Ghosting and orbiting: An analysis of victims’ experiences

Abstract

Ghosting is the practice of ending a relationship without explaining to the partner and avoiding any communication attempts. Orbiting is identical to ghosting, but the disengager still visibly follows the former partner on social media. Despite the increasing attention that ghosting and orbiting have gained in the popular press, they remain largely unexplored phenomena in scientific inquiry. In this work, we explored the psychological and behavioral reactions to ghosting and orbiting from the victim’s perspective, comparing them to the experience of being rejected through direct communication. Participants were randomly assigned to recall one of three conditions (ghosting, orbiting, and rejection), and the reports of 208 young adults were analyzed through qualitative thematic content analysis. The results described different stages of reactions that follow event detection and that are respectively characterized by 1) surprise and confusion, 2) anger, sadness, and guilt, 3) attempts of relational repair, 4) acceptance. The specificities of being a victim of ghosting and orbiting are presented, comparing them with social rejection. The results are discussed in the light of the existing literature on social exclusion, suggesting that ghosting and orbiting can be considered forms of ostracism. Connections between the proposed stage model and traditional relationship dissolution theories are highlighted, and relevant implications for future research and interventions are presented.

An empirical, accessible definition of “ghosting” as a relationship dissolution method

“…That is, it remains unclear whether ghosting results in permanent and/or temporary relationship dissolution. However, Pancani et al's (2021) recent research on orbiting indicates that there may be a temporal or permanence dimension of ghosting that future research should examine. Nonetheless, our findings confirm that ghosting is indeed a method of relationship dissolution.…”

“…Researchers have identified ghosting as a method of relationship dissolution that may have important and unique psychological and emotional consequences, especially for those who are ghosted (Freedman et al, 2019;Koessler et al, 2019aKoessler et al, , 2019bPancani et al, 2021;Timmermans et al, 2021). Furthermore, it is likely that people who "ghost" might have psychological characteristics that researchers will be interested in examining.…”

“…Furthermore, participants are likely familiar with other behaviors that are related to—but slightly distinct from—ghosting. For instance, Lefebvre et al's (2019) definition has been pared down and adapted for use in another study conducted by Pancani et al (2021), to distinguish behaviorally between ghosting and orbiting . Orbiting is behaviorally similar to ghosting but differs in the permanence of the dissolution; that is, the ghoster continues to passively interact with the ghosted person on social media by viewing their stories or liking their pictures (Table 1).…”

“…Some researchers have suggested that being ghosted — especially by a romantic partner — has negative psychological and emotional consequences, perhaps because of its association with ostracism and loneliness (Freedman et al, 2019; Koessler et al, 2019a; 2019b; Pancani et al, 2021; Timmermans et al, 2021). Indeed, ghosting is unique compared to other methods of relationship dissolution because it occurs without the ghosted partner's immediate knowledge that the relationship has ended (Freedman et al, 2019).…”

The Social Exclusion Bench Tool (SEBT): A visual way of assessing interpersonal social exclusion

“…A second advantage consists in its flexibility since it could be fruitfully applied to many contexts and populations. Among them, we can mention people belonging to minorities (including homeless and ex-prisoners), individuals with whom the participant holds a specific relationship (e.g., past partners, clients), or just people with specific characteristics (e.g., a specific disease, a specific attitude), that in the literature have been considered for being potential targets of interpersonal inclusion/exclusion (e.g., [12 , 15] ).…”