Dating is hard enough without wading through fake accounts flooding dating apps. Many singles have found themselves turning to these apps to quickly gain insight into a person’s appearance, hobbies, and interests to help guide them in the dating world.
Unfortunately, not all of the profiles Americans encounter are authentic. From fake photos used to catfish users to sketchy links used to scam hopeless romantics, a sea of dishonesty awaits app users who want to find a genuine connection. At Secure Data Recovery, we know there are plenty of people attempting to access personal information and data online... including on dating apps.
That’s why we set out to learn where Americans are encountering the most fake dating profiles. To do this, we surveyed dating app users in several of the country’s largest cities about their experiences. We then used these responses to create an encounter score, on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 representing the most encounters.
This scoring takes into account not only the number of apps people have seen these fake profiles on but also the suspicious intentions found on profiles and the weird encounters they have had with people on the app. Read on to see what signs to look out for the next time you’re swiping.
Key takeaways
- Residents of Austin, TX, and San Antonio, TX, encounter the most fake dating profiles.
- Grindr and Christian Mingle users have encountered the most fake content on dating profiles.
- Accounts promoting adult content or services are the most common intents Americans encounter with fake dating profiles.
- The average user thinks half of all profiles are inauthentic.
- 67% of Americans use dating apps less frequently due to fake profiles.
- 84% don't think dating apps do enough to prevent fake profiles.
The U.S. cities with the most fake dating profiles
While some apps allow users to change their location, most dating app users are swiping through profiles of people who live in the same city as them. In our study, we uncovered the worst city to swipe in is Austin, TX, with an encounter score of 98.59 out of 100. From sketchy intentions to inauthentic chats, singles in Texas’s capital city encounter more fake profiles than any other city.
About 80 miles south is our second-place city, San Antonio, TX, with an encounter score of 96.55 out of 100. Overall, San Antonio residents are the most likely to say fake profiles have caused them to use dating apps less frequently. Coming in third is Virginia Beach, VA, where residents are the most likely to have encountered profiles with the intent of romance scams.
We travel further north for fourth place as Jersey City, NJ, earned an encounter score of 92.52 out of 100. Residents of the city are the most likely to report frequent encounters with people on dating apps trying to move the conversation off the app too quickly. Perhaps this is part of the reason why Jersey City residents are the most likely to say they automatically pass on dating profiles that have not been verified or connected to a social media account.
We return to Texas once again for fifth place where Houston, TX, received an encounter score of 92.41 out of 100. Residents of the city are the most likely in the U.S. to have encountered dating profiles with the intent of promoting adult content or services.
Using the same scoring, we set out to uncover on which dating apps people are most frequently encountering fake profiles and content. Leading the way is Grindr with an encounter score of 99.21 out of 100. Christian Mingle and Plenty of Fish follow closely behind in second and third place, while Hinge users encounter fake accounts least.
Overall, the average dating app user thinks half of all profiles are inauthentic. Although many apps have incorporated various methods to verify accounts and prevent fake profiles from being created, 84% of Americans don't think dating apps are doing enough to stop the issue.
The most common intents and content found on fake profiles
After learning where Americans most frequently encounter fake accounts, we wanted to dive into the types of content singles are coming across and what intentions people have for the profiles. While there are various intentions among inauthentic profiles, we discovered the most common is promoting adult content or services, with nearly 3 in 5 people reporting it.
The second most common intention is romance scams. Typically, this starts as a person faking a bond or connection, and then asking for money or gifts. In third place is catfishing with 54% of dating app users encountering it. Catfishing is a common trend, even earning a TV show dedicated to learning the truth behind fake profiles.
While intentions can sometimes be difficult to quickly detect, some content can be a dead giveaway for a phony profile. The most common deceptive content Americans report is someone lying about their true identity, with 68% of people encountering it. Following closely behind are stolen pictures, coming in second for the most common deceptive content, and someone lying about their real intentions or feelings is ranked in third place.
AI seems to have infiltrated many aspects of our lives, and dating apps are no exception as 53% of users report seeing AI-generated photos on accounts and 39% report AI-generated chats.
Keep your heart and data safe
When engaging with the online world, whether through dating apps, social media, or any other platform, it is important to protect your data. At Secure Data Recovery, we know that data loss happens, that’s why our team of experts is trained to recover your files and drives.
Whether you need help recovering data from your desktop hard drive or you are seeking iPhone data recovery services, our team has you covered. With a success rate of 96%, you can rest easy knowing that no matter how your data was lost, we have the tools and techniques to recover it.
Methodology
In this study, we set out to learn where Americans encounter the most fake dating profiles. To do this, we surveyed residents of the largest cities in the country and asked about their experiences with dating apps. We asked a variety of questions from which apps they use to what intentions they have found people have for their fake profiles.
We then awarded points to responses that expressed interaction with fake profiles and calculated the total for each person. Using those individual scores, we calculated the average for each city and then adjusted those scores on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 representing the more frequent encounters. This data only represents those who use dating apps.
