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 the six sensed features, five regression activities demonstrated tall results having ps ? 0.036 (just about the amount of personal relationship, p = 0.253), however, every R a good d j 2 was in fact brief (assortment [0.01, 0.10]). Considering the great number of projected coefficients, we limited all of our awareness of those statistically extreme. People had a tendency to explore Tinder for a significantly longer time (b = 2.14, p = 0.032) and you may achieved a lot more friends through Tinder (b = 0.70, p = 0.008). 33, p = 0.029), had more sexual relationships (b = ?0.98, p = 0.026), and you will gathered significantly more loved ones through Tinder (b = ?0.81, p = 0.001). Old members put Tinder for longer (b = 0.51, p = 0.025), with additional frequency (b = 0.72, p = 0.011), and you can met more folks (b = 0.31, p = 0.040).

Outcome of the newest regression activities having Tinder purposes as well as their descriptives are shown within the Table 4 . The outcomes was basically purchased into the descending purchase by score form. The fresh new motives which have highest means have been interest (Yards = 4.83; reaction scale step one–7), hobby (M = 4.44), and you may intimate direction (M = cuatro.15). Those with straight down form was fellow stress (Meters = 2.20), old boyfriend (Meters = dos.17), and you can belongingness (Yards = step 1.66).

Dining table cuatro

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 fraction people fulfilled a larger number of people traditional (b = ?step one

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).