Which motives drive mobile daters in order to ghost? (RQ1)

Again, participants were served with the definition of ghosting and you can asked so you’re able to indicate how frequently participants ghosted other matchmaking software pages (Yards = 2.17, SD = 1.59) and how often they feel almost every other relationships app profiles ghost (Meters = step 3.51, SD = 0.88) towards the a measure anywhere between 0 = To not 5 = Very often.

Face-to-face get in touch with

Respondents (letter = 211) shown whether or not they noticed the person who ghosted him or her face-to-face with address categories no (0) and sure (1; 52.1%).

Duration of get in touch with

Respondents (letter = 211) shown the size of the fresh contact until the other individual ghosted that have answer categories (1) a couple of circumstances otherwise reduced (n = 9), (2) 1 day (letter = 9), (3) a short time (letter = 26), (4) a week (letter = 32), (5) a couple of weeks (n = 77), (6) 30 days (letter = 25), (7) a few months (n = 27), (8) six months to a year blendr Handy (n = 4), (9) more than per year (n = 2) (Yards = cuatro.77; SD = step one.62).

Concentration of the get in touch with

Brand new intensity of the get in touch with try measured having fun with a measure starting from one = very periodically in order to 7 = most serious (letter = 211; M = 4.98; SD = 1.42).

Number of intimate closeness

A good categorical varying was applied determine quantity of intimate closeness with answers ranging from none (n = 136), lighter (i.e., making out and you can sexual touching, n = 25) and you can serious (we.e., oral, vaginal otherwise rectal intercourse, letter = 47). About three participants don’t should share this post.

Expectancy violation

Two items from Afifi and Metts’s (1998) violated expectedness scale were used to measure whether the respondents (n = 208) expected the ghosting to occur (1 = completely expected; 7 = not at all expected; M = 5.50; SD = 1.67) and how surprised they were that the ghosting occurred (1 = not at all surprised; 7 = very surprised; M = 5.38; SD = 1.70). These items were highly correlated (Pearson’s r = .69; p < .001) and had good reliability (Cronbach's ? = .82; M = 5.44; SD = 1.55).


Participants (letter = 207) ranked just how humdrum its ghosting sense try (anywhere between 0 = not humdrum to help you 10 = really bland; M = 6.03; SD = 2.67).


Because the discussed on strategy point, on earliest research question, i put thematic research to spot emerging layouts linked to explanations why cellular daters ghost. These were formulated of the an effective logistic regression data in which i checked points anticipating which have ghosted someone else for the relationship programs within the acquisition to respond to the first one or two hypotheses. Similarly, for the second research question, i utilized thematic research to spot the many outcomes off ghosting and the various coping mechanisms away from ghostees. Once more, this type of qualitative conclusions have been with a quantitative regression data in order to decide to try hypotheses connected with affairs leading to experience ghosting much more humdrum.

To fully learn motives to ghost, we first requested ghostees (n = 217) to help you elaborate toward why they thought these were ghosted, and therefore we up coming contrasted with ghosters’ (n = 142) reasons why you should ghost other people. Getting ghostees, three main templates came up that overview as to why they believe these were ghosted due to the fact explained lower than.

Blame into the most other (ghoster)

A pretty higher ratio of the people who had been ghosted (letter = 128; 59%) blamed the other person to possess ghosting them. They think brand new ghoster is communicating with, dating, or perhaps in a love which have someone else (letter = 60); it revealed the new ghoster once the a person who had “issues” which means couldn’t commit to the latest relationships dating at this minute (letter = 43). Several respondents and expressed its frustration of the discussing the latest ghoster because the somebody who is childish, cowardly, idle, rude, otherwise disrespectful having ghosting her or him (letter = 29). Eventually, some participants indicated that the newest ghoster was not curious or also active (n = 27).

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments