presentation of online self scale (pods)

• Help & FAQ

How do we present ourselves online? Validation of the Presentation of Online Self Scale

Research output : Contribution to Book/Report › Conference Contribution

• Self concept
• online presentation

Access to Document

• http://www.cybertherapyandrehabilitation.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Magazine_Last-Versione.pdf

Fingerprint

• self-presentation Social Sciences 100%
• Ireland Social Sciences 78%
• social desirability Social Sciences 48%
• anonymity Social Sciences 46%
• questionnaire Social Sciences 42%
• virtual reality Social Sciences 40%
• construct validity Social Sciences 40%
• interaction Social Sciences 39%
• 1 Organising a conference or workshop

Activities per year

Social media and wellbeing – where do we go from here?

Lisa Orchard (Organiser) & Josephine Chen-Wilson (Organiser)

Activity : Organising a conference or workshop › Research

T1 - How do we present ourselves online? Validation of the Presentation of Online Self Scale

AU - Chen-Wilson, Chao-Hwa

AU - Fullwood, Chris

AU - Asbury, Titus

AU - Keep, Melanie

AU - Kirwan, Grainne

N1 - Conference code: 22nd

PY - 2017/7/26

Y1 - 2017/7/26

N2 - The Internet offers featuressuch as anonymity, opport Unities forasynchronous interaction and greatercontrol over what individuals shareabout themselves. These features aresuggested to promote optimal self-presentation (Walther & Parks, 2002).Individuals with certain characteristics(e.g. introverts) are also more likely toexperiment with self-presentation online,perhaps because of perceived limitationsin their offline interactions or becausethey are especially motivated to garnerdesirable impressions (Fullwood, 2015).However, there is yet an instrumentavailable that measures and identifiesdifferent types of self-presentationbehaviour in cyberspace. This studyaims to validate a questionnaire, thePresentation of Online Self Scale (POSS)that measures an individual’s propensityto experiment with self-presentationonline. The scale has been piloted onadolescents (Fullwood, James andChen-Wilson, 2016). To examine POSS’sreliability, adults in four English-speakingcounties (Australia, UK, Ireland and theUS) are being recruited to completethe questionnaire. Factor analysis willbe conducted to see if the four factorspreviously identified in adolescents arestill valid: ideal self, multiple selves,consistent self, and online presentationpreference. Data from the followingquestionnaires are being collected toexamine the POSS’s construct validity:Self Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974),Facebook Intensity (Ellison et al., 2007),Social desirability scale (Crowne andMarlowe, 1960), Social anxiety scale(Leary, 1983) and the Self-conceptclarity Scale (Campbell et al, 1996). Thedata collection is on going with a currentsample size of over 100 participantsfrom the UK and Ireland. This paper willpresent the preliminary results from thefinal sample

AB - The Internet offers featuressuch as anonymity, opport Unities forasynchronous interaction and greatercontrol over what individuals shareabout themselves. These features aresuggested to promote optimal self-presentation (Walther & Parks, 2002).Individuals with certain characteristics(e.g. introverts) are also more likely toexperiment with self-presentation online,perhaps because of perceived limitationsin their offline interactions or becausethey are especially motivated to garnerdesirable impressions (Fullwood, 2015).However, there is yet an instrumentavailable that measures and identifiesdifferent types of self-presentationbehaviour in cyberspace. This studyaims to validate a questionnaire, thePresentation of Online Self Scale (POSS)that measures an individual’s propensityto experiment with self-presentationonline. The scale has been piloted onadolescents (Fullwood, James andChen-Wilson, 2016). To examine POSS’sreliability, adults in four English-speakingcounties (Australia, UK, Ireland and theUS) are being recruited to completethe questionnaire. Factor analysis willbe conducted to see if the four factorspreviously identified in adolescents arestill valid: ideal self, multiple selves,consistent self, and online presentationpreference. Data from the followingquestionnaires are being collected toexamine the POSS’s construct validity:Self Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974),Facebook Intensity (Ellison et al., 2007),Social desirability scale (Crowne andMarlowe, 1960), Social anxiety scale(Leary, 1983) and the Self-conceptclarity Scale (Campbell et al, 1996). Thedata collection is on going with a currentsample size of over 100 participantsfrom the UK and Ireland. This paper willpresent the preliminary results from thefinal sample

KW - Self concept

KW - online presentation

M3 - Conference Contribution

BT - The 22nd Annual CyberPsychology, CyberTherapy & Social Networking Conference

PB - University of Wolverhampton

T2 - CyberTherapy & Social Networking Conference.

Y2 - 26 July 2017 through 28 July 2017

The Relationship Between Self-Concept and Online Self-Presentation in Adults

Affiliation.

• 1 School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Belfield, Ireland.
• PMID: 31794254
• DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2019.0328

Self-presentation is the process by which we portray ourselves to others to make a desired impression. Traditionally, self-presentation has been studied in face-to-face interaction. However, social media platforms have shifted how people exchange information. For example, personal content can be edited before posting online, giving the individual more control over their presentation. With this shift and the widely adapted use of social media, it is desirable to study self-presentation in online settings. The aim of this study was to broaden the understanding of self-concept as a predictor of online self-presentation by expanding upon previous research with adolescents by instead using a young adult sample. Two hundred thirty participants aged between 18 and 35 years completed the Self-Concept Clarity Scale and the Presentation of Online Self Scale (POSS). Factor analysis of the POSS revealed that with a young adult sample, the factor labeled the "Ideal Self" was distributed into the other three factors: "Multiple Selves," "Consistent Self," and "Online Presentation Preference." In addition, a significant positive correlation was found between age and self-concept. However, when controlling for age, self-concept was the best predictor of online self-presentation. Individuals with a lower self-concept were more likely to present discrepancies between their offline and online self. This study supports previous research findings that self-concept plays an important role in online self-presentation. Finally, it presents the idea that the concept of an "ideal self" adjusts into young adulthood.

Keywords: self-concept; self-presentation; social media; social networking.

• Factor Analysis, Statistical
• Self Concept*
• Self Disclosure*
• Social Media*
• Social Networking
• Young Adult

• Classification
• For Authors
• For Editors
• For Reviewers
• Open Access
• Submit Manuscript

PBSIJ.MS.ID.555761

Our media partner.

• Article in press
• Current Issue

Useful Links

• Plagarism Policy
• Peer Review System
• Join as Editor
• Join as Associate Editor
• Join as Reviewer
• Research Article
• Case Report
• Review Article
• Short Communication
• Mini Review
• Letter to Editor

• Introduction
• Limitations

Online Interactions: Comparing Self-Disclosure and Self-Presentation between Friendship and Dating

Gabrielle larson and titus asbury*.

Texas Woman’s University, USA

Submission: May 18, 2018; Published: June 08, 2018

*Corresponding author: Titus Asbury, Texas Woman’s University, USA.

How to cite this article: Gabrielle L, Titus A. Online Interactions: Comparing Self-Disclosure and Self-Presentation between Friendship and Dating . Psychol Behav Sci Int J. 2018; 9(3): 555761. DOI: 10.19080/PBSIJ.2018.09.555761.

Throughout the past few decades, there has been a powerful surge in technology that has had a profound impact on how people interact with one another. Due to the recent increase in technology, online interactions are reaching an all-time high. The current study examined two online behaviors: self-disclosure and self-presentation. The study assessed two types of online relationships: friendships and online romantic relationships. A total of 55 participants completed this online study through Psych Data. Participants were gathered through convenience sampling. Each participant completed an online survey that consisted of the Presentation of Online Self Scale and the Perception Control Scale. Results and implications for the type of relationships impact on online behaviors are discussed.

Keywords: Online behavior; Online interaction; Online communication; Online dating; Online relationships; Self-disclosure; Self-presentation

Within the past few decades, there has been an enormous growth in technology around the world. The world of technology has continued to evolve and technology has become a vital piece in most individuals’ lives. In most first world countries technology has become indispensable; this means life without this technology would become nearly impossible for some individuals. Technology is used for multiple purposes; work, education and pleasure all rely heavily on current technology. One major area of influence technology has had an immense impact on is its ability to connect others. It appears that the use of online communication has become integral in maintaining relationships. In order to foster online communication, websites and mobile applications have been created that allow people to meet new people as well as continue communication with people they already know. In regards to the websites and mobile applications that encourage individuals to meet new people, these sites can help people search for potential romantic partners; these sites are often referred to as online dating sites. While online dating is one way of using technology to connect with others, online communication can also be a powerful tool in connecting friends.

Websites such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat are examples of social networking sites that help link individuals together and allow personal information to be shared. Online communication encourages users to engage in both self- disclosure and self-presentation. The prevalence of online communication in the world today leads to the question: is there a difference between self-disclosure and self-presentation among friendships and online romantic relationships?

Prior to discussing how relationship styles impact online communication, it is necessary to first define self-disclosure and self-presentation. In an article by Gibbs [1] self-disclosure is “defined as any message about the self that an individual communicates to another… individuals make themselves known to other people and, others reciprocate by sharing revealing information.” Self-disclosure allows individuals to engage in intimacy with one another in an effort to further deepen their relationship [1]. Self-disclosure is a necessary aspect of relationships because it allows individuals to share information about them and connect with people on a deeper level. This type of behavior can strengthen relationships because it has the power to connect people. While self-disclosure is sharing information, self-presentation is “the processes through which individuals communicate an image of themselves to others” Yang [2]. Self-presentation also relates to self-development and self-identity [2]. Self-presentation refers to the way an individual chooses to present themselves to others. It is vital to understand the difference between self-disclosure and self-presentation, as this current study will focus on both. Self-disclosure refers to when an individual shares information with another to create intimacy, while self-presentation is how the individual chooses to portray him or her.

Self-disclosure and self-presentation are important online behaviors to assess when discussing online interactions. Varnali [3] conducted a study that further examined potential reasons individuals might engage in self-disclosure online. According to the study, self-disclosure on social networking sites has the ability to “facilitate establishing mutual understanding, intimacy, and trust in interpersonal relationships” [3]. Self-disclosure is a key factor in both romantic relationships and friendships because it allows individuals to connect on a more intimate level. Therefore, self-disclosure is a vital tool in both types of relationships because it encourages a feeling of connectedness between people. In a different study by Kim & Lee [4], the role of self-presentation in online interactions is examined. Perhaps one of the biggest findings from the study was that self-presentation has an effect on an individual’s subjective well-being. The study explained if an individual is to engage in positive and honest selfpresentation, “the psychological benefits of self-enhancement are derived” [4]. Therefore, online self-presentation can be considered a strong power because it has the ability to impact how an individual views himself or herself. Both self-disclosure and self-presentation are important factors to assess when studying online interactions because both behaviors can have an immense impact on relationships.

While not every person has engaged in online dating, the increasing popularity of online dating is apparent. The mention of online dating can be found from movies to television and even current literature. In fact, an article from 2015 states, “online dating is estimated to be a $2 billion business, with 1 in 10 Americans reporting they have used an online dating site or mobile app” [5]. Online dating has continued to gain popularity as an effective way to find romantic relationships. Therefore, psychology has decided to take a deeper look at online dating, including both the advantages and disadvantages of participating. In regards to the relationship between online dating and selfpresentation, one of the advantages includes dating sites using a demographics questionnaire while having users create their online dating profile. These questionnaires ask about personal information in an attempt to match people based on similarities [5]. By using these demographic questionnaires at the beginning of creating online dating profiles, self-presentation is being used as a tool to match individuals together based on similar interests, hobbies, personality types, and goals. One of the major advantages of this self-presentation questionnaire is that it has the ability to make online dating easier for users since the website is able to match potential partners instead of having the users engage in extensive work to search. The study also looks at potential disadvantages of online dating; however, none of the disadvantages pertained to self-disclosure or self-presentation. Online dating is a unique source available for individuals to meet and interact with potential romantic partners; this type of online interaction has become more prevalent recently as technology has become more important in today’s society.

A necessary factor in developing an online relationship is that individuals must be willing to engage in self-disclosure. An article published in 2015 discusses the importance of selfdisclosure for online relationships; the article states, “selfdisclosure becomes the only available means to communicate” [6]. The article continues to elaborate on the idea that online dating websites and mobile applications provide a comfortable environment for online interaction that allow both males and females to engage in deep levels of self-disclosure [6]. The study focuses on reasons for online self-disclosure and the factors that impact the likelihood and prevalence of it occurring. Factors such as gender, age, emotional state, and computer use all impact whether an individual will or will not engage in self-disclosure via online dating sites [6]. It is important to understand these factors because they help explain the reason why self-disclosure occurs and how it can be facilitated through online dating sites.

Online interactions encompass more than online dating relationships; in order to have a holistic view of online interactions it is necessary to also discuss friendships that engage in online interactions as well. Most of the recent research of online interactions focuses on romantic relationships, strangers, or friendships created due to the use of social media sites. This type of research is beneficial, but it leaves a gap in research because it does not address face-to-face friends who use social networking sites. A study published in 2013 supports this idea by stating, “considerable research on computer-mediated communication has examined online communication between strangers, but little is known about the emotional experience of connectedness between friends in digital environments” [7]. Although looking at stranger’s online interactions is beneficial in understanding how people develop relationships without face-to-face contact, it is also necessary to look at friend relationships and examine how online interactions influence and impact their face-to-face relationships. Examining multiple types of relationships that engage in online interactions is necessary because it provides a more accurate and complete depiction of cyber psychology.

One common misconception of online interactions is the idea that strangers are the predominant users. According to a study published in 2012, adolescents use online communication with friends made through face-to-face interactions the same amount as they use this type of communication to connect with strangers [8]. One major area examined in this study was adolescents’ desire and need for intimacy and emotional closeness to other individuals. The study called for participants to complete questionnaires regarding online behavior, explanation for using social networking, and how the participant believed these social networking sites impacted their friendships [8]. Based on the results from this study, it is concluded that “on average, the teens in our study interacted with 95% of their listed social networking site friends in face-to-face contexts, with only 5% described as people that they meet only online” [8]. The findings from this study suggest that people are likely to interact online with friends they have made from face-to-face communication. In fact, the results support the idea that people tend to interact more with people they have face-to-face interactions with rather than people they met only online. Although it is a popular thought that strangers typically engage in online interaction the most, this study supports the idea that this is merely a misconception of online interactions. This study strengthens the idea that it is necessary to look at different types of relationships when it comes to online interactions.

There are certain differences between online self-disclosure and self-presentation based on the type of relationship. An article produced by Subrahmanyam & Greenfield [9] highlights online communication between friends; the article stated intimacy and identity play key roles in how online interactions will occur. It is important to note intimacy refers to the idea of self-disclosure and identity refers to the idea of self-presentation. While selfdisclosure is an important factor in face-to-face friendships, the article also stated that online self-disclosure impacts these types of friendships as well. The article states, “48% of online teens believe that the Internet has improved their relationships with friends” [9]. Although this study focuses on friendships, it can be inferred that self-disclosure is also vital in online romantic relationships. A common theme in the study is the idea that selfpresentation is beneficial in creating a coherent identity and enabling self-exploration [9] Based on this information, it appears that online self-presentation is important in creating a strong emotional connection, regardless of the type of relationship. Overall, friendships with online communication seem to rely just as heavily on self-disclosure and self-presentation as online romantic relationships do.

While addressing online interactions, it becomes necessary to discuss the possibility of deception being used in online communication. The idea of deception can be considered a major limitation when it comes to online interactions because individuals’ self-disclosure and self-presentation may be vastly different than their true identity. Recent research has shown that there is a strong possibility of deception being used in selfpresentation; one study highlights the likelihood of this occurring by stating, “internet communication platforms are suspected to enhance the potential of deceptive self-presentations... research has suggested that various features of online systems and the timing of messages promote distorted self-presentations by reducing immediate accountability for those distortions” [10]. The study concludes that self-presentation did in fact occur, but it also states that individual’s self-presentation is not always accurate or honest. The idea of dishonesty in self-presentation is important to note because this will likely impact who people choose to engage in honest self-disclosure with. Types of relationships could potentially impact whom an individual feels comfortable enough around to provide an honest selfpresentation. One of the major reasons individuals engage in distorted self-presentations is due to social desirability [10]. Social desirability refers to the idea that individuals want to appear as socially acceptable as possible when engaging and interacting with others. Similar to self-presentation, distorted self-disclosure can also occur in online communication. The same study concludes that, “interpersonal deception has been conceptually defined as occurring when communicators control the information contained in their messages to convey a meaning that departs from the truth as they know it” [2]. It is likely this type of distorted self-disclosure can also be attributed to social desirability. Distorted self-disclosure has the ability to cause major issues in all types of relationships. Therefore, two major limitations when assessing online interactions and behaviors are dishonest self-presentation and distorted self-disclosure.

The current study

The current study is an analysis of interactions regarding likelihood of self-disclosure online and online self-presentation behaviors based on relationship type. Self-disclosure and selfpresentation will be assessed to evaluate [11] the likelihood of self-disclosure based on relationship and [10] the effect of relationship type on an individual’s online self-presentation behavior. The research questions are: will an individual be more likely to engage in self-disclosure online with a friend or with a romantic partner, and does self-presentation of online behaviors differ based on relationship type?

Based on these research questions, we were able to create two hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that individuals engaging with friends will show higher levels of self-disclosure online than individuals engaging with online dating partners. The second hypothesis is that online self-perception will differ based on relationship type.

Participants

A total of 64 participants began the online survey; however, a total of 9 participants were missing data. The 9 participants were removed from the data file and SPSS did not use the missing data; therefore, the 9 participants missing data did not impact any scores or results. A total of 55 participants fully completed the online survey, including 10 males (18.19%) and 45 females (81.81%). Participants were gathered through convenience sampling; the online survey was distributed via the researcher’s social media sites, as well as the Texas Woman’s University SONA system. There were no exclusions based on gender or ethnicity; however, participants were required to be 18 years or older. The average age of participants for males was 28.45 years old (sd=11.97) and for females the average age was 23.23 years old (sd=6.58). The oldest participant to complete this study was 54 years old, and the youngest participant was 18 years old. The ethnicity of participants was examined and the greatest numbers of participants were of the White/Caucasian/ European American ethnicity; this ethnicity had 33 participants (60%). Hispanic/Latino(a)/Hispanic American ethnicity had the second highest number of participants with 11 (20%). Black/ African/African American ethnicity had 6 participants (10.91%). The lowest number of participants came from the Asian/ Asian American ethnicity, which had 3 participants (5.45%), and the Pacific Islander/Native American ethnicity had only 2 participants (3.63%). Out of the 55 participants, 22 individuals (40%) stated they have engaged in online dating; however, 33 individuals (60%) stated they have not engaged in online dating. No incentives were offered to participants for completing the survey. An electronic informed consent form was presented to participants prior to beginning the study and participants were allowed to exit the study at any time.

The online survey was available through Psych Data and consisted of three scales that attempted to measure likelihood of self-disclosure, likelihood of self-presentation, and basic demographic questions. The demographic questions were based on previous surveys and included basic information such as age, gender, and ethnicity. However, for this particular study, a question was asked whether or not a participant has engaged in online dating. This question was added to provide more information regarding the audience.

In order to provide valid and reliable questions to conduct this survey, two existing surveys were used. First, the Presentation of Online Self Scale [12] was presented to participants. This scale consisted of twenty-four questions to measure an individual’s likelihood of self-disclosure in an online interaction. Participants were asked to answer the questions using a Likert Scale, which included strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, and strongly agree.

The second measure, the Perception Control Scale [11] consisted of questions assessing an individual’s opinion towards self-presentation in an online interaction. The scale consisted of twelve questions regarding how the participant believes online interactions allow them to present themselves to others. Participants were asked to answer the questions using the same Likert scale as mentioned previously for the Presentation of Online Self Scale.

In order for the study to be conducted, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Texas Woman’s University had to first approve the necessary documents. Once the study was approved, it was distributed through Psych Data. The participants completed the online survey through Psych Data, which combined the three questionnaires mentioned in the materials section. Since the survey was online, the participants were able to access this study at a time and place of their choosing. The survey had no time limit, but it most likely took participants approximately 15 to 30 minutes to complete. Incentives were offered to Texas Woman’s University students enrolled in lower level psychology courses who inputted their TWU SONA ID; if the participants completed the study he or she was awarded 1 experimental credit for his or her participation. There were no direct benefits or incentives for participants who were not in the TWU SONA system.

When the participants first opened the survey, they were shown an informed consent form. The consent form detailed the explanation and purpose of research, included a brief description of the procedures, and discussed potential risks and benefits. Finally, the informed consent offered the researchers email so if any participants had any questions or concerns regarding the study they were able to contact the researcher. After reading the information above, the participant was to indicate their willingness to complete the study. If an individual agreed to participate, they were offered a space to enter their Texas Woman’s University SONA ID so they would receive credit. However, if the individual was not participating in the study for research credit in SONA, they refrained from answering said question and continued to the first part of the survey. Participants were allowed to stop the survey at any point for any reason. If a participant was not willing to complete the survey, they were advised to exit the survey before continuing any further.

Following the informed consent, participants were presented with the three scales mentioned in the materials section. The first questionnaire addressed basic demographic questions including age, gender, ethnicity, and whether or not the participant has or has not participated in online dating. After completing this portion of the study, the participant was randomly directed to one of three prompts regarding how the participant feels about himself or herself in an online world. The three prompts asked participants to answer the next survey items based on the prompt presented. Prompt 1 asked about online interactions with friends, prompt 2 asked about online interactions with romantic partners, and prompt 3 asked about general online interactions. The friend and romantic prompts were considered the experimental groups and the final prompt about general online interactions was the control group. Participants were then required to answer the Presentation of Online Self Scale [12] this survey consisted of twenty-four questions meant to assess an individual’s likelihood of self-disclosure in an online interaction.

The last questionnaire attempted to find information about online self-presentation. The participant was presented with instructions to answer the following questions with the most accurate description of them in an online world. This portion of the survey consisted of twelve questions meant to assess online self-presentation. After completely answering the survey, participants were debriefed on information about the study and again, were given contact information for the researcher. Once over fifty participants completed the survey, the data was analyzed.

(Figure 1-4) both hypotheses were tested using a one-way ANOVA analysis to help determine if there were any significant results. Prior to performing the ANOVA, the study required the researcher to compute two variables. Adding together the twenty-four questions asked on the Presentation of Online Self Scale created the “POSS Total” and adding together the twelve questions from the Perception Control Scale created the “PCS Total.”

In regards to the first hypothesis, a one-way between subjects ANOVA was conducted to compare the effects of relationships type on self-disclosure. There was a significant effect of relationship type on self-disclosure online at the p<.05 level [F(2,52)=3.960,p=.025]. Post hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for the friendship condition (M=60.47, SD=2.76) was significantly different than the general condition (M=67.88, SD=2.76). However, the romantic condition (M=67.88, SD=2.63) did not significantly differ from the friendship or general conditions. Therefore, the hypothesis was not supported; the results did show a significant difference between general online interactions and friend interactions in comparison to general online interactions and romantic interactions. A one-way ANOVA was also performed to assess Perception Control Scale. A one-way between subjects ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of relationship type on self-presentation in online interactions. There was not a significant effect of relationship type on elf-presentation in online interactions for all of the conditions [F(2,52)=2.231,p=.118]. Therefore, the second hypothesis was not supported based on these results obtained from the one-way ANOVA.

Other analyses were conducted to delve deeper into other information that could be potentially beneficial for future research using this pilot study. Several t-tests were performed to analyze data and attempt to find statistical significance in other areas beyond what was looked at for the hypotheses. An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare age and gender. There was not a significant difference in scores for males (M=28.45, SD=11.97) and females (M=23.23, SD=6.58); t(61)=2.036, p=.046. An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare Presentation of Online Self Scale scores and gender. There was not a significant difference in scores for males (M=60.30, SD=7.18) and females (M=64.16, SD=8.66) completing the POSS; t(54)=-1.309, p=.196. An independentsamples t-test was also conducted to compare Perception Control Scale scores and gender. There was not a significant difference in scores for males (M=40.30, SD=8.27) and females (M=42.34, SD=6.80) completing the PCS; t(54)=-.823, p=.414. Based on these analyses there was no additional information to be assessed.

However, one area of interest after running data was the results from a Univariate general linear model between ethnicity and the POSS. While the descriptive statistics did not show any significance, there were some interesting conclusions that can be drawn from these analyses. It is important to note that the small number of participants affects these conclusions; therefore, a larger study would need to be conducted to see if these results can be considered reliable and valid. The Univariate general linear model was completed between ethnicity and POSS. The results showed Asian/Asian American participants are most likely to engage in self-disclosure in general online interactions (M=63.67, SD=3.21). African American participants are most likely to engage in self-disclosure in friendship interactions (M=60.83, SD=12.51). Hispanic/Hispanic American participants are most likely to self-disclose in general interactions (M=65.81, SD=7.81). Caucasian participants are also more likely to engage in self-disclosure in general online interactions (M=63.48, SD=8.43). Finally, Native American/Pacific Islander participants are slightly more inclined to engage in self-disclosure with friends (M=57.50, SD=4.95). However, the small number of participants greatly impacts the results from this analysis.

Assessing the data helped create conclusions based on our hypotheses. The first hypothesis was that friends would show higher levels of self-disclosure online than individuals engaging with online dating partners; however, this hypothesis was not supported by the results. Our hypothesis was based on a similar study by Reich et al. [8] that reported the use of self-disclosure online between friends was vital and occurred more often than between strangers. However, we failed to find the same differences between online interactions.

The second hypothesis was that online self-presentation would differ based on relationship type. Our hypothesis was based on an earlier study by Subrahmanyam & Greenfield [9], which suggested online self-presentation was important regardless of relationship type. While we wanted to determine if online self-presentation varied across relationship type, we did not find differences between friends, romantic interests, and general acquaintances.

Therefore, the study by Subrahmanyam & Greenfield [9] actually did support our findings that relationship type did not impact online self-presentation.

While conducting any study, it is inevitable that there will be certain limitations that should be addressed. This study is no exception, and therefore, it is necessary that limitations are discussed and how these limitations might have possibly impacted the results. One major limitation is the fact that this was a pilot study. This means that the number of participants was somewhat low and therefore, this study can be considered a preliminary study that can help future researchers become aware of the feasibility of this study. The small sample size made it difficult to find significant relationships from the data.

A second major limitation is that this study is self-report. The survey presented to the participants asked for individuals to provide information regarding themselves and their online habits; however, self-report surveys can cause issues if a participant does not answer honestly or is unable to provide accurate information for the questions. The study also faced lack of data, since 10 participants had missing data and were not analyzed. This could be attributed to the fact that the study could have caused experimental fatigue. This means either the length, depth of questions, or format of the study could have caused mental fatigue. This mental fatigue could be a reason for participants not fully completing the survey to its entirety. Along with the fact that this study is using a self-report measure, participants might also engage in social desirability bias. This type of bias could mean an individual might respond based on whether or not an answer will make them appear favorably to others. Although it was stated this study would be anonymous, some individuals still feel the need to respond in a positive light. Therefore, the study being self-report could have led to social desirability bias in participants.

A third limitation of this study was the disproportion between gender and ethnicities. After reviewing the results, it is apparent that more females participated in this study than males. Since this study was available on Texas Woman’s University SONA site, it is likely that the reason more females participated in this survey is because more females attend this university. In regards to ethnicity, the results also showed high amounts of both Caucasian and Hispanic ethnicities, but low amounts of African American, Asian, and Native American. A goal of all studies is for the results and conclusions to apply to the greater population. In order for a study to be applied to a bigger population, it is important to have a relatively even number of ethnicities. Therefore, the disproportion of gender and ethnicities impacted how the results can be applied.

Finally, a fourth limitation stems from the measurements and instructions. It is possible that participants interpreted statements and questions in different ways; therefore, causing participants to answer in ways not desired by the researcher. However, it is difficult to tell if participants were able to understand the questions and instructions since answers were shown on a Likert scale. The likelihood that participants misinterpreted questions and instructions can impact the validity and reliability of this study.

Future directions

In order to increase the validity of this study, it is necessary to produce further studies. Future studies are important because they have the ability to change the mistakes in the pilot study and possibly apply the findings to a larger population. For this particular study, future researchers should look at three things: expanding the study, the relationship between online dating and online behaviors, and the relationship between sexual orientation and online behaviors. If future researchers could incorporate some of these aspects into their future studies, it would provide more information on the topic of online interactions.

As mentioned previously, it is vital that studies use a sample that is representative of all types of individuals. A study is difficult to apply to bigger populations when it is comprised of a small sample. Therefore, it would be necessary that every study that uses this pilot study include an equal representation of individuals based on age, gender, and ethnicity. The more diverse and more number of participants in the study, the easier it will be to apply the findings to a bigger population

A second suggestion for future research includes a question asked in the pilot study; however, it would be interesting to have the topic looked at in more depth. While the focus of the pilot study was focused on assessing types of relationships and how that impacted online behaviors, it would be fascinating to see how online dating impacted individuals’ online behaviors. This future study could assess whether online dating increases, decreases, or has no effect on the likelihood of self-disclosure and self-presentation occurring in online interactions. It might be helpful to focus solely on individuals who have engaged in online dating; preferably having diverse participants who have used online dating for different lengths of time. The survey might include demographic questions, the POSS, the PCS, a question regarding length of online dating, and asking the participant to use a Likert scale to express their experience with online dating. Overall, this future study would be important for cyber psychology because it would help explain the impact of online dating on future online behaviors.

Finally, examining sexual orientation’s possible relationship to online behaviors would be useful as a future research study. As there has been an influx in technology, it also appears that there is an influx in research studies assessing sexual orientation’s effects on an individual’s life. It would be interesting to research further in depth if sexual orientation impacts online behaviors. This type of research study could include questionnaires such as demographics, the POSS, the PCS, sexual orientation, and whether or not the individual’s sexual orientation is honestly presented in everyday life (i.e. do friends and family know your true sexual orientation?). Overall, this type of research study could be beneficial in assessing whether or not sexual orientation has a relationship to online behaviors; therefore, this study could examine two prevalent topics in today’s society.

As a result of this study, we were able to take a deeper look into the field of cyber psychology. Our first hypothesis was not supported; however, one piece of data was statistically significant. This showed that people were more likely to engage in self-disclosure in general online interactions rather than in friendship interactions. Friendships and online romantic partners did not show any significant difference in engaging in online self-disclosure. The second hypothesis was not supported and none of the data was statistically significant. There was no significant effect of online self-perception based on relationship type. This study should be reproduced with a larger and more diverse population in order to ensure reliability and validity with these results.

• Gibbs JL, Ellison NB, Heino RD (2006) Self-presentation in online personals: the role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in internet dating. Communication Research 33(2): 152-177.
• Yang CC, Bradford BB (2016) Online self-presentation on facebook and self development during the college transition. J Youth Adolesc 45(2): 402-416.
• Varnali K, Toker A (2015) Self-disclosure on social networking sites. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal 43(1): 1-13.
• Kim J, Lee J (2011) The facebook paths to happiness: effects of the number of facebook friends and self-presentation on subjective wellbeing. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking 14(6): 359- 364.
• Wiederhold BK (2015) Twenty years of online dating: current psychology and future prospects. Cyberpsychology, Behavior & Social Networking 18(12): 695-696.
• Desjarlais M, Gilmour J, Sinclair J, Howell KB, West A (2015) Predictors and social consequences of online interactive self-disclosure: a literature review from 2002 to 2014. Cyberpsychol Behav & Soc Netw 18(12): 718-725
• Sherman LE, Michikyan M, Greenfield PM (2013) The effects of text, audio, video, and in-person communication on bonding between friends. Cyberpsychology 7(2): 1-12.
• Reich SM, Subrahmanyam K, Espinoza G (2012) Friending, iming, and hanging out face-to-face: overlap in adolescents’ online and offline social networks. Dev Psychol 48(2): 356-368.
• Subrahmanyam K, Greenfield P (2008) Online communication and adolescent relationships. Future Child 18(1): 119-146.
• Andrea DC, Tom TS, Liang YJ, Levine TR, Walther JB (2012) When do people misrepresent themselves to others? the effects of social desirability, ground truth, and accountability on deceptive selfpresentations. Journal of Communication 62(3): 400-417.
• Attrill W, Keep (2006) The perception control scale.
• Fullwood C, James B, Chen WJ (2016) Self-concept clarity and online self-presentation in adolescents. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 19(12): 716-720.

Online Self-Presentation on Facebook and Self Development During the College Transition

• Empirical Research
• Published: 03 November 2015
• Volume 45 , pages 402–416, ( 2016 )

Cite this article

• Chia-chen Yang 1 &
• B. Bradford Brown 2  

14k Accesses

125 Citations

6 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Self-presentation, a central element of young people’s identity development, now extends from face-to-face contexts to social networking sites. Online self-presentation may change when youth transition to college, faced with the need to reclaim or redefine themselves in the new environment. Drawing on theories of self-presentation and self development, this study explores changes in youth’s online self-presentation during their transition to a residential college. It also examines associations between online self-presentation and students’ self-esteem and self-concept clarity. We surveyed 218 college freshmen ( M age  = 18.07; 64 % female, 79 % White) at the beginning and again at the end of their first semester. Freshmen’s Facebook self-presentation became less restricted later in the semester. Broad, deep, positive, and authentic Facebook self-presentation was positively associated with perceived support from the audience, which contributed to higher self-esteem contemporaneously, though not longitudinally. Intentional Facebook self-presentation engaged students in self-reflection, which was related to lower self-concept clarity concurrently but higher self-esteem longitudinally. Findings clarified the paths from multifaceted online self-presentation to self development via interpersonal and intrapersonal processes during college transition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Impact of Ease of Online Self-Expression During Adolescence on Identity in Young Adulthood

Adolescence and Identity in the Twenty-First Century: Social Media as Spaces for Mimesis and Learning

Online Self-Disclosure and Self-Concept Clarity Among Chinese Middle School Students: A Longitudinal Study

Qian Liu, Zhenxing Li & Jingting Zhu

Adachi, P. J. C., & Willoughby, T. (2014). Interpreting effect sizes when controlling for stability effects in longitudinal autoregressive models: Implications for psychological science. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 12 (1), 116–128. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2014.963549 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships . New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Google Scholar  

Anderson, E. M., Bohon, L. M., & Berrigan, L. P. (1996). Factor structure of the private self-consciousness scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66 , 144–152. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_11 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Arnett, J. J. (2015). Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

Barak, A., & Gluck-Ofri, O. (2007). Degree and reciprocity of self-disclosure in online forums. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 10 (3), 407–417. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9938 .

Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91 (1), 3–26. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.91.1.3 .

Baumeister, R. F., & Tice, D. M. (1986). Four selves, two motives, and a substitute process self-regulation model. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Public self and private self (pp. 63–74). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Campbell, J. D., Trapnell, P. D., Heine, S. J., Katz, I. M., Lavallee, L. F., & Lehman, D. R. (1996). Self-concept clarity: Measurement, personality correlates, and cultural boundaries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70 (1), 141–156. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.70.1.141 .

Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chow, K., & Healey, M. (2008). Place attachment and place identity: First-year undergraduates making the transition from home to university. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28 (4), 362–372. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.02.011 .

Cooley, C. H. (1902). Human nature and the social order . New York, NY: Charles Scriber’s Sons.

Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. G. (2002). Identity formation, agency, and culture: A social psychological synthesis . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cozby, P. C. (1973). Self-disclosure: A literature review. Psychological Bulletin, 79 (2), 73–91. doi: 10.1037/h0033950 .

Davis, K. (2013). Young people’s digital lives: The impact of interpersonal relationhsip and digital media use on adolescnets’ sense of identity. Computers in Human Behavior, 29 , 2281–2293. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.05.022 .

Derlega, V. J., & Chaikin, A. L. (1977). Privacy and self-disclosure in social relationships. Journal of Social Issues, 33 (3), 102–115.

Duggan, M., Ellison, N. B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2015). Social media update 2014. Washington, D. C.: PEW Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/01/PI_SocialMediaUpdate20144.pdf

Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11 (2), 415–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x .

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis . Oxford, England: Norton & Co.

Gentile, B., Twenge, Jean M., Freeman, E. C., & Campbell, W. K. (2012). The effect of social networking websites on positive self-views: An experimental investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 28 (5), 1929–1933. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.012 .

Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life . New York, NY: Basic Books.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life . Oxford, England: Doubleday.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face interaction . Oxford, England: Aldine.

Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The self-reflection and insight scale: A new measure of private self-consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality, 30 (8), 821–835. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821 .

Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective . New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Harter, S. (2012). The construction of the self: Developmental and sociocultural foundations (2nd ed.). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Kaplan, D. (2009). Structural equation modeling: Foundations and extensions (2nd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.

Kim, J., & Dindia, K. (2011). Online self-disclosure: A review of research. In K. B. Wright & L. M. Webb (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 156–180). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Kroger, J., Martinussen, M., & Marcia, J. (2010). Identity status change during adolescence and young adulthood: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 33 , 683–698. doi: 10.1016/j-adolescence.2009.11.002 .

Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107 (1), 34–47. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 .

Lee, C., Dickson, D. A., Conley, C. S., & Holmbeck, G. N. (2014). A closer look at self-esteem, perceived social support, and coping strategy: A prospective study of depressive symptomatology across the transition to college. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 33 (6), 560–585. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2014.33.6.560 .

Little, R. J. A. (1988). A test of missing completely at random for multivariate data with missing values. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83 (404), 1198–1202. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1988.10478722 .

Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: Teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society, 10 (3), 393–411. doi: 10.1177/1461444808089415 .

Manago, A. M., Graham, M. B., Greenfield, P. M., & Salimkhan, G. (2008). Self-presentation and gender on MySpace. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29 (6), 446–458. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001 .

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Michikyan, M., Dennis, J., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2015). Can you guess who I am? Real, ideal, and false self-presentation on Facebook among emerging adults. Emerging Adulthood, 3 (1), 55–64. doi: 10.1177/2167696814532442 .

Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2000). The role of rumination in depressive disorders and mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 109 (3), 504–511. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.109.3.504 .

O’Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (1983). Self-esteem: Change and stability between ages 13 and 23. Developmental Psychology, 19 (2), 257–268.

Paul, E. L., & Brier, S. (2001). Friendsichness in the transition to college: Precollege predictors and college adjustment correlates. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79 (1), 77–89. doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.2001.tb01946.x .

Perez, T., Cromley, J., & Kaplan, A. (2014). The role of identity development, values, and costs in college STEM retention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106 (1), 315–329. doi: 10.1037/a0034027 .

Rieger, S., Gollner, R., Trautwein, U., & Roberts, B. W. (2015). Low self-esteem prospectively predicts depression in the transition to young adulthood: A replication of Orth, Robins, and Roberts (2008). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, . doi: 10.1037/pspp0000037 .

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Salimkhan, G., Manago, A., & Greenfield, P. (2010). The construction of the virtual self on MySpace.  Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace,   4(1), article 1. Retrieved from: http://cyberpsychology.eu/view.php?cisloclanku=2010050203&article=1

Scanlon, L., Rowling, L., & Weber, Z. (2007). ‘You don’t have to like an identity…you are just lost in a crowd’: Forming a student identity in the first-year transition to university. Journal of Youth Studies, 10 (2), 223–241. doi: 10.1080/13676260600983684 .

Schlenker, B. R. (2003). Self-presentation. In M. R. Leary, J. P. Tangney, M. R. Leary, & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 492–518). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Shain, L., & Farber, B. A. (1989). Female identity development and self-reflection in late adolescence. Adolescence, 24 (94), 381–392.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 38, pp. 183–242). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Siibak, A. (2009). Constructing the self through the photo selection - Visual impression management on social networking websites.  Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspac e, 3(1), article 1. Retrieved from: http://cyberpsychology.eu/view.php?cisloclanku=2009061501&article=1

Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261–302). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Stephenson-Abetz, J., & Holman, A. (2012). Home is where the heart is: Facebook and the negotiation of “old” and “new” during the transition to college. Western Journal of Communication, 76 (2), 175–193. doi: 10.1080/10570314.2011.654309 .

Swenson, L. M., Nordstrom, A., & Hiester, M. (2008). The role of peer relationships in adjustment to college. Journal of College Student Development, 49 (6), 551–567. doi: 10.1353/csd.0.0038 .

Swenson-Goguen, L. M., Hiester, M. A., & Nordstrom, A. H. (2010). -2011). Associations among peer relationships, academic achievement, and persistence in college. Journal of College Student Retention, 12 (3), 319–337. doi: 10.2190/CS.12.3.d .

Toma, C. L. (2013). Feeling better but doing worse: Effects of Facebook self-presentation on implicit self-esteem and cognitive task performance. Media Psychology, 16 (2), 199–220. doi: 10.1080/15213269.2012.762189 .

Toma, C., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). A new twist on love’s labor: Self-presentation in online dating profiles. In K. B. Wright & L. M. Webb (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 41–55). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Trapnell, P. D., & Campbell, J. D. (1999). Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model of personality: distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 (2), 284–304.

Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents’ well-being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9 (5), 584–590. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2006.9.584 .

Vanhalst, J., Luyckx, K., Scholte, R., Engels, R., & Goossens, L. (2013). Low self-esteem as a risk factor for loneliness in adolescence: Perceived-but not actual-social acceptance as an underlying mechanism. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41 , 1067–1081. doi: 10.1007/s10802-013-9751-y .

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23 (1), 3–43. doi: 10.1177/009365096023001001 .

Weber, S., & Mitchell, C. (2008). Imaging, keyboarding, and posting identities: Young people and new media technologies. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 25–47). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wheeless, L. R. (1976). Self-disclosure and interpersonal solidarity: Measurement, validation, and relationships. Human Communication Research, 3 (1), 47–61. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1976.tb00503.x .

Wheeless, L. R. (1978). A follow-up study of the relationships among trust, disclosure, and interpersonal solidarity. Human Communication Research, 4 (2), 143–157. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00604.x .

Yang, C.-c. (2015). It makes me feel good: A longitudinal, mixed-methods study on college freshmen’s Facebook self-presentation and self development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) . Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Yang, C.-c., & Brown, B. B. (2014). Facebook audience feedback and college freshmen’s sense of self. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of Society for Research on Adolescence, Austin, TX.

Young, A. L., & Quan-Haase, A. (2009). Information revelation and Internet privacy concerns on social network sites: A case study of Facebook. Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Communities and Technologies (pp. 265–274). New York, NY: ACM Press.

Yurchisin, J., Watchravesringkan, K., & McCabe, D. B. (2005). An exploration of identity re-creation in the context of internet dating. Social Behavior and Personality, 33 (8), 735–750. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2005.33.8.735 .

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24 (5), 1816–1836. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.02.01 .

Zwier, S., Araujo, T., Boukes, M., & Willemsen, L. (2011). Boundaries to the articulation of possible selves through social networking sites: The case of Facebook profilers’ social connectedness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 14 (10), 571–576. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0612 .

Download references

Author Contribution

C-cY conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, collected data, performed the statistical analyses, interpreted the results, and drafted the manuscript; BBB participated in the design and coordination of the study, interpreted the results, and critically revised the manuscript. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology and Research, University of Memphis, 303D Ball Hall, Memphis, TN, 38152, USA

Chia-chen Yang

Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 880A, 1025 West Johnson Street, Madison, WI, 53706, USA

B. Bradford Brown

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chia-chen Yang .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests.

The authors report no conflict of interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Yang, Cc., Bradford Brown, B. Online Self-Presentation on Facebook and Self Development During the College Transition. J Youth Adolescence 45 , 402–416 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0385-y

Download citation

Received : 24 September 2015

Accepted : 28 October 2015

Published : 03 November 2015

Issue Date : February 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0385-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Self-presentation
• Self-esteem
• Self-concept clarity
• College transition
• Social media
• Social networking site
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Search Menu
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Why Submit?
• About Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
• About International Communication Association
• Editorial Board
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, literature review, acknowledgments, about the authors.

• < Previous

Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Nicole Ellison, Rebecca Heino, Jennifer Gibbs, Managing Impressions Online: Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , Volume 11, Issue 2, 1 January 2006, Pages 415–441, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x

• Permissions Icon Permissions

This study investigates self-presentation strategies among online dating participants, exploring how participants manage their online presentation of self in order to accomplish the goal of finding a romantic partner. Thirty-four individuals active on a large online dating site participated in telephone interviews about their online dating experiences and perceptions. Qualitative data analysis suggests that participants attended to small cues online, mediated the tension between impression management pressures and the desire to present an authentic sense of self through tactics such as creating a profile that reflected their “ideal self,” and attempted to establish the veracity of their identity claims. This study provides empirical support for Social Information Processing theory in a naturalistic context while offering insight into the complicated way in which “honesty” is enacted online.

The online dating arena represents an opportunity to document changing cultural norms surrounding technology-mediated relationship formation and to gain insight into important aspects of online behavior, such as impression formation and self-presentation strategies. Mixed-mode relationships, wherein people first meet online and then move offline, challenge established theories that focus on exclusively online relationships and provide opportunities for new theory development ( Walther & Parks, 2002 ). Although previous research has explored relationship development and self-presentation online ( Bargh, McKenna, & Fitzsimons, 2002; McLaughlin, Osbourne, & Ellison, 1997; Parks & Floyd, 1996; Roberts & Parks, 1999; Utz, 2000 ), the online dating forum is qualitatively different from many other online settings due to the anticipation of face-to-face interaction inherent in this context ( Gibbs, Ellison, & Heino, 2006 ) and the fact that social practices are still nascent.

In recent years, the use of online dating or online personals services has evolved from a marginal to a mainstream social practice. In 2003, at least 29 million Americans (two out of five singles) used an online dating service ( Gershberg, 2004 ); in 2004, on average, there were 40 million unique visitors to online dating sites each month in the U.S. ( CBC News, 2004 ). In fact, the online personals category is one of the most lucrative forms of paid content on the web in the United States ( Egan, 2003 ) and the online dating market is expected to reach $642 million in 2008 ( Greenspan, 2003 ). Ubiquitous access to the Internet, the diminished social stigma associated with online dating, and the affordable cost of Internet matchmaking services contribute to the increasingly common perception that online dating is a viable, efficient way to meet dating or long-term relationship partners ( St. John, 2002 ). Mediated matchmaking is certainly not a new phenomenon: Newspaper personal advertisements have existed since the mid-19th century ( Schaefer, 2003 ) and video dating was popular in the 1980s ( Woll & Cosby, 1987; Woll & Young, 1989 ). Although scholars working in a variety of academic disciplines have studied these earlier forms of mediated matchmaking (e.g., Ahuvia & Adelman, 1992; Lynn & Bolig, 1985; Woll, 1986; Woll & Cosby, 1987 ), current Internet dating services are substantively different from these incarnations due to their larger user base and more sophisticated self-presentation options.

Contemporary theoretical perspectives allow us to advance our understanding of how the age-old process of mate-finding is transformed through online strategies and behaviors. For instance, Social Information Processing (SIP) theory and other frameworks help illuminate computer-mediated communication (CMC), interpersonal communication, and impression management processes. This article focuses on the ways in which CMC interactants manage their online self-presentation and contributes to our knowledge of these processes by examining these issues in the naturalistic context of online dating, using qualitative data gathered from in-depth interviews with online dating participants.

In contrast to a technologically deterministic perspective that focuses on the characteristics of the technologies themselves, or a socially deterministic approach that privileges user behavior, this article reflects a social shaping perspective. Social shaping of technology approaches ( Dutton, 1996; MacKenzie & Wajcman, 1985; Woolgar, 1996 ) acknowledge the ways in which information and communication technologies (ICTs) both shape and are shaped by social practices. As Dutton points out, “technologies can open, close, and otherwise shape social choices, although not always in the ways expected on the basis of rationally extrapolating from the perceived properties of technology” (1996, p. 9). One specific framework that reflects this approach is Howard’s (2004) embedded media perspective, which acknowledges both the capacities and the constraints of ICTs. Capacities are those aspects of technology that enhance our ability to connect with one another, enact change, and so forth; constraints are those aspects of technology that hinder our ability to achieve these goals. An important aspect of technology use, which is mentioned but not explicitly highlighted in Howard’s framework, is the notion of circumvention , which describes the specific strategies employed by individuals to exploit the capacities and minimize the constraints associated with their use of ICTs. Although the notion of circumvention is certainly not new to CMC researchers, this article seeks to highlight the importance of circumvention practices when studying the social aspects of technology use. 1

Self-Presentation and Self-Disclosure in Online and Offline Contexts

Self-presentation and self-disclosure processes are important aspects of relational development in offline settings ( Taylor & Altman, 1987 ), especially in early stages. Goffman’s work on self-presentation explicates the ways in which an individual may engage in strategic activities “to convey an impression to others which it is in his interests to convey” (1959, p. 4). These impression-management behaviors consist of expressions given (communication in the traditional sense, e.g., spoken communication) and expressions given off (presumably unintentional communication, such as nonverbal communication cues). Self-presentation strategies are especially important during relationship initiation, as others will use this information to decide whether to pursue a relationship ( Derlega, Winstead, Wong, & Greenspan, 1987 ). Research suggests that when individuals expect to meet a potential dating partner for the first time, they will alter their self-presentational behavior in accordance with the values desired by the prospective date ( Rowatt, Cunningham, & Druen, 1998 ). Even when interacting with strangers, individuals tend to engage in self-enhancement ( Schlenker & Pontari, 2000 ).

However, research suggests that pressures to highlight one’s positive attributes are experienced in tandem with the need to present one’s true (or authentic) self to others, especially in significant relationships. Intimacy in relationships is linked to feeling understood by one’s partner ( Reis & Shaver, 1988 ) and develops “through a dynamic process whereby an individual discloses personal information, thoughts, and feelings to a partner; receives a response from the partner; and interprets that response as understanding, validating, and caring” ( Laurenceau, Barrett, & Pietromonaco, 1998 , p. 1238). Therefore, if participants aspire to an intimate relationship, their desire to feel understood by their interaction partners will motivate self-disclosures that are open and honest as opposed to deceptive. This tension between authenticity and impression management is inherent in many aspects of self-disclosure. In making decisions about what and when to self-disclose, individuals often struggle to reconcile opposing needs such as openness and autonomy ( Greene, Derlega, & Mathews, 2006 ).

Interactants in online environments experience these same pressures and desires, but the greater control over self-presentational behavior in CMC allows individuals to manage their online interactions more strategically. Due to the asynchronous nature of CMC, and the fact that CMC emphasizes verbal and linguistic cues over less controllable nonverbal communication cues, online self-presentation is more malleable and subject to self-censorship than face-to-face self-presentation ( Walther, 1996 ). In Goffman’s (1959) terms, more expressions of self are “given” rather than “given off.” This greater control over self-presentation does not necessarily lead to misrepresentation online. Due to the “passing stranger” effect ( Rubin, 1975 ) and the visual anonymity present in CMC ( Joinson, 2001 ), under certain conditions the online medium may enable participants to express themselves more openly and honestly than in face-to-face contexts.

A commonly accepted understanding of identity presumes that there are multiple aspects of the self which are expressed or made salient in different contexts. Higgins (1987) argues there are three domains of the self: the actual self (attributes an individual possesses), the ideal self (attributes an individual would ideally possess), and the ought self (attributes an individual ought to possess); discrepancies between one’s actual and ideal self are linked to feelings of dejection. Klohnen and Mendelsohn (1998) determined that individuals’ descriptions of their “ideal self” influenced perceptions of their romantic partners in the direction of their ideal self-conceptions. Bargh et al. (2002) found that in comparison to face-to-face interactions, Internet interactions allowed individuals to better express aspects of their true selves—aspects of themselves that they wanted to express but felt unable to. The relative anonymity of online interactions and the lack of a shared social network online may allow individuals to reveal potentially negative aspects of the self online ( Bargh et al., 2002 ).

Although self-presentation in personal web sites has been examined ( Dominick, 1999; Schau & Gilly, 2003 ), the realm of online dating has not been studied as extensively (for exceptions, see Baker, 2002; Fiore & Donath, 2004 ), and this constitutes a gap in the current research on online self-presentation and disclosure. The online dating realm differs from other CMC environments in crucial ways that may affect self-presentational strategies. For instance, the anticipated future face-to-face interaction inherent in most online dating interactions may diminish participants’ sense of visual anonymity, an important variable in many online self-disclosure studies. An empirical study of online dating participants found that those who anticipated greater face-to-face interaction did feel that they were more open in their disclosures, and did not suppress negative aspects of the self ( Gibbs et al., 2006 ). In addition, because the goal of many online dating participants is an intimate relationship, these individuals may be more motivated to engage in authentic self-disclosures.

Credibility Assessment and Demonstration in Online Self-Presentation

Misrepresentation in online environments.

As discussed, online environments offer individuals an increased ability to control their self-presentation, and therefore greater opportunities to engage in misrepresentation ( Cornwell & Lundgren, 2001 ). Concerns about the prospect of online deception are common ( Bowker & Tuffin, 2003; Donath, 1999; Donn & Sherman, 2002 ), and narratives about identity deception have been reproduced in both academic and popular outlets ( Joinson & Dietz-Uhler, 2002; Stone, 1996; Van Gelder, 1996 ). Some theorists argue that CMC gives participants more freedom to explore playful, fantastical online personae that differ from their “real life” identities ( Stone, 1996 ; Turkle, 1995 ). In certain online settings, such as online role-playing games, a schism between one’s online representation and one’s offline identity are inconsequential, even expected. For instance, MacKinnon (1995) notes that among Usenet participants it is common practice to “forget” about the relationship between actual identities and online personae.

The online dating environment is different, however, because participants are typically seeking an intimate relationship and therefore desire agreement between others’ online identity claims and offline identities. Online dating participants report that deception is the “main perceived disadvantage of online dating” ( Brym & Lenton, 2001 , p. 3) and see it as commonplace: A survey of one online dating site’s participants found that 86% felt others misrepresented their physical appearance ( Gibbs et al., 2006 ). A 2001 research study found that over a quarter of online dating participants reported misrepresenting some aspect of their identity, most commonly age (14%), marital status (10%), and appearance (10%) ( Brym & Lenton, 2001 ). Perceptions that others are lying may encourage reciprocal deception, because users will exaggerate to the extent that they feel others are exaggerating or deceiving ( Fiore & Donath, 2004 ). Concerns about deception in this setting have spawned related services that help online daters uncover inaccuracies in others’ representations and run background checks on would-be suitors ( Baertlein, 2004 ; Fernandez, 2005 ). One site, True.com , conducts background checks on their users and has worked to introduce legislation that would force other online dating sites to either conduct background checks on their users or display a disclaimer ( Lee, 2004 ).

The majority of online dating participants claim they are truthful ( Gibbs et al., 2006; Brym & Lenton, 2001 ), and research suggests that some of the technical and social aspects of online dating may discourage deceptive communication. For instance, anticipation of face-to-face communication influences self-representation choices ( Walther, 1994 ) and self-disclosures because individuals will more closely monitor their disclosures as the perceived probability of future face-to-face interaction increases ( Berger, 1979 ) and will engage in more intentional or deliberate self-disclosure ( Gibbs et al., 2006 ). Additionally, Hancock, Thom-Santelli, and Ritchie (2004) note that the design features of a medium may affect lying behaviors, and that the use of recorded media (in which messages are archived in some fashion, such as an online dating profile) will discourage lying. Also, online dating participants are typically seeking a romantic partner, which may lower their motivation for misrepresentation compared to other online relationships. Further, Cornwell and Lundgren (2001) found that individuals involved in online romantic relationships were more likely to engage in misrepresentation than those involved in face-to-face romantic relationships, but that this was directly related to the level of involvement. That is, respondents were less involved in their cyberspace relationships and therefore more likely to engage in misrepresentation. This lack of involvement is less likely in relationships started in an online dating forum, especially sites that promote marriage as a goal.

Public perceptions about the higher incidence of deception online are also contradicted by research that suggests that lying is a typical occurrence in everyday offline life ( DePaulo, Kashy, Kirkendol, Wyer, & Epstein, 1996 ), including situations in which people are trying to impress prospective dates ( Rowatt et al., 1998 ). Additionally, empirical data about the true extent of misrepresentation in this context is lacking. The current literature relies on self-reported data, and therefore offers only limited insight into the extent to which misrepresentation may be occurring. Hitsch, Hortacsu, and Ariely (2004) use creative techniques to address this issue, such as comparing participants’ self-reported characteristics to patterns found in national survey data, but no research to date has attempted to validate participants’ self-reported assessments of the honesty of their self-descriptions.

Assessing and Demonstrating Credibility in CMC

The potential for misrepresentation online, combined with the time and effort invested in face-to-face dates, make assessment strategies critical for online daters. These assessment strategies may then influence participants’ self-presentational strategies as they seek to prove their trustworthiness while simultaneously assessing the credibility of others.

Online dating participants operate in an environment in which assessing the identity of others is a complex and evolving process of reading signals and deconstructing cues, using both active and passive strategies ( Berger, 1979; Ramirez, Walther, Burgoon, & Sunnafrank, 2002; Tidwell & Walther, 2002 ). SIP considers how Internet users develop impressions of others, even with the limited cues available online, and suggests that interactants will adapt to the remaining cues in order to make decisions about others ( Walther, 1992; Walther, Anderson, & Park, 1994 ). Online users look to small cues in order to develop impressions of others, such as a poster’s email address ( Donath, 1999 ), the links on a person’s homepage ( Kibby, 1997 ), even the timing of email messages ( Walther & Tidwell, 1995 ). In expressing affinity, CMC users are adept at using language ( Walther, Loh, & Granka, 2005 ) and CMC-specific conventions, especially as they become more experienced online ( Utz, 2000 ). In short, online users become cognitive misers, forming impressions of others while conserving mental energy ( Wallace, 1999 ).

Walther and Parks (2002) propose the concept of “warranting” as a useful conceptual tool for understanding how users validate others’ online identity cues (see also Stone, 1996 ). The connection, or warrant, between one’s self-reported online persona and one’s offline aspects of self is less certain and more mutable than in face-to-face settings ( Walther & Parks, 2002 ). In online settings, users will look for signals that are difficult to mimic or govern in order to assess others’ identity claims ( Donath, 1999 ). For instance, individuals might use search engines to locate newsgroup postings by the person under scrutiny, knowing that this searching is covert and that the newsgroup postings most likely were authored without the realization that they would be archived ( Ramirez et al., 2002 ). In the context of online dating, because of the perceptions of deception that characterize this sphere and the self-reported nature of individuals’ profiles, participants may adopt specific presentation strategies geared towards providing warrants for their identity claims.

In light of the above, our research question is thus:

RQ: How do online dating participants manage their online presentation of self in order to accomplish the goal of finding a romantic partner?

In order to gain insight into this question, we interviewed online dating participants about their experiences, thoughts, and behaviors. The qualitative data reported in this article were collected as part of a larger research project which surveyed a national random sample of users of a large online dating site (N = 349) about relational goals, honesty and self-disclosure, and perceived success in online dating. The survey findings are reported in Gibbs et al. (2006) .

Research Site

Our study addresses contemporary CMC theory using naturalistic observations. Participants were members of a large online dating service, “ Connect.com ” (a pseudonym). Connect.com currently has 15 million active members in more than 200 countries around the world and shares structural characteristics with many other online dating services, offering users the ability to create profiles, search others’ profiles, and communicate via a manufactured email address. In their profiles, participants may include one or more photographs and a written (open-ended) description of themselves and their desired mate. They also answer a battery of closed-ended questions, with preset category-based answers, about descriptors such as income, body type, religion, marital status, and alcohol usage. Users can conduct database searches that generate a list of profiles that match their desired parameters (usually gender, sexual orientation, age, and location). Initial communication occurs through a double-blind email system, in which both email addresses are masked, and participants usually move from this medium to others as the relationship progresses.

Data Collection

Given the relative lack of prior research on the phenomenon of online dating, we used qualitative methods to explore the diverse ways in which participants understood and made sense of their experience ( Berger & Luckman, 1980 ) through their own rich descriptions and explanations ( Miles & Huberman, 1994 ). We took an inductive approach based on general research questions informed by literature on online self-presentation and relationship formation rather than preset hypotheses. In addition to asking about participants’ backgrounds, the interview protocol included open-ended questions about their online dating history and goals, profile construction, honesty and self-disclosure online, criteria used to assess others online, and relationship development. Interviews were semistructured to ensure that all participants were asked certain questions and to encourage participants to raise other issues they felt were relevant to the research. The protocol included questions such as: “How did you decide what to say about yourself in your profile? Are you trying to convey a certain impression of yourself with your profile? If you showed your profile to one of your close friends, what do you think their response would be? Are there any personal characteristics that you avoided mentioning or tried to deemphasize?” (The full protocol is available from the authors.)

As recommended for qualitative research ( Eisenhardt, 1989; Glaser & Strauss, 1967 ), we employed theoretical sampling rather than random sampling. In theoretical sampling, cases are chosen based on theoretical (developed a priori) categories to provide examples of polar types, rather than for statistical generalizability to a larger population ( Eisenhardt, 1989 ). The Director of Market Research at Connect.com initially contacted a subsample of members in the Los Angeles and San Francisco Bay areas, inviting them to participate in an interview and offering them a free one-month subscription to Connect.com in return. Those members who did not respond within a week received a reminder email. Of those contacted, 76 people volunteered to participate in an interview. Out of these 76 volunteers, we selected and scheduled interviews with 36 (although two were unable to participate due to scheduling issues). We chose interview participants to ensure a good mix on each of our theoretical categories: gender, age, urban/rural, income, and ethnicity. We focused exclusively on those seeking relationships with the opposite sex, as this group constitutes the majority of Connect.com users. We also confirmed that they were active participants in the site by ensuring that their last login date was within the past week and checking that each had a profile.

Fifty percent of our participants were female and 50% were male, with 76% from an urban location in Los Angeles and 24% from a more rural area surrounding the town of Modesto in the central valley of California. Participants’ ages ranged from 25 to 70, with most being in their 30s and 40s. Their online dating experience varied from 1 month to 5 years. Although our goal was to sample a mix of participants who varied on key demographic criteria rather than generalizing to a larger population, our sample is in fact reflective of the demographic characteristics of the larger population of Connect.com ’s subscribers. Thirty-four interviews were conducted in June and July 2003. Interviews were conducted by telephone, averaging 45 minutes and ranging from 30 to 90 minutes in length. The interview database consisted of 551 pages, including 223,001 words, with an average of 6559 words per interview.

Data Analysis

All of the phone interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and checked for accuracy by the researcher who conducted the interview. Atlas.ti, a software program used for qualitative content analysis, was used to analyze interview transcripts. Data analysis was conducted in an iterative process, in which data from one informant were confirmed or contradicted by data from others in order to refine theoretical categories, propositions, and conclusions as they emerged from the data ( Lincoln & Guba, 1985 ). We used microanalysis of the text ( Strauss & Corbin, 1998 ) to look for common themes among participants. The data analysis process consisted of systematic line-by-line coding of each transcript by the first two authors. Following grounded theory ( Glaser & Strauss, 1967 ), we used an iterative process of coding. Coding consisted of both factual codes (e.g., “age,”“female,”“Los Angeles”) and referential codes (e.g., “filter,”“rejection,”“honesty”) and served both to simplify and reduce data as well as to complicate data by expanding, transforming, and reconceptualizing concepts ( Coffey & Atkinson, 1996 ). New codes were added throughout the process, and then earlier transcripts were recoded to include these new conceptual categories. All of the data were coded twice to ensure thoroughness and accuracy of codes. The researchers had frequent discussions in which they compared and refined coding categories and schemes to ensure consistency. During the coding process, some codes were collapsed or removed when they appeared to be conceptually identical, while others were broken out into separate codes when further nuances among them became apparent.

A total of 98 codes were generated by the first two authors as they coded the interviews. Unitization was flexible in order to capture complete thought units. Codes were allowed to overlap ( Krippendorff, 1980 ); this method of assigning multiple codes to the same thought unit facilitated the process of identifying relationships between codes. See Appendixes A and B for more information on codes.

These interview data offer insight into the self-presentation strategies utilized by participants in order to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of online dating. Many of these strategies revolved around the profile, which is a crucial self-presentation tool because it is the first and primary means of expressing one’s self during the early stages of a correspondence and can therefore foreclose or create relationship opportunities. These strategies are intimately connected to the specific characteristics of the online dating context: fewer cues, an increased ability to manage self-presentation, and the need to establish credibility.

The Importance of Small Cues

When discussing their self-presentational strategies, many participants directly or indirectly referred to the fact that they carefully attended to subtle, almost minute cues in others’ presentational messages, and often seemed to take the same degree of care when crafting their own messages. As suggested by SIP ( Walther, 1992 ), subtle cues such as misspellings in the online environment are important clues to identity for CMC interactants. For instance, one participant said she looked for profiles that were well-written, because “I just think if they can’t spell or … formulate sentences, I would imagine that they’re not that educated.” Because writing ability was perceived to be a cue that was “given off” or not as controllable, participants noticed misspelled words in profiles, interpreting them as evidence of lack of interest or education. As one female participant put it, “If I am getting email from someone that obviously can’t spell or put a full sentence together, I’m thinking what other parts of his life suffer from the same lack of attentiveness?” These individuals often created their own profiles with these concerns in mind. For instance, one participant who found spelling errors “unattractive” composed his emails in a word processing program to check spelling and grammar.

Many of the individuals we interviewed explicitly considered how others might interpret their profiles and carefully assessed the signals each small action or comment might send:

I really analyzed the way I was going to present myself. I’m not one of these [people who write] all cutesy type things, but I wanted to be cute enough, smart enough, funny enough, and not sexual at all, because I didn’t want to invite someone who thought I was going to go to bed with them [as soon as] I shook their hand. (PaliToWW, Los Angeles Female) 2

In this case, the participant “really analyzed” her self-presentation cues and avoided any mention of sexuality, which she felt might indicate promiscuity in the exaggerated context of the profile. This same understanding of the signals “sexual” references would send was reflected in the profile of another participant, who purposefully included sexually explicit terminology in his profile to “weed out” poor matches based on his past experience:

The reason I put [the language] in there is because I had some experiences where I got together [with someone], we both really liked each other, and then it turned out that I was somebody who really liked sex and she was somebody that could take it or leave it. So I put that in there to sort of weed those people out. (imdannyboy, Los Angeles Male)

Participants spoke of the ways in which they incorporated feedback from others in order to shape their self-presentational messages. In some cases, they seemed genuinely surprised by the ways in which the digital medium allowed information to leak out. For instance, one male participant who typically wrote emails late at night discussed his reaction to a message that said, “Wow, it’s 1:18 in the morning, what are you doing writing me?” This email helped him realize how much of a “night owl” he was, and “how not attractive that may be for women I’m writing because it’s very clear the time I send the email.” Over time, he also realized that the length of his emails was shaping impressions of him, and he therefore regulated their length. He said:

In the course of [corresponding with others on the site] I became aware of how I had to present myself. Also, I became quite aware that I had to be very brief. … More often than not when I would write a long response, I wouldn’t get a response. … I think it implied. … that I was too desperate for conversation, [that] I was a hermit. (joet8, Los Angeles Male)

The site displayed the last time a user was active on the site, and this small cue was interpreted as a reliable indicator of availability. As one male participant said, “I’m not going to email somebody who hasn’t been on there for at least a week max. If it’s been two weeks since she’s logged on, forget her, she’s either dating or there’s a problem.”

Overall, the mediated nature of these initial interactions meant that fewer cues were available, therefore amplifying the importance of those that remained. Participants carefully attended to small cues, such as spelling ability or last login date, in others’ profiles in order to form impressions. In a self-reflexive fashion, they applied these techniques to their own presentational messages, carefully scrutinizing both cues given (such as photograph) and, when possible, those perceived to be given off (such as grammar).

Balancing Accuracy and Desirability in Self-Presentation

Almost all of our participants reported that they attempted to represent themselves accurately in their profiles and interactions. Many expressed incomprehension as to why others with a shared goal of an offline romantic relationship would intentionally misrepresent themselves. As one participant explained, “They polish it up some, like we all probably do a little bit, but for the most part I would say people are fairly straightforward.” However, as suggested by previous research on self-disclosure and relationship development, participants reported competing desires. At times, their need to portray a truthful, accurate self-representation was in tension with their natural inclination to project a version of self that was attractive, successful, and desirable. Speaking about this tendency towards impression management, one participant noted that she could see why “people would be dishonest at some point because they are still trying to be attractive … in the sense they would want this other person to like them.”

One way in which participants reconciled their conflicting needs for positive self-presentation and accuracy was to create profiles that described a potential, future version of self. In some cases, participants described how they or others created profiles that reflected an ideal as opposed to actual self: “Many people describe themselves the way they want [to be] … their ideal themselves.” For example, individuals might identify themselves as active in various activities (e.g., hiking, surfing) in which they rarely participated, prompting one participant to proclaim sarcastically, “I’ve never known so many incredibly athletic women in my life!” One participant explained,

For instance, I am also an avid hiker and [scuba diver] and sometimes I have communicated with someone that has presented themselves the same way, but then it turns out they like scuba diving but they haven’t done it for 10 years, they like hiking but they do it once every second year … I think they may not have tried to lie; they just have perceived themselves differently because they write about the person they want to be … In their profile they write about their dreams as if they are reality. (Christo1, Los Angeles Male)

In two cases, individuals admitted to representing themselves as less heavy than they actually were. This thinner persona represented a (desired) future state for these individuals: “The only thing I kind of feel bad about is that the picture I have of myself is a very good picture from maybe five years ago. I’ve gained a little bit of weight and I feel kind of bad about that. I’m going to, you know, lose it again.” In another case, a woman who misrepresented her weight online used an upcoming meeting as incentive to minimize the discrepancy between her actual self and the ideal self articulated in her profile:

I’ve lost 44 pounds since I’ve started [online dating], and I mean, that’s one of the reasons I lost the weight so I can thank online dating for that. [Because] the first guy that hit on me, I checked my profile and I had lied a little bit about the pounds, so I thought I had better start losing some weight so that it would be more honest. That was in December, and I’ve lost every week since then. (MaryMoon, Los Angeles Female)

In this case, a later physical change neutralized the initial discursive deception. For another participant, the profile served as an opportunity to envision and ideate a version of self that was future-focused and goal-oriented:

I sort of thought about what is my ideal self. Because when you date, you present your best foot forward. I thought about all the qualities that I have, you know, even if I sometimes make mistakes and stuff. … And also got together the best picture I had, and kind of came up with what I thought my goals were at the time, because I thought that was an important thing to stress. (Marty7, Los Angeles Male)

Overall, participants did not see this as engaging in deceptive communication per se, but rather as presenting an idealized self or portraying personal qualities they intended to develop or enhance.

Circumventing Constraints

In addition to impression management pressures, participants’ expressed desires for accurate representation were stymied by various constraints, including the technical interface of the website. In order to activate an online profile, participants had to complete a questionnaire with many closed-ended responses for descriptors such as age, body type, zip code, and income. These answers became very important because they were the variables that others used to construct searches in order to narrow the vast pool of profiles. In fact, the front page of Connect.com includes a “quick” search on those descriptors believed to be most important: age, geographical location, inclusion of photograph, and gender/sexual orientation.

The structure of the search parameters encouraged some to alter information to fit into a wider range of search parameters, a circumvention behavior that guaranteed a wider audience for their profile. For example, participants tended to misrepresent their age for fear of being “filtered out.” It was not unusual for users who were one or two years older than a natural breakpoint (i.e., 35 or 50) to adjust their age so they would still show up in search results. This behavior, especially if one’s actual age was revealed during subsequent email or telephone exchanges, seemed to be socially acceptable. Many of our participants recounted cases in which others freely and without embarrassment admitted that they had slightly misrepresented something in their profile, typically very early in the correspondence:

They don’t seem to be embarrassed about [misrepresenting their age] … in their first reply they say, “oh by the way, I am not so many years, I am that many years.” And then if I ask them, they say, well, they tend to be attracted to a little bit younger crowd and they are afraid that guys may surf for a certain age group of women, because you use those filters. I mean, I may choose to list only those that are between X and Y years old and they don’t want to be filtered away. … They are trying to be sort of clever so that people they tend to be attracted to will actually find them. (Christo1, Los Angeles Male)

If lying about one’s age was perceived to be the norm, those who didn’t engage in this practice felt themselves to be at a disadvantage (see Fiore & Donath, 2004 ). For instance, one participant who misrepresented his age on his profile noted:

I’m such an honest guy, why should I have to lie about my age? On the other hand, if I put X number of years, that is unattractive to certain people. They’re never going to search that group and they’re never going to have an opportunity to meet me, because they have a number in their mind just like I do. … Everybody lies about their age or a lot of people do. … So I have to cheat too in order to be on the same page as everybody else that cheats. If I don’t cheat that makes me seem twice as old. So if I say I am 44, people think that I am 48. It blows. (RealSweetheart, Bay Area Male)

In the above cases, users engaged in misrepresentation triggered by the social norms of the environment and the structure of the search filters. The technical constraints of the site may have initiated a more subtle form of misrepresentation when participants were required to choose among a limited set of options, none of which described them sufficiently. For instance, when creating their profiles, participants had to designate their “perfect date” by selecting one from a dozen or so generic descriptions, which was frustrating for those who did not see any that were particularly appealing. In another case, one participant complained that there was not an option to check “plastic surgery” as one of his “turn-offs” and thus he felt forced to try to discern this from the photos; yet another participant expressed his desire for a “shaved” option under the description of hair type (“I resent having to check ‘bald’”).

Foggy Mirror

In addition to the cases in which misrepresentation was triggered by technical constraints or the tendency to present an idealized self, participants described a third branch of unintentional misrepresentation triggered by the limits of self-knowledge. We call this phenomenon “foggy mirror” based on this participant’s explanation:

People like to write about themselves. Sometimes it’s not truthful, but it’s how they see themselves and that gives you a different slant on an individual. This is how they really see themselves. Sometimes you will see a person who weighs 900 pounds and—this is just an exaggeration—and they will have on spandex, you’ll think, “God, I wish I had their mirror, because obviously their mirror tells them they look great.” It’s the same thing with online. (KarieK, Bay Area Female)

This user acknowledges that sometimes others weren’t lying per se, but the fact that their self-image differed from others’ perceptions meant that their textual self-descriptions would diverge from a third party’s description. In explaining this phenomenon, KarieK used the metaphor of a mirror to emphasize the self-reflexive nature of the profile. She also refers to the importance of subtle cues when she notes that a user’s self-presentation choices give one a “different slant on an individual.” The term “foggy mirror” thus describes the gap between self-perceptions and the assessments made by others. The difference might be overly positive (which was typically the case) or negative, as the below example illustrates. A male participant explained:

There was one gal who said that she had an “average” body shape. … When I met her she was thin, and she said she was “average,” but I think she has a different concept of what “average” is. So I then widened my scope [in terms of search parameters] and would go off the photographs. What a woman thinks is an “average” body and what I think is an “average” body are two different things. (joet8, Los Angeles Male)

In this case, the participant acknowledged the semantic problems that accompany textual self-descriptions and adopted a strategy of relying on photographs as visual, objective evidence, instead of subjective, ambiguous terms like “average.” To counter the “foggy mirror” syndrome in their own profiles, some individuals asked friends or family members to read their profiles in order to validate them.

In regards to self-presentation, the most significant tension experienced by participants was one not unique to the online medium: mediating between the pressures to present an enhanced or desired self ( Goffman, 1959 ) and the need to present one’s true self to a partner in order to achieve intimacy ( Reis & Shaver, 1988 ). In their profiles and online interactions, they attempted to present a vision of self that was attractive, engaging, and worthy of pursuit, but realistic and honest enough that subsequent face-to-face meetings were not unpleasant or surprising. Constructing a profile that reflected one’s “ideal self” ( Higgins, 1987 ) was one tactic by which participants reconciled these pressures. In general, although all of our participants claimed they attempted to be honest in their self-presentation, misrepresentations occurred when participants felt pressure to fudge in order to circumvent the search filters, felt the closed-ended options provided by the site didn’t describe them accurately, or were limited by their self-knowledge.

Establishing Credibility

The increased ability to engage in selective self-presentation, and the absence of visual cues in the online environment, meant that accuracy of self-presentation was a salient issue for our interviewees. The twin concerns that resulted from these factors—the challenge of establishing the credibility of one’s own self-descriptions while assessing the credibility of others’ identity claims—affected one another in a recursive fashion. In an environment in which there were limited outside confirmatory resources to draw upon, participants developed a set of rules for assessing others while incorporating these codes into their own self-presentational messages. For example, one participant made sure that her profile photograph showed her standing up because she felt that sitting or leaning poses were a camouflage technique used by heavier people. This illustrates the recursive way in which participants developed rules for assessing others (e.g., avoid people in sitting poses) while also applying these rubrics to their own self-presentational messages (e.g., don’t show self in sitting pose).

Participants adopted specific tactics in order to compensate for the fact that traditional methods of information seeking were limited and that self-reported descriptions were subject to intentional or unintentional misrepresentation when others took advantage of the “selective self-presentation” ( Walther & Burgoon, 1992 ) available in CMC. As one participant noted, “You’re just kind of blind, you don’t know if what they’re saying in their profile online is true.” Acknowledging the potential for misrepresentation, participants also sought to “show” aspects of their personality in their profiles versus just “telling” others about themselves. They created their profiles with an eye towards stories or content that confirmed specific personality traits rather than including a ‘laundry list’ of attributes. As one Los Angeles male participant explained, “I attempted to have stories in my profile somewhat to attempt to demonstrate my character, as opposed to, you know, [just writing] ‘I’m trustworthy,’ and all that bit.” This emphasis on demonstration as opposed to description was a tactic designed to circumvent the lack of a shared social context that would have warranted identity claims and hedged against blatant deception.

Another aspect of “showing” included the use of photographs, which served to warrant or support claims made in textual descriptions. Profile photographs communicated not only what people looked like (or claimed to look like), but also indicated the qualities they felt were important. For instance, one man with a doctorate included one photo of himself standing against a wall displaying his diplomas and another of him shirtless. When asked about his choice of photos, he explained that he selected the shirtless photo because he was proud of being in shape and wanted to show it off. He picked the combination of the two photos because “one is sort of [my] intellectual side and one is sort of the athletic side.” In this case, the photos functioned on multiple levels: To communicate physical characteristics, but also self-concept (the aspects of self he was most proud of), and as an attempt to provide evidence for his discursive claims (his profile listed an advanced degree and an athletic physique).

To summarize, our data suggest that participants were cognizant of the online setting and its association with deceptive communication practices, and therefore worked to present themselves as credible. In doing so, they drew upon the rules they had developed for assessing others and turned these practices into guidelines for their own self-presentational messages.

The primary goal of the online dating participants interviewed for this study was to find someone with whom they could establish a dating relationship (although desired commitment level and type of relationship varied across participants). Given this, they attempted to achieve their goals while contending with the unique characteristics of the online environment, engaging in strategies designed to circumvent the constraints of the online dating environment while exploiting its capacities. One constraint—the lack of nonverbal cues—meant that the task of interpreting the remaining cues became paramount in regards to both assessment of others and presentation of self. Since the goal of most online dating participants was to identify and interact with potential romantic partners, individuals strove to highlight their positive attributes and capitalize on the greater perceived control over self-presentation inherent in the medium. However, the future face-to-face interaction they anticipated meant that individuals had to balance their desire for self-promotion with their need for accurate self-presentation. In response to the risk of misrepresentation online, made possible by the selective self-presentation affordances of CMC, participants adopted various strategies to demonstrate the credibility of their identity claims, recursively applying the same techniques they employed to uncover representational ruses in others. Our findings suggest that participants consistently engaged in creative workarounds (circumvention strategies) as they went through the process of posting a profile, selecting individuals to contact, and communicating with potential romantic partners. Our data also highlight the recursive process by which some participants constructed rules of thumb for assessing others (e.g., an inactive account indicates a lack of availability or interest) while simultaneously incorporating these rules in their own messages (e.g., frequently making slight adjustments to the profile).

Theoretical Implications

As individuals make initial decisions about potential partners, they form impressions that help reduce uncertainty about the other ( Berger & Calabrese, 1975 ). For this to happen in the context of CMC, SIP argues, individuals will adapt their behaviors to the cues that are available ( Tidwell & Walther, 2002; Walther, 1992 ) to convey information to one another. While empirical support for SIP has been demonstrated (see Walther & Parks, 2002 for a review), this article is among the few to provide evidence for SIP in a naturalistic setting. Our data show that in the initial interactions of online dating participants, stylistic aspects of messages such as timing, length, and grammar appear equally as important as the content of the message itself; this is consistent with SIP’s formulation that when nonverbal cues are decreased, the remaining cues become more salient to users. Previous laboratory studies of SIP have tended to focus on the manipulation of a subset of cues. A unique contribution of this study’s extension of SIP is its demonstration of the organic interplay of these alternative sources of social information online.

Although much of the public debate about online dating has centered on the medium’s inability to ensure participants’ truthful self-descriptions, our interview data suggest that the notion that people frequently, explicitly, and intentionally “lie” online is simplistic and inaccurate. Exploring the question of whether participants created a playful or fantastical identity online ( Stone, 1996 ; Turkle, 1995 ) or were more open and honest ( Rubin, 1975 ), we found that the online dating participants we spoke with claimed that they attempted to present an accurate self-representation online, a finding echoed in our survey data ( Gibbs et al., 2006 ). This study highlights the fact that creating an accurate online representation of self in this context is a complex and evolving process in which participants attempt to attract desirable partners while contending with constraints such as those posed by technological design and the limits of self-knowledge.

In some cases, the technical constraints of the site may have unintentionally enabled acts of misrepresentation, for instance when participants slightly altered information in situations in which they felt an arbitrary data point (in age, for example) would significantly harm their chances of being discovered by a potential mate. Additionally, self-reported descriptions that use subjective terms (e.g., “pretty” or “average”) could also result in unintentional misrepresentation due to different interpretations of these terms. Additionally, as Shah and Kesan point out, “Defaults have a legitimating effect, because they carry information about what most people are expected to do” (2003, p. 7). In the case of online dating, it may be that the default settings in the search field (i.e., an age range, whether searches are limited to profiles with photographs) influence user perceptions of the desirability or appropriateness of certain responses.

Additionally, our interview data suggest that online representations of one’s ideal self—when combined with the increased accountability engendered by an anticipated face-to-face interaction—may serve as a tool to enable individuals to minimize the discrepancy between their actual and their ideal selves. The ideal self refers to qualities or achievements one strives to possess in the future ( Bargh et al., 2002 ). In the realm of online dating, it is interesting that participants reported using the profile to ideate a version of self they desired to experience in the future. For some, the act of constructing an online profile may begin a process of self-growth as they strive to close the gap between actual and ideal self, such as the woman who misrepresented her weight but then was able to achieve her goal of weight loss over time. Future research is needed to assess the extent to which this phenomenon exists and its long-term consequences for processes of self-growth.

More research is also needed to understand fully whether strategies designed to circumvent constraints (technical or other) are perceived to be deceptive by users and, if so, which norms govern their use. The literature on deception explores a wide range of deceptive acts, ranging from the more mundane “diversionary responses” to outright “lies” ( Buller & Burgoon, 1994 ). Future research could work to develop a taxonomy of online deception and acceptability, which takes into account the nuances of social norms and the fact that some misrepresentation may be unintentional or socially accepted. For instance, if a profile includes incorrect information that is rectified immediately over email, is it a “lie?” More importantly, is it acceptable? Also, more research is needed to understand more clearly the extent and substance of participants’ actual concerns regarding online dating (i.e., misrepresentation, effectiveness, safety) and how they overlap with the often sensationalized discourse about online deception as represented in media accounts and social narratives.

Practical Implications

Given that deceptive practices are a concern for online dating participants, future research should explore the ways in which online dating sites could implement design features aimed at addressing these issues. For instance, they could acknowledge and incorporate aspects of a shared social context, similar to social networking sites like Friendster ( Donath & boyd, 2004 ), through the use of testimonials or social network visualizations. Online dating sites could adopt some of the design features used in e-commerce sites, such as testimonials, user rating systems, or social network visualizations, where participants also must operate in an uncertain environment in which warranting is difficult and deception can be costly ( Resnick & Zeckhauser, 2002 ).

A second design consideration is the possibility that the technical characteristics of some online dating sites may privilege objective characteristics (such as demographic features) and de-emphasize the process of seeing others as individuals rather than as amalgams of various traits. The benefit, or capacity, of online dating is that participants can use specific search parameters to cull a subset of profiles from a larger database. Participants acknowledged that the online dating environment placed more emphasis on certain kinds of information—information that might not be very important in a face-to-face setting when chemistry was already established. To compensate for or to circumvent these constraints, participants tried to create profiles that stood out or evidenced aspects of self that they were particularly proud of rather than a laundry list of features. They struggled to present themselves as unique individuals within the constraints of a technical system that encouraged homogeneity, negotiating a desire to stand out with the need to blend in. Future research might examine the potential for developing self-presentation tools that allow individuals more nuanced ways of expressing themselves in the online environment, such as video presentations, more sophisticated communication tools, or triangulated information from others on the site. Online dating sites may need to reconsider the ways in which profiles are structured and the characteristics they include; as Fiore and Donath argue, “the features of a person that Match.com presents as salient to romance will begin to have some psychological and cultural influences if 40 million Americans view them every month” (2004, p. 1395). If we accept this claim, then it stands to reason that participants’ visions of self may be impacted by their online self-presentations, especially if these presentations are constrained.

Limitations

We chose to conduct interviews with online dating participants in order to gain insight into how they perceived their experiences and the processes through which they learned to avoid the pitfalls and exploit the possibilities of online dating. However, there are several limitations that should be acknowledged in our method and sample. Limitations of this study include the sampling of only participants located on the West Coast. While Connect.com members are worldwide, we cannot assess if regional or national differences affect the online dating experience. A major limitation is the potential for self-selection bias, as participants volunteered for the study. While demographically diverse, those that chose to volunteer might be biased toward a more positive outlook on online dating or potentially more honest in their online dating practices.

In addition, the self-reported nature of the data may have resulted in a social desirability bias, making participants less likely to admit to intentional misrepresentation. Finally, many of our findings may be specific to Connect.com ’s model of online dating, in which participants post profiles and select with whom they want to communicate. Other online dating sites, such as eHarmony, utilize a very different model, acting as online matchmakers where individuals who are found to be compatible are paired based on personality tests developed by “expert” psychologists. Future research could assess whether variables like self-efficacy predict which model users choose to utilize. Although our observations in this article were based on the sample as a whole, we acknowledge that there may be differences (for instance, along gender lines) which are beyond the scope of this article but which could be explored in future research.

Although self-presentation and relationship formation have been studied in other online contexts, tracing how these processes take place in the online dating realm offers researchers unique insights into the crucial role of circumvention techniques, the complicated nature of “honesty” in online environments, and the social and psychological implications of the design and structure of these sites. From a historical perspective, the goals of online dating participants are not that different from those described by poets throughout the ages. What is different is the tools in their repertoire and the constraints and opportunities they present. As O’Sullivan writes, “From a functional perspective, it appears new technologies may be providing nothing terribly new— just new ways of doing things that people have been doing throughout the history of social interaction” (2000, p. 428). This study has attempted to elucidate and explain some of these social practices as a window into the ways in which new communication technologies are shaping us—and we are shaping them—in the ongoing pursuit of romantic relationships.

The authors thank Karen Aroian, Ulla Bunz, Annika Hylmo, Edythe Hough, Patrick O’Sullivan, Charles Steinfield, Joe Walther, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions regarding this manuscript.

Similar to the concept of “workaround” employed by designers and software engineers, users engage in circumvention strategies to neutralize constraints—or turn them into capabilities. Prior CMC research has identified similar processes in interpersonal contexts. For instance, O’Sullivan (2000) found that users chose mediated channels over face-to-face communication in situations where a preferred impression was expected to be violated in order to capitalize on the face-saving capabilities of mediated interaction. Similarly, CMC researchers working in other contexts have noted the process by which individuals adapt their behavior to compensate for the limitations imposed by the medium in order to pursue their communication goals ( Walther, Loh, & Granka, 2005 ).

All identifying information about our participants has been changed to protect their confidentiality, although we have attempted to use pseudonyms that reflect the tone and spirit of their chosen screen names. Additionally, at the request of our research site, we have used a pseudonym in place of the site’s actual name.

Ahuvia , A. C. , & Adelman , M. B . ( 1992 ). Formal intermediaries in the marriage market: A typology and review . Journal of Marriage & the Family , 54 ( 2 ), 452 – 463 .

Google Scholar

Baertlein , L . ( 2004 ). Demand for advice to online lovelorn is booming . BizReport . Retrieved August 14, 2004, from http://www.bizreport.com/news/6516/

Baker , A . ( 2002 ). What makes an online relationship successful? Clues from couples who met in cyberspace . CyberPsychology & Behavior , 5 ( 4 ), 363 – 375 .

Bargh , J. A. , McKenna , K. Y. , & Fitzsimons , G. M . ( 2002 ). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the Internet . Journal of Social Issues , 58 ( 1 ), 33 – 48 .

Berger , C. R . ( 1979 ). Beyond initial interaction: Uncertainty, understanding and development of interpersonal relationships . In H. Giles & R. St. Clair (Eds.), Language and Social Psychology (pp. 122 – 144 ). Baltimore: University Park Press .

Google Preview

Berger , C. , & Calabrese , R . ( 1975 ). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication . Human Communication Research , 1 ( 2 ), 99 – 112 .

Berger , P. L. , & Luckman , T . ( 1980 ). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge . New York: Irvington Publishers .

Bowker , N. , & Tuffin , K . ( 2003 ). Dicing with deception: People with disabilities’ strategies for managing safety and identity online . Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 8 ( 2 ). Retrieved January 25, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue2/bowker.html

Brym , R. J. , & Lenton , R. L . ( 2001 ). Love Online: A Report on Digital Dating in Canada . Retrieved July 2, 2003, from http://www.nelson.com/nelson/harcourt/sociology/newsociety3e/loveonline.pdf

Buller , D. B. , & Burgoon , J. K . ( 1994 ). Deception: Strategic and nonstrategic communication . In J. A. Daly & J. M. Wiemann (Eds.), Strategic Interpersonal Communication (pp. 191 – 223 ). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum .

CBC News . ( 2004 ). Online Dating Facts and Figures . Retrieved November 17, 2005, from http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/services/onlinedating/facts.html

Coffey , A. , & Atkinson , P . ( 1996 ). Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Cornwell , B. , & Lundgren , D. C . ( 2001 ). Love on the Internet: Involvement and misrepresentation in romantic relationships in cyberspace vs. realspace . Computers in Human Behavior , 17 ( 2 ), 197 – 211 .

DePaulo , B. , Kashy , D. , Kirkendol , S. , Wyer , M. , & Epstein , J . ( 1996 ). Lying in everyday life . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 70 ( 5 ), 979 – 995 .

Derlega , V. , Winstead , B. , Wong , P. , & Greenspan , M . ( 1987 ). Self-disclosure and relationship development: An attributional analysis . In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal Processes: New Directions in Communication Research (pp. 172 – 187 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Dominick , J. R . ( 1999 ). Who do you think you are? Personal home pages and self-presentation on the World Wide Web . Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly , 76 ( 4 ), 646 – 658 .

Donath , J. S . ( 1999 ). Identity and deception in the virtual community . In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in Cyberspace (pp. 29 – 59 ). New York: Routledge .

Donath , J. , & Boyd , D . ( 2004 ). Public displays of connection . BT Technology Journal , 22 ( 4 ), 71 – 82 .

Donn , J. , & Sherman , R . ( 2002 ). Attitudes and practices regarding the formation of romantic relationships on the Internet . CyberPsychology & Behavior , 5 ( 2 ), 107 – 123 .

Dutton , W. E . ( 1996 ). Information and Communication Technologies: Visions and Realities . Oxford: Oxford University Press .

Egan , J . ( 2003, November 23 ). Love in the time of no time . The New York Times . Retrieved November 25, 2003, from http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/23/magazine/23ONLINE.html?ex=1070719885&ei=1&en=fcd72235b67ffb79

Eisenhardt , K. M . ( 1989 ). Building theories from case study research . Academy of Management Review , 14 ( 4 ), 532 – 550 .

Fernandez , S . ( 2005, May 30 ). Getting to know you: Tell-all sites put online dater profiles to truth test . The Washington Post . Retrieved June 5, 2005, from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/29/AR2005052901071_pf.html

Fiore , A. T. , & Donath , J . ( 2004 ). Online Personals: An Overview . Paper presented at the meeting of ACM Computer-Human Interaction 2004, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved October, 1, 2004, from http://smg.media.mit.edu/papers/atf/chi2004_personals_short.pdf

Gershberg , M . ( 2004, June 10 ). Funny odds of online dating . BizReport . Retrieved October 28, 2004, from http://www.bizreport.com/news/7383/

Gibbs , J. L. , Ellison , N. B. , & Heino , R. D . ( 2006 ). Self-presentation in online personals: The role of anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in Internet dating . Communication Research , 33 ( 2 ), 1 – 26 .

Glaser , B. G. , & Strauss , A. L . ( 1967 ). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research . Chicago: Aldine Publishing .

Goffman , E . ( 1959 ). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life . New York: Anchor .

Greene , K. , Derlega , V. L. , & Mathews , A . ( 2006 ). Self-disclosure in personal relationships . In A. Vangelisti & D. Perlman (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .

Greenspan , R . ( 2003 ). Socializing surfers shop for friends, dates . Clickz . Retrieved April 3, 2004, from http://www.clickz.com/news/article.php/3114251

Hancock , J. , Thom-Santelli , J. , & Ritchie , T . ( 2004 ). Deception and design: The impact of communication technology on lying behavior . In E. Dykstra-Erickson & M. Tscheligi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 129 – 134 ). New York: ACM .

Higgins , E. T . ( 1987 ). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect . Psychological Review , 94 ( 3 ), 319 – 340 .

Hitsch , G. J. , Hortacsu , A. , & Ariely , D . ( 2004 ). What makes you click: An empirical analysis of online dating (Working Paper) . Retrieved June 22, 2005, from http://rover.cs.northwestern.edu/~surana/blog/extras/online_dating.pdf

Howard , P. N . ( 2004 ). Embedded media: Who we know, what we know and society online . In P. N. Howard & S. Jones (Eds.), Society Online: The Internet in Context (pp. 1 – 28 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Joinson , A. N . ( 2001 ). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity . European Journal of Social Psychology , 31 ( 2 ), 177 – 192 .

Joinson , A. N. , & Dietz-Uhler , B . ( 2002 ). Explanations for the perpetration of and reactions to deception in a virtual community . Social Science Computer Review , 20 ( 3 ), 275 – 289 .

Kibby , M . ( 1997 ). Babes on the Web: Sex, identity and the home page . Media International Australia , 84 , 39 – 45 .

Krippendorff , K . ( 1980 ). Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage .

Klohnen , E. C. , & Mendelsohn , G. A . ( 1998 ). Partner selection for personality characteristics: A couple-centered approach . Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin , 24 ( 3 ), 268 .

Laurenceau , J. P. , Barrett , L. F. , & Pietromonaco , P. R . ( 1998 ). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 74 ( 5 ), 1238 – 1251 .

Lee , A . ( 2004, November 1 ). Online love may come with safety warning . Detroit News , pp. 1A – 2A .

Lincoln , Y. S. , & Guba , E. G . ( 1985 ). Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage .

Lynn , M. , & Bolig , R . ( 1985 ). Personal advertisements: Source of data for research on interpersonal relations . Journal of Social and Personal Relationship , 2 , 337 – 383 .

MacKenzie , D. A. , & Wajcman , J . ( 1985 ). The Social Shaping of Technology . Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press .

MacKinnon , R. C . ( 1995 ). Searching for the Leviathan in Usenet . In S. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-Mediated Communication and Community . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

McLaughlin , M. , Osbourne , K. , & Ellison , N . ( 1997 ). Virtual community in a telepresence environment . In S. Jones (Ed.), Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety (pp. 146 – 168 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Miles , M. B. , & Huberman , A. M . ( 1994 ). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

O’Sullivan , P. B . ( 2000 ). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Impression management functions of communication channels in relationships . Human Communication Research , 26 ( 3 ), 403 – 431 .

Parks , M. R. , & Floyd , K . ( 1996 ). Making friends in cyberspace . Journal of Communication , 46 ( 1 ), 80 – 97 .

Ramirez , A. , Walther , J. B. , Burgoon , J. K. , & Sunnafrank , M . ( 2002 ). Information-seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication: Toward a conceptual model . Human Communication Research , 28 ( 2 ), 213 – 228 .

Reis , H. T. , & Shaver , P . ( 1988 ). Intimacy as an interpersonal process . In S. W. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of Personal Relationships: Theory, Research and Interventions (pp. 376 – 389 ). Chichester, England: Wiley .

Resnick , P. , & Zeckhauser , R . ( 2002 ). Trust among strangers in Internet transactions: Empirical analysis of eBay’s reputation system . In M. R . Baye (Ed.), Advances in Applied Microeconomics: The Economics of the Internet and E-commerce . (Vol. 11 , pp. 127 – 157 ). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science .

Roberts , L. D. , & Parks , M. R . ( 1999 ). The social geography of gender-switching in virtual environments on the Internet . Information, Communication & Society , 2 ( 4 ), 521 – 540 .

Rowatt , W. C. , Cunningham , M. R. , & Druen , P. B . ( 1998 ). Deception to get a date . Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin , 24 ( 11 ), 1228 – 1242 .

Rubin , Z . ( 1975 ). Disclosing oneself to a stranger: Reciprocity and its limits . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology , 11 ( 3 ), 233 – 260 .

Schaefer , L. J . ( 2003, February 14 ). Looking for love, online or on paper . The New York Times , p. A31 .

Schau , H. J. , & Gilly , M. C . ( 2003 ). We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space . Journal of Consumer Research , 30 ( 3 ), 385 – 404 .

Schlenker , B. R. , & Pontari , B. A . ( 2000 ). The strategic control of information: Impression management and self-presentation in daily life . In A. Tesser , R. B. Felson , & J. M. Suls (Eds.), Psychological Perspectives on Self and Identity (pp. 199 – 232 ). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association .

Shah , R. C. , & Kesan , J. P . ( 2003 ). Manipulating the governance characteristics of code . Info: The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, Information and Media , 5 ( 4 ), 3 – 9 .

St. John , W . ( 2002, April 21 ). Young, single and dating at hyperspeed . The New York Times . Retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.springstreetnetworks.com/press/pdf/springst_youngandsingle.pdf

Stone , A. R . ( 1996 ). The War of Desire and Technology at the Close of the Mechanical Age . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .

Strauss , A. , & Corbin , J . ( 1998 ). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Taylor , D. , & Altman , I . ( 1987 ). Communication in interpersonal relationships: Social penetration processes . In M. E. Roloff & G. R. Miller (Eds.), Interpersonal Processes: New Directions in Communication Research (pp. 257 – 277 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Tidwell , L. C. , & Walther , J. B . ( 2002 ). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time . Human Communication Research , 28 ( 3 ), 317 – 348 .

Turkle , S . ( 1995 ). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet . New York: Simon and Schuster .

Utz , S . ( 2000 ). Social information processing in MUDs: The development of friendships in virtual worlds . Journal of Online Behavior , 1 ( 1 ). Retrieved July 15, 2004, from http://www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n1/utz.html

Van Gelder , L . ( 1996 ). The strange case of the electronic lover: A real-life story of deception, seduction, and technology . In R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices (2nd ed., pp. 533 – 546 ). San Diego, CA: Academic Press .

Wallace , P . ( 1999 ). The Psychology of the Internet . New York: Cambridge University Press .

Walther , J. B . ( 1992 ). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective . Communication Research , 19 ( 1 ), 52 – 91 .

Walther , J. B . ( 1994 ). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer mediated interaction . Human Communication Research , 20 ( 4 ), 473 – 501 .

Walther , J. B . ( 1996 ). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction . Communication Research , 23 ( 1 ), 3 – 44 .

Walther , J. B. , Anderson , J. F. , & Park , D. D . ( 1994 ). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication . Communication Research , 21 ( 4 ), 460 – 487 .

Walther , J. B. , & Burgoon , J. K . ( 1992 ). Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction . Human Communication Research , 19 ( 1 ), 50 – 88 .

Walther , J. B. , Loh , T. , & Granka , L . ( 2005 ). Let me count the ways: The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity . Journal of Language and Social Psychology , 24 ( 1 ), 36 – 65 .

Walther , J. B. , & Parks , M. R . ( 2002 ). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships . In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (3rd ed., pp. 529 – 563 ). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .

Walther , J. B. , & Tidwell , L. C . ( 1995 ). Nonverbal cues in computer-mediated communication, and the effect of chronemics on relational communication . Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce , 5 ( 4 ), 355 – 378 .

Woll , S . ( 1986 ). So many to choose from: Decision strategies in videodating . Journal of Social and Personal Relationships , 3 ( 1 ), 43 – 52 .

Woll , S. B. , & Cosby , P. C . ( 1987 ). Videodating and other alternatives to traditional methods of relationship initiation . In W. H. Jones & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in Personal Relationships (Vol. 1 , pp. 69 – 108 ). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press .

Woll , S. B. , & Young , P . ( 1989 ). Looking for Mr. or Ms. Right: Self-presentation in videodating . Journal of Marriage and the Family , 51 ( 2 ), 483 – 488 .

Woolgar , S . ( 1996 ). Technologies as cultural artifacts . In W. Dutton (Ed.), Information and Communication Technologies: Visions and Realities . Oxford: Oxford University Press .

Sample Codes and Quotes

Most Important Codes with Frequencies *

All codes with more than 100 occurrences.

Nicole Ellison is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Telecommunications, Information Studies, and Media at Michigan State University. Her research explores issues of self-presentation, relationship development, and identity in online environments such as weblogs, online dating sites, and social networking services.

Address: Dept. of Telecommunications, Information Studies, and Media, Michigan State University, 403 Communication Arts and Sciences, East Lansing, MI 48824 USA

Rebecca Heino is an Assistant Professor in the McDonough School of Business at Georgetown University. She has centered her research on the use of communication technologies—such as intranets and email—in organizations, specifically focusing on organizational adoption, implementation, and privacy.

Address: Georgetown University, McDonough School of Business, 37th & O St. NW, Old North G-04, Washington, DC 20057 USA

Jennifer Gibbs is an Assistant Professor of Communication at Rutgers University. Her research interests center around how individuals connect, collaborate, and negotiate identity and differences in global, multicultural, and mediated contexts.

Address: Department of Communication, SCILS, 4 Huntington Street, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901-1071 USA

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to Your Librarian
• Advertising and Corporate Services

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1083-6101
• Copyright © 2024 International Communication Association
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Online Self-Presentation Strategies and Fulfillment of Psychological Needs of Chinese Sojourners in the United States

1 School of Overseas Education, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China

Qianwei Ying

2 Business School, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

This study statistically analyzed survey data to examine the relationship between fulfillment of psychological needs of 223 Chinese sojourners in the United States and their online self-presentation strategies on Chinese and American social media. The results showed that the combined use of proactive and defensive self-presentation strategies on Chinese social media instead of American social media were more effective to fulfill the sojourners’ need for autonomy. Moreover, presentation strategies that helped to meet the sojourners’ need for relatedness were significantly different between Chinese and American social media. Specifically, a proactive strategy was more effective to meet sojourners’ need for relatedness on Chinese social media, while a defensive strategy was more effective to fulfill their need for relatedness on American social media.

Introduction

Self-presentation is the core concept of American sociologist Irving Goffman’s Dramaturgy . As an individual’s role-playing behavior of self-expression in interpersonal interaction, self-presentation provides an impetus for self-promotion in real life ( Goffman, 1959 ). Western social psychologists have tested and revised the Goffman’s theory ( Jones and Nisbett, 1971 ), and the impression management theory (IMT) has been developed, which suggests that people apply a series of strategies (such as modification, concealment, and decoration) to control others’ perception of themselves as impression decoration or self-presentation.

With social media widely involved in people’s daily lives, there have appeared an increasing number of studies that are based on the theories of Dramaturgy and the self-determination theory (SDT), analyzing the relationship between online self-presentation behavior and the fulfillment of psychological needs. Online self-presentation is an important part of online social interaction and is influenced by multiple factors such as individual psychology, social context, and social culture. For instance, self-enhancers will selectively choose only positive life events and favorable personal information to share with their social network friends, but other people may entail presenting both positive and negative aspects of the self on social media to reveal their true feelings ( Lee-Won et al., 2014 ; Bareket-Bojmel et al., 2016 ).

In terms of self-presentation and need for relatedness, for example, Deters and Mehl (2013) pointed out that the active self-presentation on Facebook can reduce loneliness; Pittman and Reich (2016) found that compared with text-based platforms, social media users’ presentation on image-based platforms significantly reduced loneliness due to their enhanced intimacy with others. In terms of self-presentation and the need for autonomy, since a more multidimensional space for self-determined behaviors is provided in social media ( Reinecke et al., 2014 ), people can freely present their true selves without being affected by the outside world, therefore meeting their needs for autonomy ( Chen, 2019 ). For immigrants or sojourners, studies have found that they are more inclined to fulfill their autonomy needs through self-presentation on ethnic social media ( Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007 ; Lim and Pham, 2016 ; Pang, 2018 ; Hofhuis et al., 2019 ). Additionally, proactive self-presentation strategies were found to be positively related to the maintenance of psychological well-being ( Swickert et al., 2002 ; Kim and Lee, 2011 ; Ellison et al., 2014 ; Stieger, 2019 ), and in order to obtain more social support, people need to keep a balance between the use of selective and authentic presentational strategies ( Bayer et al., 2020 ).

The psychological effect of online self-presentation has attracted more and more academic attention. However, these studies still remain inconclusive as how people fulfill their psychological needs by means of online self-presentation behavior in intercultural contexts. Specifically, most studies of sojourners are conducted in unitary contexts, either in sojourners’ ethnic social media environments or the social media of the host country, ignoring sojourners’ co-performance in dual-cultural contexts. Moreover, with the growth of the scale of Chinese sojourners, an increasing number of studies have been aimed at them, yet most have focused more on acculturation problems than online self-presentation behaviors. However, online self-presentation has gradually become an important behavior mechanism for Chinese sojourners’ acculturation and communication under the increasing influence of social media. Therefore, it is necessary to fill in the gaps in current research has left and to investigate the logical relationship between the online self-presentation and fulfillment of psychological need of Chinese sojourners in China and America’s dual-cultural contexts.

As important members of intercultural communication groups, Chinese sojourners in the United States are in the dual-cultural contexts of Chinese and American social media, thus they are ideal research participants. In view of this, this study focuses on the following questions:

• RQ 1: Do Chinese sojourners mainly use Chinese or American social media to fulfill their psychological needs?
• RQ 2: What kinds of presentation strategies are more effective in fulfilling Chinese sojourners’ psychological needs in dual-cultural contexts?

The purpose of this research is to study the logical relationship between online self-presentation strategies and the fulfillment of psychological needs (for autonomy and relatedness) of Chinese sojourners in the context of American and Chinese cultures and to further understand the characteristics of the psychological effects of Chinese sojourners’ online self-presentation behavior in intercultural contexts, so as to provide a new and resourceful way of thinking about maintaining Chinese sojourners’ mental health, as well as helping them to acculturate and communicate more effectively.

Participants and Procedure

This study focused on Chinese sojourners, who are mainly distributed on the east and west coasts of the United States. However, due to factors, such as the uniqueness of sojourners’ identity and their mobility, it is not possible to verify the official statistics on the population data. Therefore, the sampling method used in this study was a nonrandom sampling, and we were utilizing snowball sampling approach to recruit participants.

To be specific, our study initially chose Chinese overseas students, visiting scholars (college teachers and Confucius Institute teachers), and Chinese with a working visa in Washington state in the northwest of the United States as the main sample groups. We applied “Wenjuanxing” (wjx.cn), the most commonly used online questionnaire platform, to send out our questionnaires to people we knew in these three sample groups. We asked them to fill out the questionnaires and distributed the questionnaire link to their interpersonal social networks, including the WeChat groups of Chinese students studying in the United States and visiting scholars in American Colleges and universities, as well as online communities of local American Chinese. Following these procedures, we collected a snowballing sample of 300 questionnaires with responses.

In order to further reduce the error, the study carefully checked the responses to the 300 questionnaires; 29 questionnaires that did not indicate the use of both Chinese and American social media were excluded from the total sample, leaving 223 questionnaires as statistically valid. According to the data analysis of the demographic characteristics of the sample (see Table 1 ), a total of 135 female and 88 male sojourners participated in the survey. In terms of age, they ranged from 17 to 60 years of age, and the number of people aged between 21 and 30 was the biggest (120 people); there were 211 sojourners who had lived in the United States for 1 year or more.

Descriptive statistics for demographic characteristics of participants.

Finally, based on the data collected, this study performed a descriptive statistical analysis of self-presentation strategies and psychological needs on Chinese and American social media followed by a regression analysis of the two main variables.

Self-presentation strategies and the fulfillment of psychological needs were two major variables in our questionnaire, and both of them were measured with multiple items that were modified from established scales ( Lee et al., 1999 ; Partala, 2011 ; Chen, 2019 ).

Self-Presentation Strategies

Although there were differences in the classification of self-presentation strategies in the field of psychology at the microlevel, the self-presentation strategies could still be divided into two categories: proactive strategies and defensive strategies ( Goffman, 1959 ; Arkin et al., 1980 ; Tedeschi and Melburg, 1984 ; Fiske and Taylor, 1991 ). Based on this dichotomy and the self-presentation tactic scale developed by Lee et al. (1999) , as well as our empirical observation of Chinese sojourners’ online self-presentation behavior in the United States, this paper specified six presentational tactics, namely “posting selected photos,” “expressing humorous and close content,” and “displaying discipline” for proactive strategies, aimed at actively shaping and maintaining an ideal image and, “expressing controlled feelings,” “self-taunting,” and “reporting only good news” for defensive strategies, aimed at preventing others from depreciating or belittling one’s image. These tactics were measured with six statements; responses were captured on a 5-point Likert scale from “1-never use” to “5-use almost every time.”

Psychological Need Fulfillment

Our measure of the fulfillment of need for autonomy was based on scale for the satisfaction of psychological needs on social networking sites developed by Partala (2011) and was specified with the statements “I feel that my choices express my ‘true self’” and “I have a say in what happens and can voice my opinion.” To measure the fulfillment of need for relatedness, we adapted existing measures of need satisfaction ( La Guardia et al., 2000 ; Ryan et al., 2006 ; Partala, 2011 ) to the intercultural context on social media. Specifically, sojourners mainly maintained and developed three types of relationships in the intercultural context: the relationship with relatives and friends in their home country, the relationship with co-nationals or immigrants of the same cultural background, and the relationship with the locals in the host country ( Lim and Pham, 2016 ; Hofhuis et al., 2019 ; Liu and Kramer, 2019 ). Based on the existing research, this study divided the needs for relatedness of Chinese sojourners in the United States into three categories: first, relational need with domestic relatives and friends, which was stated as “I feel close and connected with my domestic relatives and friends”; second, relational need with Chinese Americans, which was stated as “I feel a sense of contact with Chinese Americans”; third, relational need with Americans, which was stated as “I feel a sense of contact with Americans.” Responses were captured on a 5-point Likert scale from “1-totally disagree” to “5-totally agree.”

In order to understand the basic identity characteristics of Chinese sojourners, this study designed demographic characteristics variables, including “gender,” “age,” “marital status,” “education level,” “time to the United States,” “daily social media use time.” On this basis, this study designed a set of scale to evaluate the online self-presentation behavior of Chinese sojourners in the United States from the overall level. The scale consists of three parts: demographic information, self-presentation strategy, and psychological need fulfillment. Responses were captured with 5-point Likert scales, except for demographic characteristics. Since WeChat and Facebook were the two social media that are most frequently used according to our preliminary study on Chinese sojourners’ general use of social media, this paper chose WeChat and Facebook as the main platforms to observe and analyze the self-presentation behavior of the sojourners. On the basis of quantitative research, this study conducted interviews with 18 Chinese sojourners from all the respondents to understand the logical relationship between self-presentation strategies and fulfillment of psychological needs on Chinese and American social media.

RQ 1: Do Chinese Sojourners Mainly Use Chinese or American Social Media to Fulfill Their Psychological Needs?

In order to answer this question, this study conducted a descriptive statistical analysis of the questionnaire data, and the results are shown in Table 2 . We first calculated the average score of the respondents’ psychological needs on social media in China and the United States and then used a t -test to compare the difference of the average scores between Chinese and American social media. As for “the fulfillment of the need for autonomy,” the results showed that the average score of Chinese social media was significantly higher than that of American social media at the level of 1%, indicating that the self-presentation behavior of Chinese social media was more effective for the fulfillment of Chinese sojourners’ need for autonomy.

Fulfillment of the needs for autonomy and relatedness in American and Chinese social media.

In terms of “the fulfillment of the need for relatedness,” the average score of American social media was significantly higher than 3 (a score of 3 represents neutrality), indicating that the development of a relationship with Americans through online self-presentation was significant. In Chinese social media, the average score of “maintaining the relationship with domestic relatives and friends” was significantly higher than 3 at the level of 1%, indicating that Chinese social media had a significant impact on the relationship with family and friends back in China. As for maintaining a relationship with American Chinese, the average score of Chinese social media was significantly higher than that of American social media at the level of 1%, suggesting that the Chinese social media could promote the relationship between sojourners and American Chinese more effectively than American social media.

RQ 2: What Kinds of Presentation Strategies Are More Effective to Fulfill Chinese Sojourners’ Psychological Needs in the Dual-Cultural Contexts?

In order to test the relationship between online self-presentation strategies and the fulfillment of psychological needs, this study further applied a regression analysis after controlling the demographic characteristics of sojourners such as gender, age, marital status, education level, years in the United States, and time spent on social media. The specific regression model was as follows:

Among them, the dependent variable Effect represented the fulfillment of psychological needs (autonomy and relatedness) brought by the online self-presentation behaviors of the Chinese sojourners, and the independent variable Strategy represented the self-presentation strategies including “posting selected photos,” “expressing humorous and close content,” “displaying discipline,” “reporting only good news,” “expressing controlled feelings,” and “self-taunting.” The control variables included the sojourners’ gender ( Gender ), age ( Age ), marital status ( Marriage ), education level ( Education ), length of stay in America ( Years ), and hours spent on social media daily ( Time ). Table 1 illustrates the descriptive statistics for the above demographic characteristics of participants in our regression.

We have found in Table 2 that Chinese sojourners’ self-presentation behavior on Chinese social media is more effective in fulfilling their need for autonomy. Therefore, we conducted a regression analysis on the relationship between the presentation strategies adopted by the sojourners on Chinese social media and their need for autonomy (see Table 3 for the research results). It was found that all six presentation strategies can significantly promote the fulfillment of the sojourners’ need for autonomy but that there are differences in the effectiveness of these strategies. Specifically, for the autonomy dimension of “expressing one’s true self,” the strategy with the most obvious effect was the proactive strategy “expressing humorous and close content,” while for the autonomy dimension of “voicing one’s opinion,” the strategy with the most obvious effect was the defensive strategy “expressing one’s controlled feelings.” It could be seen that in the context of social media in China, the combination of proactive and defensive strategies played a more positive role in meeting the need for autonomy. Through offline interviews, the results of quantitative analysis were further supported. Interviewees have said that the presentation strategy of “expressing humorous and close content” played an important role in arousing emotional resonance and expressing one’s true self; while for important events in personal or social life, using the defensive strategy of “expressing one’s controlled feelings” was more helpful for sojourners to voice his or her opinion in an objective stand and build an intercultural image with the ability of reflection.

The effect of different self-presentation strategies on the fulfillment of the need for autonomy in Chinese social media.

T statistics were calculated based on White robust standard errors are in parentheses.

The empirical analysis in this paper had shown that the self-presentation behavior was effective in fulfilling sojourners’ need for relatedness in both Chinese and American social media. In order to investigate the differences between presentation strategies used in Chinese and American social media, this paper then conducted a regression analysis of the two platforms’ presentation strategies and fulfillment of sojourners’ needs for relatedness.

For Chinese social media, panel A in Table 4 shows that except “reporting only good news,” the other five presentation strategies have positive effects on maintaining the relationship between sojourners and their domestic relatives and friends. However, there were differences in the effectiveness of these strategies in fulfilling such a need, specifically, the proactive strategies of “expressing humorous and close content” and “displaying discipline” were comparatively more effective in fulfilling sojourners’ need to maintain domestic relationships. Similarly, the results in panel B shows that only the two proactive strategies of “displaying discipline” and “expressing humorous and close content” played an active role in maintaining the relationship between sojourners and Chinese Americans. It could be seen that the self-presentation on Chinese social media, whether to meet the relational needs with domestic relatives and friends or with Chinese Americans, was more effective by adopting proactive presentation strategies. The results of offline interviews further supported the quantitative research results. Interviewees said that “expressing humorous and close content” played an important role in maintaining the relationship with domestic relatives and friends, and this strategy could help them to narrow down the emotional distance with their relatives and friends back in China. At the same time, interviewees often expressed humorous and close content in the WeChat group of “Fellow Countrymen Association,” so as to promote the emotional connection with Chinese Americans. Also, interviewees considered as it necessary to present their “principled” side on Chinese social media and pointed out that “forwarding + commenting” was the most effective way to show the principle. Interviewees said that the strategy of “displaying principle” could help them to shape their self-image of self-discipline, self-reliance, and maintenance of their own cultural identity, thus strengthening the connection with their domestic relatives, friends, and Chinese Americans.

The effect of different self-presentation strategies on the fulfillment of the need for relatedness in Chinese social media.

T statistics calculated based on White robust standard errors are in parentheses.

For American social media, the statistical results of Table 5 shows that four presentation strategies played effective roles in developing the relationship between sojourners and Americans, but that there were differences in their degree of effectiveness. According to a ranking of their effect, the top three presentation strategies included two defensive ones, which were “reporting only good news” and “expressing controlled feelings,” and “reporting only good news” served as the most effective strategy to fulfill sojourners’ need for intercultural relatedness. This result was different from the situation on Chinese social media. That was, on Chinese social media, sojourners mainly adopted a proactive strategy to fulfill their need for relatedness with domestic relatives, friends, and Chinese Americans, while on American social media, sojourners preferred to use a defensive strategy to promote the fulfillment of their needs for relatedness. In the offline interview, the interviewees said that the strategy of “reporting only good news” could build a positive impression, activate dialog more quickly, and protect personal privacy. Such strategy conformed to the communication code of conduct on American social media, thus laying a good foundation for the establishment and maintenance of the interpersonal relations between Chinese sojourners and Americans. Additionally, the cultural context of American social media is obviously different from that of Chinese social media. In order to avoid possible cultural misunderstanding or even conflict, the interviewees said that they would control the limit of emotional expression on American social media. The results of interview analysis supported the quantitative research.

The effect of different self-presentation strategies on the fulfillment of the need for relatedness in American social media.

Our study recruited 223 Chinese sojourners in the United States as research participants, investigated, and analyzed the relationship between their self-presentation behavior and the fulfillment of their psychological needs (autonomy and relatedness) on Chinese and American social media.

The study shows that, compared with American social media, the self-presentation behavior on Chinese social media can more significantly promote the fulfillment of sojourners’ need for autonomy. This paper holds that the main reason for this difference may be cultural context, that is, Chinese social media are more conducive to the realization of the sojourners’ autonomy. After all, there are cultural values and relational networks that the sojourners are familiar and identified with. The higher the degree of identification and integration with the cultural context, the higher the degree of autonomy of individual actions ( Chirkov et al., 2003 ). In contrast, the cultural context of social media in the United States is relatively unfamiliar and features more heterogeneity. According to SDT, heterogeneity is a reverse force that hinders the realization of autonomy ( Deci and Ryan, 1985 , 2000 ); therefore, compared with the heterogeneous American social media, self-presentation behavior on Chinese social media is more active in promoting the satisfaction of the need for autonomy. Additionally, the results show that Chinese social media play a more active role in maintaining the relationship between sojourners and Chinese Americans than American social media. This result shows that the relatively homogeneous cultural context of Chinese social media provides sufficient emotional and spiritual exchange opportunities, as well as mutual social assistance space for sojourners and Chinese Americans, which is more recognized and adapted by both sides, thus helping to meet the fulfillment of their need for relatedness in the common cultural context ( Lim and Pham, 2016 ; Xiao et al., 2018 ).

This study found that on Chinese social media, the comprehensive use of proactive and defensive presentation strategies helps to meet sojourners’ need for autonomy, which to a certain extent reflects the expediency of Chinese self-presentation behavior ( Zhai, 2017 , p. 56). That is, even when “expressing one’s true self,” sojourners still pay attention to what to say and what not to say, what kind of emotion needs to be expressed and what need not be, which generally reflects that sojourners are striking a balance between sense and sensibility on Chinese social media. At the same time, the sojourners not only distribute and adjust their presentation content but also pay attention to “voicing one’s opinion” through different forms of media, and Chinese social media is technically providing the sojourners with different kinds of effective ways to present ideal self-images and realize autonomous expression.

There are significant differences between Chinese and American social media in the use of self-presentation strategies that help to fulfill sojourners’ need for relatedness. On Chinese social media, a proactive strategy is more effective in meeting sojourners’ need for relatedness, while on American social media, sojourners tend to use a defensive strategy to promote the fulfillment of their need for relatedness. This paper argues that the differences in the connotation of the relationship between Chinese and American cultures affect sojourners’ tendencies when choosing presentation strategies. In the Chinese context, relationship ( guanxi ) is “a kind of social force exerted by family chain and social structure prior to individual existence” ( Zhai, 2011 , p. 187). Individuals must actively maintain important relationships for settling down and gain identification from the social environment at the same time. For Chinese sojourners, their intercultural identity and experiences more intangibly promoting them to adopt proactive presentation strategies on Chinese social media to meet their need for relatedness, because on the one hand, they can help them to consolidate different domestic relationships, and on the other hand, the maintenance of domestic relationships can provide them emotional attachment and a sense of belonging, which help them to alleviate various negative emotions caused by cultural maladjustment.

Compared with the guanxi in China, interpersonal relationships in the American context are clear “role relationships” and have a distinct public-private boundary ( Chu, 1979 ). In the classic social interaction mode with an American-style interpersonal relationship at the core, the means of maintaining and developing the relationship presents very obvious characteristics of instrumental rationality ( Altman and Taylor, 1973 ). Most of the Chinese sojourners who participated in this study came to the United States between 1 and 2 years prior. With the purpose of achieving their specific goals of sojourning in the United States, they needed to develop intercultural interpersonal relationships with local Americans as much as possible; on the other hand, the context of American social media is full of strangeness, heterogeneity, and uncertainty, which made the sojourners more cautious and more aware of all kinds of intercultural communication barriers. Therefore, based on the identification and understanding of the characteristics of relationships in an American context, Chinese sojourners are more likely to adopt a defensive strategy as the main and proactive strategy as the auxiliary to achieve the purpose of fulfilling their need for intercultural relatedness on American social media.

Unlike most previous studies that mainly analyzed the relationship between self-presentation strategies and psychological need fulfillment in a single cultural context, this paper provides empirical evidence for the first time on how self-presentation strategies affect fulfillment of psychological needs in the contexts of dual culture (host and home culture), which provides new inspiration for the study of online self-presentation behavior of sojourners, an important intercultural communication group.

Future Directions

Future research might include empirical research on the relationship between online self-presentation strategies and the satisfaction of Chinese sojourners’ need for competence ( Deci and Ryan, 2000 ) in the United States. In addition, future research might examine how the psychological effects of Chinese sojourners’ online self-presentation behavior affect their offline intercultural adaptation and communication, as well as the acquisition of social capital; such research should be strictly followed by an intercultural analysis of the causes of the general impact. On the basis of empirical research, future research might discuss ways to positively promote the intercultural adaptation and communication of international sojourners, and help sojourners to maintain their psychological well-being in host countries over the long run.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

Ethical review and approval was not required for this study on human participants, which was in accordance with local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author Contributions

TY contributed to research design, theoretical discussion, and manuscript writing. QY contributed to data processing and empirical analysis. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to Sichuan University and all the funding resources that helped us in the completion of this research.

Funding. This work was supported by the Social Sciences General Project of China’s Sichuan Province (SC19B067), the research fund from Sichuan University (2018hhs-24, SCU-SOE-ZY-202008, SKSYL201822, and SCU-BS-PY-202003), and the Youth Fund Project for the Humanities and Social Sciences of the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China (18YJC790204).

• Altman I., Taylor D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships . Holt, Rinehart & Winston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arkin R. M., Appleman A. J., Burger J. M. (1980). Social anxiety, self-presentation, and the self-serving bias in causal attribution . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 38 , 23–25. 10.1037/0022-3514.38.1.23, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bareket-Bojmel L., Moran S., Shahar G. (2016). Strategic self-presentation on Facebook: personal motives and audience response to online behavior . Comput. Hum. Behav. 55 , 788–795. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.033 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bayer J. B., Triệu P., Ellison N. B. (2020). Social media elements, ecologies, and effects . Ann. Rev. Psychol. 71 , 471–497. 10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-050944 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen A. (2019). From attachment to addiction: the mediating role of need satisfaction on social networking sites . Comput. Hum. Behav. 98 , 80–92. 10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chirkov V., Ryan R. M., Kim Y., Kaplan U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism and independence: a self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well-being . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84 , 97–110. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.97, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chu G. (1979). “ Communication and cultural change in China: a conceptual framework ” in Moving a mountain: Cultural change in China. eds. Chu G., Hsu F. L. K. (Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior . New York, NY: Plenum. [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2000). The “What” and “Why” of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior . Psychol. Inq. 11 , 227–268. 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deters F. G., Mehl M. R. (2013). Does posting Facebook status updates increase or decrease loneliness? An online social networking experiment . Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci. 4 , 579–586. 10.1177/1948550612469233, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ellison N. B., Gray R., Lampe C., Fiore A. T. (2014). Social capital and resource requests on Facebook . New Media Soc. 16 , 1104–1121. 10.1177/1461444814543998 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fiske S. T., Taylor S. E. (1991). Social cognition: From brains to culture . Sage Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goffman E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: A Division of Random House, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofhuis J., Hanke K., Rutten T. (2019). Social network sites and acculturation of international sojourners in the Netherlands: the mediating role of psychological alienation and online social support . Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 69 :120. 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2019.02.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jones E. E., Nisbett R. E. (1971). The actor and the observer: Divergent perceptions of the causes of behavior. New York: General Learning Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim J., Lee J. -E. R. (2011). The Facebook paths to happiness: effects of the number of Facebook friends and self-presentation on subjective well-being . Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14 , 359–364. 10.1089/cyber.2010.0374, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• La Guardia J. G., Ryan R. M., Couchman C. E., Deci E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: a self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79 , 367–384. 10.1037/0022-3514.79.3.367, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee S., Quigley B. M., Nesler M. S., Corbett A. B., Tedeschi J. T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale . Pers. Individ. Differ. 26 , 701–722. 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00178-0, PMID: [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee-Won R. J., Shim M., Joo Y. K., Park S. G. (2014). Who puts the best “face” forward on Facebook?: positive self-presentation in online social networking and the role of self-consciousness, actual-to-total Friends ratio, and culture . Comput. Hum. Behav. 39 , 413–423. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.08.007 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lim S. S., Pham B. (2016). “If you are a foreigner in a foreign country, you stick together”: technologically mediated communication and acculturation of migrant students . New Media Soc. 18 , 2171–2188. 10.1177/1461444816655612 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu Y., Kramer E. (2019). Cultural value discrepancies, strategic positioning and integrated identity: American migrants’ experiences of being the other in mainland China . J. Intercult. Commun. Res. 10.1080/17513057.2019.1679226 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mikulincer M., Shaver P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pang H. (2018). Exploring the beneficial effects of social networking site use on Chinese students’ perceptions of social capital and psychological well-being in Germany . Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 67 , 1–11. 10.1016/j.ijintrel.2018.08.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Partala T. (2011). Psychological needs and virtual worlds: case second life . Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 69 , 787–800. 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2011.07.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pittman M., Reich B. (2016). Social media and loneliness . Comput. Hum. Behav. 3 , 155–167. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reinecke L., Vorderer P., Knop K. (2014). Entertainment 2.0? The role of intrinsic and extrinsic need satisfaction for the enjoyment of Facebook use . J. Commun. 64 , 417–438. 10.1111/jcom.12099. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan R., Rigby C., Przybylski A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: a self-determination theory approach . Motiv. Emot. 30 , 344–360. 10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stieger S. (2019). Facebook usage and life satisfaction . Front. Psychol. 10 :2711. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02711, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swickert R. J., et al. (2002). Relationships among Internet use, personality, and social support . Comput. Hum. Behav. 18 , 437–451. 10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00054-1. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tedeschi J. T., Melburg V. (1984). “ Impression management and influence in the organization ” in Research in the sociology of organizations. Vol. 3 eds. Bacharach S. B., Lawler E. J. (Greenwich, CT: JAI; ), 31–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xiao Y., Cauberghe V., Hudders L. (2018). Humor as a double ‐ edged sword in response to crises versus rumors: the effectiveness of humorously framed crisis response messages on social media . J. Conting. Crisis Manag. 26 , 247–260. 10.1111/1468-5973.12188 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhai X. (2011). The principles of Chinese guanxi: Time-space order, life desire and their changes . Peking University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhai X. (2017). The behavioral logic of Chinese. Beijing: Joint Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]

Our approach

• Responsibility
• Infrastructure
• Try Meta AI

RECOMMENDED READS

• 5 Steps to Getting Started with Llama 2
• The Llama Ecosystem: Past, Present, and Future
• Introducing Code Llama, a state-of-the-art large language model for coding
• Meta and Microsoft Introduce the Next Generation of Llama
• Today, we’re introducing Meta Llama 3, the next generation of our state-of-the-art open source large language model.
• Llama 3 models will soon be available on AWS, Databricks, Google Cloud, Hugging Face, Kaggle, IBM WatsonX, Microsoft Azure, NVIDIA NIM, and Snowflake, and with support from hardware platforms offered by AMD, AWS, Dell, Intel, NVIDIA, and Qualcomm.
• We’re dedicated to developing Llama 3 in a responsible way, and we’re offering various resources to help others use it responsibly as well. This includes introducing new trust and safety tools with Llama Guard 2, Code Shield, and CyberSec Eval 2.
• In the coming months, we expect to introduce new capabilities, longer context windows, additional model sizes, and enhanced performance, and we’ll share the Llama 3 research paper.
• Meta AI, built with Llama 3 technology, is now one of the world’s leading AI assistants that can boost your intelligence and lighten your load—helping you learn, get things done, create content, and connect to make the most out of every moment. You can try Meta AI here .

Today, we’re excited to share the first two models of the next generation of Llama, Meta Llama 3, available for broad use. This release features pretrained and instruction-fine-tuned language models with 8B and 70B parameters that can support a broad range of use cases. This next generation of Llama demonstrates state-of-the-art performance on a wide range of industry benchmarks and offers new capabilities, including improved reasoning. We believe these are the best open source models of their class, period. In support of our longstanding open approach, we’re putting Llama 3 in the hands of the community. We want to kickstart the next wave of innovation in AI across the stack—from applications to developer tools to evals to inference optimizations and more. We can’t wait to see what you build and look forward to your feedback.

Our goals for Llama 3

With Llama 3, we set out to build the best open models that are on par with the best proprietary models available today. We wanted to address developer feedback to increase the overall helpfulness of Llama 3 and are doing so while continuing to play a leading role on responsible use and deployment of LLMs. We are embracing the open source ethos of releasing early and often to enable the community to get access to these models while they are still in development. The text-based models we are releasing today are the first in the Llama 3 collection of models. Our goal in the near future is to make Llama 3 multilingual and multimodal, have longer context, and continue to improve overall performance across core LLM capabilities such as reasoning and coding.

State-of-the-art performance

Our new 8B and 70B parameter Llama 3 models are a major leap over Llama 2 and establish a new state-of-the-art for LLM models at those scales. Thanks to improvements in pretraining and post-training, our pretrained and instruction-fine-tuned models are the best models existing today at the 8B and 70B parameter scale. Improvements in our post-training procedures substantially reduced false refusal rates, improved alignment, and increased diversity in model responses. We also saw greatly improved capabilities like reasoning, code generation, and instruction following making Llama 3 more steerable.

*Please see evaluation details for setting and parameters with which these evaluations are calculated.

In the development of Llama 3, we looked at model performance on standard benchmarks and also sought to optimize for performance for real-world scenarios. To this end, we developed a new high-quality human evaluation set. This evaluation set contains 1,800 prompts that cover 12 key use cases: asking for advice, brainstorming, classification, closed question answering, coding, creative writing, extraction, inhabiting a character/persona, open question answering, reasoning, rewriting, and summarization. To prevent accidental overfitting of our models on this evaluation set, even our own modeling teams do not have access to it. The chart below shows aggregated results of our human evaluations across of these categories and prompts against Claude Sonnet, Mistral Medium, and GPT-3.5.

Preference rankings by human annotators based on this evaluation set highlight the strong performance of our 70B instruction-following model compared to competing models of comparable size in real-world scenarios.

Our pretrained model also establishes a new state-of-the-art for LLM models at those scales.

To develop a great language model, we believe it’s important to innovate, scale, and optimize for simplicity. We adopted this design philosophy throughout the Llama 3 project with a focus on four key ingredients: the model architecture, the pretraining data, scaling up pretraining, and instruction fine-tuning.

Model architecture

In line with our design philosophy, we opted for a relatively standard decoder-only transformer architecture in Llama 3. Compared to Llama 2, we made several key improvements. Llama 3 uses a tokenizer with a vocabulary of 128K tokens that encodes language much more efficiently, which leads to substantially improved model performance. To improve the inference efficiency of Llama 3 models, we’ve adopted grouped query attention (GQA) across both the 8B and 70B sizes. We trained the models on sequences of 8,192 tokens, using a mask to ensure self-attention does not cross document boundaries.

Training data

To train the best language model, the curation of a large, high-quality training dataset is paramount. In line with our design principles, we invested heavily in pretraining data. Llama 3 is pretrained on over 15T tokens that were all collected from publicly available sources. Our training dataset is seven times larger than that used for Llama 2, and it includes four times more code. To prepare for upcoming multilingual use cases, over 5% of the Llama 3 pretraining dataset consists of high-quality non-English data that covers over 30 languages. However, we do not expect the same level of performance in these languages as in English.

To ensure Llama 3 is trained on data of the highest quality, we developed a series of data-filtering pipelines. These pipelines include using heuristic filters, NSFW filters, semantic deduplication approaches, and text classifiers to predict data quality. We found that previous generations of Llama are surprisingly good at identifying high-quality data, hence we used Llama 2 to generate the training data for the text-quality classifiers that are powering Llama 3.

We also performed extensive experiments to evaluate the best ways of mixing data from different sources in our final pretraining dataset. These experiments enabled us to select a data mix that ensures that Llama 3 performs well across use cases including trivia questions, STEM, coding, historical knowledge, etc.

Scaling up pretraining

To effectively leverage our pretraining data in Llama 3 models, we put substantial effort into scaling up pretraining. Specifically, we have developed a series of detailed scaling laws for downstream benchmark evaluations. These scaling laws enable us to select an optimal data mix and to make informed decisions on how to best use our training compute. Importantly, scaling laws allow us to predict the performance of our largest models on key tasks (for example, code generation as evaluated on the HumanEval benchmark—see above) before we actually train the models. This helps us ensure strong performance of our final models across a variety of use cases and capabilities.

We made several new observations on scaling behavior during the development of Llama 3. For example, while the Chinchilla-optimal amount of training compute for an 8B parameter model corresponds to ~200B tokens, we found that model performance continues to improve even after the model is trained on two orders of magnitude more data. Both our 8B and 70B parameter models continued to improve log-linearly after we trained them on up to 15T tokens. Larger models can match the performance of these smaller models with less training compute, but smaller models are generally preferred because they are much more efficient during inference.

To train our largest Llama 3 models, we combined three types of parallelization: data parallelization, model parallelization, and pipeline parallelization. Our most efficient implementation achieves a compute utilization of over 400 TFLOPS per GPU when trained on 16K GPUs simultaneously. We performed training runs on two custom-built 24K GPU clusters . To maximize GPU uptime, we developed an advanced new training stack that automates error detection, handling, and maintenance. We also greatly improved our hardware reliability and detection mechanisms for silent data corruption, and we developed new scalable storage systems that reduce overheads of checkpointing and rollback. Those improvements resulted in an overall effective training time of more than 95%. Combined, these improvements increased the efficiency of Llama 3 training by ~three times compared to Llama 2.

Instruction fine-tuning

To fully unlock the potential of our pretrained models in chat use cases, we innovated on our approach to instruction-tuning as well. Our approach to post-training is a combination of supervised fine-tuning (SFT), rejection sampling, proximal policy optimization (PPO), and direct preference optimization (DPO). The quality of the prompts that are used in SFT and the preference rankings that are used in PPO and DPO has an outsized influence on the performance of aligned models. Some of our biggest improvements in model quality came from carefully curating this data and performing multiple rounds of quality assurance on annotations provided by human annotators.

Learning from preference rankings via PPO and DPO also greatly improved the performance of Llama 3 on reasoning and coding tasks. We found that if you ask a model a reasoning question that it struggles to answer, the model will sometimes produce the right reasoning trace: The model knows how to produce the right answer, but it does not know how to select it. Training on preference rankings enables the model to learn how to select it.

Building with Llama 3

Our vision is to enable developers to customize Llama 3 to support relevant use cases and to make it easier to adopt best practices and improve the open ecosystem. With this release, we’re providing new trust and safety tools including updated components with both Llama Guard 2 and Cybersec Eval 2, and the introduction of Code Shield—an inference time guardrail for filtering insecure code produced by LLMs.

We’ve also co-developed Llama 3 with torchtune , the new PyTorch-native library for easily authoring, fine-tuning, and experimenting with LLMs. torchtune provides memory efficient and hackable training recipes written entirely in PyTorch. The library is integrated with popular platforms such as Hugging Face, Weights & Biases, and EleutherAI and even supports Executorch for enabling efficient inference to be run on a wide variety of mobile and edge devices. For everything from prompt engineering to using Llama 3 with LangChain we have a comprehensive getting started guide and takes you from downloading Llama 3 all the way to deployment at scale within your generative AI application.

A system-level approach to responsibility

We have designed Llama 3 models to be maximally helpful while ensuring an industry leading approach to responsibly deploying them. To achieve this, we have adopted a new, system-level approach to the responsible development and deployment of Llama. We envision Llama models as part of a broader system that puts the developer in the driver’s seat. Llama models will serve as a foundational piece of a system that developers design with their unique end goals in mind.

Instruction fine-tuning also plays a major role in ensuring the safety of our models. Our instruction-fine-tuned models have been red-teamed (tested) for safety through internal and external efforts. ​​Our red teaming approach leverages human experts and automation methods to generate adversarial prompts that try to elicit problematic responses. For instance, we apply comprehensive testing to assess risks of misuse related to Chemical, Biological, Cyber Security, and other risk areas. All of these efforts are iterative and used to inform safety fine-tuning of the models being released. You can read more about our efforts in the model card .

Llama Guard models are meant to be a foundation for prompt and response safety and can easily be fine-tuned to create a new taxonomy depending on application needs. As a starting point, the new Llama Guard 2 uses the recently announced MLCommons taxonomy, in an effort to support the emergence of industry standards in this important area. Additionally, CyberSecEval 2 expands on its predecessor by adding measures of an LLM’s propensity to allow for abuse of its code interpreter, offensive cybersecurity capabilities, and susceptibility to prompt injection attacks (learn more in our technical paper ). Finally, we’re introducing Code Shield which adds support for inference-time filtering of insecure code produced by LLMs. This offers mitigation of risks around insecure code suggestions, code interpreter abuse prevention, and secure command execution.

With the speed at which the generative AI space is moving, we believe an open approach is an important way to bring the ecosystem together and mitigate these potential harms. As part of that, we’re updating our Responsible Use Guide (RUG) that provides a comprehensive guide to responsible development with LLMs. As we outlined in the RUG, we recommend that all inputs and outputs be checked and filtered in accordance with content guidelines appropriate to the application. Additionally, many cloud service providers offer content moderation APIs and other tools for responsible deployment, and we encourage developers to also consider using these options.

Deploying Llama 3 at scale

Llama 3 will soon be available on all major platforms including cloud providers, model API providers, and much more. Llama 3 will be everywhere .

Our benchmarks show the tokenizer offers improved token efficiency, yielding up to 15% fewer tokens compared to Llama 2. Also, Group Query Attention (GQA) now has been added to Llama 3 8B as well. As a result, we observed that despite the model having 1B more parameters compared to Llama 2 7B, the improved tokenizer efficiency and GQA contribute to maintaining the inference efficiency on par with Llama 2 7B.

For examples of how to leverage all of these capabilities, check out Llama Recipes which contains all of our open source code that can be leveraged for everything from fine-tuning to deployment to model evaluation.

What’s next for Llama 3?

The Llama 3 8B and 70B models mark the beginning of what we plan to release for Llama 3. And there’s a lot more to come.

Our largest models are over 400B parameters and, while these models are still training, our team is excited about how they’re trending. Over the coming months, we’ll release multiple models with new capabilities including multimodality, the ability to converse in multiple languages, a much longer context window, and stronger overall capabilities. We will also publish a detailed research paper once we are done training Llama 3.

To give you a sneak preview for where these models are today as they continue training, we thought we could share some snapshots of how our largest LLM model is trending. Please note that this data is based on an early checkpoint of Llama 3 that is still training and these capabilities are not supported as part of the models released today.

We’re committed to the continued growth and development of an open AI ecosystem for releasing our models responsibly. We have long believed that openness leads to better, safer products, faster innovation, and a healthier overall market. This is good for Meta, and it is good for society. We’re taking a community-first approach with Llama 3, and starting today, these models are available on the leading cloud, hosting, and hardware platforms with many more to come.

Try Meta Llama 3 today

We’ve integrated our latest models into Meta AI, which we believe is the world’s leading AI assistant. It’s now built with Llama 3 technology and it’s available in more countries across our apps.

You can use Meta AI on Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, and the web to get things done, learn, create, and connect with the things that matter to you. You can read more about the Meta AI experience here .

Visit the Llama 3 website to download the models and reference the Getting Started Guide for the latest list of all available platforms.

You’ll also soon be able to test multimodal Meta AI on our Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses.

As always, we look forward to seeing all the amazing products and experiences you will build with Meta Llama 3.

Our latest updates delivered to your inbox

Subscribe to our newsletter to keep up with Meta AI news, events, research breakthroughs, and more.

Join us in the pursuit of what’s possible with AI.

Product experiences

Foundational models

Latest news

Meta © 2024