M = mean. SD = standard deviation. Sk = skewness. SE = standard error; # = number. Usage time, measured in months. Use frequency, measured as times/week. Men: dummy variable where women = 0 and men = 1. Age, measured in years. Bold values correspond to statistically significant coefficients (p < 0.05).
Into six experienced attributes, five regression activities displayed high abilities with ps ? 0.036 (just about how many romantic relationships, p = 0.253), however, all Roentgen a great d j 2 was quick (assortment [0.01, 0.10]). Because of the plethora of estimated coefficients, we restricted all of our attention to men and women statistically significant. Guys tended to have fun with Tinder for a longer time (b = dos.fourteen, p = 0.032) and you may achieved a great deal more members of the family thru Tinder (b = 0.70, p = 0.008). 33, p = 0.029), had significantly more sexual relationship (b = ?0.98, p = 0.026), and you may achieved alot more household members via Tinder (b = ?0.81, p = 0.001). More mature users utilized Tinder for longer (b = 0.51, p = 0.025), with regularity (b = 0.72, p = 0.011), and met more people (b = 0.29, p = 0.040).
Outcome of brand new regression habits to possess Tinder objectives as well as their descriptives get when you look at the Desk cuatro . The outcomes was indeed bought inside descending purchase because of the get form. This new purposes having large mode was indeed interest (M = 4.83; response measure 1–7), craft (M = 4.44), and you can sexual positioning (M = cuatro.15). People with lower mode was in fact peer pressure (M = 2.20), ex boyfriend (Yards = 2.17), and you may belongingness (M = step 1.66).
Desk 4
M = mean. SD = standard deviation. Sk = skewness. SE = standard error. Men: dummy variable where women = 0 and men = 1. Age, measured in years. Dependent variables were standardized. Motives were ordered by their means. Bold values correspond to statistically significant coefficients (p < 0.05).
Intimate minority users came across more substantial number of people offline (b = ?1
For the 13 considered motives, seven regression models showed significant results (ps ? 0.038), and six were statistically nonsignificant (ps ? 0.077). The R a d j 2 tended to be small (range [0.00, 0.13]). Again, we only commented on those statistically significant coefficients (when the overall model was also significant). Women reported higher scores for curiosity (b = ?0.53, p = 0.001), pastime/entertainment (b = ?0.46, p = 0.006), distraction (b = ?0.38, p = 0.023), and peer pressure (b = ?0.47, p = 0 .004). For no motive men’s means were higher than women’s. While sexual minority participants showed higher scores for sexual orientation (as could be expected; b = –0.75, p < 0.001) and traveling (b = ?0.37, p = 0.018), heterosexual participants had higher scores for peer pressure (b = 0.36, p = 0.017). Older participants tended to be more motivated by relationship-seeking (b = 0.11, p = 0.005), traveling (b = 0.08, p = 0.035), and social approval (b = 0.08, p = 0.040).
The results for the 10 psychological and psychosexual variables are shown in Table 5 . All the regression models were statistically significant (all ps < 0.001). Again, the R a d j 2 tended to be small, with R a d j 2 in the range [0.01, 0.15]. Given the focus of the manuscript, we only described the differences according to Tinder use. The other coefficients were less informative, as they corresponded to the effects adjusted for Tinder use. Importantly, Tinder users and nonusers did not present statistically significant differences in negative affect (b = 0.12, p = 0.146), positive affect (b = 0.13, p = 0.113), body satisfaction (b = ?0.08, p = 0.346), or self-esteem as a sexual partner (b = 0.09, p = 0.300), which are the four variables related to the more general evaluation of the self. Tinder users showed higher dissatisfaction with sexual life (b = 0.28, p < 0.001), a higher preoccupation with sex (b = 0.37, p < 0.001), more sociosexual behavior (b = 0.65, p < 0.001), a more positive attitude towards casual sex (b = 0.37, p < 0.001), a higher sociosexual desire (b = 0.52, p < 0.001), and a more positive attitude towards consensual nonmonogamy (b = 0.22, p = 0.005).