Skip to main content

Digital desire and filtered selves: performance, gender and intimacy in contemporary Nigerian fiction

Nifemi Orimabuyaku (2026) — Journal of Gender Studies

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

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


              
              

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

The publication analyzes how three contemporary Nigerian short stories depict online dating and digital intimacy, using Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical theory to examine identity presentation on digital platforms. The study argues that dating apps in these narratives function as contested stages where characters perform optimized selves for algorithmic and visual appeal, while back-stage realities remain partially hidden. Dooshima, Bella, and Priscilla each navigate a tension between curated online personas and embodied, in-person selves, revealing how profiles, photos, and biographical details are crafted to maximize desirability rather than convey full honesty. A central finding is that online dating patterns reproduce gendered inequalities. Women bear the greatest emotional and social risks, facing deception, objectification, and the pressures of fulfilling appearance-based expectations, whereas men often retain more freedom and deniability in their online conduct. The texts portray how masculine advantage surfaces in how platform dynamics are interpreted and acted upon, with male characters frequently exploiting ambiguity around commitment. Yet the narratives also show moments of genuine connection and agency, where affection, hope, and relational perseverance emerge despite the mediated environment. Overall, the study treats digital intimacy as a shifting cultural site that amplifies existing social hierarchies while offering new avenues for pursuit of romance. It emphasizes that online dating is not inherently liberatory or oppressive; its effects depend on gendered contexts, individual strategies, and the persistence of authentic longing within a technologically mediated landscape. The conclusion highlights the relevance of these Nigerian fictions for broader digital humanities and African literary studies.

Identified Gaps

Digital humanities research on African literature remains under-theorized relative to Africa's digital transformation. The paper also identifies limited attention to how class, ethnicity, and geography may differentiate online-dating experiences in Nigerian fiction.

Methods

Qualitative literary analysis of three purposively selected Nigerian short stories: Damilare Kuku's “Catfish” and Ugochukwu Ugonna's “Swiped Right” and “Love at First Chat.” The author applies Erving Goffman's dramaturgical theory to interpret self-curation, gendered risks, deception, objectification, and the possibilities for connection in fictional depictions of online dating.

Limitations

The study analyzes only three fictional Nigerian short stories and interprets representations rather than collecting evidence about actual dating-platform users, offenders, victims, or scam prevalence. Its conclusions are therefore best understood as literary and cultural analysis, not direct evidence of romance-scam behavior or victimization.

Future Work

Extend the analysis to how class, ethnicity, and geography differentiate online-dating experiences in Nigerian fiction. Compare Nigerian fictional representations of digital intimacy with representations from other African literary traditions.

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

  • Related through topic mapping

    Victim Vulnerabilities

    Victim Vulnerabilities: Factors Associated with Susceptibility, Targeting, Continued Engagement, and Repeat Victimization in Relationship‑based Online Scams

    This publication is mapped to the Victim Vulnerabilities topic but is not cited in the current synthesis version.

    Browse Victim Vulnerabilities publications
  • Related through topic mapping

    Technology and AI

    Technology and AI in Relationship-Based Fraud: Evidence Synthesis

    This publication is mapped to the Technology and AI topic but is not cited in the current synthesis version.

    Browse Technology and AI publications