dating apps

Why it’s Really Not You, It’s Them. Hook Up Culture, Explained

Sociolinguistics

Have you ever wondered why participants of hook-up culture have a hard time communicating with one another? Whether it’s differences in intentions or the usage of different communication styles, it’s likely that they’re not on the same page. As a result of our extensive research, this paper will highlight the reality of hook-up culture and the big question that haunts the community: How do participants of hook-up culture communicate differently than the ingrained standards we see within long-term relationships? Our hypothesis specifically focused on the idea that communication within hook-up culture will differ between genders and communication styles, ultimately creating a larger gap between methods of communication in short-term and long-term relationships. With the help of our studies, we were able to identify the use of code-switching through emojis and slang, common communication themes (vernaculars and communicative traits), and overall motivations! Overall, we hope to help many be able to overcome communication barriers within hook-up culture in order to see some healthy change within our social dynamics and communication!

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

The goal of our paper was to research the intricacies of a prevalent communication topic in our generation: “hook-up culture”. More specifically, we chose to focus on the motivations behind each gender’s experiences or participation in hook-up culture, ultimately allowing us to analyze the different communication patterns exhibited as well. Hook-ups within “hook-up culture” are defined as, “… activities [that] may include a wide range of sexual behaviors, such as kissing, oral sex, and penetrative intercourse …. these encounters often transpire without any promise of, or desire for, a more traditional romantic relationship…” (Garcia/Merriwether, 2012).  With this definition, the rise of hookup culture is then marked by the phenomenon of, “…increasingly normative among adolescents in North America, representing a marked shift in openness and uncommitted sex…” (Garcia/Merriwether, 2012). As a result, our research was conducted on the basis that hook-up culture is prevalent within our society. However, given the constraints of our research project, we had research gaps that prevented us from reaching further conclusions, including the short amount of time we had to conduct our research (given more time we would research a larger group). Another limitation was due to the lack of empirical research on hook-up culture due to the prominence of the topic only flourishing within this past decade.

Our last limitation came as a result of the demographic in which we focused on. Obviously, our demographic was catered to college students, but there may be different results if our demographic was different– so that most definitely should be noted. However, our research, as shown throughout this blog post, will illustrate that our hypothesis is mostly supported by our conducted research. Our research highlights different modes of communication, varying personal intentions, and the popularity of hook-up culture amongst college-aged students.

Methods

Within our method, we looked at different sources of information such as scholarly articles, scholarly speeches (TedTalk), and our own research conducted through the usage of Google Forms. Our scholarly references ranged from communicating commitment in a romantic relationship to communication in the modern hook-up culture, but we made sure to organize an array of valuable sources that would not only prove our hypothesis but also explain our results within our conducted survey. We distributed a survey (through GroupMe chats, Instagram stories, and professors showcasing it at the beginning of class) to our wide demographic of students at UCLA who have knowledge or a basic understanding of hook-up culture, ultimately granting us valuable responses that could help us with our research on how communication differs within hook-up culture through studying gender imbalances/differences in viewpoints and styles. Through our survey, we politely asked our respondents to share their experiences with hook-up culture and answer our specific questions to the best of their abilities. Additionally, there were no incentives and we made sure to inform them that their responses would be anonymous and removable at any point in time. We asked 10 specific questions in connection to our research and our own personal wonderings alongside an entry method for attachments of physical experiences with hook-up culture. Some examples of our questions were: check off boxes of emojis you’ve used when communicating with a prospective partner or how to communicate your intentions to a prospective partner, therefore giving us a deep understanding and a specific answer to the ideas that our research would mention but not specifically answer for us. Within our research, we analyzed communication styles such as emojis or slang, collective gender differences within communication patterns and beliefs, and overall values within personal communication styles and methods such as direct vs. passive communication. For more information on our exact survey, here is a direct link to it: https://forms.gle/cGUqi9sAmSsGQoNX8.   

Results and Analysis

In summary, our hypothesis focused on how romantic communication differs between types of connections/relationships (hook-up partners vs long-term relationships), and how each gender engaged with each category differently. Through our extensive research methods, we found that there were factual differences between male and female ideologies. For example, there were similarities within our target audience such as age, education status, and lifestyles – which played a role in the situations these individuals would imagine and partake in throughout their experiences with or without hook-up culture. Our respondents were 50% male and 50% female, mostly aged at 21 to 23 years old by 87.5%. Now, the differences range from gender perceptions/mindset, communication styles, and personal values/needs.

Our survey questions were able to support our hypothesis. For further context, here are some of the most important pieces of information gained from our studies. When asked about hook-up culture in our generation and if they (respondents) participate in hook-up culture, 87.5% answered yes (Figures 1 and 2). 

Figure 1: Do you believe hook-up culture is prevalent within this generation?
Figure 2: Do you believe you participate in hookup culture?

With most of our respondents knowing about or experiencing hook-up culture, the results of our survey would most definitely help us understand the reality of hookup-culture whether it proved or disproved our hypothesis. Now, our questions became more specific in order to curate a representative sample of patterns within hook-up culture. Furthermore, these two questions below provided the most valuable information within our survey research.

Within our hypothesis, we predicted that there would be a difference between communication styles and methods. So, with our own experience with hook-up culture, and our learnings from Amanda N. Gesselmen’s research article on “Emoji as affective signals for relationship-oriented digital communication”, we were able to create our question about the influence of emojis on romantic communication and how different ones convey different meanings (casual hook-up vs long-term love). As can be seen, a majority of respondents affiliated with emojis were deemed to be used for “sexting” within hook-up culture communication (Figure 3). For further support, on our side, we can see that most of our respondents that used those emojis are also the same individuals who announced their participation in hook-up culture as well. Next, Figure 4 provided us with the different communication styles we noted through romantic communication in general, but we mentally sorted them into different categories that would analyze different perspectives. For example, those who answered that their communication style was direct and dishonest were usually men (remember: one can be directly dishonest– they are not mutually exclusive). On the other hand, those who answered that their communication style was more honest, considerate, and passive were women. Through these results, we were able to see that there IS a difference of communication styles between genders AND relationship/partner status (hook-up vs long-term). Furthermore, we were able to conclude that men’s expectations are more short-term and casual while female expectations are more long-term and exclusive, ultimately impacting their different communication styles that portray most men as direct, dishonest, dominant, selfish, and confident while portraying most women as passive, considerate, committed, and honest.

Figure 3: Emojis used when communicating with a prospective partner
Figure 4: Communication styles of survey respondents

Discussion and Conclusions

As discussed at the beginning of the paper, ‘hook-up culture’ has gained high levels of popularity, and more recently amongst younger generations. With influential communication-based platforms and media, such as TikTok, “…. popular culture is simultaneously representing aspects of actual contemporary sexual behavior and providing sexual scripts for emerging adults…”, which has potentially played a role in why we concluded the results from our research as we did (Garcia / Merriwether, 2012). Our results suggest a few common themes within the communication patterns of ‘hookup culture’. As seen in the data above, our results suggest that there is a correlation between men’s motivations for just wanting to participate in casual sexual intercourse, whereas women want to participate in sexual intercourse more so in the pursuit of a serious partner, thus suggesting genders do in fact have different motivations when participating in hookup culture. Additionally, our results show a form of ‘code-switching’ that occurs when individuals use emojis and slang to communicate within hook-up culture. Furthermore, code-switching is defined as, “…the practice of selecting or altering linguistic elements so as to contextualize talk in interaction…”, which we see has occurred when individuals interchanged emoji’s arbitrary meanings with more sexual notions only in the context of hook-up culture communication (Nilep, 2006).  Additionally, we saw that the most popular ages amongst participants who take part in hookup culture range from 21-23. Given these results, and the inferences we’ve made from our research, our paper concludes that communication with hookup culture has a unique nature to it that involves various tactics in order to achieve that ‘hook-up goal’, and that there are many mechanical and analytical parts involved in the motivations behind hook up culture. However, depending on who you are, it’s highly likely that if you aren’t achieving that dream ‘hook up’ it really isn’t you, it’s them.

References

Ackerman, J. M., Griskevicius, V., & Li, N. P. (2009). Let’s get serious: Communicating commitment in romantic relationships. PsycEXTRA Dataset. https://doi.org/10.1037/e615882011-144

Garcia, J. R., Reiber, C., Massey, S. G., & Merriwether, A. M. (2012). Sexual Hookup Culture: A Review. Review of General Psychology, 16(2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027911

Gesselman, A. N., Ta, V. P., & Garcia, J. R. (2019). Worth a thousand interpersonal words: Emoji as affective signals for relationship-oriented digital communication. PLOS ONE, 14(8). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221297

Klinger, L. (n.d.). Hookup Culture on College Campuses: Centering College Women, Communication Barriers, and Negative Outcomes. https://doi.org/https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/csal/vol3/iss2/5/

Lundquist, J. H., & Curington, C. V. (2019). Love me Tinder, love me sweet. Contexts, 18(4), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536504219883848

Nilep, C. (2006). “Code Switching” in Sociocultural Linguistics. Colorado Research in Linguistics, 19. https://doi.org/10.25810/hnq4-jv62

Pham, J. M. (2017). Beyond hookup culture: Current trends in the study of college student sex and where to next. Sociology Compass, 11(8). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12499

Tom Tong, S., & Walther, J. B. (2010). Just say ‘‘no thanks’’: Romantic rejection in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 28(4), 488–506. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407510384895

Webb, S. (n.d.). Communication in the Modern Hookup Culture: A Literature Review. https://doi.org/https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/lexia/vol4/iss1/3/

Wood, M. (n.d.). Addressing Context with Hymes’s SPEAKING Model. https://doi.org/https://the-ofla-cardinal.org/2018/01/14/addressing-context-with-hymess-speaking-model/

Appendix

NPR Podcast – Hook-up Culture: The Unspoken Rules of Sex on College Campuses https://www.npr.org/transcripts/552582404

TedTalk – Stripping Down the Hook-up Culture: The Need for Emotional Visibility https://youtu.be/EhzOohyAZjs

 [/expander_maker]

, , , , ,

Click, Swipe, Connect: Flirting Directly and Indirectly through Online Mediums and In-Person Interactions

Sociolinguistics

Natasha Motamed, Sasha Bok, Angelica Limoanco, Ashley Lopez

Does the medium in which you flirt with someone change your flirting style? Are you more likely to use direct language such as complimenting when trying to flirt online versus in-person, or are you more likely to use a pick-up line? The following research project will investigate how individuals flirt online via private messaging on dating apps such as Hinge, Bumble, and Tinder, and text messages versus in-person interactions and whether they use direct or indirect language in their flirting practices. Based on previous findings, we hypothesized that flirting on various online mediums will employ greater directness, whereas in-person flirting would consist of more indirect language. To test these hypotheses, we compared screenshots of online flirting interactions with flirting scenes between contestants on The Bachelor and Bachelor in Paradise.

Our main finding was that flirting on online mediums consisted of both direct and indirect communication through the usage of compliments and pick-up lines, respectively. Therefore, our hypothesis was partly true in predicting that online mediums would at least employ direct communication. On the other hand, we were surprised to discover that in-person flirting employed direct communication rather than indirect communication, which was what we had initially predicted.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

How exactly do you interpret what flirting is? According to Wade (2018), flirting refers to words or nonverbal actions that include any semblance of romantic and sexual relations between individuals. Moreover, when communicating face-to-face, flirtatious speech is also often used with laughter and animated speech (Whitty, 2016). With flirting, it is prevalent within our society today both in-person as well as on online mediums. Regardless of whether someone uses pick-up lines or compliments to flirt, people tend to communicate differently depending on the modality they are using, i.e. online or in-person.

For our research, we investigated how people flirt differently depending if it is in-person or online. We researched and observed the similarities and differences of flirting indirectly or directly between in-person interactions of The Bachelor and Bachelor in Paradise contestants and online private messages on various dating mediums, direct messages, and texts, which were obtained from 18-29-year-old UCLA students. When looking at the linguistics of flirting, indirect communication can be defined as nonverbal choices such as pauses and bouts of silence, where the recipient must contextualize the situation in order to more accurately discern the speaker’s implied message (Joyce, 2012). Pick-up lines are a perfect example when it comes to indirect flirting since there might be hidden messages beyond what is actually being said. A popular example of this would be the infamous saying “Netflix and Chill,” which requires contextual clues in order to decipher the sexual innuendo being implied.

On the other hand, direct communication means there is no hidden meaning in what is being said, so the speaker will use exact words for their intended meaning (Joyce, 2012). An example of direct communication while flirting is a compliment, such as “I think you are gorgeous.” We had hypothesized that flirting on various online mediums will utilize greater directness, whereas in-person flirting will use more indirect language and word choice. Whether it was a Bachelor franchise contestant flirting in-person or a UCLA student flirting online, they had all found different methods of flirting depending on where they communicated from (see below in Results).

Methods

To investigate these hypotheses, we observed two target populations –– the first consisted of male, female, and non-binary/non-conforming UCLA students, ages 18 to 29, from any ethnic or socioeconomic background. While people of all ages and demographics use the internet, according to Smith (2014), the majority of internet users are actually between the ages of 18 to 29. Additionally, it has also been noted that they utilize technology to start romantic relationships (Meenagh, 2015). Therefore, we analyzed their online communication through various online platforms such as dating apps (Hinge, Bumble, and Tinder) and private text messaging. Our second target population included cisgender male and female contestants, ages 21-35 years old, from any ethnic background and socioeconomic status, on the television shows The Bachelor and Bachelor in Paradise. We observed their in-person communication through their methods of flirting shown on-screen.

The communicative/language aspects our project looked at included directness versus indirectness which is observed through word choice and specifically manifested through pick-up lines versus straightforward phrases and complimenting. These practices are used as a means to flirt in both in-person and online contexts.

We recruited the participants for our first target population and collected their screenshots by posting a Google Form on various platforms that UCLA students use such as GroupMe chats from various classes, Instagram stories, and Slack groups. Participants were asked to submit one or more screenshots where they used flirting on the following platforms: Hinge, Bumble, Tinder, or private messaging.

Our total data set included 33 screenshots of conversations on various online platforms as well as 21 in-person interactions observed from The Bachelor franchise shows. Throughout the analysis process, we highlighted and noted which interactions utilized indirect and direct communication by analyzing word choice in addition to the use of compliments and pick-up lines.

 Results and Analysis

Figure 1: Bar graph comparison of direct and indirect communication in in-person vs online interactions

As a result, in Figure 1 we see a comparison of direct and indirect communication within in-person and online interactions. Direct communication like compliments were seen the most in online mediums as well as in in-person interactions. Indirect communication such as pick-up lines were only seen in online interactions.

Figure 2: Breakdown of the number of direct and indirect communication within online and in-person interactions and examples of each type of communication.

After collecting our empirical evidence, we observed that out of 33 online flirting interactions, 24 of them contained direct communication manifested through compliments whereas only 9 interactions contained indirect communication through the use of pick-up lines. Examples of direct and indirect communication observed are shown in Figure 2 above. This shows that although both direct and indirect communication are utilized on online platforms, the majority of online interactions use direct communication. In contrast, out of a total of 21 in-person flirting interactions, all of them contained direct communication and none of them contained any indirect communication or the usage of pick-up lines. Examples of direct communication in in-person interactions are linked in Figure 2 above.

After observing 33 screenshots and 21 in-person interactions, we found that pickup lines were very prominent in online mediums and were used indirectly compared to in-person interactions. Participants in The Bachelor franchise were more direct in their conversations while pursuing a romantic relationship. They did not utilize any indirect communication such as through pick-up lines in person. But in both mediums, compliments were utilized. For example, the following compliments were used on online mediums: “you know how to dress well and ur kinda cute”, “I like ur face”, “I think you’re gorgeous”, “you really fine”, and “that smile won me over”. The following compliments were used in in-person interactions: “I’m very nervous, I’m shaking really badly if you can’t tell but I’m excited to get to know you,” “you look amazing,” “you’re the hottest girl here,” and “you’re a hot commodity.” In online mediums, it is much more common to see someone use direct language when they ask if someone is free when compared to in-person interactions. Individuals will use direct language such as “Are you free this Tuesday” or “U free later tn tho?” We found that people online were more indirect through their usage of pickup lines and it was rare to see pickup lines like “you’re definitely a star because I can’t take my eyes off you” used in person. Both online and in-person interactions used direct and explicit word choices in the form of compliments in order to get their meanings across. However, in the in-person interactions, our observations found that the flirting did not result in any individual asking out another person. Overall, we found that flirting online utilizes both direct and indirect communication through the use of complimenting and pick-up lines, respectively, whereas in-person interactions solely use direct communication as a means to show romantic interest.

Discussion and Conclusion

For our Post Data Collection Analysis, we concluded that word choice can result in either direct or indirect communication, for example through compliments or pick-up lines, respectively. We observed both the screenshots and Bachelor scenes through the lens of explicit and implicit word choice, and ultimately placed them into their respective categories, as seen in the chart and graph above.

Based on these findings alone, we could predict that flirting on online mediums could potentially lead to higher or more frequent usage of direct and indirect communication through the employment of pick-up lines and compliments. We attribute this trend possibly to people feeling more confident or comfortable when there is a physical distance between the parties involved and also due to the anonymity veil provided by device screens.

In regards to the validity of our observations and findings, we do acknowledge that there are limitations in having The Bachelor represent in-person flirting practices due to the possibility of it being scripted. Therefore, it’s important to note potential differences between our samples from the reality show and what actually happens within everyday life.

That being said, we believe that our observational results can benefit anyone who communicates online or would like to explore the benefits of talking to and meeting new people online, especially in the romance department. As daily users of technology and online communication yourselves, you can definitely utilize our findings to improve your methods of obtaining the best romantic partner ever! We want you to succeed romantically as much as possible, so take our results into consideration when looking for your future partner in crime!

For future purposes, it’s also important that we research and examine any new and upcoming trends and patterns that arise from our behaviors within these online modalities, especially since we live in this technological age where the majority of society is now heavily reliant on social media as a primary means of communication.

References

Joyce, C. (2012). The impact of direct and indirect communication. Journal of the International Ombudsman Association.

Meenagh, J. (2015). Flirting, dating, and breaking up within new media environments. Sex Education, 15(5), 458–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681811.2015.1033516

Smith, J. (2014). The Perceived Impact of Online Versus Offline Flirting on Romantic Relationships [Master’s thesis, University of Dayton]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center.

‌Wade J. A. (2018). (I Think) You Are Pretty: a Behavior Analytic Conceptualization of Flirtation. Perspectives on behavior science, 41(2), 615–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-018-0136-y

Whitty, M. T. (2004). Cyber-flirting: An examination of men’s and women’s flirting behaviour both offline and on the Internet. Behaviour Change, 21(2), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.1375/bech.21.2.115.55423

 [/expander_maker]

, , , , ,
Scroll to Top