SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Aristotle. (350 BC). Rhetoric (W. Rhys Roberts, Trans.). New York: Infomotions.
  • Baker, A. J. (2005). Double click: Romance and commitment among online couples. New York: Hampton.
  • Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 326.
  • Baxter, L. A. (2011). Voicing relationships: A dialogic perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Baym, N. K. (2010). Personal connections in the digital age. Malden, MA: Polity.
  • Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
  • Business Wire. (2008). Jupiter research sees steady growth for online personals, despite explosion of social networking. Retrieved July 9, 2012, from http://www.Businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080211005037&newsLang=en
  • Carpenter, S. (2008, December). No recession for online dating sites. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved July 9, 2012, from http://www.latimes.com/features/lifestyle/la-ig-dating28-2008dec28,0,1563805.story?page=1
  • Caspie, A. & Gorsky, P. (2006). Online deception: Prevalence, motivation, and emotion. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9, 54-50.
  • Condit, C. M. (2006). Relationality. In G. J. Shepherd, J. St. John, & T. Striphas (Eds.) Communication as… Perspectives on theory (pp. 3-12). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Duck, S. W. (1998). Human relationships (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Duck, S. W. (2011). Rethinking relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Eisenberg, E. M. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51, 227-242.
  • Ellison, N. B., Heino, R.D., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415-441.
  • Foster, E. (2008). Commitment, communication, and contending with heteronormativity: An invitation to greater reflexivity in interpersonal research. Southern Communication Journal, 73, 84-101.
  • 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, 1-26.
  • Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C. (2011). First comes love, then comes Google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Communication Research, 38(1), 70-100.
  • Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Anchor.
  • Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2008). Identity shift in computer-mediated environments. Media Psychology, 11, 167-185.
  • Goodwin, R. (1999). Personal relationships across cultures. London: Routledge.
  • Hall, J. A., Park, N., Song, H., & Cody, M. J. (2010). Strategic misrepresentation in online dating: The effects of gender, self-monitoring, and personality traits. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 117-135.
  • Halwani, R. (2010). Philosophy of love, sex, and marriage. New York: Routledge.
  • Hancock, J. T., & Toma, C. L. (2009). Putting your best face forward: The accuracy of online dating photographs. Journal of Communication, 59, 367-386.
  • Heino, R. D., Ellison, N. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2010). Relationshopping: Investigating the market metaphor in online dating. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27(4), 427-447.
  • Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177-192.
  • Kellerman, K (1992). Communication: Inherently strategic and primarily automatic. Communication Monographs, 59, 288-300.
  • Leary, M.R. (1996). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview.
  • Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34-47.
  • LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed). San Diego: Academic.
  • Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Liu, H. (2007). Social network profiles as taste performances. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1). Retrieved August 7, 2011 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/liu.html
  • Livingstone, S. (2009). On the mediation of everything: ICA Presidential Address 2008. Journal of Communication, 59, 1-18.
  • Madden, M. & Lenhart, A. (2006). Online dating. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved June 2, 2008 from http://pewinternet.org/˜/media/Files/Reports/2006/PIP_Online_Dating.pdf
  • Manning, J. (2007). Ethnographic understandings of online love. Review of Communication, 7(4), 427-430.
  • Manning, J. (2009). Because the personal is the political: Politics and unpacking the rhetoric of (queer) relationships. In K. German & B. Dreshel (Eds.), Queer identities/political realities (pp. 1-12). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge.
  • Manning, J., & Kunkel, A. D. (In press). Researching interpersonal relationships: Qualitative methods, studies, and analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Merskin, D. L., & Huberlie, M. (1996). Companionship in the classifieds: The adoption of personal advertisements by daily newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 219-229.
  • Petronio, S. (2002). Boundaries of privacy: Dialectics of disclosure. Albany, NY: State University of New York.
  • Postmes, T., & Baym, N. K. (2005). Intergroup dimensions of the Internet. In J. Harwood, & H. Giles (Eds.), Intergroup communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 213-238). New York: Peter Lang.
  • Rowatt, W. C., Cunningham, M. R., & Druen, P. B. (1998). Deception to get a date. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(11), 1228-1242.
  • Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Schlenker, B. R., & Wowra, S. A. (2003). Carryover effects of feeling socially transparent or impenetrable on strategic self-presentation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 871-880.
  • Toma, C. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2010). Looks and lies: The role of physical attractiveness in online dating self-presentation and deception. Communication Research, 37(3), 335-351.
  • 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, 1023-1036.
  • Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-44.
  • Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language and cognition. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 2538-2557.
  • Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Tong, S. T., Carr, C. T., & Atkin, C. K. (2010). The effects of interpersonal goals on inadvertent intrapersonal influence in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 36, 323-347.
  • Whitty, M. (2008). Revealing the “real” me, searching for the “actual” you: Presentations of self on an Internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1707-1723.
  • Wynn, E., & Katz, J. E. (1998). Hyperbole over cyberspace: Self-presentation and social boundaries in Internet home pages and discourse. The Information Society, 13(4), 297-328.
  • Zey, M. (1992). Decision making: Alternatives to rational choice models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.