There Are Layers to Liars: A Systematic Literature Review of Online Dating Deception

Background & Context

The field of online dating deception research has been plagued by terminological inconsistency, with scholars using heterogeneous terms and definitions interchangeably to describe a spectrum of deceptive behaviors ranging from minor impression management to severe catfishing schemes. This systematic literature review addresses a critical gap in deception science by providing the first comprehensive taxonomic framework for understanding the "layers" of dishonesty in digital romantic contexts.

As online dating has become a mainstream pathway to romantic relationships, understanding the nature and extent of deception on these platforms has taken on both theoretical and practical urgency. Previous research recognized that deceptive practices exist on a spectrum, from relatively benign impression management to more severe forms like catfishing, but lacked a unified conceptual model. This review synthesizes the fragmented literature to clarify what researchers actually mean when they discuss "online dating deception."

Research Design & Methodology

This systematic review employed a TCCM (theories, contexts, characteristics, and methodology) analysis framework to examine research into online dating deception. The TCCM approach allows researchers to systematically identify patterns, gaps, and opportunities across four critical dimensions of the literature: the theoretical foundations used, the contextual settings studied, the characteristics of deception examined, and the methodological approaches employed.

The review had two primary objectives. First, researchers examined what terms and definitions are commonly used to refer to online dating deception across the scholarly literature. Second, they structured this terminology within a new Typological Model of Deception in Online Dating (TOMDOD), describing the characteristics of various layers of deception ranging from impression management to catfishing. The authors synthesized findings from multiple empirical studies to create this hierarchical framework.

The systematic review was presented at the 73rd Annual ICA conference in Toronto, Canada in 2023, representing a 63-page comprehensive analysis of the online dating deception literature.

Results & Key Findings

The review demonstrated extensive use of heterogeneous terms and definitions across online dating deception research, confirming the field's need for conceptual clarity and standardization.

The authors developed the Typological Model of Deception in Online Dating (TOMDOD), which organizes deceptive behaviors into distinct layers based on severity, ranging from impression management to catfishing. According to this model, if various forms of deception were ranked by level of deceit, impression management would be the least deceptive, followed by self-presentation, misrepresentation, lying, and finally catfishing as the most deceitful practice on the spectrum.

Key findings from the TCCM analysis revealed methodological homogeneity alongside conceptual heterogeneity:

• Little variation existed in research methods, with surveys dominating the literature
• The online dating profile phase was the most commonly studied context, with limited attention to other stages of interaction
• Operationalization of deception as an outcome variable showed minimal diversity across studies
• Theoretical frameworks and conceptualizations of deception nature varied strongly across the literature

Discussion & Significance

The TOMDOD model represents a significant theoretical contribution to deception science by providing a structured framework for understanding online dating deception as a continuum rather than a binary phenomenon. This nuanced approach recognizes that not all forms of digital dishonesty carry equal severity or intent, which has important implications for both research design and practical interventions.

The review's identification of methodological monotony—particularly the overreliance on survey methods and focus on profile creation—highlights critical gaps in the research landscape. The field would benefit from diversifying both research methods and contexts of study, examining deception across the entire online dating lifecycle from initial profile creation through messaging, first meetings, and relationship development. The strong variation in theoretical frameworks, while indicating intellectual diversity, also suggests a need for greater theoretical integration.

The authors discussed both theoretical and practical implications of their findings and identified future research avenues, positioning this review as a roadmap for advancing the field beyond its current fragmented state.

Limitations & Considerations

While this systematic review provides valuable taxonomic and methodological insights, it inherits certain limitations from the primary literature it synthesizes. The predominance of survey-based research in the reviewed studies means the TOMDOD model is built largely on self-reported data, which may not fully capture actual deceptive behaviors or the psychological mechanisms underlying them.

The focus on profile-level deception in the existing literature means the model may not adequately represent deceptive practices that emerge during messaging, video calls, or face-to-face meetings. Additionally, the rapidly evolving nature of online dating platforms—with new features like video verification, AI-assisted profile creation, and algorithm-driven matching—means that patterns of deception may shift faster than systematic reviews can capture them.

Practical Applications

For dating platform designers and moderators, the TOMDOD model offers a framework for developing tiered intervention strategies matched to deception severity. Minor impression management might warrant educational nudges, while catfishing requires stronger identity verification measures. Understanding deception as layered rather than binary enables more proportional and effective platform governance.

For users of online dating platforms, this research validates the common experience that "everyone stretches the truth a little" while highlighting genuinely harmful deceptive practices. The hierarchical model can help users calibrate their expectations and develop appropriate skepticism—recognizing that small exaggerations about height or age differ fundamentally from fabricated identities. Dating education programs and digital literacy initiatives could use this framework to help users identify red flags while maintaining realistic expectations about online self-presentation.