The concept of “playing hard to get” in dating and romantic relationships has long been a topic of interest, discussed in both popular culture and psychological research. The strategy typically involves showing a certain level of restraint or disinterest to increase one’s attractiveness, theoretically creating intrigue and a sense of challenge for the other person. Psychological theories on attraction, desire, and uncertainty play a central role in understanding why “playing hard to get” may influence people’s behaviour and perceptions in romantic pursuits. This article explores the science behind this approach, examining psychological theories, research studies, and the potential impact of playing hard to get on relationships.

Keywords: Playing hard to get, Psychology of attraction, Scarcity in relationships, Playing hard to get in dating, Reward uncertainty and attraction, Attachment style and attraction, Gender differences in attraction, Selectiveness in dating, Benefits of playing hard to get, Downsides of playing hard to get

Playing hard to get is a social strategy that leverages the psychology of scarcity, uncertainty, and challenge. Scarcity theory, rooted in social psychology, suggests that people tend to assign greater value to things they perceive as rare or difficult to obtain (Cialdini, 2009). When an individual presents themselves as selectively available, they create a sense of scarcity around their time and attention, making the other person view them as more valuable.

Another theory that underpins this behaviour is the “reward uncertainty hypothesis.” This concept proposes that when the outcome of an interaction is uncertain, such as not knowing if one’s interest will be reciprocated, people are more likely to invest time and effort to gain a sense of control over the outcome (Whitchurch et al., 2011). Thus, playing hard to get introduces a degree of uncertainty, which can heighten attraction by making the potential reward (a relationship) seem more enticing.

Tip: Psychological theories like scarcity and reward uncertainty can help explain why people may perceive someone as more desirable if they seem hard to obtain.

While the concept of playing hard to get is widely known, research offers mixed results regarding its effectiveness. In a study by Dai, Dong, and Jia (2014), participants who were led to believe that their romantic interest was uncertain about their feelings reported heightened levels of attraction compared to participants who received clear indications of interest. The researchers argued that this uncertainty kept participants mentally engaged, resulting in stronger attraction.

However, other studies highlight the importance of a balanced approach. A study by Walster et al. (1973) found that while people are attracted to individuals who display selectiveness, they still need some indication that their advances might ultimately be successful. Complete indifference or rejection can be counterproductive, as it may lead the other person to give up. Thus, research suggests that playing hard to get may work best when combined with occasional, subtle indications of interest.

Tip: A balanced approach—showing selectiveness without complete disinterest—may be more effective than appearing entirely aloof.

How people respond to someone playing hard to get may depend on individual differences, such as self-esteem and attachment style. Research indicates that individuals with high self-esteem are more likely to respond positively to the challenge presented by playing hard to get, viewing it as an opportunity to prove their worth (Bringle & Buunk, 1986). Conversely, those with lower self-esteem may feel discouraged or interpret the behaviour as a sign of rejection, leading to reduced attraction.

Attachment styles also play a significant role. For instance, people with a secure attachment style may view playing hard to get as a minor obstacle and pursue the relationship with confidence. In contrast, individuals with an anxious attachment style may experience increased anxiety or clinginess, feeling uncertain about where they stand, which could either increase their pursuit or cause them to withdraw out of fear of rejection (Simpson & Rholes, 1994).

Tip: Individual differences like self-esteem and attachment style can influence how one perceives and responds to someone who is playing hard to get.

Gender may also impact how playing hard to get is perceived and practised. Studies have found that traditionally, men are more likely to be drawn to women who play hard to get, perhaps due to societal norms that encourage men to pursue and women to be selective (Jonason & Li, 2013). Playing hard to get can reinforce gender roles, where men view the “chase” as a desirable challenge, while women may see selectiveness as a way to filter potential partners.

However, gender norms are evolving, and more recent studies show that playing hard to get can be appealing to both men and women. Still, it is important to note that the perceived success of playing hard to get may differ depending on cultural and social expectations, with some individuals interpreting it as an attractive trait, while others may find it frustrating or inauthentic.

Tip: Gender differences may influence the perceived attractiveness of playing hard to get, although changing social norms are making this approach more common across genders.

While playing hard to get can create initial attraction, it may also lead to misunderstandings and communication challenges. Individuals who play hard to get risk appearing uninterested or insincere, which can cause confusion or frustration for the other person. Moreover, relying on this strategy can prevent authentic connection, as it may limit honest communication and emotional vulnerability (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).

Another downside of playing hard to get is that it may not foster trust, which is essential for healthy relationships. If one partner appears elusive or unavailable, the other may struggle to build a strong emotional connection, potentially leading to feelings of insecurity or doubt. Building trust requires open communication and reliability, both of which can be difficult to establish if one partner is playing hard to get.

Tip: Playing hard to get may create initial attraction, but it is important to move toward open communication and authenticity to build a lasting relationship.

For those interested in using the “playing hard to get” approach, striking a balance between selectiveness and availability is key. Research suggests that showing selectiveness while also providing clear signals of interest can enhance attraction without creating excessive uncertainty (Dai et al., 2014). Occasional moments of availability can reassure the other person that their interest is reciprocated, creating a dynamic where both attraction and trust can develop.

A balanced approach may involve setting boundaries and maintaining one’s own interests and goals while remaining responsive and engaged. By creating a sense of independence and self-worth, individuals can project confidence without appearing detached. This approach not only attracts others but also lays the foundation for a healthy and balanced relationship.

Tip: Combining selectiveness with genuine moments of interest can help foster attraction without sacrificing authenticity and openness.

The psychology behind playing hard to get highlights the role of scarcity, uncertainty, and individual differences in shaping attraction. While research suggests that this approach can increase initial interest, its success largely depends on finding a balance and understanding individual preferences. Factors like self-esteem, attachment style, and cultural norms all influence how this behaviour is perceived and experienced. By combining selectiveness with moments of genuine interest, individuals can enhance attraction without compromising the potential for a meaningful connection. Ultimately, while playing hard to get may create excitement, building a strong, authentic connection requires open communication and mutual respect.

• Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), pp. 497-529.
• Bringle, R. G., & Buunk, B. P. (1986). Examining the causes of relationship dissolution. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 4(3), pp. 271-293.
• Cialdini, R. B. (2009). Influence: Science and Practice (5th ed.). Pearson.
• Dai, X., Dong, P., & Jia, J. S. (2014). When does playing hard to get increase romantic attraction? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, pp. 103-109.
• Jonason, P. K., & Li, N. P. (2013). Playing hard-to-get: Manipulating one’s perceived availability as a mate-retention tactic. Personal Relationships, 20(1), pp. 82-92.
• Simpson, J. A., & Rholes, W. S. (1994). Stress and secure base relationships in adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(5), pp. 878-896.
• Walster, E., Walster, G. W., Piliavin, J. A., & Schmidt, L. (1973). “Playing hard to get”: Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 26(1), pp. 113-121.
• Whitchurch, E. R., Wilson, T. D., & Gilbert, D. T. (2011). “He loves me, he loves me not…” Uncertainty can increase romantic attraction. Psychological Science, 22(2), pp. 172-175.

How to get in touch

If you or your NDIS participant need immediate mental healthcare assistance, feel free to get in contact with us on 1800 NEAR ME – admin@therapynearme.com.au.