PIIS2405844024008508

Heliyon 10 (2024) e24819
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon
Research article
The Bumble motivations framework- exploring a dating App’s uses

by emerging adults in India
Devadas Menon
Development and Educational Communication Unit, Gujarat- 380056, India
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Researchers have called for a better understanding of the differing motivations of dating app
Bumble users. Whereas these have been described for Tinder, Grinder and Hinge in the Anglosphere, no
Dating research examples could be found for Indian users of Bumble. In response, this paper’s pathfinder
Emerging adulthood
study helps close the gap by developing a Bumble motivation scale. Six primary motivations for
Motivations
Online dating
using Bumble were identified through the exploratory factor analysis: Love, Socialisation, Ease of
Uses and gratifications communication, Distraction, Trendiness, and Sexual experience. Notably, socialisation and love
motivations emerged as more significant drivers for Bumble usage than sexual experiences, which
contrasted with prior findings on dating apps. Additionally, age and biological sex differences
were observed in the motivations reported by the participants. Men were more likely to use
Bumble for sexual experiences, while women were more motivated by ease of communication.
Furthermore, age was found to positively relate to motivations linked to love, distraction,
trendiness, and sexual experiences. Moreover, the motivations of Love, socialisation, and trend
iness were found to positively predict the frequency of Bumble usage. Among these motivations,
Love, socialisation, and trendiness emerged as significant predictors of offline dating behaviour
among the participants. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the factors
influencing the adoption and engagement with Bumble among emerging adults in India. The
implications of these findings may aid in refining dating app features and marketing strategies
targeted at this specific demographic.
1. Introduction
Bumble is one of the most popular Location-Based Real-Time Dating (LBRTD) apps that allow users to meet potential romantic
partners nearby. Like any other dating application, Bumble is designed in such a way to expand the users’ social, romantic, and sexual
relationships outside their existing network of contacts [1–3]. Bumble was founded by Whitney Wolf Herd, one of the co-founders of
Tinder. Whitney Wolf left Tinder in protest against sexual harassment and discrimination and went on to start a new dating app called
Bumble [4].
The dating app Bumble was launched in 2014 with identical features to Tinder. However, the differentiating factor is that the app
allows only women to make the first move and initiate a conversation [5]. Once a match is made on Bumble, a conversation has to be
initiated by the respective woman within 24 h, while men have no control over starting any tête-à-tête [6]. If the woman fails to
respond within 24 h, the match disappears. The power play on the female side is a deliberate attempt to give women autonomy in the
dating app space. Bumble is a self-proclaimed feminist dating app [7–9]. The idea of the founders of the app was to reduce the unequal
E-mail address: devadasmb@gmail.com.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24819
Received 14 May 2023; Received in revised form 2 January 2024; Accepted 15 January 2024
Available online 20 January 2024
2405-8440/Â© 2024 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
D. Menon Heliyon 10 (2024) e24819
dynamics that exist on other dating apps. Whitney Wolfe believed that this approach was essential to address the prevalent issue of
online harassment and to create a more respectful and equitable online dating environment. By allowing women to initiate conver
sations, Bumble aimed to empower them and give them greater control over their online dating experiences, reducing the likelihood of
experiencing uncomfortable or offensive interactions that can be common on other platforms like Tinder [4]. This approach aligns with
Bumble’s mission to foster more respectful and safe connections in the online dating world, which sets it apart from many other dating
apps. To some degree, the discomfort and fear of being harassed are minimized; otherwise part of the online medium [10].
For all the biological sex tropes that the app is associated with, Bumble is one of the primary competitors of Tinder. Though the app
is based in the United States of America, its usage seems high in countries like India [11]. Therefore, recognizing the women-centered
slant in dating apps is of special importance to a country like India [11].
In 2020 Bumble in India hit 4 million users and showed a trend of women making moves over 15 million times [12]. The COVID-19
pandemic further accentuated the usage of dating apps in India, particularly Bumble. A recently published report on “Intimacy in
pandemic” by Bumble suggested that COVID-19 has significantly altered youngsters’ motivation for using dating applications. The
report further suggested that in terms of physical relationships, youngsters in India are more open-minded to exploring and exper
imenting than the youth in the USA and Western countries. Also, 60 % of the respondents who participated in the survey indicated that
they were looking forward to being more sexually active once the COVID-19 restrictions eased [13].
Indeed Bumble has significantly increased its user base in developing countries like India, but there is an unclear picture of its user
motivations. Although Bumble has similar interfaces and features, as that of other dating applications there are meaningful differences
in how they have marketed themselves and are likely to influence motivations to use these apps [14]. For example, the dating app,
Tinder is widely marketed as a dating app for casual sex or hook-ups [14–18]. On the other hand, Bumble celebrates itself as a dating
app designed to challenge ‘outdated heterosexual norms [19].’ Also, the specific app feature that allows the “women to make the first
move” is the unique selling point of Bumble. Hence, the motivation to use Tinder and Bumble can vary with how they have been
marketed.
The rise of dating apps coincides with "emerging adulthood," a phase between adolescence and full adulthood (typically ages
18–29), where young adults explore their identities and transition into mature life. Dating apps can significantly impact how they
approach relationships during this period, providing a convenient means to meet potential partners and discover their romantic and
sexual preferences. These apps offer a diverse pool of partners, allowing individuals to explore various relationship styles and improve
their social and communication skills in a low-pressure environment, which is particularly beneficial for socially anxious or less
experienced individuals. However, as emerging adults undergo personal growth and exploration, their relationship goals and ex
pectations may evolve. Therefore, it’s crucial for researchers to comprehend how dating apps are shaping the romantic lives of
emerging adults and influencing their overall development during this pivotal life stage.
Dating apps like Tinder and Bumble have witnessed substantial user growth in low and middle-income nations like India, yet there
remains a gap in research regarding the motivations of users in these regions. While existing studies have primarily centered on Tinder
[2,20], Bumble has received limited scholarly attention. Despite both apps sharing similar features and interfaces, their distinct
marketing approaches are likely to shape users’ motivations for selecting one over the other.
Drawing upon the framework of uses and gratifications theory, this study attempts to identify the various motivations for using
Bumble among Indian emerging adults. Additionally, the study looks into the biological sex and age differences among the motivations
for using dating apps, highlighting the need to examine whether these factors influence Bumble’s motivations. Furthermore, the study
aims to investigate how Bumble’s motivations relate to the frequency of app usage and whether they predict offline dating outcomes.
By addressing these research questions, the study intends to contribute to the understanding of Bumble usage motivations and their
implications for Indian emerging adults’ dating experiences.
This study contributes to the existing literature in three ways. First, theories of media usage behaviour indicate that understating
user motivations can shed light on the potential outcomes of particular media usage behaviours [21–23]. Prior literature on dating
application usage motivations has shown that certain user motivations are similar to traditional and new media usage while dating
apps exhibit certain unique motivations [15] [14, 18]. Hence current study attempts to unravel the various motivations for using
Bumble, a dating app which is specifically designed for females. By exploring these motivations, the study will enhance our under
standing of user behaviour within the context of dating apps and contribute valuable insights to the field.
Second, LBRTD applications like Bumble have been suggested to positively and negatively affect emerging adults’ social, psy
chological, romantic, and sexual lives [24,25]. For example, nowadays, dating applications help in potential matchmaking that can
lead to long relationships like marriage [26–28]. On the other hand, dating applications can affect one’s life in an undesirable way,
such as sexual harassment and bullying [29–31] and vulnerability to sexually transmitted diseases [32,33]. Understanding user
motivations can paint a clear picture of the positive and negative outcomes of Bumble usage. Also, understating motivations can help
take appropriate steps to combat adverse outcomes [14].
Lastly, most of the literature on dating apps is from either the United States or western countries, limiting their external validity.
Scholars observed cross-cultural differences influence dating norms, particularly individualism, and collectivism [28,34]. They have
argued that individualistic and collectivistic cultures influence people’s interpretation of love and intimacy [35]. Research findings
have indicated that in societies with a strong emphasis on individualism, such as the USA and Australia, dating apps tend to be
predominantly utilized for pursuing casual relationships or engaging in hook-up interactions. Conversely, in Asian countries like
Japan, Korea, and China, where more collectivist cultural norms prevail, these platforms are often employed as a means to facilitate
potential marriage arrangements [26,36]. Earlier investigations [37,38] have pointed out that the inclusion of samples from a nation
known for its cultural diversity can bolster the external validity of the research. In the current study, we have utilized our sample from
India, a culturally diverse and collectivistic country, to increase the study’s external validity.
2
In short, this study seeks to contribute to the existing literature by unravelling the motivations driving the usage of the dating app
Bumble among Indian emerging adults. By understanding these motivations, the research aims to shed light on the potential outcomes
of using Bumble and its implications for individuals’ dating experiences. Additionally, the study addresses the need to consider cultural
diversity and external validity in dating app research by focusing on India as a representative of a collectivistic society. The utilization
of the uses and gratifications theory and a mixed-method approach enhances the study’s methodology, offering valuable insights and
opportunities for replication by other researchers in the scientific community.
2. Theoretical framework and research questions
2.1. Motivations to use Bumble
Recent reports on Bumble have shown that most of its users are 18–29 years old [39,40]. The uses and gratifications theory is a
suitable framework for exploring emerging adults’ motivations for using Bumble. This theory assumes that people use mass media to
fulfill certain needs and desires [41]. Considering media users as active and purpose-driven in their media choices and usage, the Uses
and Gratifications Theory provides a clear insight into user perceptions, behaviours, and outcomes [42,43]. If the media gratifies the
users’ needs up to their expectations, the users will continue depending on the same media resulting in recurring usage of the media
[41,44,45]). For instance, if a user with a sexual motive uses Bumble to gratify their need and is satisfied with the app will be more
likely to continue using Bumble. Prior literature has underscored that social, psychological, and physical gratifications motivate users’
consumption of dating apps [15] [8,14,18,46,47]).
Considerable literature has explored the motivations behind the usage of dating applications. The earliest studies in this regard
focused on Grindr, the first-ever mobile-based dating application [48]. found that “killing time’” was the most prominent motivation to
use Grindr, followed by “making friends,” “having sex/hook-up,” “finding out dating companion,” and “connecting to the gay com
munity.” With the aid of the uses and gratification theory [47], identified six motivations behind Grindr usage: social inclusion, sex,
entertainment, friendship, romantic relationships, and location-based partner searching. Other researchers have also reported iden
tical findings [49,50], suggesting that Grinder gratifies its users’ various social, psychological, and physical needs.
Three important scales emerged from three research groups that gained more attention and were widely replicated to capture the
gratifications from dating applications. The first scale was developed by Ref. [18]; popularly known as the Tinder Motive Scale (TMS).
The TMS was developed through qualitative and quantitative methodology and has identified 13 motivations for using Tinder, i.e.,
social approval, relationship-seeking, sexual experience, flirting/social skills, travelling, Ex, Belongingness, socializing, peer pressure,
sexual orientation, pass time/entertainment, distraction, and curiosity. The second measure of dating applications’ motives is the
Motivation to Use Online Dating Scale (MODS) designed by Ref. [51]. MODS reported five motivations behind the usage of dating
applications/Tinder, i.e., romantic relationships, casual sex, making new friends, keeping in touch with existing friends, and fun. The
final scale for measuring dating apps usage motivations was the Dating App Motivation Scale (DAMS) by Ref. [52]; which was a
reclassified version of the original six Tinder motivations (i.e., love, casual sex, ease of communication, self-worth validation, the thrill
of excitement, and trendiness) developed by Ref. [14]. In DAMS, the six Tinder motivations were classified under three goals: rela
tional, interpersonal, and entertainment.
An analysis of the various motivations for using dating applications across the three dating app scales shows considerable overlap.
In uses and gratification research, the overlap of gratifications among the same media or between different media is a commonly
observed phenomenon [53]. In light of prior literature, the motivations for dating apps can be classified under three broad categories
(relational, interpersonal, and entertainment), as suggested by Ref. [14]. Most literature on dating applications identified motivations
under these broad categories [54]. However, motivations encapsulated under these three classifications have certain inherent lacunas
that limit their generalizability.
Most of the prior literature on dating applications has exclusively focused on Tinder. Given its huge popularity across the globe [39,
55,56], it is not surprising that most of the prior researchers have specifically focused on Tinder [14,18,51,57–61]. A recent
meta-analysis of 70 studies on dating applications has revealed that 35 % of the studies were Tinder-specific [2]. Bumble is second in
terms of its user base in developed countries like the USA and developing countries like India [62]. Despite its popularity, no study has
yet probed into its user motivations. Recent studies [2,51] speculate that individuals may have different motivations than Tinder for
using other dating applications, and studies on other dating applications are highly warranted. A recent study [54] that compared the
motivations behind using three dating applications (i.e.Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge) revealed considerable differences in the moti
vations to use various dating apps.
Further, Bumble’s marketing strategies and features (i.e. first move by women) can also influence user motivation. Since no studies
could be found that describe Bumble users’ motivations, this study intends to uncover the motivations to use Bumble. We believe that
the results of this explorative study will be used to create one of the first measures of Bumble motivations. Thus based on the existing
literature on dating applications reviewed above, we will present the following research question (RQ).
RQ1. What are emerging adults’ primary motivations for using Bumble?
2.2. Demographics and Bumble motivations
Literature on gender socialisation has reported that biological sex can be important in determining individuals’ social, psycho
logical, and physical needs [63–67]. Studies have observed biological sex and age differences in users’ social, psychological, and
3
physical motivations for dating applications [2,14,54]. For instance, several prior scholars [63]; [15][14,20,51,52,55,68]; Timmer
mans & De Caluwé, 2017s) have reported that men are more likely to use dating applications to fulfill their sexual needs than women.
Similarly, men exhibited more interest in using Tinder for relationship-seeking, love, flirting, thrill-seeking, and ease of communi
cation [20,52,54]. But in another study [18], found no significant difference between men and women in their entertainment moti
vations. These inconsistencies in prior literature demand further analysis of the biological sex differences among the motivations to use
Bumble. It is also worth noting that Bumble is an exclusive application for women where women make the first move.
Age is another important determinant that influences the motivation to use dating apps. Prior research has proven that individuals’
social, psychological, and sexual needs change as they grow older [69–72]. For example, emerging adults tend to have more serious
romantic relations once they grow old [73–76]. Also, the tendency to engage in casual sex and hook-up relationships is common while
emerging adults grow up [77–80]. Prior studies on dating apps [2,14,52,68] also found significant correlations between age and
various motivations to use dating apps. For example [14], found that age positively correlates with motivations like love, casual sex,
and ease of communication. Hence it is plausible that the age of Bumble users may have relationships with their usage motivations.
In quintessence, the second research question RQ2 reads.
RQ2. Do the motivations to use Bumble vary with the age and biological sex of the emerging adults?
2.3. Bumble motivations and offline dating
Different motivations to use media can result in different outcomes [81–84]. Studies on dating apps [2,14,52,85,86] have revealed
that various social, psychological, and physical motivations can influence their usage behaviours. Prior studies [3,14,52,87,88] have
looked into the outcomes of dating applications in terms of physical meetings/dating with partners and engaging in casual sex [49].
found that those users who sought to gratify their physical needs met their dating partners and had casual sex more frequently than
those who were not motivated to use dating apps for physical gratification. However, results from collectivistic and Asian countries
paint a slightly different picture of the motivations and outcomes of dating app usage [28]. Prior research in China, Japan, and Korea
has shown that people use dating apps mainly for relationship-seeking and socialisation motivations [36];[89]. Their offline dating
often ends in committed relationships or marriages [26]. Prior research on dating apps is largely biased toward Tinder [2,54]. Tinder is
considered a masculine app and is largely used for casual sex and hook-ups [14,18].
On the other hand, Bumble is projected and marketed as a female-friendly dating app [7] where women decide to date. Hence the
possible outcomes of Tinder can’t be generalised to Bumble. Hence in the current study, we try to delineate how Bumble motivations
predict offline dating. To sum up, we pose our third and fourth research questions.
RQ3. How do Bumble motivations related to the frequency of usage?
RQ4. How do Bumble motivations predict offline dating?
To address these research questions, we followed the commonly used dual method [90];[43] in uses and gratification research by
conducting a focus group interview followed by a survey method. The details are reported below.
3. Methods
3.1. Focus group summary
Focus groups are commonly used to investigate gratifications due to their methodological advantages. Utilizing an open-ended
interview approach with a limited number of participants who possess diverse levels of experience, focus groups offer an effective
means of exploring a broad spectrum of ideas that might be challenging to access through alternative research methods [91]. This
approach is especially valuable when the objective of the study is to uncover participants’ interpretations and modes of comprehension
[92]; [80]
Given the constraints imposed by the pandemic, we adapted our research approach and conducted two online focus groups using
Zoom. A total of 12 participants took part in these virtual sessions. Based on the availability of participants,7 were assigned to the first
session and 5 were in the second. The recruitment of participants for our study was carried out through prominent social media
platforms like Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and Snapchat, as well as through the personal social network of the primary author.
Utilizing these channels, we were able to effectively reach and engage individuals who expressed an interest in participating in our
research. 7 out of the 12 participants were females and their ages varied from 19 to 26 (M = 23.11, SD = 2.11).
We developed a focus group protocol based on the uses and gratifications framework. By focusing on key concepts such as gra
tification sought, frequency of use, and unintended outcomes, we seek to capture the whole user experience of the participants with
Bumble to better identify sources of gratifications. The focus group discussions were probed using the grounded theory approach
(Glaser et al., 1968; Martin & Turner, 1986; Holtzblatt & Beyer, 1998) to tap all the possible motives behind Bumble usage. The
obtained themes were further analysed through the lens of prior uses and gratification literature on dating applications. Responses that
reflected similar motives were combined, resulting in the re-wording of some of the items. The final item pool consisted of 49 items (see
Anexure-I). The result revealed that most motivations were similar to previous uses and gratification research on Tinder, such as love,
socialisation, ease of communication, distraction, trendiness, sexual experience, the thrill of experience, self-worth validation,
entertainment and relationship seeking. As suggested by past researchers [90]; [43], each of the 49 motivations from the 10 themes
from the focus groups was then converted into a questionnaire for final data collection.
4
3.2. Sample and procedure
Since the exact statistics of Bumble users in India are unknown, participants were recruited through a convenient snowball
sampling method. The snowball sampling method is the easiest and most parsimonious method of data collection from a large and
unknown population [93,94]. In researching Bumble usage among Indian emerging adults, where sensitivity and access challenges
may arise [95,96] the strategy involves employing individuals’ social networks to reach a population considered "hard-to-reach." The
term "hard-to-reach" denotes groups difficult for researchers to access due to privacy concerns or cultural factors. Leveraging social
connections helps overcome these challenges by tapping into existing relationships and social groups, potentially facilitating access to
individuals who may be hesitant or challenging to reach through conventional research methods. Studies of sensitive subjects have
employed individuals’ social networks to access ‘‘hard-to-reach’’ and ‘‘sensitive’’ populations [97].
All procedures performed in this research involving human participants were in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki declaration.
The study is approved by the IRB. The respondents were informed of the objective and purpose of the study. Before conducting the
interviews, the respondents’ verbal consent was obtained. The survey instrument was designed in the English language. The potential
samples were recruited by posting flyers containing the survey links on various social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and
WhatsApp. The first page of the questionnaire explained the study objectives and anticipatory benefits. Those respondents who gave
their consent by clicking “YES, I wish to proceed” were continued to the next page. Participants were also assured that the survey was
anonymous and they could quit anytime. Participation in the survey was voluntary, and participants did not receive any monetary
benefits or gifts. The survey was conducted between February to July 2022. The respondents who completed the surveys likely to be
from the more affluent strata of Indian society in terms of their mobile phone ownership, daily internet access, English-speaking and
affordances to go on regular dates.
Emerging adulthood, a term coined by psychologist [98,99]; refers to a distinct developmental stage experienced by individuals
between the ages of 18 and 29. This period is characterized by significant changes and exploration in various aspects of life. One
important aspect of exploration for emerging adults is dating and romantic relationships. Unlike individuals in their thirties, emerging
adults often have not yet established stable long-term partnerships and instead engage in a series of intimate relationships [98]. In the
modern era, dating apps have become increasingly popular among emerging adults as a means to date and initiate romantic con
nections. A total of 298 (59.7 % males; MAge = 22.23; SDAge = 2.71; Age Range = 18–29) Indian emerging adults, who have been users of
Bumble for the last six months, took part in the survey.
The sample size used in the study may be considered small, but the findings can still be meaningful and can be extrapolated under
certain conditions. The sample’s adequacy relies on its representativeness, context of the study, effect size, and statistical significance
[100,101]. Conducting an exploratory factor analysis and ensuring methodological rigour can strengthen the validity of the results
[102]. It is essential to transparently report the limitations of the study and acknowledge the potential constraints. While a larger
sample would be preferable, the study can offer valuable insights, and replication studies can further confirm and extend the findings.
3.3. Measures
3.2.1. Bumble usage: Participants indicated their age (in years) and biological sex. Bumble usage of participants was measured using
the Tinder usage scale [14]. Participants who were users of Bumble for the last six months were considered for the study. Respondents
indicated how often they used the application on a five-point scale ranging from 1 = once or twice in the last six months; 2 = monthly
once; 3 = 1–3 times a week; 4 = 4–5 times a week, and 5 = every day. The Bumble usage was normally distributed (Skewness = 0.19;
Kurtosis = − 0. 84).
3.3.1. Outcome of Bumble usage

The outcome of Bumble usage was measured using the method of [14]. In this method, participants indicated whether they had met
a Bumble match for offline dating. The respondents indicated whether they had offline dating or not as a dichotomous variable (1 =
Yes; 0 = No).
3.3.2. Bumble motivations

The Bumble motivation scale was developed in a three-step procedure [14] in line with prior studies on dating applications. First,
an item pool was created based on the extensive review of prior uses and gratifications literature [14,18,51,52] related to dating apps.
The items with similar meanings in the prior literature were used only once. Thus the final item pool consisted of 49 items that
represented the various physical, social, and socio-psychological motivations for using dating apps. For each item, the participants
were asked to express their agreement on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Second, the item pool
was reviewed by four (2 male; 2 female) current Bumble users and four (2 male; 2 female) former Bumble users who were not involved
in the selection of items to ensure that the items have clarity. Based on the feedback of these independent reviewers, the items were
refined. In the third step, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to locate the motivations behind using Bumble.
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive statistics of Bumble usage and Bumble offline encounters
The frequency of Bumble usage of current and former Bumble users indicated that 61.7 % of the users log on to the app daily.
5
Around 11.7 % used the app once or twice. 10.7 % used the app 4–5 times a week, and 8.7 % used it monthly. Analysis of offline
Bumble encounters indicated that more than half of the participants were involved in real-life dating. Men reported higher real-life
Bumble dating than women (Refer to Table 1).
4.2. Bumble usage motivations
A Principal component analysis with Varimax rotation was performed to identify the emerging adults’ Bumble usage motivations. A
six-factor solution is accepted based on numerous standard criteria such as scree plot analysis, eigenvalues (>1), and interpretability
[103]. The factor analysis explained 69.2 % of the variance. All six motivations fulfilled the Kaiser criterion, i.e. eigenvalue>1.0. The
items in each interpretable factor, corresponding factor loadings, eigenvalues, percentage of variance explained by each factor, and
reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) were presented in Table 2.
The first motivation for Bumble usage was love, which reflected participants’ socio-psychological need to fall in love with someone
and build an emotional bond to have a serious relationship. The socialisation motivation was about users’ intention to use Bumble to
make new connections and broaden their social networks. The ease of communication motivation reflected the users’ easiness and
comfortability in making an online relationship. The distraction motivation referred to users’ intention to use Bumble to forget their
past relationships or make them less lonely. The trendiness motivation reflected that some emerging adults find Bumble a cool and
trendy app. Finally, the sexual experience motivation sheds light on users’ dependency on Bumble to have online and offline physical
and sexual relationships. The intercorrelation between the six motivations is presented in Table 3.
4.3. Biological sex and age differences in Bumble usage
Zero-order correlation, also known as Pearson’s correlation coefficient, is conducted to examine the strength and direction of the
relationship between two variables. In this case, zero-order correlations were performed to assess the association between age and
various motivations for using Bumble. By calculating the correlation coefficient, researchers can determine whether there is a sig
nificant linear relationship between age and each motivation and whether the relationship is positive or negative. In the current
research, Zero-order correlations showed a significant negative association of age with the motivations of love, distraction, trendiness
and sexual experience. That means younger users tend to seek love, distraction, trendiness, and sexual experience gratifications from
the usage of Bumble. A MANOVA test (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) was conducted to examine the biological sex differences in
Bumble usage motivations among the users. The aim was to determine if there were significant variations between men and women in
their motivations for using the dating app. By analyzing multiple motivational factors simultaneously, the MANOVA test provides a
comprehensive understanding of the biological sex differences in Bumble usage motivations. MANOVA test (See Table 4) showed a
significant biological sex difference for the Bumble usage motivations, i.e., ease of communication and sexual experience, Wilks’λ =
0.53, F (6, 291) = 44.40, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.478. Men reported higher sexual experience than women (p < 0.001). On the other hand,
compared to men, women reported Bumble being more useful for ease of communication (p < 0.001).
4.4. Relationship between Bumble motivations and frequency of usage
Zero-order correlations indicated that the frequency of Bumble usage is positively related to love, socialisation, and trendiness
motivations. That means emerging adults find Bumble trendy and use it to socialise and find a potential romantic partner.
A hierarchical regression analysis was conducted to investigate the relationship between Bumble usage and motivations in detail.
Hierarchical regression analysis allows researchers to examine the unique contribution of each independent variable in explaining the
variance in the dependent variable. The use of hierarchical regression analysis in this context suggests that the researchers wanted to
investigate the relationship between Bumble usage and motivations while controlling for the potential influence of other variables. By
analyzing hierarchically, this study examines the incremental variance explained by each set of variables and determines their relative
importance in predicting the outcome. In hierarchical regression, the independent variables are entered into the model in sequential
blocks or steps based on theoretical or logical considerations. Typically, demographic variables or control variables are entered in the
first step to account for their effects. Then, motivations for Bumble usage were added in subsequent steps to assess their additional
contribution to explaining the variance in Bumble usage. The results are presented in Table 5.
4.5. Relationship between Bumble motivations and Bumble outcomes
The zero-order correlation results (see Table 3) showed that love, socialisation, ease of communication, and trendiness positively
Table 1
Offline encounters with Bumble matches (N = 298).
Have you been on a Bumble date?
Yes No
Women 46 63
Men 126 63
All 172 126
6
Table 2
Exploratory factor analysis results (N = 298) Bumble.
Motives Mean S. D Loading Eigen value Variance Alpha
I use/d Bumble (because) ….
Love (Mean = 3.16; SD = 1.33)

To find someone to be with 2.54 1.57 .794
To seek out someone to date 3.90 1.10 .761
To find someone for a serious relationship 2.79 1.38 .755
To fall in love 2.49 1.41 .743 11.47 30.18 .90
To find a steady relationship 3.76 1.03 .729
To build an emotional connection with someone 3.09 1.45 .727
To find a potential romantic partner 3.56 1.42 .700
Socialisation (Mean = 3.15; SD = 1.45)
To meet new people 3.21 1.47 .919
To make new friends 3.08 1.46 .854
To broaden my social networks 3.29 1.47 .809 4.03 10.62 .93
To talk to people, I don’t know personally 3.06 1.43 .773
To get attention 3.06 1.36 .770
To improve my self-esteem 3.27 1.52 .678
Ease of communication (Mean = 2.52; SD = 1.17)
Online is easier to open up 2.32 1.36 .837
Online less shy than offline 2.37 1.39 .836
People online judge me less 3.97 1.02 .703 3.51 9.25 .83
It is easy to find a match on dating apps 1.44 .916 .670
Distraction (Mean = 2.83; SD = 1.55)
To distract me from being reminded about my broken relationship 3.12 1.52 .803
To get out of my otherwise sad/disturbed state 2.79 1.64 .797 3.09 8.15 .89
To feel less lonely 2.68 1.64 .750
To think less about ex 2.79 1.42 .726
Trendiness (Mean = 2.78; SD = 1.40)
It is trendy 2.79 1.23 .743
It is new 2.47 1.46 .634 2.36 6.23 .85
It is cool 2.86 1.58 .618
Everyone is using it 2.89 1.34 .606
Sexual experience (Mean = 2.66; SD = 1.09)
To exchange sexy pictures 2.67 1.03 .780
To meet singles with similar sexual orientation 2.56 1.24 .664 1.80 4.75 .78
To sext 2.78 1.02 .539
Note: 69.20 % of the total variance explained.
Table 3
Zero-order correlation between Bumble Motivations, Bumble Usage, and Age among Bumble users (N=298)
Zero-order correlation matrix Bumble.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
1. Love – .43*** .12* .47*** .41*** .16** .24*** .29** − .13*

2. Socialisation – .19** .41*** .48*** .19** .34*** .28*** − .06
3. Ease of communication – .16** .26*** − .20*** − .22* .19** .08
4. Distraction – .56*** .02 − .03 .10 − .15**
5. Trendiness – − .09 .20*** .21*** − .27***
6. Sexual experience – .04 .12 − .15**
7. Frequency of use – .07 − .06
8. Bumble dates (No = 0, Yes = 1) – − .26***
9. Age –
***P < 0.001 **P < 0.01 * P < 0.05.
related to offline dating. A logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the relationship between Bumble motivations and
offline dating experiences. Logistic regression analysis is used to examine the relationship between a binary dependent variable (in this
case, offline dating experiences) and one or more independent variables (Bumble motivations) while controlling for the influence of
other variables. It is particularly useful when the dependent variable is categorical or dichotomous, and the researcher wants to predict
the probability of an event occurring. In this context, logistic regression analysis is conducted to investigate the relationship between
Bumble motivations and offline dating experiences. By using logistic regression, it is examined how the different motivations for using
Bumble (love, socialisation, ease of communication, and trendiness) relate to the likelihood of having offline dating experiences. Age
and biological sex were used as control variables. The result is presented in Table 6.
The logistic regression result showed that age negatively predicts offline dating. This means that the younger the user, the more
they are inclined toward offline Bumble dating. Among the Bumble motivations, love, socialisation, and trendiness have emerged as
significant predictors of offline dating.
7
Table 4
Mean differences (MANOVA) in Bumble Motivations by biological sex among the users of Bumble (N =
298).
Motive Biological sex
Women Men
Love 3.05 (0.95) 3.11 (1.14)

Socialisation 3.10 (1.16) 3.19 (1.31)
Ease of communication 3.25 (0.98) 2.10 (0.66) ***
Distraction 3.02 (1.43) 2.74 (1.32)
Trendiness 2.83 (1.10) 3.05 (1.20)
Sexual experience 2.47 (1.01) 2.78 (0.98) ***
***P < 0.001.
Table 5
Hierarchical Regression analysis predicting the frequency of
Bumble usage.
Usage (β)
Controls
Age .009
Bilogical Sex (Male = 1) .254***
Predictors
R2 .063
Love .152**
Socialisation .144**
Ease of Communication − .279
Distraction − .169
Trendiness .379***
Sexual experience .020
R2 .183
Total Adjusted ΔR2 .160
***P < 0.001 **P < 0.01 * P < 0.05.

The result showed that biological sex is a significant positive
predictor of the frequency of Bumble usage (P < 0.001),
indicating that men exhibited a higher frequency of Bumble
usage (R2 = 0.063). Amongst the motivations, love (P <
0.01), socialisation (P < 0.01), and trendiness (P < 0.001)
significantly predicted Bumble usage (R2 = 0.183).
5. Discussion
Recently, LBRTD applications have become a trend in the mobile dating applications landscape, with Bumble being one of the
dominant leaders targeting female mobile daters. The current study advances the literature on LBRTD applications, with a specific
focus on Bumble and its motivations among emerging adults. The study is theoretically grounded in the Uses and Gratifications (U&G)
theory, which provides a framework for understanding users’ motivations and how they interact with technology. By integrating the
U&G theory, this study offers a more comprehensive exploration of the motivations driving Bumble usage among emerging adults.
To ensure methodological rigour, a mixed-method approach combining surveys and factor analysis was employed. This approach
allowed us to systematically explore and categorize motivations. The survey data was collected from a diverse sample of emerging
adults, enhancing the generalizability of findings.
Table 6
Logistic regression predicting Bumble dates.
B SE β Wald’s X2(1) P e β
Controls
Age − .234 .059 15.88 .000 0.79
Biological Sex .738 .403 3.34 .067 2.09
Predictors
Love .454 .166 7.49 .006 0.64
Socialisation .406 .148 7.52 .006 0.67
Ease of communication − .172 .194 0.78 .376 0.84
Distraction − .520 .136 14.73 .050 0.60
Trendiness .483 .174 7.67 .006 1.62
Sexual experience − .157 .167 0.89 .348 0.85
8
Regarding the first research question, i.e. the emerging adults’ primary motivations for using Bumble, the current study located six
Bumble motivations: love, socialisation, ease of communication, distraction, trendiness, and sexual experience. Among the six mo
tivations, love, socialisation, and distraction were the prominent ones that drove Bumble dating. Prior studies [2,14,18,52] demon
strated emerging adults’ quest for love and romantic relationships make them expand their dating pool outside their pre-existing
networks through mobile dating applications. Similarly, our study echoes prior studies [104,105] that identified mobile dating
application users as sociable. This finding implies that for people looking to expand their social capital [106], mobile dating appli
cations can be considered another way of social networking.
By identifying ease of communication as one of the motivations behind Bumble usage, the current study upheld the viewpoint [51]
that emerging adults increasingly depend on mobile dating applications for interpersonal goal motivations. Many of the prior studies
on Tinder [14,18,52] observed ease of communication as a prominent interpersonal goal for online dating.[14] suggested that mobile
dating application users feel more comfortable in online communication where there is a lesser chance of meeting the matches.
Break-ups are an inevitable part of dating, whether online or offline. Prior studies [18,107,108] have shown that emerging adults often
distract themselves from getting over breakups by using dating applications. In line with these prior studies on mobile dating ap
plications, the current study identified distraction as one of the motivations for emerging adults gratifying from Bumble usage [109].
suggested that online dating has changed over the years from a socially stigmatised practice to a new trend and a preferred way of
meeting potential dating partners. Corresponding to this, the last two psychosocial motivations behind using Bumble identified in this
study are trendiness and sexual experience. This finding corresponds to the prior uses and gratification studies [18,52] on Tinder.
The current study sheds some light on the influence of culture on dating practices. Dominant motivations identified for using
Bumble in the current study are love and socialisation. This finding contradicts the existing scholarships (see Refs. [14,18,52] for
mobile dating applications, where the major motivations behind using dating applications were identified as casual sex or a one-night
stand. Interestingly, psychosocial motivations like casual sex and one-night stands did not emerge as significant themes in the factor
analysis. This finding underscores the influence of cultural differences [28,34] on online dating behaviours. According to Ref. [110];
Indians exhibit a collectivistic culture compared to the United States and western countries’ individualistic cultures. That means Indian
users are more likely to be engaged in social media platforms for socialisation and relationship building [45,110]. Along similar lines
[35], argued that collectivistic and individualistic values influence the way people interpret love and intimacy and that, in turn, affects
their online dating behaviours. Comparative studies on online dating applications [28,36,89] between North American and Asian
countries have shown that American daters preferred casual and open relationships compared to their Asian daters, who preferred
romantic and committed relationships. It is also observed that online intimacy and romantic relationships in Asian countries often lead
to marriages [26]. The difference in Bumble motivations in the current study can also be attributed to rapid progress in the architecture
of mobile dating applications where some of the existing gratifications may diminish, reinforce, or an entirely new gratification may
emerge [53].
The second research question of the study pertains to the age and biological sex differences in the reported motivations to use
Bumble. The findings indicate that younger users seek love, distraction, trendiness, and sexual experience gratifications from using
Bumble. In a prior scholarship [111], observed that people increasingly seek out both psychosocial and physical motivations in their
relationships during their early adulthood stages. This study also aligns with [61], in which the researchers observed that youngsters
identify popular motivations for using Tinder, including entertainment, curiosity, casual sex, and ego-boosting, with ’casual sex’
ranking higher in the Indian context.
Significant biological sex differences were also observed in Bumble usage motivations, where men reported higher sexual expe
rience than women. This result is consistent with earlier studies on dating applications [2,14,18,20] that reported that men are more
likely to use dating apps for casual sex or hook-ups. The current study reported that women find Bumble more useful for ease of
communication. This finding contradicts the prior scholarships [14,52] that have observed men were more likely than women to report
ease of communication as a motivation for using Tinder. This difference in motivations for Bumble can be attributed to its design
architecture, where only women can make the first move. From the results of the current study, one needs to assume that the
‘women-first’ design architecture of Bumble allows women to screen and filter all their requests and accept the best ones so that
interpersonal communication with the prospective match can be smooth.
The biological sex differences observed in Bumble usage motivations, particularly regarding ease of communication and sexual
experience, can also be illuminated by insights from the sociology of online dating and evolutionary psychology [112]. extensively
explores the connection between evolutionary psychology and human behaviour, particularly in the realm of dating and mating. Buss’s
research suggests that certain dating and relationship behaviours can be traced back to our evolutionary past. For instance, the higher
reported motivation among men for sexual experiences on Bumble aligns with the idea that their drive for mating and competition, as
proposed by Ref. [112]; may influence these preferences. This perspective implies that men might view online dating platforms as
avenues for pursuing short-term, casual encounters, thereby explaining their heightened focus on sexual experiences as a motivation.
Further, insights into sex differences in dating preferences, such as the importance of employment status, education, and religious
beliefs, offer valuable context for understanding the motivational disparities between women and men in the study [113]. According to
Ref. [113]; men’s focus on employment status and women’s varied preferences related to education, family aspirations, and religious
beliefs underscore the multifaceted nature of dating motivations. These findings emphasize the complex interplay of cultural and
personal factors, suggesting that the motivations for using Bumble may be shaped by a diverse range of considerations, including
communication, shared values, and economic and societal expectations.
The third research question of the study was to find out the relationship between Bumble motivations and the frequency of Bumble
usage. In line with the prior scholarship [114], biological sex emerged as a significant positive predictor of Bumble usage, indicating
that men exhibited a higher frequency of Bumble usage. This result supports the reports [115,116] on the usage of Bumble in India in
9
which men were the largest users of Bumble and exhibited a higher frequency of usage. Furthermore, the higher frequency of Bumble
usage among men may be influenced by societal norms and expectations [117,118]. Men, on average, might feel more comfortable
being proactive in their search for potential partners, leading them to use dating apps more frequently. On a similar line [64], sug
gested that men prefer online communication as an easier way to meet new people and potential romantic partners than women.
Amongst the motivations, love, socialisation, and trendiness significantly predicted Bumble usage. Hence, the current study supports
the argument [114];[119] that dating apps are used more for entertainment purposes than sex or dating. [14]; based on their study on
Tinder, suggested that some people are more interested in using dating apps to explore their features than their functionality.
Finally, the current research delineated some interesting insights from the relationship between demographics, Bumble motiva
tions, and physical dating. The result showed that age negatively predicted offline dating, indicating that the younger the user, the
more they are inclined toward offline Bumble dating [73]. stated that emerging adulthood is a distinct developmental period in an
individual life cycle characterised by change and exploration. One of the primary ways through which emerging adults can experience
change and exploration is by using online dating apps. [2] suggested that youngsters increasingly depend on dating apps to pursue
social, sexual, and romantic connections. Hence, given the ubiquity of smartphone usage, it is logical that the younger the user, the
more inclined to invite their prospective matches for a face-to-face meeting [114]. Among the Bumble motivations, love, socialisation,
and trendiness have emerged as significant predictors of physical dating. This finding corresponds to the previous studies on Tinder
[14,52,119], in which many users tend to use the dating app for entertainment goals and are in line with the prior uses and gratifi
cations studies [120,121] on social networking. The establishment and continuance of romantic relationships online are very common
nowadays, and these relationships are similar in meaning, intimacy, and stability compared to offline relationships [122]. In the case of
mobile dating applications, relationships developed online can lead to subsequent offline dating that continues to develop over a while
into longer romantic partnerships and marriages [26,36,123].
This study offers a valuable methodology for the scientific community by advancing the literature on LBRTD applications, spe
cifically focusing on Bumble, a popular mobile dating app targeting female users. It is innovative because it addresses the motivations
behind using Bumble among emerging adults, shedding light on the factors driving its popularity among this age group. The meth
odology employed in this study can be replicated by other researchers interested in investigating motivations behind LBRTD appli
cations, not just limited to Bumble. Researchers can use a mixed-method approach, combining surveys and factor analysis to identify
and categorize motivations. Additionally, by considering cultural differences and demographic factors, such as age and biological sex,
researchers can gain insights into how these motivations vary across different user groups.
The study’s emphasis on age and biological sex differences in Bumble usage motivations also opens up avenues for comparative
research across various dating apps and cultures. By replicating this methodology in different contexts, researchers can contribute to a
more comprehensive understanding of how LBRTD apps influence dating behaviours and social interactions among emerging adults.
This research approach allows for a deeper exploration of users’ intentions and preferences, contributing to the development of user-
centric design and targeted marketing strategies for dating applications. Overall, the study’s methodology offers a valuable template
for researching LBRTD applications, making it a significant contribution to the scientific community studying online dating behaviour
and social networking trends.
6. Theoretical and practical implications
The current study’s findings have several important implications: Theoretically, integrating the U&G theory has identified six
potential motivations for emerging adults’ usage of the relatively new and trendy but hardly studied Bumble dating app. Significant
differences were also observed between the motivations of Bumble and its competitor, Tinder. For example, in the current study,
socialisation has emerged as one of the most significant motivations for Bumble usage compared to casual sex motivation ([124] for
Tinder. This finding supports the argument that technological affordances may cause existing gratifications to diminish or reinforce, or
an entirely new gratification may emerge [53]; [43] Further, this study reinforced the influence of culture [34] on dating applications
by not locating casual sex as the major motivation for Bumble usage.
The practical implications of the study call for greater awareness of the technological affordances and marketing strategies of
dating applications. Identifying the user motivations behind mobile dating applications is important for advertisers of these appli
cations as they can design their user profiles and marketing strategies. Our findings indicate that people use Bumble for social
networking rather than a sexual experience. Hence, to attract more potential users to Bumble, marketers can provide more features and
a variety of tools to stimulate social networking among their users further. For example, marketers can facilitate chat rooms or group
creation options for their users so that they can form communities for dating. Given our finding that the trendiness motive influences
the frequency of Bumble usage and offline dating, the developers should make the apps more cool and trendy to appeal more to
potential users. Similarly, since female users find Bumble useful for ease of communication, app designers can think of providing more
women-friendly features to attract potential customers.
7. Limitations and future research
Our findings should be interpreted in light of several limitations. First, the convenient sampling method, cross-sectional design, and
small sample size limit the possibility of generalising our findings. Hence, study results should be interpreted in the cultural context of
India. Second, although we have conducted a focus group interview to identify the new sets of motivations, the motivation scale that
emerged in the current study is largely identical to existing dating app motivation scales. Self-report bias in the collected data in
troduces the potential for skewed responses, affecting the reliability of reported motivations. Furthermore, although the study has
10
identified correlations between motivations and usage frequency, establishing causality remains a complex task, potentially
complicated by unaccounted-for variables. To enhance the depth of understanding, future research endeavours should focus on
building and expanding upon the existing scales, aiming to capture a broader spectrum of motivations underlying Bumble usage.
Additionally, the recently developed Bumble scale should undergo cross-validation in an independent sample, with a meticulous
examination of both convergent and divergent validity for the six identified motivations. This rigorous validation process will
contribute to the robustness and reliability of the motivation scale, ensuring its applicability and accuracy in diverse contexts. Third,
the study’s exploration of age and biological sex differences should be understood within the context of its specific sample, potentially
not fully representative of all emerging adults. Also [125], recommended giving adequate representation to non-binary genders in
human-computer interaction (HCI) research. However, this study did not include individuals who identified as transgender, limiting
the insights into transgender dating experiences within the LGBTQ + community. This omission underscores the need for future
research to explore and address this specific aspect of human-computer interaction.
Further, Bumble’s emphasis on women initiating contact may deter men seeking casual encounters (who prefer platforms like
Tinder) and could potentially exclude gay men (favouring Grindr) and lesbians as participants, potentially introducing a sample bias.
Fourth, the current study measured offline Bumble dating on a dichotomous scale. Also, the study did not include several potential
offline dating app behaviours. We suggest that forthcoming researchers incorporate supplementary measures of offline behaviours to
gain a comprehensive understanding of Bumble’s impact on the lives of emerging adults. Additionally, we recommend that future
studies include the quantification of Bumble dates as a key metric, providing insights into the platform’s role in facilitating real-world
interactions and potentially fostering long-term relationships. This finding can demonstrate whether Bumble facilitates long-term
romantic relationships, such as marriages. Fifth, there is a likelihood that the respondents, characterized by mobile phone owner
ship, daily internet access, English proficiency, affordability for regular dates, and the time and cultural capital for questionnaire
completion, represent a more affluent segment of Indian society. This indicates a potential bias towards economically privileged
participants. It is imperative to emphasize the need for future research that investigates dating app motivations among less
economically affluent strata for a more representative understanding of Indian society’s dating dynamics. Additionally, the study could
benefit from further exploration of caste and ethnic differences in dating app motivations, recognizing that India’s diverse cultural
landscape may influence dating preferences differently among various groups.
Sixth, this study did not address the potential presence of deceptive or insincere users on dating apps, including romance scammers,
individuals experimenting with false digital identities (e.g., identity play), and instances where individuals misrepresent themselves,
such as men posing as women [126]. Additionally, there may be cases of people seeking free meals, a phenomenon sometimes referred
to as "foodie calls" or "sneating." These behaviours, if prevalent, could introduce elements of dishonesty and exploitation within the
online dating environment. Understanding the extent and impact of such behaviours on the dynamics of dating apps would require
further investigation, which future researchers can explore.
Lastly, the present study was set amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, we believe that the pandemic might have influenced user
motivations to some extent. Hence, we recommend another post-pandemic longitudinal study with a more nuanced set of motivations
to yield better generalisable results.
Data availability statement
Data will be made available on request.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Devadas Menon: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Supervision, Software, Resources, Project
administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24819.
References
[1] A. Anzani, M. Di Sarno, A. Prunas, Using smartphone apps to find sexual partners: a review of the literature, Sexologies 27 (3) (2018) e61–e65, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sexol.2018.05.001.
[2] Á. Castro, J.R. Barrada, Dating apps and their sociodemographic and psychosocial correlates: a systematic review, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 17 (18)
(2020) 6500, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186500.
11
[3] S. Wu, D. Trottier, Dating apps: a literature review, Annals of the International Communication Association 46 (2) (2022) 91–115, https://doi.org/10.1080/
23808985.2022.2069046.
[4] M. Kosoff, Ousted Tinder Cofounder Settled Her Sexual Harassment Lawsuit against the Company for ‘Just over $1 Million. Business Insider, 2014. Accessed
from, https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/report-ousted-tinder-cofounder-settled-her-sexual-harassment-lawsuit-against-the-company-for-just-over-1-
million/articleshow/45039544.cms.
[5] C. Jordan, Bumble is exactly like tinder, except girls are in charge. Tech crunch, Accessed from, https://techcrunch.com/2014/12/02/bumble-is-exactly-like-
tinder-except-girls-are-in-charge/, 2014.
[6] S. Buck, Dating App Bumble Just Changed for Men in a Major Way, Mashable, 2016. Accessed from, https://mashable.com/article/bumble-24-hours-men.
[7] R. Bivens, A.S. Hoque, Programming sex, gender, and sexuality: infrastructural failures in the” feminist” dating app Bumble, Can. J. Commun. 43 (3) (2018)
441–459, https://doi.org/10.22230/cjc.2019v44n3a3375.
[8] E. Filice, C.W. Johnson, D.C. Parry, Unicorns on the digital range: bisexual persons’ experiences of geo-social networking application use, J. Bisex. 23 (1)
(2023) 50–79, https://doi.org/10.1080/15299716.2022.2124214.
[9] C. MacLeod, V. McArthur, The construction of gender in dating apps: an interface analysis of Tinder and Bumble, Fem. Media Stud. 19 (6) (2019) 822–840,
https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1494618.
[10] U. Pruchniewska, “I like that it’s my choice a couple different times”: gender, affordances, and user experience on Bumble dating, Int. J. Commun. 14 (2020)
18.
[11] V. Das, Dating applications, intimacy, and cosmopolitan desire in India. Global Digital Cultures: Perspectives from South Asia, 2019, pp. 125–141.
[12] M. Sekohose, Bumble hits 4 million users in India, Women continue to make the first move. Tech Hindustan Times, 2020. Accessed from, https://tech.
hindustantimes.com/tech/news/bumble-hits-4-million-users-in-india-women-continue-to-make-the-first-move-71596094558381.html.
[13] News 18, 60% of Bumble users in India look forward to being more sexually active after lockdown, Accessed from, https://www.news18.com/news/lifestyle/
60-of-bumble-users-in-india-look-forward-to-being-more-sexually-active-after-lockdown-4314128.html, 2021.
[14] S.R. Sumter, L. Vandenbosch, L. Ligtenberg, Love Me Tinder: untangling emerging adults’ motivations for using the dating application Tinder, Telematics Inf.
34 (1) (2017) 67–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2016.04.009.
[15] K. Bryant, P. Sheldon, Cyberdating in the age of mobile apps: understanding motives, attitudes, and characteristics of users, Am. Commun. J. 19 (2) (2017)
1–15.
[16] R. Gillett, “This is not a nice safe space”: investigating women’s safety work on Tinder, Fem. Media Stud. 23 (1) (2023) 199–215, https://doi.org/10.1080/
14680777.2021.1948884.
[17] D.C. Parry, E. Filice, C.W. Johnson, “Algorithmic Heteronormativity: Powers and Pleasures of Dating and Hook-Up Apps”, 2023, pp. 1–19, https://doi.org/
10.1177/13634607221144626. Sexualities.
[18] E. Timmermans, E. De Caluwé, Development and validation of the tinder motives scale (TMS), Comput. Hum. Behav. 70 (2017) 341–350, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.028.
[19] Bumble.com, What is Bumble?, Accessed from, https://bumble.com/en-in/help/what-is–bumble, 2021.
[20] G. Ranzini, C. Lutz, Love at first swipe? Explaining Tinder self-presentation and motives, Mobile Media & Communication 5 (1) (2017) 80–101, https://doi.
org/10.1177/2050157916664559.
[21] Robin L. Nabi, Marina Krcmar, Conceptualising media enjoyment as attitude: implications for mass media effects research, Commun. Theor. 14 (4) (2004)
288–310, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00316.x.
[22] N. Park, K.F. Kee, S. Valenzuela, Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes,
Cyberpsychology & Behaviour 12 (6) (2009) 729–733, https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0003.
[23] J. So, Uses, gratifications, and beyond: toward a model of motivated media exposure and its effects on risk perception, Commun. Theor. 22 (2) (2012)
116–137, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01400.x.
[24] C. Courtois, E. Timmermans, Cracking the Tinder code: an experience sampling approach to the dynamics and impact of platform governing algorithms,
J. Computer-Mediated Commun. 23 (1) (2018) 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmx001.
[25] Y.C. Her, E. Timmermans, Tinder blue, mental flu? Exploring the associations between Tinder use and well-being, Inf. Commun. Soc. 24 (9) (2021) 1303–1319,
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1764606.
[26] S. Tang, J. Zuo, Dating attitudes and behaviors of American and Chinese college students, Soc. Sci. J. 37 (1) (2000) 68–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0362-
3319(99)00066-X.
[27] M. Rosenfeld, Are Tinder and dating apps changing dating and mating in the USA?, in: Families and Technology Springer, Cham, 2018, pp. 103–117, 10.1007/
978- 3-319-95540-7_6.
[28] A. Paul, S. Ahmed, K. Zaluski, Does online dating promotion vary across cultures? A cross-cultural analysis of homepage advertisements of online dating
services in 51 countries, J. Creativ. Commun. (2021), https://doi.org/10.1177/09732586211060010.
[29] F. Shaw, “Bitch I said hi”: the Bye Felipe campaign and discursive activism in mobile dating apps, Social Media+ Society 2 (4) (2016) 2056305116672889,
https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305116672889.
[30] R. Gillett, Intimate intrusions online: studying the normalisation of abuse in dating apps, in: Women’s Studies International Forum, vol. 69, Pergamon, 2018,
pp. 212–219, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2018.04.005.
[31] L. Thompson, “I can be your Tinder nightmare”: harassment and misogyny in the online sexual marketplace, Fem. Psychol. 28 (1) (2018) 69–89, https://doi.
org/10.1177/0959353517720226.
[32] M.R. Beymer, R.E. Weiss, R.K. Bolan, E.T. Rudy, L.B. Bourque, J.P. Rodriguez, D.E. Morisky, Sex on demand: geosocial networking phone apps and risk of
sexually transmitted infections among a cross-sectional sample of men who have sex with men in Los Angeles County, Sex. Transm. Infect. 90 (7) (2014)
567–572, https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2013-051494.
[33] A. Coor, R. Kachur, A. Friedman, L. Witbart, M.A. Habel, K. Bernstein, M. Hogben, Sexually transmitted disease, human immunodeficiency virus, and
pregnancy testing behaviors among internet and mobile dating application users and nonusers, 2016, Sex. Transm. Dis. 46 (8) (2019) e83, https://doi.org/
10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000997.
[34] G. Hofstede, Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organisations across Nations, SAGE publications, 2001.
[35] K.K. Dion, K.L. Dion, Cultural perspectives on romantic love, Pers. Relat. 3 (1) (1996) 5–17, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1996.tb00101.x.
[36] S.H. Kale, M.T. Spence, A trination analysis of social exchange relationships in e-dating, in: E-collaboration: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications,
2009, pp. 842–856, https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-652-5.ch066. IGI Global.
[37] V.E. Sower, J.C. Sower, Moderator variables in cultural values and business ethics research: important to external validity, Southwest Business & Economics
Journal 13 (2004).
[38] R. McDermott, Internal and external validity, Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science (2011) 27–40.
[39] Statista, US Bumble usage by age 2020, Accessed from, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1114026/share-of-us-internet-users-who-use-bumble-by-age/,
2020.
[40] D. Zytko, J. Chan, The dating metaverse: why we need to design for consent in social VR, IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graph. 29 (5) (2023) 2489–2498,
10.1109/TVCG.2023.3247065.
[41] E. Katz, J.G. Blumler, M. Gurevitch, Uses and gratifications research, Publ. Opin. Q. 37 (4) (1973) 509–523. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2747854.
[42] E. Katz, J.G. Blumler, M. Gurevitch, Utilization of mass communication by the individual, in: J.G. Blumler, E. Katz (Eds.), The Uses of Mass Communication,
Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, 1974, pp. 19–32.
[43] D. Menon, Purchase and continuation intentions of over-the-top (OTT) video streaming platform subscriptions: a uses and gratification theory perspective,
Telematics and Informatics Reports 5 (2022) 100006, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teler.2022.100006.
12
[44] A.M. Rubin, Television uses and gratifications: the interactions of viewing patterns and motivations, J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 27 (1) (1983) 37–51,
https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158309386471.
[45] D. Menon, Uses and gratifications of photo sharing on Instagram, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 168 (2022) 102917, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhcs.2022.102917.
[46] L.L. Sharabi, C.V. Ryder, L.C. Niess, A space of our own: exploring the relationship initiation experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex,
and asexual dating app users, J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 40 (7) (2023) 2277–2297, https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221143790.
[47] C. Van De Wiele, S.T. Tong, Breaking boundaries: the uses & gratifications of Grindr, in: Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on
Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing, 2014, pp. 619–630, https://doi.org/10.1145/2632048.2636070.
[48] E. Rice, I. Holloway, H. Winetrobe, H. Rhoades, A. Barman-Adhikari, J. Gibbs, S. Dunlap, Sex risk among young men who have sex with men who use Grindr, a
smartphone geosocial networking application, J. AIDS Clin. Res. (Suppl. 4) (2012), 10.4172/2155– 6113.S4–005.
[49] D. Gudelunas, There’s an app for that: the uses and gratifications of online social networks for gay men, Sex. Cult. 16 (4) (2012) 347–365, https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12119-012-9127-4.
[50] L.S. Chan, The role of gay identity confusion and outness in sex-seeking on mobile dating apps among men who have sex with men: a conditional process
analysis, J. Homosex. 64 (5) (2017) 622–637, https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2016.1196990.
[51] K. Gatter, K. Hodkinson, On the differences between Tinder™ versus online dating agencies: questioning a myth. An exploratory study, Cogent Psychology 3
(1) (2016) 1162414, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1162414.
[52] S.R. Sumter, L. Vandenbosch, Dating gone mobile: demographics and personality-based correlates of using smartphone-based dating applications among
emerging adults, New Media Soc. 21 (3) (2018) 655–673, https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818804773.
[53] S.S. Sundar, A.M. Limperos, Uses and Grats 2.0: new gratifications for new media, J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 57 (4) (2013) 504–525, https://doi.org/
10.1080/08838151.2013.845827.
[54] S.E. Hawkins, Dating App Motivations in Emerging Adulthood: Differences across Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge, Doctoral dissertation, California State
University, San Marcos, 2022. Accessed from, https://scholarworks.calstate.edu/downloads/d791sn901.
[55] Z. Stardust, R. Gillett, K. Albury, Surveillance does not equal safety: police, data and consent on dating apps, Crime Media Cult. 19 (2) (2023) 274–295,
https://doi.org/10.1177/17416590221111827.
[56] M. Tanner, The Actualisation of Mobile Dating Application Affordances to Support Racial Digital Dating Intentions: the Case of Tinder, Behaviour &
Information Technology, 2023, pp. 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2023.2190417.
[57] J. Degen, A. Kleeberg-Niepage, The more we Tinder: subjects, selves and society, Human Arenas 5 (1) (2022) 179–195, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-020-
00132-8.
[58] G. Orosz, I. Tóth-Király, B. Bőthe, D. Melher, Too many swipes for today: the development of the problematic tinder use scale (PTUS), Journal of Behavioral
Addictions 5 (3) (2016) 518–523, https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.016.
[59] G.K. Shapiro, O. Tatar, A. Sutton, W. Fisher, A. Naz, S. Perez, Z. Rosberger, Correlates of Tinder use and risky sexual behaviors in young adults, Cyberpsychol.,
Behav. Soc. Netw. 20 (12) (2017) 727–734, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0279.
[60] M. Stoicescu, C. Rughiniș, Swiping as a single mom: a first look at the experiences of single mothers who use tinder, Socio. Res. Online 27 (4) (2022) 964–983,
https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804221117835.
[61] A. Nair, K. Padmakumar, Analyzing tinder through user motivations and experiences among Indian young adults, Indian J. Market. 50 (8–9) (2020) 32–47.
[62] S. Dixon, Number of paying Bumble Inc. users worldwide as of 3rd quarter 202. Accessed from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1233241/quarterly-
bumble-paying-users/#:~:text=users%20amounted%20to%20roughly%202.86,paying%20users%20for%20the%20year, 2022.
[63] H.K. Aljasim, D. Zytko, Foregrounding women’s safety in mobile social matching and dating apps: a participatory design study, Proceedings of the ACM on
Human-Computer Interaction 7 (GROUP) (2023) 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1145/3567559.
[64] N. Haferkamp, S.C. Eimler, A.M. Papadakis, J.V. Kruck, Men are from Mars, women are from Venus? Examining gender differences in self-presentation on
social networking sites, Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 15 (2) (2012) 91–98, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0151.
[65] J. Huang, S. Kumar, C. Hu, Gender differences in motivations for identity reconstruction on social network sites, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 34 (7) (2018)
591–602, https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1746060.
[66] D. Khera, A. Champion, K. Walton, C. Pedersen, Why men don’t say no: sexual compliance and gender socialization in heterosexual men, Psychology &
Sexuality 13 (5) (2022) 1336–1349, https://doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2022.2031263.
[67] H.C. Kim, Z.Y. Zhu, A gender perspective on the use of mobile social network applications to enhance the social well-being of people with physical disabilities:
the mediating role of sense of belonging, Behav. Inf. Technol. 42 (4) (2023) 444–457, https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2021.2023637.
[68] B. Sevi, T. Aral, T. Eskenazi, Exploring the hook-up app: low sexual disgust and high sociosexuality predict motivation to use Tinder for casual sex, Pers. Indiv.
Differ. 133 (2018) 17–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.053.
[69] J.J. Arnett, Emerging adulthood: what is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Perspectives 1 (2) (2007) 68–73, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-
8606.2007.00016.x.
[70] A.C. Crouter, A. Booth, Romance and Sex in Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood: Risks and Opportunities, Psychology Press, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4324/
9781410617361.
[71] C.M. Curley, B.T. Johnson, Sexuality and aging: is it time for a new sexual revolution? Soc. Sci. Med. 301 (2022) 114865 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
socscimed.2022.114865.
[72] T. Morgenroth, M.K. Ryan, Gender trouble in social psychology: how can Butler’s work inform experimental social psychologists’ conceptualization of gender?
Front. Psychol. 1320 (2018) https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01320.
[73] J.J. Arnett, R. Žukauskienė, K. Sugimura, The new life stage of emerging adulthood at ages 18–29 years: implications for mental health, Lancet Psychiatr. 1 (7)
(2014) 569–576, https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00080-7.
[74] S.A. Kumar, J.F. Mattanah, Parental attachment, romantic competence, relationship satisfaction, and psychosocial adjustment in emerging adulthood, Pers.
Relat. 23 (4) (2016) 801–817, https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12161.
[75] D.Y. Leung, A.C. Chan, G.W. Ho, Resilience of emerging adults after adverse childhood experiences: a qualitative systematic review, Trauma Violence Abuse 23
(1) (2022) 163–181, https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020933865.
[76] R. Luz, M.J. Alvarez, C.A. Godinho, C.R. Pereira, A fertile ground for ambiguities: casual sexual relationships among Portuguese emerging adults, Front.
Psychol. 13 (2022) 823102, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.823102.
[77] S.E. Claxton, M.H. van Dulmen, Casual sexual relationships and experiences in emerging adulthood, Emerg. Adulthood 1 (2) (2013) 138–150, 10.1177%
2F2167696813487181.
[78] J. Katz, M.E. Schneider, Casual hook-up sex during the first year of college: prospective associations with attitudes about sex and love relationships, Arch. Sex.
Behav. 42 (8) (2013) 1451–1462, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-013-0078-0.
[79] G. Sanders, H.A. Lyons, The sagacity of the surround: the casual sex-assemblages of young adults, Sexualities 25 (4) (2022) 424–444, https://doi.org/10.1177/
1363460720967656.
[80] S.B. Olmstead, A decade review of sex and partnering in adolescence and young adulthood, J. Marriage Fam. 82 (2) (2020) 769–795, https://doi.org/10.1111/
jomf.12670.
[81] A. Javornik, B. Marder, J.B. Barhorst, G. McLean, Y. Rogers, P. Marshall, L. Warlop, ‘What lies behind the filter?’Uncovering the motivations for using
augmented reality (AR) face filters on social media and their effect on well-being, Comput. Hum. Behav. 128 (2022) 107126, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2021.107126.
[82] S. Miranda, I. Trigo, R. Rodrigues, M. Duarte, Addiction to social networking sites: motivations, flow, and sense of belonging at the root of addiction, Technol.
Forecast. Soc. Change 188 (2023) 122280, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122280.
13
[83] C. Ross, E.S. Orr, M. Sisic, J.M. Arseneault, M.G. Simmering, R.R. Orr, Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use, Comput. Hum. Behav. 25 (2)
(2009) 578–586, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024.
[84] G. Seidman, Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: how personality influences social media use and motivations, Pers. Indiv. Differ. 54 (3) (2013)
402–407, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.009.
[85] J.J. Cummings, K. Mays, Trait motivational reactivity as a predictor of online dating app behavior, Comput. Hum. Behav. 121 (2021) 106775, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2021.106775.
[86] J.D.L. Cruz, N.M. Punyanunt-Carter, J.S. Wrench, Dating app communication: personal characteristics, motives and behavioural intent, Media Watch (Taipei)
14 (2) (2023) 131–154, https://doi.org/10.1177/09760911231160240.
[87] E. Timmermans, C. Alexopoulos, Anxiously searching for love (among other things): attachment orientation and mobile dating application users’ motives and
outcomes, Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 23 (7) (2020) 447–452, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0542.
[88] R.T. Newlands, D.M. Denning, K.S. Massey, L.T. Benuto, Safe dating in the digital era: protective behavioral strategies in dating behaviors facilitated by dating
applications, Violence Vict. 37 (2) (2022) 185–200.
[89] C.Y. Wan, W.L.V. Yeung, A socio-ecological approach to relationship goals and self-presentation strategies in American and Chinese online dating websites,
Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology 3 (2022) 100029, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cresp.2021.100029.
[90] A. Oeldorf-Hirsch, S.S. Sundar, Social and technological motivations for online photo sharing, J. Broadcast. Electron. Media 60 (4) (2016) 624–642, https://
doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2016.1234478.
[91] D.L. Morgan, Focus Groups as Qualitative Research, vol. 16, Sage publications, Thousand Oaks, 1996.
[92] P. Lunt, S. Livingstone, Rethinking the focus group in media and communications research, J. Commun. 46 (2) (1996) 79–98, 10.1111/j.1460-2466. 1996.
tb01475.x.
[93] R.D. Petersen, A. Valdez, Using snowball-based methods in hidden populations to generate a randomized community sample of gang-affiliated adolescents,
Youth Violence Juv. Justice 3 (2) (2005) 151–167, https://doi.org/10.1177/1541204004273316.
[94] O. Tansey, Process tracing and elite interviewing: a case for non-probability sampling, in: Methoden der vergleichenden Politik-und Sozialwissenschaft, VS
Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2009, pp. 481–496, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-91826-6_24.
[95] P. Datta, S.N. Panda, S. Tanwar, R.K. Kaushal, A technical review report on cyber crimes in India, in: 2020 International Conference on Emerging Smart
Computing and Informatics (ESCI), IEEE, 2020, March, pp. 269–275, https://doi.org/10.1109/ESCI48226.2020.9167567.
[96] A. Pinch, J. Birnholtz, S. Rawat, A. Bhatter, D. Baruah, A. Dange, “Someone else is behind the screen”: visibility, privacy, and trust on geosocial networking
apps in India, Social Media+ Society 8 (3) (2022) 20563051221126076, https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221126076.
[97] P. Sheldon, Profiling the non-users: examination of life-position indicators, sensation seeking, shyness, and loneliness among users and non-users of social
network sites, Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 (2012) 1960–1965, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.016. Retrieved from.
[98] J.J. Arnett, The Winding Road from the Late Teens through the Twenties: Emerging Adulthood, Oxford University Press, 2014.
[99] J.J. Arnett, The Oxford Handbook of Emerging Adulthood, Oxford University Press, 2015.
[100] D.J. Biau, S. Kernéis, R. Porcher, Statistics in brief: the importance of sample size in the planning and interpretation of medical research, Clin. Orthop. Relat.
Res. 466 (2008) 2282–2288, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-008-0346-9.
[101] D. Kahneman, A. Tversky, Subjective probability: a judgment of representativeness, Cognit. Psychol. 3 (3) (1972) 430–454, https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-
0285(72)90016-3.
[102] H. Treiblmaier, P. Filzmoser, Exploratory factor analysis revisited: how robust methods support the detection of hidden multivariate data structures in IS
research, Inf. Manag. 47 (4) (2010) 197–207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2010.02.002.
[103] A. d’Astous, L. Boujbel, Positioning countries on personality dimensions: scale development and implications for country marketing, J. Bus. Res. 60 (3) (2007)
231–239, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.11.005.
[104] P.M. Valkenburg, J. Peter, Who visits online dating sites? Exploring some characteristics of online daters, Cyberpsychol. Behav. 10 (6) (2007) 849–852,
https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9941.
[105] M. Kim, K.N. Kwon, M. Lee, Psychological characteristics of Internet dating service users: the effect of self-esteem, involvement, and sociability on the use of
Internet dating services, Cyberpsychol. Behav. 12 (4) (2009) 445–449, https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0296.
[106] N.B. Ellison, C. Steinfield, C. Lampe, The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites, J. Computer-
Mediated Commun. 12 (4) (2007) 1143–1168, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x.
[107] E. Timmermans, E. De Caluwé, C. Alexopoulos, Why are you cheating on Tinder? Exploring users’ motives and (dark) personality traits, Comput. Hum. Behav.
89 (2018) 129–139, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.040.
[108] J.R. Barrada, Á. Castro, Tinder users: sociodemographic, psychological, and psychosexual characteristics, Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Health 17 (21) (2020)
8047, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218047.
[109] E.J. Finkel, P.W. Eastwick, B.R. Karney, H.T. Reis, S. Sprecher, Online dating: a critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science, Psychol. Sci.
Publ. Interest 13 (1) (2012) 3–66, https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612436522.
[110] S. Muralidharan, C. La Ferle, Y. Sung, How culture influences the “social” in social media: socializing and advertising on smartphones in India and the United
States, Cyberpsychol., Behav. Soc. Netw. 18 (6) (2015) 356–360, https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0008.
[111] S.R. Sumter, P.M. Valkenburg, J. Peter, Perceptions of love across the lifespan: differences in passion, intimacy, and commitment, IJBD (Int. J. Behav. Dev.) 37
(5) (2013) 417–427, https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413492486.
[112] D.M. Buss, When Men Behave Badly: the Hidden Roots of Sexual Deception, Harassment, and Assault, Little Brown Spark, NY, 2021.
[113] R. Henderson, Swiping and dating preferences. Rob hendeson’s newsletter, Accessed from, https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/swiping-and-dating-
preferences, 2023.
[114] C.J. Carpenter, B. McEwan, The Players of Micro-dating: Individual and Gender Differences in Goal Orientations toward Micro-dating Apps, First Monday,
2016, https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v21i5.6187.
[115] K. Mehrotra, Surge in dating apps in Tier-II cities, but skew against women, Hindustan Times (2021). Accessed from, https://indianexpress.com/article/india/
dating-apps-tier-ii-cities-women-7150680/.
[116] K. Singh, Mind the gap: there are three men for every woman on dating apps in India, Quartz (2018). Accessed from, https://qz.com/india/1484691/woo-
tinder-trulymadly-have-a-massive-gender-problem-in-india.
[117] L.S. Cousineau, C.W. Johnson, D.C. Parry, ‘What’s my score?’: the complexities of straight male Geo-Social Networking Application use, Leisure Stud. 40 (2)
(2021) 154–168, https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2020.1810302.
[118] M.A. Christensen, “Tindersluts” and “Tinderellas”: examining the digital affordances shaping the (hetero) sexual scripts of young womxn on Tinder, Socio.
Perspect. 64 (3) (2021) 432–449, https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121420950756.
[119] S. Suresh, R. Abhay, Analysing Trends in Online Dating Among Young Adults in India: before, during, and after COVID-19 Pandemic [Conference Session].
Media Meet 2022, August 26, CHRIST (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India, 2022.
[120] I.R. Mull, S.E. Lee, “PIN” pointing the motivational dimensions behind Pinterest, Comput. Hum. Behav. 33 (2014) 192–200, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2014.01.011.
[121] T. Ryan, A. Chester, J. Reece, S. Xenos, The uses and abuses of Facebook: a review of Facebook addiction, Journal of Behavioral Addictions 3 (3) (2014)
133–148, https://doi.org/10.1556/jba.3.2014.016.
[122] A.M. Lomanowska, M.J. Guitton, Online intimacy and well-being in the digital age, Internet interventions 4 (2016) 138–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
invent.2016.06.005.
[123] A. Ramirez Jr., S. Zhang, When online meets offline: the effect of modality switching on relational communication, Commun. Monogr. 74 (3) (2007) 287–310,
https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750701543493.
14
[124] M. Tappé, L. Bensman, K. Hayashi, E. Hatfield, Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers: a new research prototype, Interpersona: An International
Journal on Personal Relationships 7 (2) (2013), https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.2171.
[125] K. Spiel, O.L. Haimson, D. Lottridge, How to do better with gender on surveys: a guide for HCI researchers, Interactions 26 (4) (2019) 62–65, https://doi.org/
10.1145/3338283.
[126] A. Bhasin, The dark side of dating apps: the game we’re all playing, October 15, Dly. Calif. (2023). Accessed from, https://dailycal.org/2021/02/11/the-dark-
side-of-dating-apps-the-game-were-all-playing.
15

PIIS2405844024008508

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIIS2405844024008508

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heliyon 10 (2024) e24819

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

The Bumble motivations framework- exploring a dating App’s uses

E-mail address: devadasmb@gmail.com.

2. Theoretical framework and research questions

2.1. Motivations to use Bumble

2.2. Demographics and Bumble motivations

2.3. Bumble motivations and offline dating

3.1. Focus group summary

3.2. Sample and procedure

3.3.1. Outcome of Bumble usage

3.3.2. Bumble motivations

4.1. Descriptive statistics of Bumble usage and Bumble offline encounters

4.2. Bumble usage motivations

4.3. Biological sex and age differences in Bumble usage

4.4. Relationship between Bumble motivations and frequency of usage

4.5. Relationship between Bumble motivations and Bumble outcomes

Love (Mean = 3.16; SD = 1.33)

Note: 69.20 % of the total variance explained.

1. Love – .43*** .12* .47*** .41*** .16** .24*** .29** − .13*

***P < 0.001 **P < 0.01 * P < 0.05.

Love 3.05 (0.95) 3.11 (1.14)

***P < 0.001.

***P < 0.001 **P < 0.01 * P < 0.05.

6. Theoretical and practical implications

7. Limitations and future research

Data availability statement

Data will be made available on request.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Declaration of competing interest

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24819.

You might also like

1. Love – .43*** .12* .47* .41* .16 .24* .29** − .13*

P < 0.001 P < 0.01 P < 0.05.

P < 0.001 P < 0.01 P < 0.05.