As long as virtual reality resembles grounded reality, there is no reason to expect other forms of social interaction. The extent to which virtual social influence is comparable to grounded social influence depends on several factors:

• The extent to which the other is seen as mindful and sentient.
• The extent to which behaviour comes across as human (i.e. communicative realism).
• The extent to which there is automatic processing compared to reasoned processing.

The more realism in online interaction, the more social influence. Realistic movement is more important than how human or photorealistic an avatar looks. Automatic processes will differ less than reasoned processes in grounded or virtual reality. In a virtual environment, social support under stress (1), mimicry (2) and social facilitation (3) occur.

Hyperpersonal interaction theory states that anonymity ensures that people are less afraid to self-disclose. It also allows for more strategic self-presentation. A consequence of this is that there is more self-report in online environments than in face-to-face environments. There is also more idealisation of the interaction partner.

The reduced social cues approach states that the absence of important social signals leads to less satisfactory interactions. This makes both extreme negative and extreme positive forms of interaction possible. It is possible that there is an absence of important social signals in online environments.

The social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) states that behaviour of others is seen as indicative of group norm due to less observed differences between others. More salient in-group norms lead to more collective self-awareness.

The social information processing theory (SIP) states that cues are conduits for communication, not representatives of social norms. Online, there is increased self-disclosure because there are fewer means of communicating. The media richness theory (MRT) states that the richer the medium is, the more information can and will be transmitted.

The social penetration theory states that changes in self-disclosure between partners are integral to relationship growth and decline. There is more breadth and depth of disclosures as the relationship progresses. The network theory of emotions states that emotions, cognitions and action tendencies are connected in memory through association. The association of one element can spread to other nodes in the associative network.

There is more self-awareness in interaction with visibility for in-group and with salient norms, there is more social identification. Anonymity leads to less informative interaction and more extreme positive and negative interactions. (A)synchronicity leads to more control over self-presentation and more idealization of the conversation partner.

Self-disclosure is a prerequisite for satisfactory social interactions and intimacy. There appears to be more self-disclosure in computer-mediated-communication (CMC) but the conversations are experienced as more superficial.

The further away someone is, the less frequent and more extensive communication is. This means that frequent contact will lead to less context in case of proximity. People tend to share emotions with strangers online when the goal is clear (1) and there is a shared interest (2). There are no negative repercussions of expression of emotions (e.g. shame, fear) when you do not know somebody.

Instrumental aggression refers to aggression that is used to attain goals. Hostile aggression refers to aggression where harm or injury to the target is the primary goal of behaviour. Hostile anger is associated with anger in response to frustration. Stalking refers to willful, malicious and repeated following and harassing of another person. There are more opportunities for aggression online because of the greater availability of targets (1) and the invisibility of targets (2). The invisibility of targets makes the consequences of aggression less salient.

Interactive video games require a person to become the aggressor whereas passive media only shows the aggressor. Furthermore, violence is directly rewarded in videogames compared to indirectly rewarded in other media. There is also almost continuous violence in videogames and videogames are becoming increasingly realistic. This makes videogames potentially more harmful than violent media. The internet does not create new aggressors but provides tools for already aggressive people to victimize a larger group of people.

Moral justification of an action may occur through sanitizing euphemistic language (1), advantageous comparison (2), disavowal of a sense of personal agency (3), disregarding the injurious effects of one’s actions (4) and attribution of blame to the victim (5).

The effects of cyberbullying appear to be more extreme. It is anonymous (1), there is a wider group of bullies (2) and there is no traditional supervision (3). There is more flaming in CMC. There are several factors that make disinhibition of aggression less likely online:

• Lack of supervision.
• Anonymity
• Contact with like-minded individuals.

The most important thing about anonymity is the extent to which and by whom people can be identified. The contact with like-minded individuals could lead to group polarisation (1), groupthink (2) and the confirmation bias (3).

Through CMC, people are less susceptible to interpersonal influence than in face-to-face interactions. Anonymity and physical isolation ensure a greater private self-awareness. This focus reduces the susceptibility to interpersonal influence. The less identifiable someone is, the less compliant one will be.

Online, people are more susceptible to norm-based influence. This depends on anonymity to the outgroup (1), visibility within the ingroup (2) and salience of social identity cues (3). There is more group polarisation in case of identifiability for their group.

Participation in self-help groups may be harmful to some members because:

• Members may encounter cyberstalkers.
• Members may be exposed to threats, profanity, seduction and personal attacks.
• Members may receive misinformation from others.
• Messages may be saved, resulting in a loss of privacy.
• The qualifications of moderators are not regulated.
• The identity of members is unknown.
• Identity can be easily disguised.

Online dating has the availability of more potential partners (1), more availability of information about potential partners (2), more accessibility for people who have difficulty finding contact offline (3) and makes use of matching algorithms (4).

The large number of potential partners may lead to choice stress. Larger choice sets cause people to make mating decisions that are less aligned with their idealized mating decisions. A larger choice set makes people less likely to commit to one partner and it may lead to less satisfaction with the selected partners.

The mind-set effect refers to the fact that performing a task following a procedure makes it more likely that this procedure will be used for the following task. In an assessment mindset, people are more concerned with evaluating different options. In an implementation mindset, people are more concerned with the effective and enjoyable pursuit of important goals. Evaluating many dating sites stimulates an assessment mindset and this hinders smooth first social interaction.

The fact that the initial contact will be online can be an advantage if face-to-face contact follows shortly after the initial contact because online contact has more self-disclosure (1), more control over appearance (2) and more idealization of the partner (3). Direct contact remains important as the spontaneous affective response to a person does not always match the explicit preferences.

People are not good at determining relationship preferences. The matching on online dating sites via an algorithm can work if people with relationship-unfriendly characteristics are filtered out. However, the most important determinants of a successful relationship require some form of interaction.

In dating, matching is important. There are several matching factors that make someone more attractive:

• A match in attractiveness.
• A match in speech patterns.
• A match in attitudes.
• A match in demographic characteristics.
• A match in face (i.e. similarity of face).

Opposites do not attract unless it is for a fling. Disadvantages of online dating are that objectively the most attractive profiles get the most attention (1) and it is more difficult to assess whether someone suits you (2).

Relationship maintenance may be done through engaging in positivity (1), assurances (2), openness (3) and social networks (4). Communication among partners that is intensified through permanent or frequent online exchange contributes to positive outcomes.

Online communication makes the sexual dimension of intimate relationships more accessible and relevant to both partners throughout the day and expands the space of opportunities to negotiate and enjoy sexual interaction beyond episodes of face-to-face contact. Online communication can lead to one partner receiving ambiguous information about their partners that would have otherwise been inaccessible. This can trigger negative emotions. Mobile device usage can lead to partners expanding or amplifying problematic activities (e.g. excessive monitoring).