Introduction
The dating app market is growing exponentially, with more than 366 million users in 2022 and revenues close to $3 billion (Match Group, 2023). In Spain alone, this sector had revenues of nearly 50 million euros, and it is estimated to reach almost 7 million users by 2027, achieving an introduction rate of 17.6%, higher than in the United States (Statista, 2023). These applications serve different purposes. In Spain, 55% of users claim to use these apps to find a stable partner, while also using them to meet friends with benefits (19%) or for one-night stands (13%) (Bueso, Reference Bueso2023). Dating apps are perceived to bring various advantages, including efficiency, greater uninhibited behavior, a perceived sense of safety as the initial contact with the other person occurs at a certain distance, and the use of search algorithms that provide individuals with a sense of objectivity and reliability (Coduto et al., Reference Coduto, Lee-Won and Baek2020; David & Cambre, Reference David and Cambre2016). However, there is also a dark side to using these tools (Soto & Ibabe, Reference Soto and Ibabe2022). For example, nearly three-quarters of female users of dating apps in Australia reported experiencing some form of sexual violence (Wolbers et al., Reference Wolbers, Boxall and Long2022) and, in Utah, 14% of the rapes that occurred during the first encounter were organized through a dating app (Valentine et al., Reference Valentine, Sekula, Cook, Campbell, Colbert and Weedn2019).
In Spain, sexual violence remains a critical concern, with recent reports highlighting both the prevalence of these incidents and the challenges in addressing them. Longitudinal data from the Spanish government shows that sexual violence against women has annually increased between 2010 and 2022 (Ministerio de Igualdad, 2023). Amnesty International reported that, between January and September 2023, there was a 12% increase in the number of rapes recorded in the country compared to the same period of the previous year (Herrera & Garces de los Fayos, Reference Herrera and Garces de los Fayos2024). Specifically related to the online setting, the recent study “Apps Without Sexual Violence” revealed that 21.7% of surveyed women were raped in dates organized through the Tinder app in Spain (Saiz et al., Reference Saiz, Otero and Crespo2022). This figure is alarmingly high compared to offline statistics, such as the 3.37 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants reported by Eurostat in 2020 (Eurostat, 2024). Despite these troubling statistics, existing research predominantly focuses on the quantitative aspects of sexual violence related to dating apps and lacks an in-depth examination of the phenomenological interpretations of dating app users. Specifically, there is a noticeable gap in research addressing the nuanced, subjective experiences of users within the Spanish context. While theoretical frameworks on digital-mediated rape exist (e.g., Filice et al., Reference Filice, Abeywickrama, Parry and Johnson2022), they do not adequately explore the phenomenological perspectives of those that are, to some extent, involved in the phenomenon.
This study aims to fill this gap by analyzing the phenomenological perspectives of active Tinder users in Spain. By exploring how these users perceive and attribute meaning to their experiences, we hope to enhance our understanding of behavioral perceptions and attributions related to dating app-facilitated sexual violence. The insights gained may assist policymakers in designing and implementing more effective strategies to address and mitigate this critical issue.
Literature Review
History and Evolution of Dating (Heterosexual in the Western World)
“Romantic and sexual encounters (…) have always been mediated through the technologies of the time” (Albury et al., Reference Albury, Burgess, Light, Race and Wilken2017, p. 3).
The first matrimonial service through advertisements was established around 1700, almost a decade after the invention of modern newspapers (Flug, Reference Flug2016). The term “date,” in the sense it is understood today, originated as slang and referred to a woman’s agenda. Specifically, its invention is often attributed to the American journalist George Ade (Brainz, n.d.), who published a daily column titled “Stories of the Streets and of the Town” in the Chicago Record. In one of his columns from 1896, he narrated a confrontation between Artie, a young office worker, and his girlfriend, who seemed to have lost interest in him and had started seeing other men. Upon meeting her, he exclaimed, “I suppose they’re occupying all my dates, right?” in reference to the dates in her diary that would have been filled with her plans with other suitors.
The concept of a “date” had its origins in the city, but it saw exponential growth on university campuses. It gave rise to the hookup culture (Getlen, Reference Getlen2016), which was described by the anthropologist Margaret Mead as a competitive game rather than a courtship ritual (Schwartz, Reference Schwartz2016). The situation changed again during and after World War II (Weigel, Reference Weigel2016). On one hand, there was a gradual inclusion of women in the social sphere through the labor market. On the other hand, consumer society encouraged women not to settle for the first suitor they encountered (Schwartz, Reference Schwartz2016). These factors, along with other circumstances, led to the emergence of another system: the “going steady” culture, which had both positive aspects, such as allowing couples a greater degree of emotional intimacy, and negative aspects, such as the responsibility placed on women regarding the regulation of sexual impulses (Weigel, Reference Weigel2016). Gradually, social barriers regarding who could date whom eroded, and the invention of the World Wide Web allowed for nearly limitless options (Hodgson, Reference Hodgson2018).
Online Dating
There are three generations of dating platforms. The first dating platform, Kiss.com, appeared in 1994, although Robert Ross and Lewis Altfest had created the first computerized matchmaking service in 1965 (Avilés, Reference Avilés2015). A year later, Match.com was registered by the same person who registered Kiss.com. From that point on, the market grew rapidly. In 1996, there were 16 dating websites registered on Yahoo!, and all of them provided users with the ability to create a profile and search through personal ads of other members using a search engine. The second generation began with the launch of eHarmony.com in 2000. This site distinguished itself from the earlier ones by employing a scientific system, also known as an algorithmic or compatibility system. Some companies competed by positioning their processes as even more scientific, for example, using genetic material. This was the value proposition of GenePartner, which, for $99, provided a kit to obtain a saliva sample and determine its biological compatibility rating (Tugend, Reference Tugend2009). Another distinction between these two generations was the revenue model. Typically, second-generation platforms charged a monthly fee, while first-generation ones generated revenue through advertising (Ali & Wibowo, Reference Ali and Wibowo2011). In 2008, the third generation emerged, when Apple launched its online app store. The shift to smartphones represented a significant change, similar in impact to the shift from offline to online channels (Cachon et al., Reference Cachon, Terwiesch and Xu2008). The dating app saw another exponential growth (Goldsmith, Reference Goldsmith, Goggin and Hjorth2014), with ubiquity, impulsivity, and disinhibition being key factors in this evolution (Jung et al., Reference Jung, Bapna, Ramaprasad and Umyarov2019). In order to find a match, users are compelled to provide specific and limited information, and matches are based on similarity or complementarity (Tong et al., Reference Tong, Hancock and Slatcher2016a).
Tinder, the Emergence of a New Culture
Tinder users view profiles of other users and choose those they would like to meet. For this reason, Carr (Reference Carr2016) argues that Tinder can be seen as a massive voting system, as swiping right means yes, and swiping left means no, which gave rise to the swiping culture (Rodrigues & Baldi, Reference Rodrigues and Baldi2017). Sales (Reference Sales2015), on the other hand, associates it with hookup culture, as it promotes more casual and rapid behaviors. These behaviors are said to be encouraged by the way these app’s interfaces are user-oriented, as well as the possibilities associated with mobile communications (Rodrigues & Baldi, Reference Rodrigues and Baldi2017). However, Haywood (Reference Haywood and Haywood2018) and Paul (Reference Paul2017) argue that while it may increase the speed of matchmaking and potentially encourage short-term pairing, the app also provides a pre-date stage when users filter potential partners and express their intentions, ultimately leading to a decrease in speed. Furthermore, users are only allowed to initiate further contact after a match. For this reason, it has been argued that the design is based on a dynamic of mutual attraction and consent (MacKee, Reference MacKee2016).
Tinder’s popularity represents a shift in the culture of establishing social connections and bonds through three elements. Firstly, a swiping action that takes place in a minimalist environment that prompts users to continuously and frequently use it (David & Cambre, Reference David and Cambre2016). The simplification of choice, being binary, promotes the acceleration of the process (David & Cambre, Reference David and Cambre2016). Secondly, interactions are intuitive and perceived as a game due to the introduction of the aforementioned gesture and variable rewards (Abolfathi & Santamaria, Reference Abolfathi and Santamaria2020). These features have changed the user experience and reduced barriers to entry for young adults. Finally, it creates a perception of immediate gratification, primarily due to the proximity of potential profiles (Kao, Reference Kao2016).
The way these platforms are used reveals both an integration and a contribution to the specific logic of a sense of control (Tong et al., Reference Tong, Hancock and Slatcher2016a), absolute availability, acceleration, and optimization (Degen & Kleeberg-Niepage, Reference Degen and Kleeberg-Niepage2022). On the other hand, these factors can lead to stressful situations for individuals and accentuate the objectification of human beings, especially women.
The Dark Side of Tinder
Several critics have been made to Tinder. For example, some authors proposed that Tinder users perceive it as calibrated to be addictive rather than helping them find quality dates (Orosz et al., Reference Orosz, Toth-Kiraly, Bothe and Melher2016) and suspect that this manipulation is solely aimed at maximizing the company’s profits (Zuboff, Reference Zuboff2019). However, they continue to use the platform as they apparently “do not believe that there is an alternative to Tinder’s logic” (Narr, Reference Narr2022, p. 5349).
According to Weigel (Reference Weigel2016), in online dating, it is assumed that individuals take full control of their lives, which leads to increased pressure, and consequently, stress. In other words, individuals must function as a small organization and market themselves as such, both within the company and in their social environment (Prada, Reference Prada2019). Furthermore, “the norm is no longer based on guilt but on responsibility” (Petit, Reference Petit2009, p. 99) as individuals have full agency on their decisions (Prada, Reference Prada2019). Therefore, if something goes wrong, the blame lies solely with the individual.
Another consequence would be the ability of algorithms to commodify and objectify humans, depersonalizing them (Breslow et al., Reference Breslow, Sandil, Brewster, Parent, Chan, Yucel, Bensmiller and Glaeser2020; Haywood, Reference Haywood and Haywood2018). Additionally, the use of vocabulary that is typical of economic markets promotes this trend, such as “shopping for partners” (Baxter, Reference Baxter2013; Erjavec & Fiser, Reference Erjavec and Fiser2016). This “commodification” was also claimed to reinforce certain masculinity stereotypes through the objectification of women (Breslow et al., Reference Breslow, Sandil, Brewster, Parent, Chan, Yucel, Bensmiller and Glaeser2020).
Research has found that dating apps have detrimental effects on health and well-being (Albury et al., Reference Albury, Burgess, Light, Race and Wilken2017; Tong et al., Reference Tong, Hancock, Slatcher and Meiselwitz2016b). Specifically, the depersonalization of humans along with the possibility of rejection and blame has led to an increased risk of mental illnesses such as anxiety or depression (Coduto et al., Reference Coduto, Lee-Won and Baek2020; Holtzhausen et al., Reference Holtzhausen, Fitzgerald, Thakur, Ashley, Rolfe and Pit2020); eating disorders (Tylka & Sabik, Reference Tylka and Sabik2010); or sexual violence (Saiz et al., Reference Saiz, Otero and Crespo2022; Wolbers et al., Reference Wolbers, Boxall and Long2022). Women have been disproportionately targeted with harassment and sexual abuse by men on these platforms (Tampubolon, Reference Tampubolon and Akink2023), to the extent that “acts of sexual violence against female users are so common on dating apps that it has become a norm” (Zhou, Reference Zhou2023, p. 59).
Sexual Violence and Dating Apps
Researchers have proposed some explanations as to why sexual violence is often mediated by digital technologies, including dating apps. This phenomenon has become so widely established that the term “technology-facilitated sexual violence” is now commonly used to describe different types of violence, including sexual, that involve the use of communication technologies (e.g., Powell & Henry, Reference Powell and Henry2019). There are four main theories that attempt to explain why online dating is associated with sexual violence or how it occurs. First, the Risky Lifestyle Approach suggests that online dating alone does not increase people’s tendency for sexual violence (e.g., Choi et al., Reference Choi, Wong and Fong2018). Instead, it provides a convenient platform for those who already have violent tendencies to act on them. Therefore, the use of platforms like Tinder can increase the likelihood of encountering individuals with preexisting abusive tendencies as certain features like perceived anonymity and ease of access can attract those who may have violent predispositions (see, e.g., Phan et al., Reference Phan, Seigfried-Spellar and Choo2021). For example, Duncan and March (Reference Duncan and March2019) found that predatory behavior on Tinder was often predicted by the prevalence of several Dark Tetrad personality traits, associated with the male gender. Sevi (Reference Sevi2019) discovered that those who used Tinder exhibited higher levels of Dark Triad traits than those who did not use dating apps. These results were corroborated by Lyons et al. (Reference Lyons, Messenger, Perry and Brewer2020), who reported that Tinder users had elevated Dark Triad traits, with male users showing particularly high scores. Consequently, environments that facilitate casual and anonymous interactions can often become hotspots for individuals seeking to exploit these conditions for predatory behavior.
The Disinhibition Approach proposes that people behave differently online because digital interactions lack many social cues present in face-to-face communication. This, associated with the delayed or asynchronous nature of online communication reduces self-awareness and diminishes people’s ability to see themselves from others’ perspectives, making it harder for them to self-regulate (see, e.g., Suler, Reference Suler2004). Consequently, this reduced social accountability can lead to more impulsive and antisocial behavior, including sexual harassment and abuse (Dietzel, Reference Dietzel, Bailey, Flynn and Henry2021). Although this approach has been widely accepted, some recent studies propose other explanations for the disinhibition effect. For example, Roos and colleagues (2020) analyzed several online interactions and found no support for factual, more disinhibited behavior. The authors found instead that the fact that messages were carefully crafted, together with the unresponsiveness of online messages, could lead to a perceived disinhibition by the interaction partner, rather than actual disinhibition of the sender due to a lack of self-regulation. That is, it was the restrictions posed by the medium (online platform) that could explain the reduced perception of shared cognition and solidarity between people, rather than an increased disinhibition per se.
The Technoculture Approach acknowledges that digital platforms can generate new sexual behavioral norms or transform existing ones (Duguay et al., Reference Duguay, Burgess and Suzor2018). Dating apps, for example, can cultivate their own unique sexual scripts, which may promote sexual violence by encouraging certain behaviors or interpretations of consent. Tinder, as a prominent example of a digital dating platform, plays a significant role in shaping how individuals perceive and engage in sexual interactions. This theory suggests that the design and culture of Tinder could encourage certain behaviors that might contribute to sexual violence. For instance, the gamification of swiping and matching could potentially trivialize interactions and lead to a commodification of individuals, which could encourage disrespectful or harmful behaviors. Nevertheless, some studies contradict this perception. For example, Jurgenson’s (Reference Jurgenson2012) Augmented Reality Thesis argues that the digital and physical worlds are deeply intertwined, challenging the notion of a clear separation between online and offline experiences. The author posits that our reality is inherently augmented by digital elements, as digital information continuously shapes and enhances our perception of the physical world. On Tinder, for example, the availability of potential matches, of information, of opportunities to connect, among others, is undoubtedly augmented. Nevertheless, as per the author, the reality does not change, there is no separation between “online” and “offline” space. Instead, both realms are so intertwined that maintaining a division between them is unproductive and falsely suggests that digital connections are less real. Therefore, he proposes that digital and physical realities form a combined “augmented reality.”
The Social Embedding Approach suggests that sexual violence is not caused by the internet but is imported into the digital sphere from broader cultural norms. It argues that online sexual violence reflects existing (hetero) sexist scripts, which assume men’s entitlement to sex and women’s submissive roles, perpetrating beliefs like victim blaming. These scripts, which downplay the importance of mutual and affirmative consent, are said to contribute to rape culture both online and offline. Consequently, users’ behaviors on Tinder are not just individual choices but are embedded within a network of social, cultural, and technological influences. This approach suggests that interactions on Tinder are a complex interplay of various factors that go beyond the digital platform itself.
In the current study, we aim to examine how these approaches may apply to the phenomenological interpretations of recent data indicating that 21.7% of the women who went on a date with a man they met through Tinder had been raped (Saiz et al., Reference Saiz, Otero and Crespo2022). More precisely, our objective is to identify the most important categories of explanations provided by Tinder users who belong to the same gender and age groups as the typical perpetrators and victims. Will these categories, that emerged from real-world perceptions, fit with the theoretical explanations of “technology-facilitated sexual violence”?
Methodology
Procedure
We opted for the focus group design with a semi-structured script (see Appendix A), which is considered as a good option when the purpose is to examine people’s understanding, opinions, and points of view and obtain a deep understanding of social problems (Nyumba et al., Reference Nyumba, Wilson, Derrick and Mukherjee2018). Likewise, the group dynamic was selected not only due to the exploratory nature of the subject but also because the apps are embedded in a relational and social field and, consequently, the interactions between the participants are particularly relevant (Parisi & Comunello, Reference Parisi and Comunello2020). To manage the emotional impact of discussing sensitive topics, the study implemented several supportive measures. Participants were informed about the potential for emotional distress and provided with contact details for counseling services and support organizations before and during the study. The consent process emphasized voluntary participation and the option to withdraw at any time. The group dynamics included opportunities for breaks, and the researcher who led the dynamics was a psychologist properly trained in trauma-informed approaches to address any signs of distress. Following interviews, participants received a debriefing session and follow-up contact to ensure their well-being and remind them of available support resources.
Each dynamic was divided into three sections. First, participants were asked about the potential different forms of socialization and their evolution in recent years regarding the online and offline realms. Then, we introduced the topic of Tinder use for socializing/flirting, in order to understand their attitudes and behaviors regarding this platform. Finally, we gave participants an excerpt from the “Apps without Violence” document in which it was detailed that 21.7% of the women who had organized a meeting through Tinder had been raped, so that they could assess and explain this phenomenon. The purpose of this part was to analyze the phenomenological interpretations and explanations of participants. The focus groups were recorded on camera and transcribed verbatim by one of the researchers. One single researcher facilitated all focus groups. The researcher assumed a peripheral role instead of a central one (Bloor et al., Reference Bloor, Frankland, Thomas and Robson2001) and applied the saturation technique in order to stop data collection when the obtained information began to become redundant and repetitive (Glaser & Strauss, Reference Glaser and Strauss1967). In managing focus group dynamics, the facilitator employed several strategies to ensure balanced participation: to promote equal involvement, the facilitator established ground rules at the outset, emphasizing respect for each participant’s contribution and the importance of allowing everyone to speak. Techniques such as round-robin sharing and direct prompts were used to encourage quieter participants to contribute. Dominant voices were tactfully managed through interventions such as redirecting the conversation to others and encouraging diverse viewpoints. Additionally, the facilitator monitored group interactions closely and made adjustments as needed to maintain a balanced and inclusive discussion environment, thereby enhancing the reliability of the data collected.
Sample
Participants were recruited with the help of an agency, focusing on two specific age groups: women aged 18–25 and men aged 35–55. All participants were required to be current users of Tinder with at least six months of app usage, a minimum of monthly engagement, and prior experience meeting people through the app. Additionally, participants were to be single, with women having dated older men and men having dated younger women through the mediation of Tinder. The recruitment agency utilized their internal database, which consists of 18,000 contacts accumulated from past studies and proactive sign-ups for market research. They performed a filtering process to match the desired profiles and then contacted eligible individuals via phone. The refusal rate was between 20% and 25% of those contacted. Those who declined participation did so due to reasons such as unavailability or lack of interest. The recruitment was interrupted once the targeted number of participants was reached. The final sample consisted of 24 people who had been using Tinder for at least a year. Participants were separated in focus groups, two of them consisted of men and the other two of women. Group 1 comprised six men with ages ranging from 39 to 55 years old (M = 47.2, SD = 5.34), and Group 2 comprised six men with ages ranging from 38 to 50 (M = 46.8, SD = 4.32). We selected this specific age group given that more than 70% of the total violence reported in the study “Apps without violence” was perpetrated by men within this age range. Group 3 comprised six women with ages ranging from 21 and 25 (M = 22.5, SD = 1.5), and Group 4 comprised six women with ages ranging from 19 and 25 (M = 22.2, SD = 2.42). These age ranges reflected the profile of the victims reported in said study.
All participants were single (with the assumption that this group would have a more recent and habitual use of the app), heterosexual (because the women in the study were raped by men), from different professions, residents of Barcelona (to facilitate traveling to the session), and Tinder users.
Analysis & Results
Analysis
The analysis commenced with repeated listening to each audio recording from all four focus groups to achieve familiarity with the content. Initially, the first two transcripts were analyzed using a color-coded, pen-and-paper method for code development. Throughout the analysis, multiple meetings were held to discuss and generate themes. The coding process was deductive and involved all four transcripts. Codes were revised as needed, with some being merged, deleted, or renamed for clarity. A meeting between the first and second coders facilitated discussions on minor adjustments to the overall coding structure. Once consensus was reached between the coders for the first two transcripts, they proceeded with the analysis of the remaining two independently. A meeting was conducted to review and validate the categorizations, and the inter-rater reliability was assessed using Cohen’s Kappa (J. Cohen, Reference Cohen1960). The results indicated perfect agreement between the two coders, κ = 1.00, p < .001. This suggests that the coding process was highly consistent. Below, the results obtained for each theme are presented. In addition, a compilation is shown in Table 1, segmented by profiles, where the similarities and differences between the groups can be observed.
Perceptions about the phenomenon under scrutiny (21.7% rape)
Results
We start by presenting the different reactions to the phenomenon under scrutiny across the two genders. We then present the results regarding the explanations divided by the two genders, since the themes that emerged significantly differed across the two.
First Reactions to the Phenomenon Under Scrutiny
All male participants initially expressed disbelief at the 21.7% rape statistic. Later, four of them questioned the figure and expressed doubts about its accuracy (Is it true? Where does this report come from? Who conducted this research?). Another four participants expressed their astonishment (I can’t believe it, I hope it’s not true/I’m shocked that this happens). Finally, all participants in the male dynamics agreed that these situations occurred on Tinder but did not translate into the offline world (This happens on Tinder, but not in real life [i.e., offline dating]).
Male participants denied knowing anyone who had experienced or perpetrated a similar situation. One of them highlighted a situation experienced by a male friend where the behavior of the woman made him feel uncomfortable during a Tinder date (Watch out! Because men can also feel uncomfortable. For example, a colleague of mine felt very uncomfortable due to the sexual discourse she had. There was a significant sexual undertone in her words).
On the contrary, none of the female participants expressed any sense of surprise at the 21.7% rape statistic. One of the participants even expressed that the figure seemed low. All female participants stated that the numbers of abuse on social networks or platforms were a mirror faithfully reflecting what happened in the real world.
Explanations about the Phenomenon Under Scrutiny
Men’s Perceptions—the Hierarchy of Blame
The male participants provided four possible explanations for the phenomenon under investigation.
It’s Tinder’s Fault—a Breeding ground for Sexual Predators
The male participant group alluded to the, perhaps not explicitly declared, goal of male Tinder users: to have sex. According to male participants, this was the primary purpose of the application’s users (there is a phrase on Tinder that goes something like “I’m not looking for anything, but…” or something like that; I don’t really remember. Well, in reality, it refers to sex/Tinder is an app for having sex). This supports the Technoculture Approach. Only two participants pointed to the people and not to the application as the ones to blame (It’s not true. It’s men who prostitute the apps. Swiping left doesn’t exist for guys/There are men who don’t even look at the photo).
It’s the Pathology’s Fault
Another theme that emerged was related to Tinder’s rapists suffering from a psychiatric disorder. Participants asserted that these men were part of some specific pathological group (The platform is an ideal place for sociopaths/Tinder facilitates predatory behavior/They are professionals with a specific modus operandi, the goal is to subjugate women). This supports the Risky Lifestyle Approach.
It’s Pornography’s Fault
All members of the male groups pointed to early access to pornographic material, without any guidance or control by adults, as one of the main causes of the phenomenon (today’s porn has done a lot of harm/I don’t know how they can believe that a delivery guy comes to deliver a pizza, and in the next second, he’s having sex on the kitchen table with two women… it messes you up!). This supports the Technoculture Approach.
It’s Women’s Fault
Participants in the male dynamics also referred to the behavior of women as a proximal cause of the rapes. Specifically, two behaviors were described. On the one hand, four participants in the male group stated that there is a sub-market for prostitution on Tinder (there’s a “hit” which is prostitution using Tinder as a platform to find clients; instead of working in the streets, you post on Tinder). On the other hand, one participant suggested that it was the lack of risk perception on the part of the female group that explained the phenomenon under analysis (Of course, if you go to his house on the same day you meet the guy for the first time, you’re risking everything). This view is aligned with the Social Embedding Approach.
Women’s Perception
The female participants provided five possible explanations for the phenomenon under investigation.
No Pathological Explanations
Women unanimously dismissed the theory of pathological sexual predators, as they agreed that it was not possible for a small group of men (those who could be rightfully identified as pathological abusers) to be solely responsible for this situation, or that all rappers in Tinder suffered from a sex-related pathology. This somehow supports the Social Embedding Approach.
The Goal of Using Tinder
Women participants referred to the different objectives between men and women in encounters organized through the application. Specifically, men were claimed to commonly have sex as their final goal, while women would have other purposes (guys are straightforward about their intentions, and you have to make it clear again and again that you’re not up for that/I can’t believe they can’t understand that “no” means “no,” and you have to repeat it a thousand times). This is mostly aligned with the Technoculture and the Disinhibition Approach.
Victim Blaming
All members of the female groups highlighted that men would take advantage of the victim-blaming phenomenon, consciously or unconsciously, to rape women. This means that, if women were to denounce a rape during a date they have actively orchestrated through Tinder, society would question the victim’s behavior, choices, or actions, suggesting that they somehow contributed to their victimization (men don’t accept a “no”/people ask “why did you go to such a place? Were you drunk? What were you wearing?” instead of asking, “how are you?”, “how do you feel?”). This is mostly aligned with the Social Embedding Approach.
Paralyzing Fear
The female participant groups alluded to the overwhelming fear women experience in situations where they are pressured to have sex. They explained that such fear normally leads to an inner paralysis that translates into an incapacity to say no as a defense strategy, applied to avoid greater harm (“maybe you feel trapped, with no way out, and you think ‘better a lesser evil than a greater one’”/“I was in an unknown, isolated place when he suggested moving to the backseat, and I thought ‘it’s better to give him what he wants, finish quickly, and get it over with”). This is mostly aligned with the Social Embedding Approach.
Pornography
Finally, the female participants pointed to early access to pornographic material, as well as its content without any guidance or control by adults, as one of the main causes of the phenomenon (pornography has done a lot of harm, especially to today’s young people /sex is very aggressive, and women can’t say “no” halfway through). Two of the female participants expressed their opposition to considering pornography as sex or equating the content of pornographic films with sex (most pornography is only enjoyable for men, that’s not sex). This is mostly aligned with the Tecnoculture and Social Embedding Approaches.
In Table 1, we present the main results separated by key themes and by the perception of different profiles.
Discussion
The objective of this study was to examine and compare the perceptions of different Tinder users about the recently published report that revealed that over 20% of Tinder female users were raped during a date orchestrated through the application. To this end, we compared groups of participants separated by gender group and age range, in order to replicate the profile of the perpetrators and the victims.
Initial Reactions to the Phenomenon
Women—No Surprise and No Differences Between Online and Offline Realms
The data was received very differently by both groups. On the one hand, the women groups showed no surprise and claimed that online dating is as dangerous as offline dating. Women perceived the same risk and had either experienced it first-hand or knew someone who had experienced some form of abuse during a Tinder date. They agreed that both realms are equally dangerous, which corroborated Jurgenson’s theory (2012) of augmented reality rather than digital dualism, this is, the online realm is not different but just an expansion of the offline one. In fact, recent studies tend to view this approach as more realistic than the common division between both realms (e.g., Newett et al., Reference Newett, Churchill and Robards2018). Moreover, research also indicates that women have more experiences of harassment than men, be it verbal, physical, or sexual, online or offline (e.g., Lane et al., Reference Lane, Gover and Dahod2009). This may explain why their perception is homogeneous between both scenarios. Focusing on the offline realm alone, Macmillan et al. (Reference Macmillan, Nierobisz and Welsh2000) revealed that 85% of women have encountered some form of harassment and Fairchild and Rudman (Reference Fairchild and Rudman2008) reported that 40% of college women experienced harassment monthly, with 31% facing such incidents every few days. This exposure increases the perception of danger and vulnerability to sexual violence, independently of the realm (Donnelly & Calogero, Reference Donnelly and Calogero2017).
Men—Disbelief and Sharp Differences Between Online and Offline Realms
Men’s first reaction to the data was complete disbelief. They supported their reaction with the fact that they did not know anyone who had raped a woman during a Tinder date. A possible explanation is the concept of “denial” and its role in enabling individuals and society to overlook atrocities, including acts of sexual coercion (Cohen, Reference Cohen2000; Garland, Reference Garland2008). In fact, although official data unequivocally indicates that men are the predominant perpetrators of sexual offenses (Cowburn, Reference Cowburn2005), studies have indicated that a significant portion of men either consider themselves as uninvolved bystanders or, at the very least, perceive no direct association with such acts of violence (e.g., Peretz & Vidmar, Reference Peretz and Vidmar2021). Cohen (Reference Cohen2000, pp. 1) explained that when individuals are “presented with information that is too disturbing, threatening or anomalous (…) the information is therefore somehow repressed, disavowed, pushed aside or reinterpreted.”
Male participants agreed that the online realm was riskier and that it was also inherently different. They mentioned that most male Tinder profiles were fake to some extent, as men had the necessity to stand out as much as possible from their “competitors” because there were more men than women on the app. This behavior is connected to the Social Embedding Approach because, according to this theory, users curate their profiles in ways that they believe will be attractive to potential matches, which is influenced by societal standards of beauty, success, and desirability. This assertion is reflected in the literature when Manta (Reference Manta2019) mentions that “almost eighty percent of individuals lie in at least some part of their dating app profiles” (p. 207). This perceived higher competitiveness between men was also linked to a higher rejection rate. It is worth noting that a study by Andrighetto et al. (Reference Andrighetto, Riva and Gabbiadini2019) showed that, when men are exposed to women’s refusal to match, they show more positive attitudes toward rape and dating violence compared to those in the control condition. This outcome aligns with the Social Embedding Approach, which suggests that the normalization of male entitlement and the reinforcement of heterosexist scripts within online spaces can escalate harmful attitudes when men face rejection. The Disinhibition Approach further explains this phenomenon by highlighting how the anonymity and depersonalization inherent in digital interactions can amplify these negative reactions. The Risky Lifestyle Approach also offers insights, suggesting that men with preexisting tendencies toward abusive behavior might be more susceptible to these negative shifts in attitude when their sense of control or dominance is challenged by a refusal to match. Moreover, the Technoculture Approach underscores the role of Tinder’s gamified environment in trivializing social interactions, potentially diminishing the perceived seriousness of rejection and fueling a more hostile response.
Second, male participants reported that using the app was like a game, due to its ease and entertainment value. This sensation is a key aspect of the Technoculture Approach, which explores how digital environments shape user behavior. This gamification, as highlighted in previous studies (Abolfathi & Santamaria, Reference Abolfathi and Santamaria2020; Kao, Reference Kao2016), contributes to the commodification and dehumanization of interactions, where users are seen as mere avatars or points in a game rather than real people. It has the potential to increase the commodification and dehumanization of the interlocutor (Berkowitz et al., Reference Berkowitz, Tinkler, Peck and Coto2021), therefore augmenting the risk of harmful behaviors, such as abuse and coercion. The ease with which users can swipe, match, and dismiss others reduces complex human interactions to simplistic, transactional exchanges, increasing the risk of treating others as disposable, thus potentially normalizing abusive behaviors.
Phenomenological Justifications for the Phenomenon
The efforts of male participants to not identify themselves with perpetrators were so strong that they agreed that this phenomenon occurred because Tinder is a breeding ground for sexual predators (Theme 1), and that these perpetrators probably suffered from some kind of pathology (Theme 2). Both themes are reactions that reflect the concept of implicatory denial, which involves disregarding the prevalence and gendered aspects of sexual abuse by suggesting that such acts are infrequent or are committed by persons considered as intrinsically malicious, sick, or biologically inclined. They are also aligned with the Risky Lifestyle Approach (e.g., Kaakinen, Reference Kaakinen, Koivula, Savolainen, Sirola, Mikkola, Zych, Paek and Oksanen2021), which posits that online dating platforms are just a tool used by those who already have violent tendencies. Male participants suggested that the platform’s anonymity and ease of use made it a conducive environment for those with malicious intentions. For example, several participants mentioned feeling that certain behaviors on Tinder, such as persistent harassment or aggressive advances, were indicative of users who sought out the platform specifically to exploit these conditions. Nevertheless, these justifications did not emerge among the women groups. In fact, while the pathologizing view has been the prevailing theory for explaining rape for a considerable period, by emphasizing that the majority of rapes were perpetrated by a small group of repeat offenders (Lisak & Miller, Reference Lisak and Miller2002), it has recently faced challenges from cultural explanations categorized as “rape culture.” These perspectives argue that broader cultural norms, sexual scripts, and certain ideals of masculinity amplify the pool of men who could engage in sexual offenses (Brown & Messman-Moore, Reference Brown and Messman-Moore2010). This rape culture has been supported by a panoply of studies, such as the one that found that around 30% of surveyed men expressed a willingness to commit rape if assured they would not face reporting or conviction (see Cowburn, Reference Cowburn2005). This is connected to the Social Embedding Approach, which suggests that online sexual violence reproduces existing (hetero) sexist scripts, which assume men’s entitlement to sex and women’s submissive roles. If fact, three themes that emerged in the focus groups corroborated this view: the women’s responsibility (fault) for being raped that emerged in the men’s groups (Theme 5); the victim blaming (Theme 6), proposed in the female groups, which was also proposed as a reason for the low rates of denounces; and the paralyzing fear (Theme 7), discussed among the female participants, proposed as a justification for women to not fight back in situations of rape. In consonance with these explanations are several studies showing that, under certain circumstances, young men deemed acceptable to force a woman to have sex, such as when the man is highly sexually aroused (Sipsma et al., Reference Sipsma, Isabel, Cerrato and Everaerd2000). There is also evidence that supports the low reporting rates, including a study that found that the count of unreported sex offenders is roughly 15 times greater than those officially reported (Percy & Mayhew, Reference Percy and Mayhew1997).
Furthermore, both genders agreed that men used Tinder as a tool to explicitly look for sex (Theme 3). This is aligned with the Disinhibition Approach, which proposes that people display different behaviors online due to reduced social accountability and factors like anonymity (Dietzel, Reference Dietzel, Bailey, Flynn and Henry2021). It is also aligned with the Technoculture Approach, which explains how Tinder’s design and digital culture shape male behavior on the platform, particularly the use of the app to explicitly seek sex. Tinder’s gamified interface and emphasis on quick, superficial interactions foster a transactional view of relationships, where partners are commodified and traditional sexual scripts are reinforced. This environment normalizes and even incentivizes the pursuit of casual sex, reflecting how technoculture can influence and reinforce gendered behaviors and expectations in online dating.
Lastly, both groups agreed that exposure to pornographic material (Theme 4) distorted the image men had about sex, leading them to perform aberrant behaviors that are inspired or influenced by the male-centered pornography they consume. This explanation is aligned with the Technoculture Approach, which depicts the interplay between technology and societal norms. Pornography, widely accessible digitally, is believed to impact cultural perceptions of sex, often promoting unrealistic and harmful attitudes toward consent and sexual interaction (e.g., Tarzia & Tyler, Reference Tarzia and Tyler2021). This influence manifests on Tinder through the normalization of aggressive behavior, anonymity and reduced accountability, expectations of immediate gratification, and the objectification and dehumanization of users. This theme also aligns with the Social Embedding Approach because, for years, various authors have contended that sexually explicit material creates and perpetuates preexisting sexist stereotypes, along with the notion that violence, particularly against women, is acceptable (e.g., Willis et al., Reference Willis, Bridges and Sun2022). For example, a review of 20 years of research found that pornography use was associated with more pronounced stereotypical gender-based sexual beliefs (Peter & Valkenburg, Reference Peter and Valkenburg2016). Favaro and de Miguel (Reference Favaro and De Miguel2016) addressed the issue from a patriarchal and neoliberal perspective, which places women in the patriarchal imaginary as “bodies well prepared and disciplined in the service of others’ pleasure” (p. 2). Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that research on the relationship between pornography consumption and sexual violence is not conclusive. On the one hand, authors like Stanley et al. (Reference Stanley, Barter, Wood, Aghtaie, Larkins, Lanau and Överlien2018) demonstrated the association between regular internet pornography consumption and the perpetration of coercion and sexual abuse by men. In fact, researchers have been reporting, since decades ago, the correlation between pornography use and sexual aggression (e.g., Gray, Reference Gray1982). Nevertheless, other authors propose that the relationship between pornography and aggression is not that clear, and that it was curated by religious and feminist groups between the 1970s and 1980s, when it became more widely available due to the development of technology (e.g., Ferguson & Hartley, Reference Ferguson and Hartley2009). In fact, they claim that the relationship is negligible, given that most developed countries are presently witnessing a notable decrease in rape and sexual assault rates, even in the face of a growing accessibility to pornography. They describe that a potential explanation is the nature of the pornography used, being that material with explicit violent content such as aggression toward women would be more propense to lead to aggression in the real world than in non-violent pornography or in that where the relationship between men and women is egalitarian (Linz et al., Reference Linz, Donnerstein and Penrod1987; Palys, Reference Palys1986). Another explanation is that the relationship between pornography use and aggression only occurs when other individual factors, like anger, are present. These and other factors could be further explored in future studies.
In sum, the categories that emerged in our focus groups fit the four main theories that attempt to explain why online dating is associated with sexual violence. Together, these theories provide a robust framework for understanding how digital platforms can unintentionally contribute to a cycle of violence and aggression, particularly in the context of gender dynamics and rejection.
Limitations and Directions for Future Research
This study has several limitations. The sample size and demographic composition may not represent the broader population of Tinder users, limiting the generalizability of the findings. The reliance on self-reported data introduces potential response biases, where participants may have provided socially desirable answers or may have recalled events inaccurately. Additionally, focus group dynamics may have constrained the depth and diversity of individual perspectives shared, and they can sometimes suppress dissenting opinions or lead to conformity, which might limit the expression of diverse viewpoints. Furthermore, the study did not account for the potential impact of cultural differences, as the focus groups were conducted within a specific geographical and cultural context. Additionally, controlling for other usage characteristics such as familiarity, frequency, and success rates could have enhanced intragroup homogeneity.
Future research should use larger, more diverse samples, including participants from various cultural backgrounds to enhance generalizability. Employing mixed-methods approaches could provide a more robust analysis. Longitudinal studies are also needed to explore how online dating and sexual violence dynamics evolve over time. Examining individual psychological factors could help identify specific vulnerabilities and protective factors.
Conclusion
This study delved into the reactions and justifications of Tinder users to a report revealing alarming statistics of rape. The findings demonstrated a stark divergence between the perceptions of male and female participants. The results highlighted a complex interplay of the theories attempting to explain online sexual violence, including the Risky Lifestyle Approach, Social Embedding Approach, Disinhibition Approach, and Technoculture Approach, suggesting that all four intertwine and are not mutually exclusive. In essence, the results unveiled a complex web of perceptions, behaviors, and motives contributing to the association between online dating and sexual violence. The multifaceted nature of these findings underscores the need for further exploration and nuanced understanding in future studies, acknowledging the intricate interplay of societal norms, individual behaviors, and technological influences in the realm of online dating.
Data availability statement
Data is available upon request.
Author contribution
Josep Sayeras: Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, project administration, supervision, writing—original draft. Rita Rueff-Lopes: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, validation, visualization, writing—review & editing.
Competing interest
The authors declare no competing interests exist.
Appendix: Focus Group General Script
Kick-Off: Evolution in the World of Dating
Current Relationship Snapshots
How do you meet new people?
How do you think the ways of meeting people have evolved?
What positive changes have you noticed? Reasons.
What negative changes have you noticed? Reasons.
Do you think it’s easier or harder to meet people now? Why?
What different formats exist?
Tinder Overview
Usage
How long have you been using Tinder?
Why did you start using it?
Is it the app you use the most? Why or why not?
Experience
Overall, how do you rate your experience with this application?
Have you had positive experiences? What were they like?
And negative experiences? Tell us about different experiences using this app.
Do you think there are differences in online versus offline dating?
Functionality
What do you think of the way Tinder works?
Do you think the information provided on users’ profiles is 100% honest?
When you go on a date, how do you organize it? For example, do you meet in public places, inform a friend, etc.?
Have you ever felt unsafe or know someone who felt unsafe when meeting someone from Tinder or experienced a strange situation? If so, what was the impact after experiencing such a situation?
Evaluation and Analysis of the Phenomenon under study
What do you think of the conclusion reached by this study conducted last year?
Are you surprised? Why or why not?
Seeing this data and thinking about your experience or that of your friends, do you feel identified?
Why do you think this happens?
