents and is one of the major downside of Tinder with the addictive aspect.

Despite some disadvantages, respondents invest time in the app daily. Some even reach the maximum amount of swipes possible in a day which proves once again, that Tinder has an important addictive potential, and was designed in a way that pushes users to come back regularly on the app. However, one can note a difference between male and female respondents:

52 if men use Tinder daily, women tend to use it only a few times a week. As mentioned before, this may be due to the fact that men have less chances to get matches than women and therefore need to spend more time on the app (Gareth et al.).

The main motivations to use Tinder for the respondents are meeting new people and having casual and fun relations. However, friends can often be the trigger for one to start Tinder: as demonstrated in the case study, there is a group effect. Only one respondent was looking for a serious relationship, however, as can be seen, three ended up seriously engaging to someone met through Tinder. This illustrates another conclusion: motivations do not stagnate and can change. From what the respondents have said, one can also conclude that some do not know for sure what they want. One usually decides what he or she wants according to the person in front of them. Tinder is also a way for respondents to learn how to present themselves and how to approach other users in order to attract them.

Another thread that came out of the interviews is the use of Tinder to improve oneself. Indeed, it can be used to improve sexual relations or to gain experience. Some use it as an ego boost to feel socially accepted or to learn about dating, and others use it to go out of their comfort zone and face their social fears.

Respondents spend on average a couple of seconds to a few minutes to evaluate a profile. Added to other components, this makes the dating process a fast one. The first element respondents usually look at are the photos. But if they focus on the physical appearance first, it can be said that the interface presentation is partly responsible by displaying the photos first. Respondents may feel push by the design of the app to behave in a superficial way. However, female respondents tend to also pay attention to the biography and may even like a profile for an intriguing one. Unlike preconceptions about Tinder can imply, attractiveness is not always the most important element when evaluating a profile and personality does matter.

Another important finding is the different practices between men and women: men sending the first message or women being more selective to name only two. After a good start on the Tinder chat, switching to another app to get more intimacy is also a common practice emphasized by respondents.

As for the experience of Tinder itself it can be a stressful process for some. Going on a first date is never easy one may say, but it can be even harder when one never saw the person before. Another interesting finding is the difference of perception between a Tinder date and a ‘normal’ date. Even though the two usually follow the same schema – “having a drink together”

53 (respondent 5) –, there is a “surprise effect on Tinder” (respondent 1), and expectations can be different. This and the fear of an awkward date can explain why there may be more pressure on a Tinder date. But if for some there is more stress, for others, there is less. Indeed, Tinder can help to feel detached. This shows an intimate connection to another point: there is a strong idea of interchangeability conveyed by the app and one can have the impression of unlimited options. This can lead to one not needing to invest fully when a relationship faces troubles because he or she knows that other options are possible within just a few swipes. Here, the relationship’s construction is impacted and modified. In addition, dating on Tinder can be seen as an economy. Indeed, users need to sell themselves and advertise for their profiles like on a market place in order to attract partners. Another point worth mentioning is that unlike previous studies have shown, the match itself is not an end and going on dates is not uncommon, although I cannot make generalizations with such a small sample of respondents. I come back to this aspect in the discussion section.

During the analysis process, I was able to identify other trends. First, Tinder is seen as a tool by respondents and not as a revolutionary way to meet people. That way of meeting does not necessarily impact relationship construction and is quickly forgotten. In addition, if some find love on Tinder, some find casualness. As addressed by critics (Jo Sales), one can say that Tinder favors informal relationships because of its features and the way its interface is designed: “The interface produces a discourse where interactions can be interpreted as casual, one-time- only, rather than putting in the effort and building a sustainable meaningful relationship” (Zap et al.). The last conclusion one could make with the results of the interviews is that Tinder, through casualness, can create new ways of dating such as dating more than one person at a time. Of course this way of dating was not invented because of Tinder, but the app certainly promotes it among less conventional relationship models. Moreover, one can say that given the repetitive process of Tinder dates, the app trivializes dates and relationships into a fast and common process. Now that I have stated the major findings of this research, I reflect on them in a discussion section.

4.10 Discussion

The findings drawn from the interviewees’ responses show that millennials are focused on results with a fast pace. Indeed, some of the answers give the impression that respondents are in a hurry to date and to meet new people. We want everything and we want it now. As mentioned in the introduction with the work of Sinek, millennials are accustomed to immediacy

54 as they grew up with the internet and instant gratification. This can explain the lack of patience present in some responses. And if Tinder can be a good distraction, a nice ego boost or a way to improve oneself, the app can also turn into a way to counter impatience. Indeed, through its design Tinder reiterates this focus on a fast pace. The interface is constructed in a simple and direct way in order to offer instantaneity and provide users with a fast and simplified online dating experience which often leads to casual encounters: “Tinder’s approach to romance is straightforward” (Purvis). Moreover, the ‘swiping’ interface has been meticulously thought out – “Tinder’s interface is perfectly constructed to encourage […] rapid swiping” (Purvis) – in order to generate a maximum of interactions and so that users come back regularly, ensuring long term success for the app. According to Assistant Professor of Applied Philosophy at the University of Twente, Nolen Gertz, whose primary research interest is in the intersection of political philosophy, existential phenomenology, and philosophy of technology, the tremendous success of Tinder is due to the fact that the app is “increasingly addictive” (124). Therefore, despite Tinder’s downsides such as vulnerable data treatment – “Tinder does not forget anything, it records everything” (QueenCamille) –, respondents still invest a lot of time in the app as they “feel like they are not wasting time but are engaging in human interactions” (128). In fact, the average user checked the app 11 times a day in 2013 according to the firm (125). That highlights the success of the interface in triggering users and ensuring their fidelity, although one can notice a difference of time investment between male and female respondents: women dedicate less time to the app.

The interface design combined with the fast pace of the app make dating a quick process where users need to sell themselves. To do so, they have to present themselves in a certain way in order to attract potential partners. Dating turns into an economy with supply meeting demand. Gertz argues that if some dating apps like OkCupid have noble intentions of helping users to find love, it is not the case of Tinder: “Tinder focuses not on romance but on transaction” (124), “Tinder […] invites users to go shopping” (125), “The market place for love” (Robinson). The terms ‘transaction’, ‘shopping’ and ‘market’ all call to mind the economic market. This shows that with Tinder, romance is reduced to a simple economic operation. This ‘reduction’ has a direct connection with the way in which users examine profiles.

The examination of other profiles is fast and rarely last more than a couple of minutes. In terms of evaluation criteria, photos are the most important element to respondents. The interface presentation plays a role in this by displaying the photos first. This could mean that Tinder has, in some ways, an influence on the profiles that users like: “Tinder has very concrete

55 consequences on our intimate life, determining who we have the right to approach or not” (QueenCamille). Although the interface presentation can be held partly responsible, Gertz pointed out in his book that the online dating world “revels in letting users accept and reject each other over profile pictures” (124). Gertz argues that Tinder gives to users the possibility to shop through pictures, “pictures that are uploaded by users to be looked over and judged” (125). For him, “users are reduced from persons to profiles, from profiles to pictures, and from pictures to hot or not” (126). A statement that matches the findings of this research as some respondents were deploring the fact that Tinder reduces people to their looks and photos, leading them to do the same. However, the vision of Gertz is slightly more pessimistic as he argues that “users enjoy turning other down” because it gives them power over other people (127). For him, Tinder allows “playing out on our phones the fantasy to have real power, the fantasy of taking what we want and destroying what we don’t want” (128). He argues that “all that Tinder requires is the swipe, the same activity that we also use when we speed through social media timelines, choosing in a similar fashion which of our “friends” are worth our time and which are not, which are worth a “like” and which are worth nothing” (128). Nonetheless, one can note that physical attractiveness is not always the most important element and can be outstripped by personality, especially with female respondents who can swipe right on a profile only for an intriguing biography. This shows that millennials, contrary to preconceptions, may not always be superficial and physical-oriented, although one should bear in mind that this result cannot be generalized because of the sample size.

This research has highlighted other differences between men’s and women’s practices on Tinder. For instance, male respondents are more prone to send the first message and female respondents are more selective. But there are also practices common to both genders such as the need to switch to another app like WhatsApp after having had a good start with a match. This shows that Tinder may be perceived as an impersonal platform by some respondents. Other apps may remedy to this issue by offering a more intimate online environment.

Despite the fact that Tinder dates can generate stress due to potentially different expectations on both sides and a surprise effect, respondents were all enthusiastic to go on Tinder dates. However, even though matches often turned into dates for respondents, it is not the case for most Tinder users as shown in the literature review with the study conducted by Lendedu. As stated, 70,8% of active users never went on a Tinder date (Motherboard Staff). Gertz gives an explanation: “The pleasure that we can derive from Tinder […] far outweighs the pleasure that we can derive from face-to-face interactions” (128). One may say that

56 satisfaction can be generated mainly through getting new matches. However, Gertz argues that as matches occurs on only 2% of swipes, “it is not the match but the swipe that is satisfying” (126). Gertz appears to believe that the end for users is the swipe and not the match which would only be a “bonus” (126). Based on the findings drawn from the interviewees’ responses, this theory does not seem to be fully true. From what the respondents have said, it was clear that the goal was to meet people in real life and not only to swipe on a phone’s screen. Therefore, even though the match was not an end, it was a necessary step to access the final goal: a date. However, it is interesting to mention Gertz’s point of view. He points out that not only very few matches are taken place – only 2% of swipes end in a match – but even fewer matches turn into a conversation. When it does, that conversation is also reducing users: “And when users did sent a message, they appeared not to see it as an opportunity to be more than what they had been reduced to but rather as yet another medium for reduction, with women writing the equivalent of a tweet, and men writing the equivalent of bathroom stall graffiti” (127). Gertz argues that “while it is generally accepted that users of Tinder are not looking for love, such behavior suggests that users of Tinder are barely even engaged in pursuing casual flings” (127). This shows that users have once again the desire to get what they want – or not – quickly, without too many efforts.

Obeying to group pressure, learning how to present oneself, how to approach others, pursuing informal relation or simply meeting new people, the motivations to be on Tinder are as various as they are versatile. Indeed, as illustrated in this thesis, some respondents changed their initial motivations to commit seriously to someone. This and some answers show that respondents were not sure of what they wanted on Tinder. In a way, they are passive because they let the app offer what it has and only then do they make a decision.

If the motivations to use Tinder can vary and evolve, the results also pointed out that for many respondents, Tinder is only a tool to meet people and that this way of meeting does not necessarily impact relationship. However, with the countless options Tinder offers its users, one can say that while the app does not explicitly encourage hookup culture, it does not foster meaningful relations either. It can be said that the app, through its affordances, encourages casual relationships or new ways of dating by making them mainstream. In addition, the interchangeability of partners conveyed by the app may push users to feel more detached in their relationships, at least initially. Tinder does not push users to invest fully in relationship construction because they always have the possibility to replace one partner by another. Indeed, some respondents did not feel the need to seriously engage in a relationship because they know

57 other options are just a few swipes away. Users are reduced to “swipeability” (128). Tinder then has an impact on relationships because it changes the way one sees his or her relations. For Gertz, “Tinder reduces the complication of interpersonal relationships to a hand gesture” (127). However, one should bear in mind that finding love on the app and committing seriously is still possible as showed by the experiences of 3 respondents.

Additionally, the abundance of options offered by Tinder can have other consequences in terms of behavior. According to journalist QueenCamille, “the number of people with whom we can interact trivializes a kind of cruel carelessness” (QueenCamille). One can say that if this abundance of options combined with an intensive use of the app may redefine the notion of attractiveness itself, it may also nudge users to act a certain way. Indeed, as exposed in the results, Tinder may promote looking at appearance and favor certain behaviors or actions such as ghosting. This shows that the virtual makes it easier for respondents to act in a way that would probably not be tolerated in real life: “Turning people down in person is mean and complicated, but turning people down on Tinder is fun and fast” (128), “Tinder users often use the app when they’re alone and can reject or express interest without receiving any social backlash” (Purvis). Moreover, one can do it without any guilt: “Users can feel like they are not hurting anyone’s feelings but just having a good time” (128). For Gertz, “what we find so fun about Tinder is … what Nietzsche describes as the pleasure of cruelty” (129). Such practices show that behaviors and interpersonal relationships can be under the influence of Tinder. However, based on the interviewees’ responses, this influence is not that important and the app does not change tremendously the way one shapes relationships. Indeed, Tinder remains a tool for respondents.

Having stated new insights and exposed the theoretical contributions brought by this research, I would like to nuance this study by reflecting on the methods and the results. Indeed, these words will not be the last ones written about this research topic, and I cannot claim my research to be exhaustive. This is partly due to the size of the sample but also to the methods I decided to use. Interviews and qualitative content analysis, like any other methods have limitations. Moreover, the constraints in time and space imposed by a Master thesis makes it impossible to be fully exhaustive if that is even an attainable goal. I acknowledge that my data may not have been always complete, my methods not all encompassing and my sample not representative as it consisted of 6 people. It is essential to mention that the results of this research were never intended to be representative of the experience of all millennials on Tinder and they must not be generalized. Moreover, with a topic such as this one, it is important to

58 bear in mind that it is not all white or all black. Results should be read with nuance. Even though this thesis presented common trends, when it comes to interpersonal relationships every individual can act differently as it is a very personal and intimate topic. In addition, not only can it be a difficult exercise for interviewees to remain objective and reflect on their own experience, but it is even harder to take into account the subconscious mechanisms and social conditioning that may guide them. Now that I have reflected on my research, the results I have obtained and the method I have used, I conclude this study in the next chapter.

59 V-CONCLUSION

Technology occupies an increasing place in people’s everyday life (Knox), including in their love life through the development of dating apps like Tinder. In less than a decade, there has been a drastic change in the way people meet: dating apps have become a new intermediary to connect with others outside of traditional ways (Moreira). One of the most used dating app? Tinder (Gertz 125). For journalist Corentin Durand, “Tinder changed the meeting in our prudish societies” (Durand). Its simple design and playful strategy propelled it to become the best dating app to use (Jansen). The success was quick to arrive and soon enough indisputable, especially with millennials (Diedrich). Like Fisher, some argue that the advent of dating apps has a direct impact on relationships (Polverini). And if technology through online dating has an impact on relationships, it is only legitimate to wonder to what extent and whether or not it is free of consequences in terms of relationship construction. While Tinder can be a modern and innovative way to connect to other people, one can wonder to what extent does it change interpersonal relationships among those under 30? This is the main question this Master thesis attempted to answer. This research examines Tinder’s impact on Generation Y’ interpersonal relationships through semi-structured interviews.

After the introduction that illustrates the purpose of this study, a chapter is dedicated to the literature review. This second chapter situates the subject in context by explaining the history of Tinder. It provides an inventory that explains in detail how Tinder and its features work. This chapter also summarizes the results of previous research which investigated various aspects of the application such as the motivations of users, the link between sexuality and new technologies or the ‘pre-match’ phase of Tinder profile construction and match selection.

In the third chapter, the methodological approach is discussed and the data collection method is detailed. Interviews have been conducted to investigate Tinder users’ experiences. The benefits of the chosen method are developed, such as the possibility to assess the respondent’s understanding of the questions, as well as its limitations, such as the fact that interviews are very time consuming. After taking the reader step by step in implementing this method, this chapter details and explains the data analysis method. In this thesis, a content analysis has been conducted to analyze the results of the interviews. Once more, the benefits and limitations are listed as well as other possible methods.

In the fourth chapter – the case study –, the results of this research are exposed, highlighting the major themes that came out of the interviews: reasons to turn to online dating,

60 advantages and disadvantages of Tinder, time management, main motivations, evaluation of other users, common practices, Tinder experiences, and changes in relationship construction. These are the themes that this research had to reflect on as they appeared to be the most relevant according to content analysis. Through an analysis of users’ experience on the app, the purpose of this chapter was to understand the change in interpersonal relationships. With the data, several conclusions were drawn. After presenting the results theme by theme, this chapter summarizes the major findings in the form of an organized summary of key results before presenting a discussion section that nuances the results.

To answer the question “To what extent has Tinder changed interpersonal relationships among millennials?”, it can be said that the application does bring, in some ways, changes in terms of interpersonal relationships: the evaluation of other people becomes more superficial, one may take relationships less seriously and be more casual when faced with too many options. Thus, romantic relationships can become something common and dating can turn into an economy with profiles displayed like in a catalog. Additionally, because of the design of Tinder’s interface, less conventional ways of dating can become mainstream for some users. One can say that Tinder has the power to steer online behavior and nudge its users to act a certain way. Despite these changes, Tinder does not modify tremendously the way one shapes relationships. Indeed, according to the results of the interviews, the dating app remains a tool to meet people and that way of meeting does not have a huge impact on interpersonal relationships. In addition, whether it is on Tinder or in real life, some aspects such as men enacting the first step, remain the same.

As mentioned before, Tinder received limited attention from the research community and many elements are not within the scope of this research. This leaves open the possibility for further research to be conducted. Among others, an aspect that this thesis could not develop and that could be an interesting topic to investigate is the ‘ELO score’. Secretly calculated with an algorithm, this grade gives an indication of the “desirability” of each user and calculates the popularity of their profiles to make them match with people from the same “league” (QueenCamille). Design and technology journalist Austin Carr argues that “the dating app uses data to give every user a desirability rating” (Carr). Based on some mysterious criteria among which the number of right swipe, the number of match, the profile photo, the level of education, the level of language used in the chat and other elements of one’s profile, the algorithm ranks users, placing them in a hierarchy of desirability (Carr). According to journalist Judith Duportail, who wrote a book on the secrets of Tinder’s algorithm – Love under algorithm –,

61 men users and women users are not evaluated in the same way (Queen Camille). The matching system favors a model in which men must have the upper hand over women: “to be more educated, richer and older” (Queen Camille). One could question the ethical aspect behind this score system.

It could also be captivating to question the model of Tinder. Indeed, if the app is supposed to help users find their soul mate, one should bear in mind that “loneliness is at the heart of Tinder’s business model” (QueenCamille). It makes the slogan – “It starts here. Tinder is how people meet.” – if not untruthful, paradoxical. Indeed, when a match does turn into a love story, Tinder loses two customers at once: “It must be remembered that it is above all a financial empire that is not intended to make us find love but to bring us back again and again on the app” (QueenCamille). To meet this need and make profit, the app has developed some strategies. For example, through its affordances, the application allows users to pursue several relationships at the same time and encourages them to examine many different profiles (Zap et al.). One may wonder if Tinder is doing everything in its power to find a partner for each user or if the app encourages casual relationships and hookup culture to ensure their loyalty.

62 Sources

Allen, Mike. “Content Analysis: Advantages and Disadvantages.” SAGE Research Methods, 2017, https://methods.sagepub.com/Reference//the-sage-encyclopedia-of-communication- research-methods/i3223.xml.

Anderson, Monica., and Smith, Aaron. “5 facts about online dating.” Pew Research Center, 29 Feb. 2016, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/02/29/5-facts-about-online-dating/.

Arbrun, Clément. “Comment le ghosting est devenu la rupture de l'ère Tinder.” Les Inrockuptibles, 3 Mar. 2017, https://www.lesinrocks.com/2017/03/03/actualite/actualite/ghosting-devenu-rupture-de-lere- tinder/.

Asv-stp.fr. “Pourquoi ASV?” ASV STP, http://asv-stp.fr/about.

Ballet, Virginie. “Accusé de tuer la romance au profit des coups d’un soir, Tinder se fâche tout rouge.” Next.libération.fr, 12 Aug. 2015, https://next.liberation.fr/sexe/2015/08/12/accuse-de- tuer-la-romance-au-profit-des-coups-d-un-soir-tinder-se-fache-tout-rouge_1362383.

Banuta, Rudy. “Content Analysis and Discourse Analysis.” SlideShare, 21 Jan. 2015, https://fr.slideshare.net/tesono/content-analysis-and-discourse-analysis.

Bertier, Anne-Sophie. “Comment Tinder a construit sa croissance explosive?” Don’t Believe The Hype, 31 Aug. 2015, http://www.dontbelievethehype.fr/2015/08/comment-tinder- construit-sa-croissance-explosive-application/.

Bowles, Nellie. “Mr. (Swipe) Right? After a year of tumult and scandal at Tinder, ousted founder Sean Rad is back in charge. Now can he — and his company — grow up?” The California Sunday Magazine, 11 Jan. 2016, https://story.californiasunday.com/sean-rad-tinder.

Boyer, Clémence. “Pourquoi la Génération Y est malheureuse au travail.” Les Echos Start, 5 Jan. 2019, https://start.lesechos.fr/rejoindre-une-entreprise/actu-recrutement/pourquoi-la- generation-y-est-malheureuse-au-travail-6933.php.

Brown, Mike. “Is Tinder a Match for Millennials?” Lendedu, 22 Apr. 2017, https://lendedu.com/blog/tinder-match-millennials/.

63

Brysiewicz, Petra., and Erlingssona, Christen. “A hands-on guide to doing content analysis.” Science Direct, Sept. 2017, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211419X17300423.

Carr, Austin. “I Found Out My Secret Internal Tinder Rating And Now I Wish I Hadn’t.” Fast Company, 1 Nov. 2016, https://www.fastcompany.com/3054871/whats-your-tinder-score- inside-the-apps-internal-ranking-system?cid=search.

Chamorror-Premuzic, Tomas. “The Tinder Effect: Psychology of Dating in the Technosexual Era.” The Guardian, 17 Jan. 2014, https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media- network-blog/2014/jan/17/tinder-dating-psychology-technosexual.

Croquet, Pauline., and Signoret, Perrine. “Insultes, avances répétées… Sur les sites de rencontre, le harcèlement des femmes est banalisé.” Le Monde, 14 June 2018, https://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2018/06/14/insultes-avances-repetees-sur-les-sites-de- rencontre-le-harcelement-des-femmes-est-banalise_5315122_4408996.html.

Datingsitesreviews.com. “OkCupid Information, Statistics, Facts and History.” Dating Sites Reviews, 22 Apr. 2019, https://www.datingsitesreviews.com/staticpages/index.php?page=OkCupid-Statistics-Facts- History.

Datingsitesreviews.com. “Happn Information, Statistics, Facts and History.” Dating Sites Reviews, 11 Aug. 2018, https://www.datingsitesreviews.com/staticpages/index.php?page=happn-statistics-facts- history.

Davis, Jenny L., and Chouinard, James B. “Theorizing Affordances: From Request to Refuse.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 2016, vol. 36, no. 4.

Decoeur, Patrice. “Etude qualitative, pourquoi faire?” Web Marketing & Com, 15 Nov. 2012, https://www.webmarketing-com.com/2012/11/15/17052-etude-qualitative-pourquoi-faire.

Diedrich, Joseph S. “Everything I Know About Economics I Learned from Tinder.” Foundation for Economic Education, 28 May 2014, https://fee.org/articles/everything-i-know-about- economics-i-learned-from-tinder/.

64

Doyle, Alison. “What Is a Semi-Structured Interview?” The Balance Careers, 29 Oct. 2018, https://www.thebalancecareers.com/what-is-a-semi-structured-interview-2061632.

Durand, Corentin. “Tinder, Happn, Once, Grindr… : notre guide ultime des applis de rencontre pour la Saint-Valentin.” Numerama, 14 Feb. 2018, https://www.numerama.com/pop- culture/144435-trouver-lamour-avant-la-saint-valentin-notre-guide-des-applis-de- rencontre.html.

Fabien. “Étude qualitative : tout savoir sur l'entretien individuel.” Critizr for Business, 12 July 2016, https://business.critizr.com/blog/etude-qualitative-tout-savoir-sur-entretien-individuel.

Gertz, Nolen. Nihilism and Technology. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield International, 2018.

G, Jerome. “Tinder must be joking with their “download your data” option.” Medium, 31 Oct. 2017, https://medium.com/personaldata-io/tinder-must-be-joking-with-their-dowload-your- data-option-88fdd7b3950d.

Gomaere, Géraldine. “Qui sont les profils des générations X, Y et Z?” Le Journal du CM, 10 May 2017, https://www.journalducm.com/generations-x-y-z/.

Green, Anna. “The Advantages of an Interview Over a Questionnaire.” Biz Fluent, https://bizfluent.com/info-8220458-advantages-interview-over-questionnaire.html.

Hasa. “Difference Between Content Analysis and Discourse Analysis.” Pediaa, 20 Aug. 2016, https://pediaa.com/difference-between-content-analysis-and-discourse-analysis/.

Huffpost.com “This Is How Technology Is Affecting Your Relationship.” HuffPost, 19 Oct. 2014, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/technology-changing- relationships_n_5884042?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLm NvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFjMNea4RFzaAWTh_XZ3lTMRLYylsR26Fc_o_pk47H wM_jqQEeOJSrapG7T5DSksCC8qk8EN_B3zYG3t3ZByrohpyq7HpdVph7IYsDw4ofHnRY 491zmOSmLeSbm9pmqhm_oBHh-0ayaiUuYInVY7RC4n7_0kI1SlUrV4PiVneLDA.

Iqbal, Mansoor. “WhatsApp Revenue and Usage Statistics (2019).” Business of Apps, 19 Feb. 2019, http://www.businessofapps.com/data/whatsapp-statistics/.

65

Jansen, Mark. “The best dating apps for 2019.” Digital Trends, 2 Nov. 2019, https://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/best-dating-apps/.

Jo Sales, Nancy. “Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse”.” Vanity Fair, 6 Aug. 2015, https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/08/tinder-hook-up-culture-end-of-dating.

Kattalia, Kathryn. “What Dating App Withdrawal Feels Like When You Delete Tinder For A Month.” Bustle, 11 Apr. 2016, https://www.bustle.com/articles/153152-what-dating-app- withdrawal-feels-like-when-you-delete-tinder-for-a-month.

Kinsey Institute and Clue. “Technology & Modern Sexuality: Results from Clue and Kinsey’s International Sex Survey.” Gallery Mailchimp, June 2017, https://gallery.mailchimp.com/554663d7c6758f89d1856e0a5/files/a4abae17-ddd2-42a3-aff7- 3700b9bd0193/170809_SexSurveyResults_XL.pdf.

Knox, David. “How Technology Is Changing Our Relationships.” MEEM, 20 Nov. 2016, https://www.meemmemory.com/technology-changing-relationships/.

Lacse.fr. “Tinder sans Facebook: la nouveauté qui va changer la rencontre en ligne.” Lacse, https://www.lacse.fr/tinder-sans-facebook/.

Landry, Valérie. “10 statistiques fascinantes sur les rencontres en ligne.” Daily Remedy, 11 Jan. 2018, https://www.dailyremedy.co/amour-et-sexe/10-statistiques-fascinantes-sur-les- rencontres-en-ligne.

Lapowsky, Issie. “Tinder May Not Be Worth $5B, But It’s Way More Valuable Than You Think.” Wired, 11 Apr. 2014, https://www.wired.com/2014/04/tinder-valuation/.

LeFebvre, Leah E. “Swiping Me off My Feet: Explicating Relationship Initiation on Tinder.” SAGE Journals, 2018, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265407517706419.

Levesque, Anne-Sophie. “Les applis de drague géolocalisée cartonnent!” Biba, 11 Feb. 2014, https://www.bibamagazine.fr/sexo/celibat/le-boom-des-applications-de-drague-geolocalisees- 990.

66 Litaud, Emmanuelle. “Zone Interdite enquête sur le boom des applications pour célibataires.” Le Figaro TV Mag, 18 Mar. 2018, http://tvmag.lefigaro.fr/programme-tv/zone-interdite- enquete-sur-le-boom-des-applications-pour-celibataires_1bbae68c-278c-11e8-9128- cbd319f5d0fd/.

Louis, Jean-Philippe. “Rencontres : comment Tinder compte résister à Facebook.” Les Echos, 14 Aug. 2018, https://www.lesechos.fr/tech-medias/hightech/rencontres-comment-tinder- compte-resister-a-facebook-136567.

Mathieu. “Avantages et inconvénients des enquêtes quantitatives.” Superprof Ressources, https://www.superprof.fr/ressources/developpement-personnel/communication/supports- com1/resume-com1/plus-moins-enquete-avis.html.

Mathieu. “Réaliser des enquêtes de marketing.” Superprof Ressources, https://www.superprof.fr/ressources/developpement-personnel/communication/cours- com3/terminale-stmg-com3/sondage-population-produit.html.

Matsakis, Louise. “Facebook Dating Is Rolling Out. Here’s How It Differs From Tinder.” Wired, 8 Nov. 2018, https://www.wired.com/story/facebook-dating-how-it-works/.

Money. “The Dating Market: The Economics of a Relationship.” The Saint, 8 Nov. 2018, http://www.thesaint-online.com/2018/11/the-dating-market-the-economics-of-a-relationship/.

Moreira, Enrique. “Les couples ne se rencontrent plus comme avant.” Les Echos, 19 Mar. 2016, https://www.lesechos.fr/19/03/2016/lesechos.fr/021776982484_les-couples-ne-se- rencontrent-plus-comme-avant.htm.

Motherboard Staff. “Ce que veulent les jeunes qui s’inscrivent sur Tinder.” Vice, 20 June 2018, https://www.vice.com/fr_be/article/5999na/ce-que-veulent-les-jeunes-qui-sinscrivent-sur- tinder.

Newsmonkey.be. “Super Like Tinder: c'est quoi et comment ça fonctionne?” Newsmonkey, 21 June 2018, http://fr.newsmonkey.be/article/24933.

Nlto.fr. “Les trentenaires accrocs à Tinder.” Nlto, https://www.nlto.fr/Les-trentenaires-accrocs- a-Tinder_a427.html.

67 Numerama.com. “Tinder : Historique, Présentation, Chiffres-Clés.” Numerama, https://www.numerama.com/startup/tinder.

Oag.ca. “La tenue d'enquêtes.” Office of the Auditor General of Canada, http://www.oag- bvg.gc.ca/internet/Francais/meth_gde_f_19728.html.

Pant, Meghna. “Love in the time of Tinder: Why the dating app has ruined love for its users.” Firstpost, 12 June 2016, https://www.firstpost.com/living/love-in-the-time-of-tinder-why-the- dating-app-has-ruined-love-for-its-users-2826988.html.

Polverini, Léa. “Les applications de rencontre, ça marche ou non?” Slate, 5 May 2018, http://www.slate.fr/story/157876/applications-rencontre-efficace.

Purvis, Jeanette. “Finding love in a hopeless place: Why Tinder is so “evilly satisfying”.” Salon, 12 Feb. 2017, https://www.salon.com/2017/02/12/finding-love-in-a-hopeless-place-why- tinder-is-so-evilly-satisfying/.

QueenCamille. “Les secrets de l’algorithme de Tinder.” Madmoizelle, 26 Mar. 2019, http://www.madmoizelle.com/algorithme-tinder-livre-992489.

Réju, Emmanuelle. “Une majorité de Français rencontrent leur premier conjoint chez des amis.” La Croix, 24 Jan. 2013, https://www.la-croix.com/Famille/Couple/Une-majorite-de-Francais- rencontrent-leur-premier-conjoint-chez-des-amis-_NG_-2013-01-24-903233.

Robinson, Holly. “Tinder : The Market Place for Love.” Semantic Scholar, 2018, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/359d/68c87ef5f81b87e069e20cee85f542b831e0.pdf.

Rocha, Polyanna. “Gamification of love: a case study of Tinder in Oslo.” Duo, 2018, https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/64406/Polyanna- %20Rocha.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

Schreier, Margrit. “Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice.” SAGE Publishing, Feb. 2012, https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/46241_Schreier.pdf.

68 Segel, Alison. “How To Move The Conversation Off Tinder & Into Real Life.” Elite Daily, 15 Oct. 2017, https://www.elitedaily.com/p/how-to-move-the-conversation-off-tinder-into-real- life-2895434.

Shaw, Frances. “‘Bitch I Said Hi’: The Bye Felipe Campaign and Discursive Activism in Mobile Dating Apps.” SAGE Journals, Oct. 2016, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2056305116672889#articleCitationDownloadC ontainer.

Sumter, Sindy R., Ligtenberg, Loes., Vandenbosch, Laura. “Love me Tinder: Untangling emerging adults' motivations for using the dating application Tinder.” Telematics and Informatics, 1 Apr. 2016, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301774015_Love_me_Tinder_Untangling_emergin g_adults'_motivations_for_using_the_dating_application_Tinder.

SunnyDoll. “Ghosting.” Urban Dictionary, 19 Aug. 2016, https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Ghosting.

Swipehelper.com. “Tinder Without Facebook – Pros & Cons of Signing Up with Your Phone Number.” Swipe Helper, 10 May 2018, https://www.swipehelper.com/2018/05/10/tinder- without-facebook-account-pros-cons-sign-up-phone-number/.

The Writing Studio. “Advantages of Content Analysis.” Writing@CSU, https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/page.cfm?pageid=1318&guideid=61.

The Writing Studio. “An Introduction to Content Analysis.” Writing@CSU, https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/page.cfm?pageid=1305&guideid=61.

Tinder.com. “Qu’est-ce que Tinder?” Tinder, https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/fr/articles/115004647686-Qu-est-ce-que-Tinder-.

Tinder.com. “Super Like.” Tinder, https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/fr/articles/115004493543- Super-Like.

Tinder.com. “Tinder Plus et Tinder Gold.” Tinder, https://www.help.tinder.com/hc/fr/articles/115004487406-Tinder-Plus-et-Tinder-Gold-.

69 Tns-sofres.com. “Les Millennials passent un jour par semaine sur leur smartphone.” Kantar, 30 Nov. 2015, https://www.tns-sofres.com/publications/les-millennials-passent-un-jour-par- semaine-sur-leur-smartphone#.

Toumert, T. “Entretien ou Questionnaire : Quelle méthode de collecte de donnés pour son mémoire?” Open Edition, 6 Jan. 2017, https://arlap.hypotheses.org/8170.

Tuckfield, Bradford. “Attraction Inequality and the Dating Economy.” Quillette, 12 Mar. 2019, https://quillette.com/2019/03/12/attraction-inequality-and-the-dating-economy/.

Tyson, Gareth., Haddadi, Hamed., Perta, Vasile C., and Seto, Michael C. “A First Look at User Activity on Tinder.” ResearchGate, July 2016, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305007166_A_First_Look_at_User_Activity_on_Ti nder.

University of Georgia. “What is content analysis?” UGA, 2012, https://www.terry.uga.edu/management/contentanalysis/research/.

Vieira, Suzi. “Aux origines de la domination masculine.” Philosophie Magazine, 26 Sept. 2012, https://www.philomag.com/les-idees/aux-origines-de-la-domination-masculine-5033.

Ward, Janelle. “What are you doing on Tinder? Impression management on a matchmaking mobile app.” Information, Communication & Society, 6 Nov. 2016, vol. 20, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1252412?needAccess=true.

Zap, Luisa. Van Breugel, Joris. Bakker, Daniëlle. Bels, Sarah. “Swiping Right vs. Finding Mr. Right: Facebook Attempts to Reinvent Online Dating.” Masters of Media, 18 Oct. 2018, https://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl/blog/2018/10/18/swiping-right-vs-finding-mr-right- facebooks-attempt-to-reinvent-online-dating/.

70 Interview Questions

As explained in the methodology chapter, I conducted semi-structured interviews. This interview format allows spontaneity and does not imply a strict list of questions to follow. As a result, the following list of questions may not be exhaustive. Moreover, some questions may look similar. This was done to encourage respondents to develop their answers. In addition, 2 of the 6 interviews have been conducted in French and translated.

How old are you?

How would you describe your gender?

Why did you download Tinder?

What do you like and dislike about this app?

How often are you using Tinder?

What is the main raison for you to user Tinder?

What are your other motivations/reasons to use Tinder?

What are you looking for exactly on this app?

How long does it takes you to evaluate a profile?

What are you looking at when you see a profile on Tinder?

71 Would you say you pay a lot of attention in the physical appearance or are you more interested in what the person has to say?

Would you like someone just for a funny/intriguing biography?

Would you say that there are things you do/practices you have on the app because you are a man/a woman?

Have you ever met someone via Tinder?

If yes, how was this experience? Can you describe it briefly?

Do you go on Tinder dates often or is it rare?

If yes, would you say that it is different from a ‘normal’ date?

If yes, what aspects are changing? What is different?

What is a ‘normal’ date for you?

Would you say you use this app to improve yourself?

Have you ever had a bad experience on Tinder?

72