Digital Extinction of the Relational Bond

Digital Extinction of the Relational Bond: History

Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Subjects: Communication

Contributor: Nicolás Valle-Palomino , Olinda Victoria Guzmán-Gonzales , Oscar Manuel Vela-Miranda ,

Brunella Orlandini-Valle

Danae de Lourdes Talledo-Sebedón

Background/Objectives: Ghosting is an emerging phenomenon in technology-mediated relationships; the lack of theoretical cohesion surrounding it justifies systematizing the available evidence to propose an explanatory model for this form of relating. The primary objective of this systematic review was to propose an explanatory model to articulately understand the phenomenon of ghosting within the context of digital communication. Methods: The PRISMA statement was used to formulate the criteria for selecting the 21 articles analyzed, which were sourced from the Scopus and Web of Science databases. The elements considered were: study period, area of study, document type, article language, keyword, publication stage, and open access. The only exclusion criterion was that, although the article included the keyword, it did not demonstrate psychological content related to ghosting. The included studies were evaluated by three reviewers, who worked independently using respective matrices in Microsoft Excel. To present and synthesize the results, a flow diagram of the selection process and a table of the articles included in the study were used. Results: The analysis identified four elements upon which the study was developed: (i) unilateral relationship dissolution and communication avoidance; (ii) communicative bond and digital relationship; (iii) relational exclusion and loss of belonging; and (iv) social isolation and psychological threat. The main limitation was that, although the term “ghosting” has been used since 2006, the number of related studies remains limited. Conclusions: Based on a review and systematization of the evidence, an explanatory model of the ghosting phenomenon within the context of digital communication was developed, termed the ‘silent relationship dissolution model’.

explanatory theoretical model
ghosting
digital communication

Contemporary technological mediation has redefined the fundamental paradigms of human interaction, establishing a new communicative ecosystem in which the formation, maintenance, and dissolution of interpersonal relationships acquire unprecedented dynamics [1]. This digital context, while optimizing the operational and logistical connectivity of modern life, has simultaneously generated a profound transformation in the quality of relational exchanges [2]. Screen-mediated communication fosters a culture of progressive disengagement, manifested through delayed or omitted responses, fragmented interaction, and a reduction in direct emotional presence, gradually eroding the foundations of commitment and affective reciprocity [3,4] resulting in negative psychological consequences for individuals’ mental health [5].

In this context, technology functions as a buffer against the discomfort associated with interpersonal conflict, facilitating avoidance strategies that elude both direct confrontation and the explicit expression of rejection. As a result, ghosting finds a favorable environment in which to emerge and consolidate, becoming a relational distancing mechanism characteristic of contemporary communication [6]. Within a communicative framework that is, in principle, based on bidirectionality and reciprocity [5,7,8], ghosting manifests through the abrupt and unilateral termination of communication, leading to the dissolution of the emotional bond [9]. Far from being a circumstantial lack of response, this practice constitutes a specific relational dissolution strategy, characterized by persistent silence and the deliberate omission of any explanation or justification. As a result, the recipient remains in a state of relational ambiguity, compelled to interpret the communicative void and subjectively attribute meaning to the rupture. This absence of clarity and explicit closure interferes with the psychological processes typically involved in processing loss, contributing to prolonged distress and a breakup experience that lacks a coherent narrative that provides meaning [10].

In this regard, there is considerable empirical evidence supporting the alarming prevalence of this phenomenon, particularly in relationships initiated in digital environments. The prevalence of ghosting ranges from 20% to 40% in the general population, rising significantly among young adults, where 64.5% admit to having engaged in the practice and 72% admit to having experienced it. The majority of victims (59%) attribute responsibility to the initiator’s personality traits, such as a lack of commitment or cowardice, which threaten their psychological needs for belonging, control, and existence; meanwhile, self-blame and the dynamics of dating apps each account for 37% of the perceived influence [11,12]. A lack of relational commitment, combined with the disinhibited digital behaviors of the person engaging in ghosting, lowers barriers to empathy and acts as a catalyst for the unilateral and inexplicable breakdown of communication [13]. This phenomenon has established itself as one of the most significant and widespread digital stressors in virtual environments, affecting technology-mediated relationships across the board [14]. These findings reinforce the characterization of ghosting as a widespread and socially normalized behavioral pattern, particularly among adolescents and adult populations [6].

Although it is often subjectively rationalized as an expedient and low emotional-cost method for ending a relationship, the psychological impact of ghosting is significant and bidirectional. For the recipient, the consequences typically manifest as a complex emotional response characterized by anxiety, confusion, profound sadness, and diminished self-esteem, intensified by distressing uncertainty and the inability to obtain answers [11]. For the perpetrator, far from constituting a clean emotional escape, the act may generate a latent psychological burden, including feelings of guilt, remorse, or diffuse anxiety, although in many cases an initial sense of relief may also predominate. This positions ghosting as a relational event with the potential to produce enduring emotional consequences for both parties involved in the interaction [15] that have a detrimental impact on mental health [10].

The guiding research question of this study was: How can existing theoretical contributions be integrated to propose an explanatory model that enables an articulated understanding of romantic ghosting within the context of digital communication?

This study presents an explanatory proposal regarding ghosting to the scientific community, termed the ‘Silent Relationship Dissolution Model’, which elucidates the relational and psychosocial mechanisms underlying sudden, inexplicable romantic breakups in contemporary digital environments. Specifically, the theoretical framework addresses how the cessation of communication, avoidance, and the undermining of the need to belong, mediated by electronic devices, converge to create an abrupt distancing interpreted as a lack of interest. Furthermore, the dynamics facilitating such unilateral disappearance without prior explanation, as well as the emotional consequences and psychological impact directly experienced by the individuals subjected to this practice. The model is grounded in key theoretical frameworks, such as Relationship Dissolution Theory, Social Exclusion Theory, the Ostracism Model, and the Theory of Relationships, Information, and Communication, which are currently used to explain relational dynamics outside the context of digital mediation.

The justification for the present study is grounded in the conceptual gaps and explanatory limitations identified through the review of existing theoretical literature on the relational phenomenon and interpersonal communication in virtual contexts known as ghosting. The theories analyzed do not fully explain the phenomenon under study; rather, they provide fragmented elements that, when integrated, may help address the guiding research question and thereby achieve the primary objective of the investigation, enabling the development of a consistent explanatory model. This new model will serve as a guide for future empirical research, contribute to the development of the theoretical framework surrounding the phenomenon, and support the design of appropriate interventions [16] in dysfunctional relational contexts from a technical and professional perspective, using validated instruments [17].

The prevalence of “ghosting” among the current generation stems from specific socio-technological dynamics facilitated by contemporary digital environments. On one hand, asynchronous communication and the lack of face-to-face constraints allow users to avoid direct confrontation, using their devices to minimize the discomfort or anxiety associated with explicit rejection [10]. On the other hand, the proliferation of digital dating platforms exposes younger cohorts to the perception of an unlimited pool of potential partners; this fosters the commodification of interpersonal connections and facilitates unilateral abandonment at the slightest sign friction [11].

Academic research has evolved from merely classifying ghosting as an emerging behavioral curiosity to recognizing it as a complex relational phenomenon symptomatic of the digital era [18]. Various studies situate it as a phenomenon that extends from romantic relationships to friendships, in which technology mediates the interaction; that is, communication does not occur face to face, but rather through a technological device [12]. In this sense, scientific attention has shifted from analyzing communication and sender–receiver motivations within a traditional interpersonal context to examining interactions mediated by digital channels, which introduce new communicative considerations and barriers. This highlights that ghosting is not simply a change in communicative form, but rather an indicator of a substantive transformation in communication norms, expectations of emotional responsibility, and the socially accepted ways of managing conflict and relationship dissolution in contemporary human relationships [19].

First, the relationship dissolution theory proposed by Duck [20] explains the dissolution of a face-to-face relationship as a gradual process that deteriorates the relationship at the intrapersonal level, reflected in negative thoughts and emotions that ultimately lead to an explicit separation. Thus, dissolution is constructed and managed through communication patterns that evolve from the personal to the social level, directly influencing how the separation is experienced and interpreted, and allowing individuals to develop personal narratives that explain, legitimize, and give meaning to the end of the relationship both to others and to themselves. However, Duck’s theoretical framework cannot fully explain romantic ghosting for three reasons: first, because it was developed at a time when digital communication did not exist; second, because it was conceived to explain aspects of face-to-face relationships; and third, because it is not specifically contextualized within exclusively romantic relationships. However, it is important to mention that this theory contributes to understanding aspects of unilateral breakup and communicative avoidance, as part of the model proposed in this research.

Along this same line of relational analysis, although from a broader perspective, the social exclusion theory proposed by Baumeister and Leary [21] states that when an individual is able to establish and maintain positive and meaningful interpersonal relationships, their psychological well-being is enhanced. However, when a person experiences rejection, abandonment, or the dissolution of relational bonds, negative emotional, cognitive, and behavioral consequences emerge, resulting in psychological distress, anxiety, sadness, among other effects. This theoretical framework, like Duck’s theory, was developed to explain face-to-face social situations rather than virtual contexts, which prevents it from fully explaining the phenomenon of ghosting on its own. Therefore, this theory contributes to an understanding of aspects of relational exclusion and issues related to the loss of belonging, which add to the model presented in this study.

Precisely in response to these limitations, Williams ostracism model [22] expands upon the theoretical framework proposed by Baumeister and Leary [21], explaining ostracism as a specific form of social exclusion that occurs when an individual is explicitly or implicitly ignored, rejected, or excluded. This experience automatically activates psychological distress that threatens four fundamental psychological needs: belonging, understood as feeling accepted and connected; self-esteem, based on the perception of personal worth; control, defined as the perceived ability to influence one’s environment; and meaningful existence, understood as feeling recognized and visible to others. Ostracism develops in three phases: (a) immediate, characterized by emotional distress; (b) reflective, in which the individual attempts to understand the cause of the exclusion and deploy strategies to restore belonging or protect self-esteem, either through prosocial or defensive behaviors; and (c) resignation, understood as the passive acceptance of the dissolution of the relational bond. However, this theoretical framework cannot fully explain ghosting, as at the time of its publication, the term had only recently begun to emerge in everyday language and had not yet been conceptually developed within the scientific literature. However, it is worth noting that this theory contributes to an understanding of aspects regarding social isolation and psychological threats, thereby reinforcing the theoretical proposal presented in this research.

Finally, the Relationship, Information, and Communication Theory (TRIC), developed by Gabelas-Barroso and Marta-Lazo [23], proposes a humanistic and relational understanding of virtual communication, in which technology is no longer the central axis, placing greater emphasis on interactions, relational bonds, and communicative processes within digital environments. Communication is not reduced to the transmission of information mediated by platforms, but is instead understood as a dynamic process of social interaction, in which individuals interpret, negotiate, and jointly construct meaning. TRIC introduces the relational dimension as a key element for explaining how digital technologies influence the quality of communication, highlighting the importance of dialogue, participation, reciprocity, and critical awareness in virtual interactions, particularly in educational and social contexts. However, this theory does not fully explain ghosting, as it does not specifically focus on romantic emotional relationships, which constitute one of the fundamental elements of the present study. It is important to note that aspects such as communicative ties and digital relationships, drawn from this theory, partially help explain the new model of ghosting presented in this study. The comparison of relational theories is presented below (Table 1).

Table 1. Comparison of Relational Theories.

As a complementary addition to the theories presented in the preceding paragraphs, Sternberg’s [24] triangular theory of love is incorporated. This theory explains face-to-face affective relationships as complex psychological experiences arising from the dynamic interaction of three fundamental components: intimacy, referring to emotional closeness, trust, and mutual support inherent in the relationship; passion, associated with physical attraction, desire, and emotional arousal as part of face-to-face interaction; and commitment, referring to the conscious decision to maintain the relationship in the short term and project it into the future. The different proportional combinations of these three components give rise to distinct types of affective relationships, conceptualizing love as a relational structure rather than a unitary state. Sternberg’s theoretical framework provides a robust explanation of affective bonds, and although it does not directly explain romantic ghosting, some of its elements help contextualize the theoretical model proposed in this systematic review.

Taken together, integrating key elements from the theories presented broadens the understanding of ghosting as a contemporary form of relational dissolution characterized by the unilateral and silent withdrawal of one of the individuals within a digital context. Based on this central premise, the primary objective of this study is to propose an explanatory model that enables an articulated understanding of the phenomenon of ghosting within the context of digital communication.

The specific objectives are:

Select and synthesize the scientific evidence on existing theoretical contributions in order to propose an explanatory model that enables an articulated understanding of ghosting within the context of digital communication.
Determine the theoretical contribution of relationship dissolution theory in partially explaining ghosting within the context of digital communication.
Determine the theoretical contribution of social exclusion theory in partially explaining ghosting within the context of digital communication.
Determine the theoretical contribution of the ostracism model in partially explaining ghosting within the context of digital communication.
Determine the theoretical contribution of the Relationship, Information, and Communication Theory (TRIC) in partially explaining ghosting within the context of digital communication.
Incorporate theoretical contributions from the triangular theory of love that help partially explain ghosting within the context of digital communication.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia6100227

© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.