From Online Dating to Online Divorce: An Overview of Couple and Family Relationships Shaped Through Digital Media

From the very early stages of initiating relationships to types of post-break-up behaviors, the internet has the potential to play an influential role in all areas of family and particularly couple relationships. This paper examines how ICTs (“information and communication technology”) can shape such relationships. The impact on the various stages of relationships is systematized (relationship development, couple and family formation, separation) with a special focus on intergenerational opportunities and conflicts associated with modern media usage. Against the background of psychological and media communication theories and psychotherapeutic approaches as well as empirical findings the following topics are considered: (1) Initiation of relationships through ICTs (e.g. meet new partners through online dating); (2) Impact of digital media on relationship development and existing partnerships (e.g. new opportunities and internet-related challenges that have to be faced by couples) (3) Influence of ICTs on separations (e.g. online mediation, getting divorced online). In summary, the role of ICTs in new, existing and separated partnerships and families is multifaceted. An outlook on further developments as well as research desiderata is given.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Similar content being viewed by others

Keeping Couples Together when Apart, and Driving Them Apart when Together: Exploring the Impact of Smartphones on Relationships in the UK

Online Dating: Modern Options of Searching for a Partner and Its Implications for Psychotherapy

Traditions in (re)Negotiation: Geosocial Networking Apps and Intimate Relationships Among Men Seeking Men

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence
• Medical Ethics

References

• Abbas, R., & Mesch, G. (2016). Do rich teens get richer? Facebook use and the link between offline and online social capital among Palestinian youth in Israel. Information, Communication & Society. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1261168. Google Scholar
• Aditi, P. (2014). Is online better than offline for meeting partners? Depends: Are you looking to marry or to date. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 664–667. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0302. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Aicken, C. R. H., Estcourt, C. S., Johnson, A. M., Sonnenberg, P., Wellings, K., & Mercer, C. H. (2016). Use of the internet for sexual health among sexually experienced persons aged 16 to 44 years: Evidence from a nationally representative survey of the British population. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18, e14. doi:10.2196/jmir.4373. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• Al Mutawa, N., Bryce, J., Franqueira, V. N. L., & Marrington, A. (2016). Forensic investigation of cyberstalking cases using behavioural evidence analyses [Supplemental material]. Digital Investigation, 16, S96-S103. doi:10.1016/j.diin.2016.01.012. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Alhabash, S., Hales, K., Baek, J., & Oh, H. J. (2014). Effects of race, visual anonymity, and social category salience on online dating outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 22–32. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Alvarez, A. R. G. (2012). “IH8U”: Confronting cyberbullying and exploring the use of cybertools in teen dating relationships. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 68, 1205–1215. doi:10.1002/jclp.21920. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anderson, T. L. (2005). Relationships among Internet attitudes, internet use, romantic beliefs, and perceptions of online romantic relationships. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 8, 521–531. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Aretz, W. (2016). Match me if you can: Eine explorative Studie zur Beschreibung der Nutzung von Tinder. Journal of Business and Media Psychology, 1. Retrieved from http://journal-bmp.de/2015/12/match-me-if-you-can-eine-explorative-studie-zur-beschreibung-der-nutzung-von-tinder/.
• Aretz, W., Becher, L., Casalino, A., & Bonorden, C. (2010). Digitale Eifersucht: Die Kehrseite soziale Netzwerke. Eine empirische Untersuchung. Journal of Business and Media Psychology, 1, 17–24. Google Scholar
• Aretz, W., Gansen-Ammann, D.-N., Mierke, K., & Musiol, A. (2017). Date me if you can: Ein systematischer Überblick über den aktuellen Forschungsstand von online-dating. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 30, 7–34. doi:10.1055/s-0043-101465. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Baker, A. J. (2004). Double click: Romance and commitment among online couples. Cresskill: Hampton Press Book. Google Scholar
• Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141922. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bay, B., Larsen, P. B., Kesmodel, U. S., & Ingerslev, H. J. (2014). Danish sperm donors across three decades: Motivations and attitudes. Fertility and Sterility, 101, 252–257. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Berend, Z. (2016). The online world of surrogacy. New York: Berghahn. Google Scholar
• Billedo, C. J., Kerkhof, P., & Finkenauer, C. (2015). The use of social networking sites for relationship maintenance in long-distance and geographically close romantic relationships. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 152–157. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0469. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bitcom (2015). Retrieved from https://www.bitkom.org/Presse/Presseinformation/9-Millionen-Deutsche-haben-Partner-im-Internet-gesucht.html.
• Blackhart, G. C., Fitzpatrick, J., & Williamson, J. (2014). Dispositional factors predicting use of online dating sites and behaviors related to online dating. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 113–118. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bowers, J. R., Mitchell, E. T., Hardesty, J. L., & Hughes, R. Jr. (2011). A review of online divorce education programs. Family Court Review, 49(4), 776–787. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Braun, C. (2009). Gruppenheimat im Cyberspace? Digitale Medien, Suchtgefährdung, Online-Therapie. Paper presented at Berliner Institut für Gruppenanalyse BIG, Berlin.
• Bridges, A. J. (2008). Dyadic consequences of non-addictive use of sexually explicit media. Oral presentation presented at the Association for Behavioral and Cognitive Therapies, Orlando, FL.
• Briken, P., & Basdekis-Jozsa, R. (2010). Sexuelle Sucht? Wenn sexuelles Verhalten außer Kontrolle gerät. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, 53, 313–318. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Brym, R. J., & Lenton, R. L. (2001). Love online: A report on digital dating in Canada. Report. Retrieved from University of Toronto, Faculty of Arts & Science: http://projects.chass.utoronto.ca/brym/loveonline.pdf, 2017/06/24.
• Campbell, L., & Kohut, T. (2016). The use and effects of pornography in romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.004. Google Scholar
• Cavaglion, G., & Rashty, E. (2010). Narratives of suffering among Italian female partners of cybersex and cyber-porn dependents. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, 17, 270–287. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Couch, D., Liamputtong, P., & Pitts, M. (2012). What are the real and perceived risks and dangers of online dating? Perspectives from online daters. Health, Risk & Society, 14, 697–714. doi:10.1080/13698575.2012.720964. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Daneback, K., Ross, M. W., & Mänsson, S. A. (2006). Characteristics and behaviors of sexual compulsives who use the Internet for sexual purposes. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 13, 53–67. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Döring, N. (2000). Romantische Beziehungen im Netz. In K. Thimm (Ed.), Soziales im Netz. Sprache, Beziehungen und Kommunikationskulturen im Netz (pp. 39–70). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. Google Scholar
• Döring, N. (2003). Sozialpsychologie des Internet. Die Bedeutung des Internet für Kommunikationsprozesse, Identitäten, soziale Beziehungen und Gruppen im Internet (2 edn.). Göttingen: Hogrefe. Google Scholar
• Döring, N. (2010). Wie wir Liebes- und sexualpartner im Internet finden: Der aktuelle Forschungsstand. Psychosozial, 4, 33–49. Google Scholar
• Döring, N. (2015). Smartphones, sex und social media: Erwachsenwerden im Digitalzeitalter. Wie Jugendliche in Deutschland mit Smartphone, apps und social-media-plattformen umgehen. Televizion, 28, 12–19. Google Scholar
• Döring, N. (2017). Vom Internetsex zum Robotersex: Forschungsstand und Herausforderungen für die Sexualwissenschaft. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 30, 35–57. doi:10.1055/s-0043-101471. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Döring, N., & Dietmar, C. (2003). Mediated communication in couple relationships: Approaches for theoretical modelling and initial qualitative findings. Forum Qualitative Social Research FQS, 4(3). Retrieved from http://www.nicola-doering.de/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/D%C3%B6ring-Dietmar-2003-Mediatisierte-Paarkommunikation.pdf.
• Doss, B. D., Cicila, L. N., Georgia, E. J., Roddy, M. K., Nowlan, K. M., Benson, L. A., et al. (2016). A randomized controlled trial of the web-based OurRelationship program: Effects on relationship and individual functioning. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84, 285–296. doi:10.1037/ccp000006. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• Dreßing, H., Bailer, J., Anders, A., Wagner, H., & Gallas, C. (2014). Cyberstalking in a large sample of social network users: Prevalence, characteristics, and impact upon victims. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 61–67. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0231. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Eichenberg, C. (2007). Online-Sexualberatung: Wirksamkeit und Wirkweise. Evaluation eines ProFamilia-Angebots. Zeitschrift für Sexualforschung, 3, 247–262. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Eichenberg, C. (2009). Internetnutzung und Sexualität aus gesundheitspsychologischer Perspektive. In B. U. Stetina & I. Kryspin-Exner (Eds.), Gesundheit und Neue Medien. Psychologische Aspekte der Interaktion mit Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien (pp. 85–111). Wien: Springer. Google Scholar
• Eichenberg, C. (2010). Zusammen—getrennt: Paarbeziehungen im Internet aus medienpsychologischer und psychodynamischer Perspektive. In H. G. Soeffner (Ed.), Unsichere Zeiten. Herausforderungen gesellschaftlicher Transformationen. Verhandlungen des 34. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Jena 2008. Wiesbaden: Springer. (CD-ROM). Google Scholar
• Eichenberg, C., & Auersperg, F. (in press). Chancen und Risiken digitaler Medien für Kinder und Jugendliche: Ein Ratgeber für Eltern und Pädagogen. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
• Eichenberg, C., & Auersperg, F. (2013). Auswirkungen von Online-Sexualität auf das sexuelle Verhalten. Schlussfolgerungen aus dem aktuellen Stand der Forschung. Psychotherapie im Dialog, 2, 72–76. Google Scholar
• Eichenberg, C., & Blokus, G. (2010). Cybersexsucht: Epidemiologie, Diagnostik, Ätiologie und Therapie—Ein Überblick zum Stand der Forschung. Psychologie in Österreich, 2(3), 142–154. Google Scholar
• Eichenberg, C., & Kühne, S. (2014). Einführung Onlineberatung und-therapie. München: Reinhardt UTB. Google Scholar
• Eichenberg, C., Schott, M., Decker, O., & Sindelar, B. (2017). Attachment style and internet addiction: An online survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19, e170. doi:10.2196/jmir.6694. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 415–441. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Eynon, R., & Helsper, E. (2015). Family dynamics and Internet use in Britain: What role do children play in adults’ engagement with the internet? Information, Communication & Society, 18, 156–171. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.942344. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W., Karney, B. R., Reis, H. T., & Sprecher, S. (2012). Online-dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 3–66. doi:10.1177/152910061243652. Retrieved from https://www3.nd.edu/~ghaeffel/OnineDating_Aron.pdf.
• Fiore, A. T. (2004). Romantic regressions: An analysis of behavior in online dating systems. Master’s thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• Fox, J., & Tokunaga, R. S. (2015). Romantic partner monitoring after breakups: Attachment, dependence, distress, and post-dissolution online surveillance via social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18, 491–498. doi:10.1089/cyber.2015.0123. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Franke, G. H. (2000). BSI. Brief symptom inventory—Deutsche version. Manual. Göttingen: Beltz. Google Scholar
• Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2009). Gamete donation: Parents’ experiences of searching for their child’s donor siblings and donor. Human Reproduction, 24, 505–516. doi:10.1093/humrep/den469. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Tranfield, E., & Golombok, S. (2016). Online sperm donation: A survey of the demographic characteristics, motivations, preferences and experiences of sperm donors on a connection website. Human Reproduction, 31, 2082–2089. doi:10.1093/humrep/dew166. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• Freud, S. (1945). Formulierungen über zwei Prinzipien des psychischen Geschehens. Gesammelte Werke (VIII). London: Imago. Google Scholar
• Gauthier, D. K., & Forsyth, C. J. (1999). Bareback sex, bug chasers, and the gift of death. Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 20, 85–100. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Geser, H., & Bühler, E. (2006). Partnerwahl online. Retrieved from http://socio.ch/intcom/t_hgeser15.htm.
• Gonyea, J. L. (2004). Internet sexuality: Clinical implications for couples. American Journal of Family Therapy, 32, 375–390. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gramatikov, M., & Klaming, L. (2011). Getting divorced online: Procedural and outcome justice in online divorce mediation. TISCO Working Paper Series on Civil Law and Conflict Resolution Systems. doi:10.2139/ssrn.1752903. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=1752903.
• Hall, J. A. (2014). First comes social networking, then comes marriage? Characteristics of Americans married 2005–2012 who met through social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 322–326. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0408. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Handel, M. J., & Shklovski, I. (2012). Disclosure, ambiguity and risk reduction in real-time dating sites. GROUP’12 Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Supporting group work (pp. 175–178). doi:10.1145/2389176.2389203.
• Heller, J., & Dresing, T. (2001). Chat - Kommunikationsmedium mit Entwicklungspotential. In R. Bader, W. Schindler & B. Eckmann (Eds.), Bildung in virtuellen Welten—Praxis und Theorieaußerschulischer Bildung mit Internet und Computer (pp. 83–90). Frankfurt: Gemeinschaftswerk der Evangelischen Publizistik. Google Scholar
• Hertlein, K. M., & Blumer, L. C. (2014). The couple and family technology framework: Intimate relationships in a digital age. New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
• Hoffmann, J. (2006). Stalking. Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar
• Huels, D. J. (2011). Beginning romantic relationships online: A phenomenological examination of Internet couples. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 72(5-B), 3135. Google Scholar
• Hugger, K.-U. (Ed.). (2010). Digitale Jugendkulturen. Wiesbaden: Springer. Google Scholar
• Kalichman, S. C., & Rompa, D. (1995). Sexual sensation seeking and sexual compulsivity scales: Reliability, validity, and predicting HIV risk behaviors. Journal of Personality Assessment, 65, 586–602. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keehn, J., Howell, E., Sauer, M. V., & Klitzman, R. (2015). How agencies market egg donation the internet: A qualitative study. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 43, 610–618. doi:10.1111/jlme.12303. Google Scholar
• Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49–74. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lampert, C., Schmidt, J. H., & Schulz, W. (2011). Jugendliche und Social Web—Fazit und Handlungsbereiche. In J. H. Schmidt, I. Paus-Hasebrink & U. Hasebrink (Eds.), Heranwachsen mit dem Social Web. Zur Rolle von web 2.0-Angeboten im Alltag von Jugendlichen und jungen Erwachsenen (pp. 275–297). Berlin: Vistas. Google Scholar
• Lee, S. J. (2009). Online communication and adolescent social ties: Who benefits more from internet use? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 509–531. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01451.x. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Linke, C. (2010). Medien im Alltag von Paaren. Eine Studie zur Mediatisierung der Kommunikation in Paarbeziehungen. Wiesbaden: Springer. BookGoogle Scholar
• Lyndon, A., Bonds-Raacke, J., & Cratty, A. D. (2011). College students’ Facebook stalking of ex-partners. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(12), 711–716. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Maddox, A. M., Rhoades, G. K., & Markman, H. J. (2011). Viewing sexually-explicit materials alone or together: Associations with relationship quality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 441–448. doi:10.1007/s10508-009-9585-4. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mao, A., & Raguram, A. (2009). Online infidelity: The new challenge to marriages. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 51, 302–304. ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
• McDaniel, B. T., Drouin, M., & Cravens, J. (2017). Do you have anything to hide? Infidelity-related behaviors on social media sites and marital satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 88–95. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.031. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mesch, G. S. (2006). Family characteristics and intergenerational conflicts over the Internet. Information, Communication & Society, 9, 473–495. doi:10.1080/13691180600858705. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More infromation than you ever wanted: Does facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 441–444. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Poley, M. E., & Luo, S. (2012). Social compensation or rich-get-richer? The role of social competence in college students’ use of the Internet to find a partner. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 414–419. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.012. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pollock, S. L. (2006). Internet counseling and its feasibility for marriage and family counseling. The Family Journal, 14, 65–70. doi:10.1177/1066480705282057. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ramirez, Jr. A., & Zhang, S. (2007). When online meets offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication. Communication Monographs, 74, 287–310. doi:10.1080/03637750701543493. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Reime, B. (2017). Leihmutterschaft—Assistenzbusiness in der globalisierten Welt. In P. Biniok & E. Lettkemann (Eds.), Assistive Gesellschaft: Multidisziplinäre Erkundungen zur Sozialform “Assistenz” (pp. 145–163). Wiesbaden: Springer. ChapterGoogle Scholar
• Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., Cummings, C., & Felt, J. (2008). The impact of emotionality and self-disclosure on online dating versus traditional dating. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2124–2157. Retrieved from http://www.csudh.edu/psych/+FINAL%20ONLINE%20DATING%20ARTICLE%20IN%20PRESS%20VERSION%20-%20Rosen,%20Cheever,%20Cummings,%20Felt.pdf.
• Saini, M., Mishna, F., Barnes, J., & Polak, S. (2013). Parenting online: An exploration of virtual parenting time in the context of seperation and divorce. Journal of Child Custody, 10, 120–140. doi:10.1080/15379418.2013.796265. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schneider, J. P. (2003). The impact of compulsive cybersex behaviours on the family. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 18(3), 329–354. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schneider, J. P., Weiss, R., & Samenow, C. (2012). Is it really cheating? Understanding the emotional reactions and clinical treatment of spouses and partners affected by cybersex infidelity. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment & Prevention, 19, 123–139. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Schramm, D. G., & McCaulley, G. (2012). Divorce education for parents: A comparison of online and in-person delivery methods. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 53, 602–617. doi:10.1080/10502556.2012.721301. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Skopek, J. (2012). Partnerwahl im Internet. Eine quantitative Analyse von Strukturen und Prozessen der Online-Partnersuche. Wiesbaden: Springer. Google Scholar
• Staley, C., & Prause, N. (2013). Erotica viewing effects on intimate relationships and self/partner evaluations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 615–624. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0034-4. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Statista (2015a). Retrieved from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/511468/umfrage/anteil-der-online-dating-nutzer-nach-geschlecht-in-den-usa/.
• Statista (2015b). Retrieved from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/76504/umfrage/anzahl-der-nutzer-von-online-dating-boersen-seit-2003/.
• Statista (2016). Retrieved from https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/510944/umfrage/bester-weg-einen-partner-eine-partnerin-fuer-eine-langfristige-beziehung-zu-finden/.
• Stinson, S., & Jeske, D. (2016). Exploring online dating preferences in line with the “social compensation” and “rich-get-richer hypothesis”. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 6, 75–87. doi:10.4018/IJCBPL.2016100106. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7, 321–326. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Who visits online dating sites? Exploring some characteristics of online daters. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 10, 849–852. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9941. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vossler, A. (2016). Internet infidelity 10 years on: A critical review of the literature. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 24, 359–366. doi:10.1177/1066480716663191. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Walther, J. B., Slovacek, C. L., & Tidwell, L. C. (2001). Is a picture worth a thousand words? Photographic images in long-term and short-term computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 28, 105–134. doi:10.1177/009365001028001004. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Weinstein, A. M., Zolek, R., Babkin, A., Cohen, K., & Lejoyeux, M. (2015). Factors predicting cybersex use and difficulties in forming intimate relationships among male and female users of cybersex. Frontiers in Psychiatry. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00054. Retrieved from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00054/full.
• Wendt, V. (2016). Überprüfung der Wirksamkeit eines “Liebestagebuchs” zur Reduktion beziehungsspezifischer Interpretationsverzerrungen—Eine randomisierte Wartegruppenstudie Master’s thesis. Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena.
• Wéry, A., & Billieux, J. (2017). Problematic cybersex: Conceptualization, assessment, and treatment. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 238–246. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.11.007. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whitty, M. T. (2008). Revealing the ‘real’ me, searching for the ‘actual’ you: Presentations of self on an internet dating site. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1707–1723. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2008.00088.x. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and Reality. London: Tavistock Publications Ltd. Google Scholar
• Zweig, J. M., Dank, M., Yahner, J., & Lachmann, P. (2013). The rate of cyber dating abuse among teens and how it relates to other forms of teen dating violence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1063–1077. doi:10.1007/s10964-013-9922-8. ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Institute for Psychosomatics, Medical Faculty, Sigmund Freud Private University, Vienna, Austria Christiane Eichenberg
2. University of Kassel, Kassel, Germany Jessica Huss
3. University of Bundeswehr Munich, Munich, Germany Cornelia Küsel
4. University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, Clinic for Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, TU Dresden, Germany Cornelia Küsel

1. Christiane Eichenberg