skip to main content
10.1145/2998181.2998241acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

What Happens in Happn: The Warranting Powers of Location History in Online Dating

Published:25 February 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many location-based dating applications allow users to search for potential matches who are physically proximate. A recent mobile dating application, happn, adds a temporal dimension to location-based dating, showing users the number of times that they crossed path with each other, as well as the location of the most recent overlap. We conducted qualitative interviews with 15 happn users to understand how people make sense of crossed paths, and assess the meanings they assign to these location overlaps. Building on Uncertainty Reduction Theory, we show the various outcomes of the crossed paths and how they play a role in uncertainty reduction. In particular, the warranting power of the device-driven location data was accepted as valuable, and generated little concern about misrepresentation. Moreover, people assigned significant meaning to the minimal cues available from the overlap data. In addition, the location overlap data was useful in allowing users to estimate convenience in meeting and establish common ground. On the other hand, concerns of security and recognition by known others persisted in the happn app. Our findings suggest the potential for utilizing location data outside of the domain of online dating.

References

  1. Louise Barkhuus, Barry Brown, Marek Bell, Scott Sherwood, Malcolm Hall, and Matthew Chalmers. 2008. From Awareness to Repartee: Sharing Location Within Social Groups. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 497--506. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Charles R Berger and Richard J Calabrese. 1975. Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research 1, 2 (1975), 99--112.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Mark Bilandzic and Daniel Johnson. 2013. Hybrid placemaking in the library: designing digital technology to enhance users' on-site experience. The Australian Library Journal 62, 4 (2013), 258--271.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Mark Bilandzic, Ronald Schroeter, and Marcus Foth. 2013. Gelatine: Making Coworking Places Gel for Better Collaboration and Social Learning. In Proceedings of the Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference: Augmentation, Application, Innovation, Collaboration (OzCHI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 427--436. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jeremy Birnholtz, Colin fitzpatrick, Mark Handel, and Jed R Brubaker. 2014. Identity, identification and identifiability: the language of self-presentation on a location-based mobile dating app. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices & Services (MobileHCI '14). ACM, 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Courtney Blackwell, Jeremy Birnholtz, and Charles Abbott. 2014. Seeing and being seen: Co-situation and impression formation using Grindr, a location-aware gay dating app. New Media & Society (2014), 1461444814521595.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Dale E. Brashers. 2001. Communication and Uncertainty Management. Journal of Communication 51, 3 (2001), 477--497.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Tiago Camacho, Marcus Foth, and Andry Rakotonirainy. 2013. Trainroulette: promoting situated in-train social interaction between passengers. In Proceedings of the Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing Adjunct Publication (UbiComp '13). ACM, 1385--1388. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Sunny Consolvo, Ian E Smith, Tara Matthews, Anthony LaMarca, Jason Tabert, and Pauline Powledge. 2005. Location disclosure to social relations: why, when, & what people want to share. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05). ACM, 81--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Elena Francesca Corriero and Stephanie Tom Tong. 2016. Managing uncertainty in mobile dating applications: Goals, concerns of use, and information seeking in Grindr. Mobile Media & Communication 4, 1 (2016), 121--141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Danielle Couch and Pranee Liamputtong. 2007. Online dating and mating: Perceptions of risk and health among online users. Health, Risk & Society 9, 3 (2007), 275--294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Henriette Cramer, Mattias Rost, and Lars Erik Holmquist. 2011. Performing a Check-in: Emerging Practices, Norms and 'Conflicts' in Location-sharing Using Foursquare. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 57--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Judith Donath. 2007. Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1 (2007), 231--251. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Nicole B Ellison, Jeffrey T Hancock, and Catalina L Toma. 2012. Profile as promise: A framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentations. New Media & Society 14, 1 (2012), 45--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jennifer L Gibbs, Nicole B Ellison, and Chih-Hui Lai. 2010. first comes love, then comes Google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Communication Research (2010), 0093650210377091.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Catherine Grevet and Eric Gilbert. 2015. Piggyback Prototyping: Using Existing, Large-Scale Social Computing Systems to Prototype New Ones. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 4047--4056. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. William B Gudykunst. 1985. The influence of cultural similarity, type of relationship, and self-monitoring on uncertainty reduction processes. Communications Monographs 52, 3 (1985), 203--217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Jeffrey T. Hancock, Catalina Toma, and Nicole Ellison. 2007. The Truth About Lying in Online Dating Profiles. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 449--452. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Mark J. Handel and Irina Shklovski. 2012. Disclosure, Ambiguity and Risk Reduction in Real-time Dating Sites. In Proceedings of the Conference on Supporting Group Work (GROUP '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 175--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Lee Humphreys. 2007. Mobile Social Networks and Social Practice: A Case Study of Dodgeball. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1 (2007), 341--360. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Giovanni Iachello, Ian Smith, Sunny Consolvo, Mike Chen, and Gregory D. Abowd. 2005. Developing Privacy Guidelines for Social Location Disclosure Applications and Services. In Proceedings of the 2005 Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS '05). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 65--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Yong Gu Ji, Hwan Hwangbo, Ji Soo Yi, PL Patrick Rau, Xiaowen Fang, and Chen Ling. 2010. The influence of cultural differences on the use of social network services and the formation of social capital. Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 26, 11--12 (2010), 1100--1121.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Julia M. Mayer, Starr Roxanne Hiltz, and Quentin Jones. 2015. Making Social Matching Context-Aware: Design Concepts and Open Challenges. In Proceedings of the 33rd Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 545--554. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Miller McPherson, Lynn Smith-Lovin, and James M Cook. 2001. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology (2001), 415--444.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Matthias R Mehl, Samuel D Gosling, and James W Pennebaker. 2006. Personality in its natural habitat: manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 90, 5 (2006), 862.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Stanley Milgram. 1974. The experience of living in cities. Crowding and Behavior 167 (1974), 41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Stanley Milgram. 1977. The familiar stranger: An aspect of urban anonymity. The Individual in a Social World (1977), 51--53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Helen Nissenbaum. 2004. Privacy as contextual integrity. Wash. L. Rev. 79 (2004), 119.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Gregory Norcie, Emiliano De Cristofaro, and Victoria Bellotti. 2013. Bootstrapping trust in online dating: Social verification of online dating profiles. In financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 149--163.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Sameer Patil, Gregory Norcie, Apu Kapadia, and Adam Lee. 2012. "Check out Where I Am!": Location-sharing Motivations, Preferences, and Practices. In CHI '12 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1997--2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Mattias Rost, Louise Barkhuus, Henriette Cramer, and Barry Brown. 2013. Representation and Communication: Challenges in Interpreting Large Social Media Datasets. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 357--362. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Raz Schwartz. 2013. The Networked Familiar Stranger : An Aspect of Online and Offline Urban Anonymity. Mobile media practices, presence and politics : the challenge of being seamlessly mobile (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Raz Schwartz and Germaine R Halegoua. 2014. The spatial self: Location-based identity performance on social media. New Media & Society (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Georg Simmel. 1950 (Original work published in 1903). The metropolis and mental life. New York: Free Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Daniel M. Sutko and Adriana de Souza e Silva. 2011. Location-aware mobile media and urban sociability. New Media & Society 13, 5 (2011), 807--823.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Catalina L. Toma, Jeffrey T. Hancock, and Nicole B. Ellison. 2008. Separating Fact From fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating Profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34, 8 (2008), 1023--1036.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Joseph B Walther. 1996. Computer-Mediated Communication: Impersonal, Interpersonal, and Hyperpersonal Interaction. Communication Research 23, 1 (1996), 3--43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Joseph B Walther. 2007. Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior 23, 5 (2007), 2538--2557. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Joseph B Walther and Malcolm R Parks. 2002. Cues filtered out, cues filtered in. Handbook of interpersonal communication (2002), 529--563.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Joseph B Walther, Brandon Van Der Heide, Lauren M Hamel, and Hillary C Shulman. 2009. Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication Research 36, 2 (2009), 229--253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. What Happens in Happn: The Warranting Powers of Location History in Online Dating

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
      February 2017
      2556 pages
      ISBN:9781450343350
      DOI:10.1145/2998181

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 February 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CSCW '17 Paper Acceptance Rate183of530submissions,35%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

      Upcoming Conference

      CSCW '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader