Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36260558›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Originality in online dating profile texts: How does perceived originality affect impression formation and what makes a text original?

Tess van der Zanden, Alexander P Schouten, Maria B J Mos, Emiel J Krahmer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tess van der ZandenDepartment of Communication and Cognition, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4392-2617
Alexander P SchoutenDepartment of Communication and Cognition, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Maria B J MosDepartment of Communication and Cognition, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Emiel J KrahmerDepartment of Communication and Cognition, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
Tilburg University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper investigates origins and consequences of perceived profile text originality. The first goal was to examine whether the perceived originality of authentic online dating profile texts affects online daters' perceptions of attractiveness, and whether perceptions of (less) desired partner personality traits mediate this effect. Results showed the positive impact of perceived profile text originality on impression formation: text originality positively affects perceptions of intelligence and sense of humor, which improve impressions of attractiveness and boost dating intention. The second goal was to explore what profile text features increase perceptions of profile text originality. Results revealed profile texts which were stylistically original (e.g., include metaphors) and contained more and concrete self-disclosure statements were considered more original, explaining almost half of the variance in originality scores. Taken together, our results suggest that perceived originality in profile texts is manifested in both meaning and form, and is a balancing act between novelty and appropriateness.

Indexed as

InternetPersonalityText MessagingIntelligenceIntentionPerception

Identifiers

PMID36260558
PMCPMC9581348
OpenAlexW4306816505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.