Online relationships | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
- Revision Notes
- Aug 5
- 18 min read
Updated: 1 day ago
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 55 minutes
Online relationships may develop differently from relationships formed entirely through face-to-face interaction. These Online relationships A-Level Psychology revision notes explain why people may disclose personal information more rapidly online, how users can control or misrepresent what others see, and how the absence of ordinary social barriers may affect relationship formation. The topic develops your understanding of personal information and attraction while showing how physical appearance, social skills and geographical distance may operate differently online. AQA requires knowledge of self-disclosure, deception and the effects of absence of gating.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Define an online relationship.
Explain why self-disclosure may occur more rapidly online.
Explain selective self-presentation and the use of deception.
Explain what is meant by the absence of gating.
Apply self-disclosure, deception and gating to unfamiliar online relationship scenarios.
Evaluate explanations of online relationships using evidence and reasoned discussion.
Revision Notes 📚
Online relationships A-Level Psychology revision overview
An online relationship is a relationship that forms or develops through internet-based communication.
Partners may communicate through:
Online dating platforms.
Social media.
Messaging services.
Online interest groups.
Other forms of computer-mediated communication.
Some online relationships remain entirely online. Others begin online and later include video calls or face-to-face interaction.
The AQA specification focuses on three features:
Self-disclosure
Use of deception
Effects of absence of gating
These features are connected. Reduced face-to-face cues may encourage rapid disclosure, allow users greater control over how they present themselves and remove some of the barriers that usually affect relationship formation.
Online and face-to-face relationships compared
Online relationship formation | Face-to-face relationship formation |
Communication may initially be text-based | Physical appearance and behaviour are immediately visible |
Users can take time to construct a response | Responses may need to be given immediately |
Some personal characteristics can be concealed | Many characteristics are difficult to conceal |
Geographical distance may be less restrictive | Physical proximity often affects opportunities to meet |
Disclosure may occur before physical meeting | Disclosure develops alongside direct interaction |
Information may be carefully selected | Unplanned behaviour provides additional information |
These are possible differences, not fixed rules. Modern relationships often involve several forms of communication.
A couple may:
First make contact online.
Begin messaging regularly.
Use video calls.
Meet face to face.
Continue communicating online between meetings.
This makes a simple contrast between “online” and “offline” relationships increasingly difficult.
Self-disclosure in online relationships
Self-disclosure involves revealing personal information about yourself to another person.
The information may concern:
Background.
Interests.
Attitudes.
Ambitions.
Experiences.
Wishes.
Fears.
Insecurities.
This connects directly with breadth, depth and reciprocal disclosure.
Online communication may change:
How quickly disclosure happens.
How much information is disclosed.
How intimate the information becomes.
How carefully the information is selected.
How the other person responds.
Rapid self-disclosure
AQA mark schemes recognise that self-disclosure may occur more rapidly online than during face-to-face interaction.
A person may find it easier to reveal personal information because:
They feel anonymous.
The other person is physically distant.
Immediate signs of judgement are not visible.
They can choose their words carefully.
They can end or pause the interaction more easily.
They feel less exposed than during a face-to-face conversation.
This may allow online partners to discuss intimate subjects relatively early in the relationship.
The stranger-on-a-train effect
The stranger-on-a-train effect describes the tendency to disclose personal information to someone who is not part of one’s usual social network.
A person may feel able to reveal private information because:
The other individual does not know their friends or family.
The interaction appears separate from everyday life.
The risk of information affecting their usual social identity seems lower.
They may not expect to meet the person again.
A similar process can occur online.
For example:
A student may be reluctant to discuss family difficulties with classmates but may reveal them to someone met anonymously in an online group.
The online partner is psychologically similar to a stranger encountered briefly while travelling. The lack of connection to the person’s normal life can encourage disclosure.
AQA’s 2022 mark scheme recognised rapid online self-disclosure linked to anonymity and the stranger-on-a-train effect.
Anonymity and disinhibition
Anonymity occurs when a person’s identity is unknown or partly concealed.
This can produce disinhibition, meaning that people behave with less restraint than they would face to face.
Online disinhibition may encourage:
More personal disclosure.
More intimate disclosure.
Greater honesty about difficult subjects.
Faster relationship development.
However, disinhibition is not always positive. It may also produce:
Harsh criticism.
Aggressive communication.
Insensitive responses.
Disclosure that is too personal for the relationship stage.
The 2021 AQA mark scheme linked online anonymity and de-individuation with disinhibition, including the possibility of critical or unkind responses to another person’s disclosures.
The hyperpersonal model
The hyperpersonal model proposes that some online relationships may become more intimate than face-to-face relationships.
Rapid and carefully controlled self-disclosure may make the interaction feel unusually intense.
The development may occur as follows:
One person reveals personal information.
The other person responds positively.
Reciprocal disclosure occurs.
Both partners form favourable impressions.
Disclosure becomes deeper.
The relationship feels unusually close or intense.
These relationships are described as hyperpersonal because intimacy may develop more rapidly than it would during ordinary face-to-face interaction.
AQA’s 2022 mark scheme identifies increased online self-disclosure as a reason relationships may become deeper and more intimate more quickly.
Reciprocal self-disclosure online
As in face-to-face relationships, disclosure is more likely to increase closeness when it is reciprocal.
For example:
Casey reveals a fear about beginning university. Morgan responds by discussing a similar fear about leaving home.
This reciprocal exchange may:
Communicate trust.
Establish similarity.
Encourage further disclosure.
Increase perceived intimacy.
Disclosure can also reveal information needed to apply similarity and complementarity filters.
Online partners may identify:
Shared attitudes.
Common interests.
Compatible ambitions.
Complementary needs.
Why online self-disclosure can feel safer
Online communication may give the discloser greater control.
The person may be able to:
Decide when to respond.
Edit a message before sending it.
Choose which topics to discuss.
Avoid revealing information through facial expressions.
End an uncomfortable conversation.
Disclose gradually across separate messages.
This can reduce the immediate social pressure associated with revealing personal information.
However, the sense of safety may be misleading. Once information is shared, the discloser may have limited control over how it is used or interpreted.
Risks of rapid self-disclosure
More disclosure is not automatically better.
Intimate disclosure that happens too quickly may:
Seem inappropriate.
Make the recipient uncomfortable.
Create pressure for equally intimate disclosure.
Make the discloser vulnerable.
Produce a false sense of closeness.
Encourage idealised impressions before partners know each other well.
This is similar to face-to-face relationships, where the timing and appropriateness of personal disclosure affect attraction.
AQA’s 2022 mark scheme explicitly recognises that excessive disclosure too early can be off-putting.
Reduced cues and online communication
Face-to-face communication provides many social cues, including:
Facial expressions.
Tone of voice.
Eye contact.
Gesture.
Posture.
Immediate reactions.
Some online communication contains fewer of these cues.
A person receiving a text message may therefore have less information about:
Whether the sender is joking.
How emotionally affected the sender is.
Whether the sender appears trustworthy.
How the sender reacts to a disclosure.
Reduced cues may encourage disinhibition because the person is less aware of the other individual’s immediate reaction.
However, cues are not always completely absent. Online users may communicate meaning through:
Emojis.
Punctuation.
Response length.
Response speed.
Photographs.
Voice messages.
Video calls.
This limits any claim that online communication contains no social information.
Selective self-presentation
Selective self-presentation occurs when a person carefully controls which information about themselves is shown to another user.
Online users can choose to highlight:
Attractive photographs.
Achievements.
Positive interests.
Desirable personality characteristics.
Shared values.
Carefully worded personal information.
They may conceal:
Unflattering information.
Characteristics they believe could cause rejection.
Contradictory opinions.
Social difficulties.
Information that does not support the image they wish to create.
Selective self-presentation does not always involve a direct lie.
A person can present a misleadingly positive image by revealing only carefully chosen information.
For example:
Sam truthfully says that they enjoy exercise but does not mention that they have exercised only twice during the previous year.
The statement may be technically true, but the overall impression is selective.
Selective self-presentation and the hyperpersonal model
Selective self-presentation can contribute to hyperpersonal relationships.
The process may be:
The sender presents a carefully selected version of themselves.
The receiver has limited contradictory information.
The receiver forms an idealised impression.
Positive feedback encourages further selective disclosure.
Both users experience the relationship as exceptionally close or compatible.
The online partner may be judged on a narrow range of positive information rather than on their complete behaviour.
AQA’s 2022 mark scheme includes selective self-presentation as part of the hyperpersonal model.
The use of deception
Deception occurs when a person deliberately provides false or misleading information.
In online relationships, someone might misrepresent:
Their age.
Their appearance.
Their interests.
Their background.
Their occupation.
Their relationship status.
Their identity.
Deception is easier when the other person cannot immediately check the information through face-to-face interaction.
A user may also combine truthful and false information, making the deception difficult to identify.
Selective self-presentation and deception compared
Selective self-presentation | Deception |
Involves choosing which information to reveal | Involves providing false or deliberately misleading information |
May consist entirely of truthful statements | Includes dishonesty or misrepresentation |
Creates a controlled impression | Creates an inaccurate impression |
Omits unfavourable information | Invents or changes information |
Common in both online and face-to-face relationships | May be easier to maintain when direct cues are limited |
The distinction matters in examination answers.
Choosing a flattering photograph is selective self-presentation. Claiming the photograph was taken yesterday when it is many years old may involve deception.
Why deception may occur online
Online environments may make deception easier because:
Some personal information is not directly visible.
Users may communicate anonymously.
Immediate verification is difficult.
Geographical distance prevents mutual contacts from checking claims.
The deceiver can construct responses carefully.
The relationship may remain entirely online.
Deception may be used to:
Appear more attractive.
Avoid rejection.
Gain attention.
Fit what the other person appears to want.
Maintain a preferred online identity.
Possible effects of deception
Deception may initially increase attraction by creating a desirable impression.
However, it may damage the relationship when:
Contradictory information appears.
The partners use video communication.
They meet face to face.
Other people reveal the truth.
Maintaining the deception becomes difficult.
Discovery may reduce:
Trust.
Closeness.
Satisfaction.
Commitment.
A relationship based on false information may not survive a shift from online to face-to-face interaction.
The expectation of future interaction
The extent of deception may depend on whether the users expect to meet.
A person communicating in an anonymous setting with no expectation of future contact may find deception relatively easy.
A user of an online dating platform who expects to meet face to face has a reason to avoid major lies because:
Appearance can be checked.
Age may become apparent.
Background information may be discussed.
Inconsistencies may be discovered.
Trust may be damaged.
The type and purpose of the online interaction therefore affect self-presentation and deception.
AQA’s 2022 mark scheme recognises that disclosures may differ between online settings, particularly according to whether communication is likely to lead to face-to-face interaction.
What is gating?
A gate is a feature that limits whether a relationship forms.
In face-to-face relationship formation, possible gates include:
Geographical distance.
Physical appearance.
Social awkwardness.
Shyness.
Anxiety.
Speech difficulties.
Visible characteristics that may lead to prejudice.
Limited opportunities for social contact.
A gate may prevent two people from interacting long enough to discover shared attitudes, interests or compatible needs.
Absence of gating
The absence of gating means that some barriers affecting face-to-face relationship formation are reduced or removed online.
For example:
Geographical distance may matter less because people can communicate from different locations.
Physical appearance may be less immediately important in text-based interaction.
A shy person can prepare messages rather than respond immediately.
Someone who finds face-to-face communication difficult can develop a relationship gradually.
Users can meet through shared interests rather than physical proximity.
AQA defines absence of gating as the reduction of ordinary barriers that constrain real-life relationship formation. Relevant gates include distance, lack of physical attractiveness and social awkwardness.
How absence of gating may encourage relationships
Absence of gating may change the order in which partners learn about each other.
In a face-to-face setting, a person might be judged first on:
Appearance.
Confidence.
Speech.
Immediate social behaviour.
Online, the initial focus may instead be on:
What the person writes.
Shared interests.
Attitudes.
Emotional disclosure.
Humour.
Compatibility.
This can allow relationships to develop between people who might not have approached one another face to face.
Absence of gating and social anxiety
Someone who experiences social anxiety may find direct interaction difficult.
Online communication may help because the person can:
Take time to respond.
Avoid immediate scrutiny.
Communicate from a familiar setting.
Control how much information is revealed.
Focus on written communication rather than visible nervousness.
The absence of this gate may allow the person to demonstrate qualities that could be overlooked during a stressful face-to-face meeting.
AQA’s 2025 mark scheme recognises evidence that the absence of gating can facilitate interaction for socially anxious people.
Absence of gating and physical attractiveness
Physical appearance can influence initial attraction in face-to-face relationships.
This is explored in physical attractiveness and partner selection.
In text-based online interaction, appearance may not be immediately visible. The partners may therefore form impressions using:
Attitudes.
Interests.
Disclosure.
Communication style.
Emotional support.
This may allow a relationship to develop before appearance becomes relevant.
However, many online platforms now place photographs at the centre of user profiles. Physical attractiveness may therefore remain a gate in a different form.
Gates may be reduced rather than removed
The phrase “absence of gating” should not be interpreted too literally.
Modern online relationships may contain different gates, including:
Profile photographs.
Age filters.
Location settings.
Educational information.
Response style.
Spelling and grammar.
Response length.
Emojis.
Number of followers or contacts.
These features can influence whether someone begins or continues an interaction.
AQA’s 2025 mark scheme notes that gates may still exist online in altered forms, such as emojis or the length of a response.
How self-disclosure and absence of gating interact
Self-disclosure and absence of gating should not always be treated as separate explanations.
They may work together.
For example:
A socially anxious person finds face-to-face communication difficult.
Online communication reduces the gate created by anxiety.
The person feels less judged.
They disclose more personal information.
Their partner responds positively.
Intimacy develops.
Absence of gating changes who can interact, while self-disclosure helps the relationship become closer.
The 2022 AQA mark scheme explicitly recognises this interaction, particularly where online communication allows socially awkward individuals to focus on what is said rather than on appearance or behaviour.
How absence of gating and deception interact
The reduction of gates can have negative consequences.
If appearance, age or identity cannot easily be checked, a person may misrepresent themselves.
The same features that allow a shy person to communicate more confidently may also allow another user to conceal important information.
Absence of gating can therefore:
Increase opportunities for genuine relationships.
Allow people to move beyond superficial judgements.
Make deception easier.
Reduce the information available for judging trustworthiness.
This shows why the effects of online communication are not entirely positive or negative.
Applying online relationship explanations
Consider this scenario:
Priya and Ellis meet in an online discussion group. Priya is very shy during face-to-face conversations but finds it easy to write long messages. Within a week, Priya tells Ellis about worries that she has never discussed with her college friends. Ellis responds by revealing similar fears. Priya uses a photograph taken several years earlier and says that it is recent because she believes it makes her look more attractive.
A developed application could explain:
Self-disclosure
Priya reveals intimate worries rapidly.
Ellis reciprocates with similar personal information.
This may increase closeness and produce a hyperpersonal relationship.
Absence of gating
Priya’s shyness is a gate during face-to-face interaction.
Online messaging reduces this barrier because she has time to prepare responses.
Ellis evaluates what Priya communicates rather than her visible nervousness.
Selective self-presentation and deception
Choosing a particularly flattering image involves controlling the impression presented.
Saying that an old photograph is recent is deceptive because Priya provides false information.
Discovery of the lie could reduce trust.
A strategy for application questions
Use the following steps.
Identify the online feature.
Is the scenario about rapid disclosure, anonymity, false information or a reduced barrier?
Name the concept.
Use terms such as self-disclosure, disinhibition, selective self-presentation, deception or absence of gating.
Use a precise scenario detail.
Do not merely repeat that the people communicate online.
Explain the mechanism.
Show why the online setting changes the interaction.
State the likely effect.
Explain whether the relationship may become closer, more intense, more accessible or less trusting.
Use:
Detail → concept → explanation → relationship effect
Evaluating explanations of online relationships
Strength: evidence supports benefits for socially anxious users
Evidence cited by AQA supports the idea that online communication can facilitate interaction for people affected by social anxiety.
This supports absence of gating because social anxiety can restrict face-to-face relationship formation.
When the barrier is reduced, users may:
Interact more confidently.
Reveal more about themselves.
Discover shared interests.
Develop relationships that would otherwise be unlikely.
This suggests absence of gating has genuine explanatory value rather than being a common-sense description.
Strength: online beginnings may increase liking
AQA mark schemes recognise evidence that couples who initially meet online may show increased liking.
This supports the proposal that reduced gates and increased communication can promote relationship development.
Online communication may allow users to focus first on:
Shared attitudes.
Personal information.
Emotional compatibility.
However, such evidence does not show that every online relationship becomes deeper or more successful.
Strength: the explanations can work together
Self-disclosure, selective self-presentation and absence of gating are not mutually exclusive.
An online environment may:
Reduce the effect of shyness.
Encourage disclosure.
Allow careful self-presentation.
Produce an idealised impression.
Increase intimacy rapidly.
Considering the interaction between processes provides a more complete explanation than treating each factor independently.
Limitation: descriptions can be mistaken for evaluation
Stating that online communication benefits shy people is a description of absence of gating.
It becomes evaluation only when it is supported or challenged using evidence and the consequence for the explanation is made clear.
For example:
Evidence that socially anxious users interact more successfully online supports absence of gating because it shows that reducing face-to-face barriers can affect genuine relationship formation.
The 2025 examiner report noted that many students presented descriptive points as though they were evaluation. Better responses rooted their arguments in evidence.
Limitation: online users may become more guarded
Online communication does not always increase disclosure.
Some people may disclose less because they are concerned about:
Deception.
Misuse of information.
Unknown audiences.
Harsh responses.
The permanence of written messages.
Uncertainty about the other person’s identity.
This challenges the claim that anonymity automatically creates disinhibition and intimate disclosure.
AQA’s 2025 mark scheme accepts that absence of gating may lead to reduced self-disclosure if people become more guarded online.
Limitation: rapid disclosure may create false intimacy
Online partners may experience intense closeness before they have enough information to judge each other accurately.
This apparent intimacy may be based on:
Selective information.
Idealised assumptions.
Reciprocal but unusually rapid disclosure.
Limited experience of the other person’s everyday behaviour.
When the partners meet or encounter difficulties, their impressions may change.
Rapid disclosure may therefore increase perceived intimacy without guaranteeing a stable relationship.
Limitation: deception can undermine online intimacy
Selective self-presentation may help users make a positive first impression, but deception can damage trust.
If one person has lied about important information, the other may question:
Which disclosures were genuine.
Whether the relationship is based on a false identity.
Whether future claims can be trusted.
This means features that encourage rapid online attraction can also make the relationship vulnerable.
Limitation: many online relationships are multimodal
Modern relationships may combine:
Online messages.
Photographs.
Voice communication.
Video calls.
Face-to-face meetings.
Gates that are reduced during early text communication may return as the relationship changes medium.
For example:
Physical appearance becomes visible.
Social behaviour can be directly observed.
Identity claims can be checked.
Geographical distance affects opportunities to meet.
AQA’s 2025 mark scheme notes that absence of gating may be less significant because relationships often operate through both online and face-to-face modes.
Limitation: online platforms differ
Different online settings encourage different communication.
An anonymous discussion group may:
Encourage disclosure to strangers.
Involve little expectation of meeting.
Make identity difficult to verify.
An online dating platform may:
Include photographs and location information.
Be designed to lead to face-to-face contact.
Make major deception harder to maintain.
A single explanation may therefore not apply equally to every form of online relationship.
This limits broad claims such as “people always disclose more online”.
Limitation: gates may be transformed rather than absent
Modern platforms often provide extensive information before communication begins.
Users may be filtered through:
Appearance.
Age.
Location.
Education.
Interests.
Communication style.
Online relationship formation may therefore introduce new gates rather than remove all existing ones.
This is consistent with the narrowing of potential partners through social and psychological information.
Limitation: online and face-to-face evidence may measure different outcomes
Studies may investigate different aspects of online relationships, including:
Number of disclosures.
Intimacy of disclosures.
Liking.
Relationship length.
Social confidence.
Intention to meet.
Satisfaction after meeting.
Evidence that online users disclose more does not automatically show that their relationships are more stable or satisfying.
Students should identify the exact outcome measured before claiming that a study supports “online relationships” generally.
Overall conclusion
Online communication can change relationship formation by:
Encouraging rapid self-disclosure.
Allowing selective self-presentation.
Creating opportunities for deception.
Reducing barriers such as distance, shyness and social awkwardness.
These processes may create intense relationships and allow users to form connections that would be difficult face to face.
However, the effects depend on:
The online platform.
Whether users expect to meet.
How honest they are.
Whether gates are genuinely removed.
Whether the relationship remains online or becomes multimodal.
Online relationships are therefore not simply more or less intimate than face-to-face relationships. Their development depends on how disclosure, deception and gating interact.
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Answer the exact question. In 2022, some students produced a prepared essay about virtual relationships generally when the question specifically required self-disclosure and absence of gating. General material received credit only when it was clearly linked to those factors.
Examiner hint: Distinguish description from evaluation. Explaining that online relationships benefit shy people describes absence of gating. To evaluate, use evidence and explain whether it supports or challenges the factor.
Examiner hint: Avoid common-sense anecdotes. The 2025 report noted that students often drifted into unsupported everyday claims about online relationships. Use specialist concepts and identifiable evidence instead.
Examiner hint: Give specific examples of self-disclosure. “Sharing information” is too vague. A creditworthy example should state what is revealed, such as telling someone your age, interests, attitudes or background.
Examiner hint: In application questions, connect each part of the scenario to a psychological process. Do not merely state that anonymity exists. Explain how anonymity may create disinhibition, rapid disclosure or deception.
Examiner hint: Keep positive and negative disinhibition separate. Anonymity may encourage intimate disclosure, but it may also encourage harsh or aggressive responses.
Examiner hint: Do not assume that absence of gating means no judgement occurs online. Modern platforms may contain photographs, filters, response patterns and other online gates.
Examiner hint: A strong extended response should evaluate both the benefits and limitations of online relationship explanations. The 2022 16-mark question allocated more marks to discussion than description, so accurate knowledge without developed evaluation could not reach the highest level.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Defining self-disclosure as ordinary online conversation
Why this is incorrect:
A conversation is not necessarily self-disclosure. The user must reveal personal information.
How to improve:
Give a specific example, such as telling another user about a fear, interest or personal experience.
Mistake: Saying that everyone discloses more online
Why this is incorrect:
Some users become guarded because they do not trust the other person or fear misuse of their information.
How to improve:
Write that online anonymity may increase disclosure, depending on the person and context.
Mistake: Treating selective self-presentation as identical to deception
Why this is incorrect:
Selective presentation may involve revealing only truthful but favourable information. Deception involves false or deliberately misleading information.
How to improve:
Use one example of omission and one example of a direct lie.
Mistake: Assuming rapid intimacy proves a strong relationship
Why this is incorrect:
Hyperpersonal closeness may be based on limited, idealised or deceptive information.
How to improve:
Distinguish perceived intimacy from long-term stability.
Mistake: Defining absence of gating as complete anonymity
Why this is incorrect:
Absence of gating concerns reduced barriers to relationship formation. Anonymity is one feature that may contribute to it.
How to improve:
Identify specific gates such as distance, physical appearance, shyness or social awkwardness.
Mistake: Claiming that physical appearance never matters online
Why this is incorrect:
Many platforms display photographs and encourage appearance-based selection.
How to improve:
Explain that physical attractiveness may be reduced as an initial gate in some text-based settings but remain important on image-focused platforms.
Mistake: Saying gates disappear permanently
Why this is incorrect:
Gates may return when partners begin video communication or meet face to face.
How to improve:
Discuss multimodal relationships and changing communication methods.
Mistake: Presenting the benefit to shy users as evaluation without evidence
Why this is incorrect:
This restates the explanation.
How to improve:
Support the point with evidence and explain how it strengthens the absence-of-gating account.
Mistake: Writing a general essay about the internet
Why this is incorrect:
The specification requires psychological explanation through self-disclosure, deception and gating.
How to improve:
Organise extended responses around the three named specification areas.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Questions
1. What is meant by the absence of gating in an online relationship?[2 marks]
Answer
Award up to two marks:
Absence of gating means that barriers which usually restrict face-to-face relationship formation are reduced or removed online.
Relevant elaboration, such as distance, physical appearance, shyness or social awkwardness having less immediate influence.
2. Suggest two examples of self-disclosure that could occur between people communicating online.[2 marks]
Answer
Award one mark for each specific example, up to two marks.
Possible answers include:
Telling another user about a personal fear.
Revealing one’s age.
Discussing an important attitude.
Telling someone about family experiences.
Revealing a private ambition.
The example must make clear that personal information is communicated.
3. Explain one difference between selective self-presentation and deception.[3 marks]
Answer
Award up to three marks:
Selective self-presentation involves choosing favourable information to reveal.
It may involve entirely truthful information while omitting less favourable details.
Deception involves giving false or deliberately misleading information.
4. Bailey is very anxious during face-to-face conversations. Bailey begins messaging Ari through an online interest group. Within a few days, Bailey discusses a private fear that has never been mentioned to friends. Ari responds by describing a similar experience.
Explain how self-disclosure and absence of gating can be applied to Bailey and Ari’s relationship.[6 marks]
Answer
Award one mark for each developed application point, up to six marks.
Possible content:
Bailey’s social anxiety acts as a gate during face-to-face interaction.
Online messaging reduces this gate because Bailey can communicate without immediate social pressure.
Bailey’s private fear is an intimate self-disclosure.
The disclosure occurs rapidly, within only a few days.
Ari reciprocates by describing a similar experience.
Reciprocal disclosure may increase trust and intimacy.
The rapid increase in closeness may be consistent with a hyperpersonal relationship.
5. A psychologist compared the median number of personal disclosures made during a 30-minute online conversation and a 30-minute face-to-face conversation.
Communication condition | Median number of personal disclosures |
Online conversation | 9 |
Face-to-face conversation | 5 |
What conclusion could the psychologist draw from these results? Explain your answer.[3 marks]
Answer
Award up to three marks:
Participants made more personal disclosures in the online condition.
The online median was 999, compared with 555 face to face.
This is consistent with the suggestion that online communication may encourage greater self-disclosure.
Do not credit the claim that online communication caused more disclosure or that the difference was statistically significant unless suitable additional information is provided.
6. Taylor creates an online dating profile. Taylor uses a carefully chosen photograph and describes only hobbies that are likely to seem attractive to other users. Taylor also falsely claims to be five years younger.
Explain selective self-presentation and deception with reference to Taylor.[4 marks]
Answer
Award up to four marks:
Choosing a favourable photograph is selective self-presentation.
Describing only attractive hobbies also controls the impression other users receive.
These details may be truthful but provide only a carefully selected image.
Claiming to be five years younger is deception because Taylor deliberately provides false information.
7. Briefly evaluate absence of gating as a factor in online relationships.[4 marks]
Answer
Award up to four marks for developed evaluation.
Possible answers include:
Evidence suggests absence of gating can help socially anxious users interact, supporting the explanation.
Gates may still exist online through photographs, age filters, emojis or response style.
Reduced gating may allow deception because personal information is difficult to verify.
Some users may become more guarded online rather than disclosing more.
Online relationships often become multimodal, so face-to-face gates may eventually return.
Higher marks require explanation rather than a list.
8. Discuss explanations of online relationships. Refer to self-disclosure, deception and absence of gating in your answer.[16 marks]
Comments