Dating apps have revolutionized the way people meet potential romantic partners, but a recent lawsuit claims that these apps are designed to be addictive rather than facilitating meaningful relationships. The class action lawsuit, filed by a law firm representing six plaintiffs, accuses Match Group Inc., the parent company of popular dating apps like Tinder, Hinge, and The League, of intentionally designing their platforms with addictive features.
The lawsuit alleges that Match Group harnesses powerful technologies and hidden algorithms to create addictive and game-like design features that keep users hooked and prioritize corporate profits over customers’ relationship goals. It claims that the apps violate consumer protection laws and utilize strategies to capture and sustain subscribers rather than helping them find a partner.
One of the apps mentioned in the lawsuit is Hinge, which is marketed as an app “designed to be deleted.” However, the lawsuit argues that it is actually “designed to be addictive.” It suggests that Match Group’s business model depends on monopolizing users’ attention and uses dopamine-manipulating product features to create psychological rewards similar to those experienced by gambling addicts.
The lawsuit cites a survey by eHarmony, a rival dating website company, which found that 90 percent of single people in the United Kingdom believe they are addicted to dating apps. It reveals that a significant percentage of users check their dating apps before bed and upon waking up, while some even check them while at work or on a date with someone else.
To understand the addictive nature of dating apps, the lawsuit refers to intermittent variable rewards (IVR), a psychological phenomenon derived by psychologist B.F. Skinner. IVR relies on uncertain rewards that trigger stronger psychological responses than expected. The lawsuit suggests that Match Group’s use of IVR is similar to Skinner’s experiment with pigeons, where he turned them into gamblers by introducing IVR to their feeding schedule.
Match Group has responded to the lawsuit, calling it ridiculous and without merit. They claim that their business model is not based on advertising or engagement metrics and that their purpose is to get people on dates and off their apps. The company argues that those who state otherwise do not understand the purpose and mission of the entire industry.
Despite the controversy surrounding dating apps, a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reveals that more couples are meeting online in recent years. The rise of the internet has allowed individuals in the dating market to meet romantic partners without the intermediation of friends and family. The Pew Research Center reports that Tinder is the most popular dating app among Americans, with 46 percent of dating app users having used it.
Experts on online addiction have pointed out that dating apps, like other platforms such as social media and pornographic websites, can give the brain a rush of dopamine, leading to addiction. Cognitive neuroscientist Trish Leigh explains that when using dating apps, most people are seeking objectified sexual gratification and pleasure, which release dopamine. She argues that dating apps are mostly used for quick pleasure-seeking events rather than genuine connections. Leigh suggests involving oneself in activities where genuine connections can be made with potential partners.
In conclusion, the lawsuit against Match Group Inc. raises concerns about the addictive nature of dating apps and their impact on users’ quest for meaningful relationships. While Match Group denies the allegations, experts and surveys indicate that addiction to dating apps is prevalent. As more couples meet online, it is essential to consider the potential risks and benefits of these platforms and encourage users to seek genuine connections beyond the quick pleasure-seeking events facilitated by these apps.
