Skip to main content

What are the real and perceived risks and dangers of online dating? Perspectives from online daters

Danielle Couch ; Pranee Liamputtong ; Marian Pitts (2012) — Health, Risk & Society

Citation activity

Total citations · Google Scholar
Unavailable
Average per calendar year
Citation count unavailable

Counts reflect Google Scholar’s coverage and do not measure research quality. Source, calculation and limitations

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.1080/13698575.2012.720964 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Australia
Tags:   Australia, Deception, Financial Fraud, Online Dating, Perceived Risk, Qualitative Research, Romance Scams, Sexual Violence
What do these research terms mean?
Preprint
A manuscript shared before formal peer review and publication. Check whether a later published version is available.
Dataset
A collection of data or examples for others to inspect or reuse. It can appear in Library search and topic mapping, but RSRC does not use dataset records as evidence in Research Insights.
Dissertation or thesis
Research submitted for an academic degree. This describes its format, not its reliability.
Journal article
An article published in a journal. This label alone does not establish peer review, study quality, or how well the findings apply elsewhere.
Qualitative research
Examines experiences, meanings, or processes, often through interviews or observations. It can explain how something happens without estimating how common it is.
Quantitative research
Uses numerical measurements to describe patterns or test relationships. A relationship between two measurements does not by itself show that one causes the other.
Systematic review
Uses a planned, documented method to find and assess research addressing a question. Its conclusions still depend on the included studies and what the search covered.
Meta-analysis
Statistically combines results from multiple studies. Combining studies does not remove weaknesses in their design or make unlike populations interchangeable.
Not classified
This record has no recognized label in this filter. It does not mean the publication used no method, or that no research exists.

Definitions draw on DataCite resource types; Cochrane review methods; NLM: association and causation. RSRC’s dataset and classification rules are explained in our methodology.

Citation tools
Download RIS Download BibTeX 


              
              

            

          

        


      

      

    

        
Transparency

        
Evidence and review status

        
This page contains AI-generated content. No human content review or subject-matter-expert review is recorded.

    


    

                    

                
Source basis

                

                    Downloaded PDF
                

            

                    

                
Source updates

                

                    No notice found at last check
                

            

                    

                
AI-generated page content

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Automated checks

                

                    Passed
                

            

                    

                
Administrative approval

                

                    Yes
                

            

                    

                
Human content review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

                    

                
Subject-matter-expert review

                

                    Not recorded
                

            

            


    

        
            How this was prepared
        
        

                            

                    
Source basis

                    

                    
RSRC downloaded and privately stored a copy of the paper for internal analysis. The PDF is not offered to viewers from this page.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    PDF added to RSRC:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Source updates

                    

                    
No incoming update notice was found in the dated Crossref response. Coverage is incomplete, particularly for corrections and expressions of concern; this is not a guarantee that the source is valid or unchanged.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Last source-status attempt:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
AI-generated page content

                    

                    
AI-generated research notes displayed on this page: Synopsis, Identified gaps, Methods, Limitations, Future work. The paper itself is not described as AI-generated.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Document analysis recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Synopsis generation recorded:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                            
  • 
                                    Page record updated:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Automated checks

                    

                    
The current, source-bound synopsis passed the recorded versioned publication checks.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Checks completed:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                            

                            
                                View passed checks (3)
                            
                            
    
                                                                    
  • Length, completeness, repetition, refusal, boilerplate, and active-markup screening
    • 
                                                                    
  • Numerical claims checked against the available source text
    • 
                                                                    
  • English-source lexical grounding check
    • 
                                                            

                        

                                        

                

                            

                    
Administrative approval

                    

                    
An authenticated administrator approved the bibliographic record for public Library display. This is not a review of every research claim.


                                            
    
                                                            
  • 
                                    Approved for public display:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Human content review

                    

                    
No human review is recorded for the AI-generated content displayed on this page.


                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
Subject-matter-expert review

                    

                    
RSRC has not recorded review of this content by a subject-matter or methods expert.


                    
                                        

                

                    

    


    

        Review-state definitions

        Found a possible error?
        Request a correction.
    



    



              

        
                  

            
Synopsis

            
This publication reports on a qualitative study exploring online daters’ perceptions of risk and actual experiences with online dating. The authors aim to understand what online daters themselves see as risky, and to document accounts of dangerous or dubious situations encountered through online dating. To gather data, they conducted in-depth online interviews with 29 participants between November 2008 and November 2009, using a thematic analysis to identify recurring patterns and themes in the transcripts. Interviews were carried out via instant messaging or email, with participants spanning ages 18 to 70 and a mix of relationship statuses and sexual orientations; most participants were in Australia, with one from the United States. The study identifies several broad risk categories articulated by participants: lies and deceit (including misrepresented photos and relationship status); sexual risks (STIs, pregnancy, and concerns about sexual violence); emotional and physical risks; and the dangers posed by encountering untrustworthy or dangerous others online and in person. A prominent analytic frame is the construction of risk as belonging to the “risky other,” allowing participants to project danger onto others while maintaining a sense of personal safety. Additional themes include the perception of the internet itself as a risky environment, strategies for mitigating risk (such as verifying identity through photos or social-network information), and comparisons of online dating risk with risks in offline encounters. The article also notes examples of scams, overseas daters, and cases of violence or coercion reported by participants, as well as some variability in perceived personal vulnerability by age or gender. Limitations acknowledged include potential recruitment bias and the lack of breadth across dating-site types. The study contributes to understanding how online daters interpret risk, manage safety, and frame dangers as emanating from others, with implications for future research on risk perception and protection in online dating contexts.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The study identifies limited prior evidence on scammers as a major perceived risk in online daters’ lived experience. It also notes that pregnancy concerns in online dating have not, to the authors’ knowledge, been reported elsewhere. Comparative evidence is needed on whether violence associated with online dating differs from violence arising through other routes of meeting partners.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
Qualitative study using online in-depth interviews with 29 current or former online daters recruited over 13 months (November 2008–November 2009). Twenty-seven interviews used instant messaging and two used email. Interviews addressed online dating practices, perceived risks, risk-management strategies, transitions to offline meetings, and sexual outcomes. Transcripts were open-coded and thematically analyzed, with emerging themes explored in later interviews.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
Despite efforts to recruit through 28 online dating websites, few sites promoted the study. The authors acknowledge that this limited response may have excluded some types of online daters. The sample was also predominantly Australian and self-selected, so findings represent participants’ accounts and perceptions rather than prevalence or causal estimates.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Investigate online daters’ concerns about overseas scammers; compare pregnancy concerns among online daters and other sexually active heterosexual populations; assess whether physical and sexual violence following online dating differs from violence initiated through other meeting routes, including disclosure, help seeking, and shame; and examine age and gender differences in risk perceptions.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

            See how this publication connects to RSRC's living evidence syntheses through current citations and research-topic mapping.