Finding Love in Cyberspace

This study follows the interactions of couples who have met by writing to each other on computers from initial contact through intensified communication by various means. It looks at respondents' plans to meet, their expectations, and then their reactions upon coming together face-to face. Using data from emailed questionnaires, the research has gathered over thirty pairs who illustrate that their written attempts at complete self-revelation regarding personality quirks and likes and dislikes can develop true, deep, deep bonds. These connections may perhaps endure longer than those based upon an initial physical attraction in real life, we will use IRL (In Real Life).

A goal of the study is to try to trace the usual sequence of types of devices used to communicate before meeting IRL. Another goal is to identify those who would benefit most from this type of encounter. One conclusion is that the "place" people first encountered each other may be important as well as the amount of time spent getting to know each other. Many in the study moved from one state to another within the U. S. and several immigrated to other countries to join their partners. What propels men and women today to search for romantic companionship online and which factors lead to successful outcomes?

I. Seeking and Finding Partners Online: Introduction

Here we will look at which types of communication in which sequences were typically used by the respondents in the early, online stages of their relationships. Comparing patterns followed by couples in this study to relationships formed IRL or beginning through personal ads placed in newspapers or with agencies may better reveal the advantages and disadvantages of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in relationship formation. One issue is whether the primacy of physical attraction is minimized through a later placement in the discovery process between prospective couples.

A second goal is to start to discern which factors may lead to more successful outcomes for potential partners meeting online. Those examined include level of honesty desired and perceived, and more structural factors such as place of meeting, length of relationship online, age of participants, and geographical location. Again, are these factors similar or different to successful outcomes for couples offline? A major obstacle often overcome by the couples online is to meet across small or large physical distance. Although no comparable groups offline were gathered for the research, theoretical comparison and data from other researchers as well as thoughts of the participants are used to suggest directions for future research.

The larger study traces the progress of relationships in cyberspace among those who have found another person to form an intimate couple, first online and then IRL. Though not necessarily looking for a dating or marriage partner, the people in this purposive sample came upon each other in various contexts and began the process of getting to know each other through CMC.

Using emailed questionnaires, with occasional follow-up interviews by phone or in person, the researcher asked about how, when and where they met online, how they communicated, including which modes were used most frequently over time, how they came to meet IRL and what happened there, and the outcomes of their relationships thus far.

II. Characteristics of the Couples in the Research

Thus far I have gathered data from thirty-four couples ranging in age from sixteen to fifty-two. One article focusing on how the first eighteen couples to contact me met IRL and their expectations of that meeting offline was published online in CMC (July, 1998.) For this report I will concentrate on the later grouping, the sixteen couples who responded in 1998 through May 1999. They are in their late teens, their twenties, thirties and forties. Almost all have completed some college, have college degrees, or done postgraduate work. They live in all regions of the United States, Canada, and in Europe. They have moved from one of their cities or the other to live together, or to marry in some cases.

Three of the sixteen couples broke up after their initial communication with the interviewer, four are married, two engaged, and one lesbian couple has cohabited for eleven months. One couple got married shortly after they completed the questionnaires, Some of them sent me private email to supplement the questionnaires which detailed the changes in their written relationships. The online letters show their progress from perceiving each other as initially compatible to actually falling in love before and/or after meeting in person. I have interviewed two couples by phone, following up the written data.

III. Getting to Know Each Other Part A:

"Where they met and sequence of communication, timing of photo"

In getting to know each other, the location of first contact online, and the modes of communication used and their order or sequencing are facets of the online process of becoming paired. The place where the couples first met in cyberspace may prove crucial in that the narrower the interest group such as a chatroom for people of Irish heritage, or a game played with avatars, the more they may have in common. People who met in

MOO's or MUd's are younger and see how each plays a role before discovering the true person underneath. Nicknames are sometimes important, if they are particularly descriptive, whereas if people use their real names, they do not matter.

Most people in this grouping and in the study as a whole met through particularized, rather than general places online. They did not become acquainted in random chat or icq messages, but rather joined certain spaces which centered around a common interest such as a game known as a MOO or through a discussion forum with specialized topics. Examples of these include online versions of Dungeons and Dragons with storylines and characters created by the participants and discussion groups for students or people interested in certain cultures within Europe or for occupational interests. One couple did seek potential mates through a dating service, Match.com.

The process of communication online started in public chat or discussion and moved to private messaging within those spaces and then too private icque-ing or one-to-one messages away from the original contexts. Email quite often accompanied the change to other private synchronous messaging. Phone calls typically came after the couple had graduated to private messaging and emails, and of course, the f2f meetings occurred last. With one exception, (Ticka, #25) individuals waited to show photographs of themselves until they had written back and forth for weeks or months.

Photos were exchanged among almost all of the couples prior to meeting, with two members of couples choosing not to send a picture and one male and female who decided to meet offline without first observing a photo. On the one hand, people say without a photo the element of physical attraction remains unknown. However with these couples, the knowing of the inner person occurs before the revelation of the outer shell. Some within this sample prefer to postpone learning about appearance, focusing upon the intellectual and emotional compatibility.

Many downplayed the photo, one man (Grady, #30) expressing that it didn't matter to him if she looked like an "ogre" because he cared for her so much. Nissa and Konrad (#26), whom I met IRL days after their own meeting in physical space, wanted to learn about each other based upon their writings alone. They liked what they saw but considered their looks secondary to ideas and beliefs and experiences shared.

One couple exchanged low quality photos one from a passport and one from online with Grady's partner Whitney worried that he would find her overweight and unattractive and stop communicating as another potential man had after seeing the snapshot. He thought she was "cute" though he had noted the unimportance of appearance at that point. The couple who had not shared photos turned out to be quite pleased with each other's looks, with Nissa also describing Konrad as "cute" and Konrad admitting that Nissa "turned out to be beautiful". Kondrad expressed pity, however, for those who needed to see photos before they would proceed with their cross-sex friendships online.

IV. Getting to Know Each Other, Part B:

Advice to Others, Advantages of CMC, and Disclosure Online

The most common bits of advice have to do with first, honesty of self-presentation, and second do not go looking for a relationship or expect one immediately. Also suggested by many is to meet in an area of common interest rather than on a dating site, as noted above.

On the honesty factor, the popular press has publicized cases of people changing genders online, or taking on a false age or marital status. More subtle exchanges among these couples involve not emphasizing good qualities at the expense of negative ones, so that prospective intimates can see the true person, the ordinary soul behind the fantasy. Almost every one of the respondents insists that accuracy is crucial when dependent on only written cues. As IRL, couples advise that nurturing friendship first provides a deeper basis for going further, that people searching for a great love online may set themselves up for disappointment as the first glow of infatuation wears off.

To be able to risk more because of the tenuous connection and relative *safety, (Neva #20) since you are "talking to a screen" instead of a live person (Gottfried #24) and to meet more people to your liking are listed as advantages. To go at your own pace, to reveal more about thoughts and feelings through the written word is mentioned. The ability to think about passages written tends to allow for deeper meanings said one respondent. "Reading takes more time", so you have "time to think" (Gottfried #24).

A few people pointed out that online communication makes it less difficult to overcome a shyness or nervousness IRL. Some found the online process of becoming acquainted more amenable because they could present themselves with "no self-consciousness"(Xaviera, #27). The youngest couple pointed to how you have "no inhibitions" and "can be yourself" (Buzz, #27). His partner Xaviera agreed by stressing how online writing is easier than in-person self-presentation because you start with "a clean slate" with "no preconceived ideas" about the other. Buzz continued, "They can't call you ugly because they don't know", reiterating the how the absence of physical cues can become a benefit, allowing people to grow together before becoming what Thad (#25) calls "distracted" by the appearance of the other person.

All but a few members of the couples admitted that they would reveal more of themselves online: Ticka and Lyra both said they were just as open with people offline, and gave a lot of personal information to people they knew. The women listed more qualifications to their disclosure statements; such as that they may likely tell a lot anyway, but still would communicate more about feelings through the written mode. Joanne (#19) noted that she was "a bit more open with my fears" because it's easier when "you don't have to see the other person". Briar (#22) noted that her partner may have received "a more accurate view" of her' online, that only she would know for sure. Men discussed greater revelations of "angst" (Jeb #19) or "personal feelings" (Thad #25). Buzz (#27) agreed because "you don't feel intimidated."

The relationship of online to offline social circles influenced Nissa (#26) to comment that since "you don't know each others' significant others...it's easier to casually share" some things. Also she characterizes online communication as "a bunch of anecdotes, or monologues" which are both less risky than RL conversations in that the relationship remains undeveloped at first. However, as IRL, "the more you come to know, respect, and like a person" things get more risky "because they could terminate the connection" at any moment and disappear.

V. Conclusions:

Time Frame of Online Relationships, Sequencing Revisited

To conclude, to the facets mentioned above draw attention to the possibility of strong ties forming from online communication. Rather than noticing a person's physique, facial features or style of movement or dress, these communicators are drawn by common interests and then thoughts and feelings expressed solely through typewritten words.

The modal sequence of communication goes from public conference or chatroom to private ones, then icqing if available at the time and then phone and then in person. In contrast ads go from public ad to phone call to meeting and typically skip steps in between. The couple then goes back and forth with phone and f2f, not needing a photo. IRL, the sequence is physical attraction followed by phone calls and more in person visits. In this study, the photo typically comes well after private chatting or icqueing but may come a bit sooner if one has a picture posted online. In a few cases, one or the other does not provide photo.

The time frame of meeting online to meeting IRL tends toward several months and in some cases, even more than a year. In part the geographical distance supports the wait for the physical meeting, yet the pull toward taking one's time is mentioned by many respondents.

In sum these partners get to know each other "from the inside out" (Neva, #20), rather than from the outside in. As one scholar of online connections put it, the question now is not "if" but "how and why" online relationships are fostered (Chenault,1998). This research traces some of the factors of those concerns.