(Credit: Hadayeva Sviatlana/Shutterstock)
WASHINGTON — If you’re having a serious conversation or getting to know someone, it’s probably best to have it face-to-face over text. At the very least, don’t start using shorthand right away (FYI). While texting is a quick way to communicate, psychologists suggest writing words in full, particularly when sincerity or a good impression is important (OMG!).
A new study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General found that texting abbreviations like IDK for “I don’t know” or GOAT for “greatest of all time” make the texter seem insincere. Constantly using abbreviations can create a bad impression by signaling a lack of effort, making recipients less likely to respond.
The study involved eight experiments with over 5,300 participants. The result was consistent across all experiments: people who abbreviated their texts were viewed as insecure and not worth answering. In the studies, texters who used abbreviations tended to receive shorter and fewer responses in certain contexts.
The findings revealed that while most texters assumed abbreviations would not bother others, they were often perceived negatively. Before the experiments, the researchers sent out a survey in which 99% of respondents said they use texting abbreviations, and 84% didn’t believe others would be bothered by their texting abbreviations.
“In daily interactions, we often encounter people who could be considered good texters or poor texters,” says lead study author David Fang, a doctoral student in behavioral marketing at Stanford University, in a media release. “We thought texters might like abbreviations because it would convey an informal sense of closeness, so we were surprised that abbreviations elicited negative perceptions about people who use them.”
Young people were the most likely to use texting abbreviations, but their attitudes toward them varied, with some studies showing they were not particularly fond of abbreviations.
“While our overall results on age were mixed, it’s clear that younger people are not particularly fond of abbreviations, though the strength of this aversion may vary by age,” Fang explains.
The experiment also analyzed replies from Discord group chat users, dating scenarios, and conversation histories from people using Tinder across 37 countries. Additionally, the study also included participants who rated texted conversations with people who were or were not using abbreviations.
According to the authors, it’s possible texting abbreviations could potentially weaken social connections if they lead to fewer or fewer positive replies, which might contribute to feelings of loneliness over time. Loneliness is already a severe problem in the U.S., with the Surgeon General declaring a loneliness epidemic in 2023.
Fang says, however, that not all texts with abbreviated words are bad. Instead, texting short abbreviated messages should depend on who you’re texting and the context of the situation.
“We often tailor the effort we put into conversations to match the significance of the relationship. In some cases, it makes sense to invest less effort and accept being perceived as less sincere, like quickly texting with a delivery driver,” Fang concludes. “However, our findings are especially relevant when we want to appear more sincere and strengthen social ties, such as at the beginning of a relationship or when we need to make a good impression.”
Paper Summary
Methodology
The researchers conducted eight studies using various methods to explore how texting abbreviations impact perceptions of sincerity and response likelihood. These methods included controlled experiments, field studies, surveys, and an analysis of real-world text conversations on platforms like Tinder and Discord.
Participants were exposed to messages with and without abbreviations, and their responses were measured for sincerity, effort, and willingness to reply. Key elements such as the length of texts, relational closeness, and the density of abbreviations were manipulated to observe their influence. The study’s robust design ensured findings were reliable across different communication contexts.
Key Results
The study revealed that using abbreviations in text messages often makes the sender appear less sincere and diminishes the likelihood of a response. Participants interpreted abbreviated texts as requiring less effort, which negatively influenced their perception of the sender’s sincerity. Even when relationship closeness or message length varied, the negative effects of abbreviations persisted. Interestingly, people underestimated the impact of abbreviations, highlighting a disconnect between how messages are crafted and how they are received.
Study Limitations
First, the study relied primarily on self-reported data and hypothetical scenarios, which might not fully capture the dynamics of real-life texting. Second, cultural factors were not explored; perceptions of abbreviations might differ across languages or regions. Lastly, the sample consisted mostly of English-speaking participants from the United States and the United Kingdom, limiting the generalizability of the findings to other populations.
Discussion & Takeaways
The research emphasizes the importance of perceived effort in digital communication. When we use abbreviations, we risk being seen as insincere, potentially harming relationships or professional interactions. However, in casual or familiar settings, this effect might be less pronounced. The study suggests being mindful of the context and the recipient’s expectations when choosing how to communicate. For a positive impression, full-text messages are a safer choice.
Funding & Disclosures
The research was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Toronto Data Sciences Institute. The authors reported no conflicts of interest. All study materials, data, and preregistrations are available on the Open Science Framework to ensure transparency and reproducibility.
