Skip to main content

Catfishing Phenomenon in the Perspective of Online Dating Services Users

Pramudiarja, Uyung ; Artika, Dian ; Prabawati, Dhea Hanna (2023) — Jurnal Ilmiah LISKI (Lingkar Studi Komunikasi)

View Original Source (opens in a new tab)

DOI: 10.25124/liski.v9i1.5128 (opens in a new tab)

Type:   Journal Article
Country:   Indonesia
Tags:   Catfishing, Identity Deception, Indonesia, Online Dating, Profile Verification, User Safety
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
                

            

                    

                
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:
                                    
                                
    • 
                                                    

                    
                                        

                

                            

                    
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 study investigates how users of online dating services perceive the catfishing phenomenon, defined as identity misrepresentation or identity fraud within online dating. The authors aim to understand users’ views on authenticity, the motives behind presenting edited or enhanced identities, and the preventive steps people take to avoid being deceived. The research adopts a phenomenological, qualitative design and draws on in-depth interviews with four online dating users who vary in platform experience and usage intensity. Data are collected via platform observations and interviews, with informants ranging from less than a year to more than five years of experience and spanning different apps. The findings show that participants acknowledge a natural tendency to craft attractive impressions on dating platforms, yet they regard outright identity deception as an unacceptable form of dishonesty. The informants describe several anticipatory strategies to verify authenticity, including inviting video calls, profiling matches on other social media, and selectively revealing personal information. Some also trace a match’s identity across multiple sources to assess consistency, and they emphasize clarifying relationship goals to prevent being drawn into unsuitable dynamics. The discussion connects these observations to established theories of online identity and communication, noting that verification features (like profile blue ticks) may reduce risk but are not foolproof. The authors conclude that catfishing remains a risk but that informed sampling of platforms, cautious self-presentation, and progressive verification can mitigate potential harms. They acknowledge limitations of a small, regional sample and suggest broader studies to capture diverse socio-cultural contexts. The publication emphasizes practical implications for users and platform designers, while remaining cautious about extrapolating broader prevalence or definitive causal claims.

          

        
                  

            
Identified Gaps

            
The study provides limited evidence on severe catfishing outcomes because none of the four informants experienced material or emotional loss. It also lacks perspectives from people with diverse sociocultural backgrounds and from victims of more extreme catfishing.

          

        
                  

            
Methods

            
This descriptive qualitative phenomenological study used observations of online dating platforms and in-depth interviews with four users representing different experience levels and platform types. It examined user perceptions of catfishing, identity authenticity, and ways to identify and avoid catfishing.

          

        
                  

            
Limitations

            
The sample comprised only four informants, primarily based in Indonesia, and none reported catfishing that caused material or emotional losses. Findings therefore reflect user perceptions and preventive practices rather than direct experience of severe victimization or offender behavior.

          

        
                  

            
Future Work

            
Further research should recruit more informants from varied sociocultural backgrounds to produce a more diverse understanding of catfishing.

          

              

    
    

        
Related Research Insights

        

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