Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative analysis uncovers user agency within algorithmic dating platforms, highlighting tensions between private desire and data-driven market governance.
Digital dating platforms have become the primary architects of modern intimacy, deploying algorithmic infrastructures that actively colonize the emotional landscape. While scholarship often interrogates dominant dating logics, it frequently neglects the fraught tension that users experience as they are forced to reconcile their private desires with prescriptive, data-driven frameworks. Utilizing consumer interviews, social media observations, and discourse analysis, we apply institutional theory to investigate how users exercise agency under the shadow of competing logics. We identify these logics and elucidate how consumers perform institutional work—adapting to, resisting, or negotiating platform norms—as a means of reclaiming psychological sovereignty from the digital apparatus. Our findings advance the critique of platformization and algorithmic governance by revealing how individuals navigate a landscape where intimacy is engineered, thereby sustaining the very markets that commodify their personal lives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Masè et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: