How do anonymous sperm donors signal credibility through their self-presentations?

References

• Almeling, R. (2006). ‘Why do you want to be a donor?’: Gender and the production of altruism in egg and sperm donation. New Genetics and Society, 25, 143–157. doi: 10.1080/14636770600855184
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almeling, R. (2011). Sex cells: The medical market for eggs and sperm. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Becker, H. S. (1986). Photography and sociology. In Doing things together: Selected papers (pp. 223–271). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beeson, D., Jennings, P., & Kramer, W. (2011). Offspring searching for their sperm donors: How family type shapes the process. Human Reproduction, 26, 2415–2424. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blyth, E. (2002). Information on genetic origins in donor-assisted conception: Is knowing who you are a human rights issue?. Human Fertility, 5, 185–192. doi: 10.1080/1464727022000199102
   Google Scholar
• Blyth, E., & Frith, L. (2009). Donor-conceived people's access to genetic and biographical history: An analysis of provisions in different jurisdictions permitting disclosure of donor identity. International Journal of Law, Policy and the Family, 23(2), 174–191. doi: 10.1093/lawfam/ebp002
   Google Scholar
• Bokek-Cohen, Y. (2014). Become familiar with eternal anonymity: How sperm banks use relationship marketing. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 18(2), 155–177. doi: 10.1080/10253866.2014.935938
   Google Scholar
• Bowker, N., & Tuffin, K. (2003). Dicing with deception: People with disabilities’ strategies for managing safety and identity online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(2). Retrieved January 25, 2013, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue2/bowker.html
   Google Scholar
• Brewaeys, A., Golombok, S., Naaktgeboren, N., de Bruyn, J., & van Hall, E. (1997). Donor insemination: Dutch parents’ opinions about confidentiality and donor anonymity and the emotional adjustment of their children. Human Reproduction, 12, 1591–1597. doi: 10.1093/humrep/12.7.1591
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bundesärztekammer (2006). Retrieved January 30, 2013 from http://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/
   Google Scholar
• Burr, J. A. (2013). Anonymous or known donors? A brief discussion of the psychosocial issues raised by removing anonymity from sperm donors. Human Fertility, 16(1), 44–47. doi: 10.3109/14647273.2013.780664
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cameron, A., Gruben, V., & Kelly, F. (2010). De-anonymising sperm donors in Canada: Some doubts and directions. Canadian Journal of Family Law, 26(1), 95–148.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwell, B., & Lundgren, D. C. (2001). Love on the Internet: Involvement and misrepresentation in romantic relationships in cyberspace vs. realspace. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 197–211. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00040-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels, C. (2004). Commodifying men: The science and politics of sperm banking. In D. S. Cobble, B. Hutchison, & A. B. Chaloupka (Eds.), Femininities, masculinities, and the politics of sexual difference(s) (pp. 31–36): working papers from the 2003–2004 seminar, Institute for Research on Women, the State University New Brunswick. New Jersey: Rutgers.
   Google Scholar
• Donath, J. S. (2007). Signals in social supernets. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 231–251. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00394.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donath, J. S. (2014). The social machine; Designs for living online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Donath, J. S., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22, 71–82. doi: 10.1023/B:BTTJ.0000047585.06264.cc
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Donn, J., & Sherman, R. (2002). Attitudes and practices regarding the formation of romantic relationships on the Internet. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5, 107–123. doi: 10.1089/109493102753770499
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellison, N. B., Heino, R. D., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-Presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 11(2), 415–441. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Émon, A. (2012). The making of the sperm donor: Constructing science, managing identity in five US Cryobanks. PhD diss., University of Wisconsin- Madison.
   Google Scholar
• Freeman, T., Jadva, V., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2009). Gamete donation: Parents ‘experiences of searching for their child’ s donor siblings and donor. Human Reproduction, 24, 505–516. doi: 10.1093/humrep/den469
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C.-H. (2011). First comes love, then comes google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Communication Research, 38, 70–100. doi: 10.1177/0093650210377091
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Grace, V. M., Daniels, K. R., & Gillett, W. (2008). The donor, the father, and the imaginary constitution of the family: Parents’ constructions in the case of donor insemination. Social Science & Medicine, 66, 301–314. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.08.029
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hauskeller, C., Sturdy, S., & Tutton, R. (2013). Genetics and the sociology of identity. Sociology, 47(5), 875–886. doi: 10.1177/0038038513505011
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Illouz, E. (2007). Cold intimacies: The making of emotional capitalism. London: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Indekeu, A., D'hooghe, T., Daniels, K. R., Dierickx, K., & Rober, P. (2014). When ‘sperm’ becomes ‘donor’: Transitions in parents’ views of the sperm donor. Human Fertility, 17(4), 269–277. doi: 10.3109/14647273.2014.910872
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaksson, S., Sydsjö, G., Skoog Svanberg, A., & Lampic, C. (2012). Disclosure behaviour and intentions among 111 couples following treatment with oocytes or sperm from identity-release donors: Follow up at age 1–4 years. Human Reproduction, 27, 2998–3007. doi: 10.1093/humrep/des285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jadva, V., Freeman, T., Kramer, W., & Golombok, S. (2010). Experiences of offspring searching for and contacting their donor siblings and donor. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 20, 523–532. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.01.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, K. A. (2011). Fertility clinic, egg donation agency, and sperm bank policies. Fertility and Sterility, 96(4), 877–879. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.07.1107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman, M. (2003). Parents’ contributions to the narrative identity of offspring of donor-assisted conception. Social Science & Medicine, 57, 2229–2242. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(03)00099-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkman, M., Rosenthal, D., & Johnson, L. (2007). Families working it out: Adolescents’ views on communicating about donor-assisted conception. Human Reproduction, 22(8), 2318–2324. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem138
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirmani, A., & Rao, A. R. (2000). No pain, no gain: A critical review of the literature on signaling unobservable product quality. Journal of Marketing, 64, 66–79. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.64.2.66.18000
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klotz, M. (2013). Genetic knowledge and family identity: Managing gamete donation in Britain and Germany. Sociology, 47(5), 939–956. doi: 10.1177/0038038513501729
   Google Scholar
• Kohler Riessman, C. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. California: Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
   Google Scholar
• Kroløkke, C. (2009). Click a donor: Viking masculinity on the line. Journal of Consumer Culture 9(1), 7–30. doi: 10.1177/1469540508099701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lalos, A., Gottlieb, C., & Lalos, O. (2007). Legislated right for donor insemination children to know their genetic origin: A study of parental thinking. Human Reproduction, 22, 1759–1768. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dem063
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, R. C. (1995). Searching for the leviathan in usenet. In S. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-mediated communication and community, pp. 112–137. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mohr, S. (2014). Beyond motivation: on what it means to be a sperm donor in Denmark. Anthropology & Medicine, 21(2), 162–173. doi: 10.1080/13648470.2014.914806
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, T. (1996). New reproductive technologies and the family. In C. Cohen (Ed.), New ways of making babies (pp. 51–69). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pietrzak, A. (2012). The price of sperm: An economic analysis of the current regulations surrounding the gamete donation industry. Journal of Law and Family Studies, 14, 121–135.
   Google Scholar
• Raman, S., & Tutton, R. (2010). Life, science, and biopower. Science, Technology and Human Values, 35(5), 711–734. doi: 10.1177/0162243909345838
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravelingien, A., & Pennings, G. (2013). The right to know your genetic parents: From open-identity gamete donation to routine paternity testing. The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(5), 33–41. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2013.776128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riggs, D. W., & Scholz, B. (2011). The value and meaning attached to genetic relatedness among Australian sperm donors. New Genetics & Society, 30(1), 41–58. doi: 10.1080/14636778.2011.552299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripper, M. (2008). Australian sperm donors: Public image and private motives of gay, bi-sexual and heterosexual donors. Health Sociology Review, 17, 313–325. doi: 10.5172/hesr.451.17.3.313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salanie, B. (2005). The economics of contracts: A primer. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shehab, D., Duff, J., Pasch, L. A., MacDougall, K., Scheib, J. E., & Nachtigall, R. D. (2008). How parents whose children have been conceived with donor gametes make their disclosure decision: Contexts, influences, and couple dynamics. Fertility and Sterility, 89, 179–187. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.02.046
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk text and interaction. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Spar, D. L. (2006). The baby business: How money, science, and politics drive the commerce of conception. Boston: Harvard Bussiness School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spence, M. (2002). Signaling in retrospect and the informational structure of markets. American Economic Review, 92, 434–459. doi: 10.1257/00028280260136200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, A. R. (1996). The war of desire and technology at the close of the mechanical age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating fact from fiction: An examination of deceptive self-presentation in online dating profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1023–1036. doi: 10.1177/0146167208318067
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Van den Broeck, U., Vandermeeren, M., Vanderschueren, D., Enzlin, P., Demyttenaere, K., & D ‘ Hooghe, T. (2013). A systematic review of sperm donors: Demographic characteristics, attitudes, motives and experiences of the process of sperm donation. Human Reproduction Update, 19, 37–51. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dms039
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43. doi: 10.1177/009365096023001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Hamel, L. M., & Schulman, H. C. (2009). Self-generated versus other- generated statements and impressions in computer- mediated communication: A test of warranting theory using Facebook. Communication Research, 36, 229–253. doi: 10.1177/0093650208330251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warkentin, D., Woodworth, M., Hancock, J. T., & Cormier, N. (2010, February 6–10). Warrants and deception in computer mediated communication. CSCW 2010, February 6–10, pp. 9–12. Savannah, Georgia, USA.
   Google Scholar