From Online to Offline: Presentations of Self and Partner Searching Techniques among Women in Turkey on Dating Sites

  • Baris Erdogan Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Department of Sociology, Üsküdar University, Turkey
Keywords: Dating Platforms (app, website), Habitus, Presentation of Self, Impression Management, Sequential Stage


Online dating platforms (apps or websites) have become instruments that are increasingly used by women in their practices of looking for a partner for romantic and/or sexual purposes. This paper focuses on discussing women’s self-presentation (also called impression management) methods and their strategies for evaluating themselves as presented both offline and online within the context of habitus. To this end, field data were collected with the netnographic method on the dating site called “OkCupid”. Afterwards, 11 university-educated white-collar women who were users of this platform in Turkey were enrolled in a semi-structured in-depth interview. While dating sites have offered women new opportunities in the intimacy market within modern society, relationships that start online and continue offline may not provide the anticipated satisfaction among daters due to several structural and technical reasons. The results of our analysis indicate that firstly, this online platform creates the insatiable idea in the minds of daters that they will find a better partner candidate at any moment. Furthermore, it decreases the possibility that daters that like each other will make long-term investments in each other. Secondly, after the rationally-built presentation of the self on the online stage, the mystery which brought about the emotional attraction has been significantly removed from the offline stage.


Download data is not yet available.


Metrics Loading ...

PlumX Statistics


1. Albright, J. M. & Conran, T. (2003). Desire, Love, and Betrayal: Constructing and Deconstructing Intimacy Online, Journal of Systemic Therapies, 22(3), 42-53. DOI:10.1521/jsyt.
2. Allan, K. (2006). Contemporary Social and Sociological Theory, Visualizing Social Worlds, London: Sage.
3. Bargh, J. A., Mckenna, K. Y. A. & 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.
4. Bauman, Z. (2003). Liquid Love, Cambridge: Polity Press.
5. Beebeejaun, Y. (2017). Gender, urban space, and the right to everyday life, Journal of Urban Affairs, 39(3), 323-334.
6. Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2004). Love Online, emotions on the Internet, New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bergström, M. (2012). Nouveaux scénarios et pratiques sexuels chez les jeunes utilisateurs de sites de rencontres, Agora débat/jeunesses, 60(1), 107-119.
8. Bergström, M. (2016). L’homogamie à l’épreuve des sites de rencontres, Sociétés Contemporaines, 104(4), 13-40. DOI:10.3917/soco.104.0013
9. Bergström, M. (2019). Les Nouvelles lois de l’amour, Paris: Découverte.
10. Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, Codes and Control, New York: Schocken Books.
11. Bourdieu, P. (1982). Distinction, critique sociale du jugement, Paris: Les Editions de Minuit.
12. Bourdieu, P. (2002). Le bal des célibataires : crise de la société paysanne en Béarn, Paris: Editions du Seuil.
13. Bourdieu, P. (2000). Esquisse d’une théorie de la pratique, Paris: Editions du Seuil.
14. Bozon M. & Heran, F. (1987). La découverte du conjoint. I. Évolution et morphologie des scènes de rencontre, Population, 42(6), 1987, 943-985.
15. Bozon, M. & Rault, W. (2012). De la sexualité au couple. L’espace des rencontres amoureuses pendant la jeunesse, Population, 67(3), 453-490.
16. Cooley, C. H. (1964). Human Nature and the Social Order, New York: Schocken.
17. Dinh, R., Gildersleve, P. & Blex, C. et al., (2021). Computational courtship understanding of the evolution of online dating through large-scale data analysis. J Comput Soc Sc
18. Doan, T. T. (2010). Online Dating: Determining the Presence of a Stigma, Roosevelt University, A Doctoral Project Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctorate in Clinical Psychology, (UMI Number: 3426707).
19. Dutton, W. H., Helsper, E. J., Whitty, M. T. & Li, N. (2009). The Role of the Internet in Reconfiguring Marriages: A Cross-national Study, Interpersona. An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 3(2), 3-18. DOI:10.5964/ijpr.v3isupp2.73
20. Eastwick, P. W., Keneski, E., Morgan, T. A., Mcdonald, M. A. & Huang, S. A. (2018). What do short-term and long-term relationships look like? Building the relationship coordination and strategic timing (ReCAST) model, Journal Experimental Psychology: General, 147(5), 747-781. DOI: 10.1037/xge0000428
21. Ellison, N., Heino, R. & Gibbs, J. (2006). Self-Presentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 415-441.
22. Ellison, N. B., Hancock, J. T. & Toma, C.L. (2011). Profile as promise: a framework for conceptualizing veracity in online dating self-presentations. New Media & Society 14: 45–62.
23. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.
24. Goffman, E. (1971). Relations in Public, Microstudies of the Public Order, New York: Basic Books.
25. Goffman, E. (1986). Frame Analysis, An Essay, on the Organization of Experience, Boston: Northeastern University Press.
26. Goffman, E. (2017). Interaction Ritual, Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior, New York: Routhledge.
27. Illouz, E. (2007). Cold Intimacies: The Making of Emotional Capitalism, Cambridge: Polity.
28. Illouz, E. (2012). Why Love Hurts, A Sociological Explanation, Cambridge: Polity.
29. Institut Français D'opinion Publique IFOP (2018). Quels sont les comportements des Français sur les sites de rencontre ? Retrieved from
30. Kalinowski, C. & Matei, S.A. (2011). Goffman Meets Online Dating: Exploring the ‘Virtually’ Socially Produced Self, Journal of Social Informatics, 16, 6-20.
31. Kauffman, J. C. (2002). La trame conjugale: Analyse du couple par son linge, Paris: Edition Nathan.
32. Kozinets, R. V. (2015). Netnography: Redefined, London: Sage.
33. Lewontin, R. (1995). Sex, Lies and Social Science, The New York Review of Books, 24-28.
34. McClean, J. (2014). Gender Maneuvering over Coffee: Doing Gender through Displays of Hegemonic Masculinity and Alternative Femininity, Journal for Undergraduate Ethnography, 4(3), 19-31. DOI:10.15273/jue.v4i2.8249
35. McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S. & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). “Relationship Formation on the Internet: What’s the Big Attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 9–31.
36. Moynihan, D. P. (1993). Defining Deviancy Down, The American Scholar, 62(1), 17-30
37. Online Dating Turkey (2021). Retrieved from
38. Online Datings Worldwide (2020). Retrieved from
39. Özseyhan, C., Badur, B., & Darcan, O. N. (2012). An association rule-based recommendation engine for an online dating site, Communications of the IBIMA, 2012, 1-15
40. Pascal, B. (1999). Pensées, New York, Oxford University Press.
41. Rosenfeld, M. J., Thomas, R. J. & Hausen, S. (2019). Disintermediating your friends: How online dating in the United States displaces other ways of meeting, PNAS, 116 (36), 17753-17758.
42. Rubin, Z. (1975). Disclosing oneself to a stranger: Reciprocity and its limits, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11(3), 233–260.
43. Sales, N. (2015). Tinder and the Dawn of the “Dating Apocalypse”’, Vanityfair, Retrieved from
44. Scharlott, B. W. & Christ, W. G. (1995). Overcoming relationship-initiation barriers: The impact of a computer-dating system on sex role, shyness, and appearance inhibitions, Computers, Human Behavior, 11 (2), 191-204.
45. Schöndienst, V. & Dang-Xuan, L. (July 9, 2011). The role of linguistic properties in online dating communication—A large-scale study of contact initiation messages, PACIS Proceeding 2011, 169, Brisbane, Australia.
46. Sharabi, L. L. & Dykstra-Devette, T. A. (2019). From first email to first date: Strategies for initiating relationships in online dating, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(11-12), 3389-3407.
47. Simmel, G. (2016). Yabancı in L. ÜNSALDI, L. (ed)., Yabancı Bir İlişki Biçimi Olarak Ötekilik, (pp.27-34), Ankara: Heretik.
48. Smith, A. & Duggan, M. (2013). Online dating & rela- tionships. Pew Research Internet Project. Retrieved from dating-relationships/
49. Stempel, C. (2018). Sport, Social Class, and Cultural Capital: Building on Bourdieu and His Critics, OSF Preprints, 1-15. DOI:10.31219/
50. Tarde, G. (2018). Les lois de l’imitation, etude sociologique, Paris: Hachette Bnf.
51. Toma, C. L., Hancock, J.T. & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating Fact From Fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating Profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023–36. DOI:10.1177/0146167208318067
52. Tong, S. T., Hancock, J. T. & Slatcher, R. B. (2016). Online dating system design and relational decision making: Choice, algorithms, and control. Personal Relationships, 23(4), 645–662.
53. Tong, S. T., Corriero, E. F. & Wilbowo, K. A. (2020). Self-presentation and impressions of personality through text-based online dating profiles: A lens model analysis, New Media & Society, 22(5), 875-895.
54. Turkish Statistical Institute TUIK( May 10, 2017). İstatistiklerle Aile, 2016, Number 24646, Retrieved from ,
55. Virilio, P. (2010). Le Grand Accélérateur, Paris: Galilée, Paris.
56. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, inter-personal, and hyperpersonal interaction, Communication research, 23(1): 3, 3-43.
57. Wrench, J. S. & Punyanunt-Carter, N. M. (2017). From the Front Porch to Swiping Right, in Wrench, J.S. & Punyanunt-Carter, N.M. (eds.) Modern Romantic Relationships, (pp.1-12), London: Lexington Books.
How to Cite
Erdogan, B. (2022). From Online to Offline: Presentations of Self and Partner Searching Techniques among Women in Turkey on Dating Sites. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 18(32), 1.
ESJ Humanities