Summarised by Centrist
In The Conversation, researcher David Fang reveals findings from experiments showing in controlled trials with more than 1,000 participants aged 15 to 80, those receiving fully spelled-out messages rated the sender as more authentic and worth replying to.
Even abbreviations like “brb” or “idk” chipped away at perceived effort, especially in personal exchanges.
The effect was consistent across all kinds of platforms—from texting to Discord to speed dating simulators. Even digital natives, well-versed in online slang, reacted more positively to complete sentences. “Even people imagining themselves chatting with a longtime buddy reported feeling a little put off by half-spelled words,” Fang notes.
A Valentine’s Day speed-dating experiment confirmed it: participants receiving abbreviation-heavy texts were notably less likely to share contact information. A separate review of thousands of Tinder chats found similar results—shortcuts like “u” and “rly” dramatically reduced engagement.
The researchers aren’t calling for a ban on “lol” or casual phrasing. Instead, Fang says the problem is chronic overuse. “It’s the overall reliance on condensed phrases that consistently lowers our impression of the sender’s sincerity.”
The study traces text shorthand back to the era of flip phones and character caps. But in a world of full keyboards and unlimited data, the persistence of “gr8” and “omg” may now be more habit than necessity.
“If your goal is connection,” Fang writes, “taking an extra second to type ‘thanks’ might be a wise investment.”
