What is love? A psychologist’s evidence‑based guide
By TherapyNearMe.com.au. Reader‑first, research‑led article. General information only; not a substitute for personalised medical or psychological advice. If you are in crisis, call 000. For 24/7 support: Lifeline 13 11 14; Beyond Blue 1300 22 4636.
Why this question is harder than it sounds
Love is not a single feeling. It is a pattern of motivation, emotion and behaviour that shows up in different forms—romantic and sexual passion, deep companionship, parental love, friendship, even love for community and humanity. Psychology, neuroscience and anthropology converge on three ideas:
- Love is multidimensional—it blends intimacy/connection, passion/attraction and commitment/decision in varying proportions (Sternberg, 1986).
- Love is also an attachment system: close bonds function as a safe base and a source of stress regulation across the lifespan (Bowlby, 1982; Hazan and Shaver, 1987).
- Love has biological signatures (e.g., dopaminergic reward and oxytocinergic caregiving circuitry), but culture and learning shape how we feel and show it (Moll et al., 2006; Bartels and Zeki, 2000; Jankowiak and Fischer, 1992).
Rather than hunt for a single definition, this guide maps the major frameworks, the brain and body mechanisms, and the habits that make love flourish or fail.
The big theories (and what they add)
1) Sternberg’s triangular theory: intimacy, passion, commitment
Sternberg proposed that most love stories combine three ingredients:
- Intimacy (closeness, trust, knowing and being known),
- Passion (desire, infatuation, motivational drive), and
- Commitment (the decision to maintain the bond over time) (Sternberg, 1986).
Different mixes produce familiar forms: romantic love (high intimacy + passion), companionate love (high intimacy + commitment), consummate love (high on all three). The model explains why relationships can feel different but still loving as they mature.
2) Attachment theory: love as a bond that regulates threat
Attachment research shows that close partners serve as safe havens under stress and secure bases for exploration (Bowlby, 1982). Adult attachment styles—secure, anxious, avoidant—reflect expectations about self and others formed in early relationships but still malleable in adulthood (Hazan and Shaver, 1987; Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). Secure attachment predicts better relationship quality, mental health and stress recovery (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007; Holt‑Lunstad, Smith and Layton, 2010).
3) Passionate vs companionate love
Psychologists distinguish early‑stage, high‑arousal passionate love from steadier, friendship‑rich companionate love(Hatfield and Walster, 1978). Both matter; long‑term pairs who cultivate friendship, responsiveness and shared meaning tend to thrive (Gottman and Levenson, 1992; Robles et al., 2013).
4) The investment/commitment model
Commitment grows from three routes: satisfaction, quality of alternatives, and investments (time, mutual friends, shared goals). High commitment predicts staying together and engaging in pro‑relationship behaviours (Rusbult, 1980; Le and Agnew, 2003).
5) Self‑expansion and growth
We fall in love partly because partners help us expand our sense of self—new skills, perspectives and identities (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron et al., 1997). Shared novelty can rekindle passion by reigniting this growth process.
What the brain and body contribute (without reducing love to “just chemicals”)
- Reward and motivation: Early romantic love engages the ventral tegmental area and caudate/ventral striatum, regions that fire for pursuit and reward (Bartels and Zeki, 2000; Fisher, Aron and Brown, 2005). This helps explain intrusive thinking, energy spikes and intense focus on the beloved.
- Caregiving and bonding: Oxytocin and vasopressin modulate social bonding and caregiving; in humans, oxytocin influences trust and stress dampening, though effects depend on context and relationship quality (Moll et al., 2006; Young and Wang, 2004).
- Stress buffering: Holding a partner’s hand reduces neural threat responses and pain, consistent with the “social regulation of emotion” (Coan, Schaefer and Davidson, 2006).
- Health links: High‑quality close relationships are associated with lower mortality risk and better health behaviours (Holt‑Lunstad, Smith and Layton, 2010). The benefit comes from quality, not merely marital status.
Biology provides the scaffolding; culture, personality and skills determine the architecture of any given love story.
Is love universal? What varies across cultures
Anthropologists have found evidence of romantic love in the majority of societies studied, suggesting a human universal with cultural variations in expression and norms (Jankowiak and Fischer, 1992). Cross‑cultural surveys show wide differences in whether people say they would marry without love (e.g., higher acceptance in some collectivist contexts), and in how much weight is placed on family approval, religion and economic security (Levine et al., 1995; Buss, 1989). The core experiences—longing, proximity seeking, distress at separation—appear widely shared, while scripts for courtship, sexuality and commitment differ.
Measuring love (imperfect but useful tools)
Researchers use psychometric scales to capture facets of love and bonding:
- Triangular Love Scale (intimacy, passion, commitment; derived from Sternberg’s model).
- Passionate Love Scale (intense longing and preoccupation) (Hatfield and Sprecher, 1986).
- Love Attitudes Scale (styles such as eros, storge, pragma) (Hendrick and Hendrick, 1986).
- Adult Attachment measures (e.g., Experiences in Close Relationships) to index anxiety and avoidance (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007).
These instruments can predict relationship satisfaction, stability and conflict patterns, but they do not replace lived context.
What makes love last? Five evidence‑based habits
- Prioritise responsiveness over mind‑reading: Partners who notice, understand and validate each other’s needs show higher intimacy and health (Reis and Shaver, 1988; Robles et al., 2013).
- Handle conflict like a team: Criticism, contempt, defensiveness and stonewalling predict break‑up; curiosity, soft start‑ups and repair attempts protect the bond (Gottman and Levenson, 1992).
- Capitalize on good news: How you respond when your partner shares a win predicts trust and satisfaction. Aim for active–constructive responses (Gable, Reis, Impett and Asher, 2004).
- Keep growing together: Share novel, challenging activities to refresh self‑expansion and passion (Aron et al., 1997).
- Invest in rituals and commitment: Small, predictable rituals (check‑ins, gratitude, good‑night routines) and shared projects build the “investment” that stabilises love (Rusbult, 1980; Le and Agnew, 2003).
Love’s “shadow side”: when it hurts
- Trauma bonds and coercive control are not love; they are cycles of affection and abuse that damage autonomy and safety. Prioritise safety planning and specialist help if there is intimidation, isolation or violence (WHO, 2013).
- Anxious–avoidant traps: Some pairs lock into protest and withdrawal patterns; individual therapy and Emotion‑Focused or CBT‑based couple work can help (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007; Johnson et al., 1999).
- Caregiver burnout: Love does not require self‑erasure; sustainable care includes boundaries and support (Schulz and Beach, 1999).
- Myths about “soulmates” can fuel all‑or‑nothing thinking; flexible mindsets predict better adjustment.
If you are unsure whether what you are experiencing is love or harm, seek a registered psychologist or GP for a confidential assessment.
Love beyond the romantic dyad
- Parent–child love: Attachment security in childhood forecasts better emotion regulation and social competence (Bowlby, 1982).
- Friendship and communal love: Close friendships deliver many of the health and wellbeing benefits attributed to romance; compassionate love—caring and concern for another’s growth—predicts satisfaction across relationships (Sprecher and Fehr, 2005; Holt‑Lunstad, Smith and Layton, 2010).
- Consensual non‑monogamy (CNM): Research suggests CNM relationships can be as satisfying as monogamous ones when agreements are explicit and partners enact responsiveness and fairness (Conley et al., 2013). The presence of multiple partners is not the same as betrayal; violating agreements is what constitutes infidelity.
A practical reflection: three conversations to have (or journal about)
- Care and comfort (attachment): When I’m stressed, what helps me feel safe? How do we signal availability to each other? (Hazan and Shaver, 1987; Coan, Schaefer and Davidson, 2006).
- Closeness and growth (intimacy/self‑expansion): What are we learning together this season? What novel, meaningful activity could we try in the next month? (Aron and Aron, 1986; Aron et al., 1997).
- Choice and future (commitment/investment): What are we building that will still matter in five years? What small ritual could we add this week? (Rusbult, 1980; Le and Agnew, 2003).
Bottom line
Love is not just a feeling you either have or don’t. It is a dynamic system of bonding, attraction and choice, scaffolded by biology and shaped by culture, skills and context. Love flourishes where partners feel safe, seen and supported, pursue growth together, and repeatedly choose the relationship when it would be easier not to.
References
Aron, A. and Aron, E.N. (1986) Love and the Expansion of Self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. New York: Hemisphere.
Aron, A., Melinat, E., Aron, E.N., Vallone, R.D. and Bator, R.J. (1997) ‘The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: A procedure and some preliminary findings’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(4), pp. 363–377.
Bartels, A. and Zeki, S. (2000) ‘The neural basis of romantic love’, NeuroReport, 11(17), pp. 3829–3834.
Bowlby, J. (1982) Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. 2nd edn. New York: Basic Books.
Brown, S.L., Nesse, R.M., Vinokur, A.D. and Smith, D.M. (2003) ‘Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it: Results from a prospective study of mortality’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), pp. 123–131.
Buss, D.M. (1989) ‘Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), pp. 1–49.
Coan, J.A., Schaefer, H.S. and Davidson, R.J. (2006) ‘Lending a hand: Social regulation of the neural response to threat’, Psychological Science, 17(12), pp. 1032–1039.
Conley, T.D., Moors, A.C., Ziegler, A. and Rubin, J.D. (2013) ‘The fewer the merrier? Assessing stigma surrounding consensually non‑monogamous romantic relationships’, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 13(1), pp. 1–30.
Gable, S.L., Reis, H.T., Impett, E.A. and Asher, E.R. (2004) ‘What do you do when things go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), pp. 228–245.
Gottman, J.M. and Levenson, R.W. (1992) ‘Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), pp. 221–233.
Hatfield, E. and Sprecher, S. (1986) ‘Measuring passionate love in intimate relationships’, Journal of Adolescence, 9(4), pp. 383–410. (See also Hatfield and Walster, 1978.)
Hatfield, E. and Walster, G.W. (1978) A New Look at Love. Reading, MA: Addison‑Wesley.
Hazan, C. and Shaver, P.R. (1987) ‘Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), pp. 511–524.
Hendrick, C. and Hendrick, S. (1986) ‘A theory and method of love’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(2), pp. 392–402. (See also Love Attitudes Scale research.)
Holt‑Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B. and Layton, J.B. (2010) ‘Social relationships and mortality risk: A meta‑analytic review’, PLoS Medicine, 7(7), e1000316.
Jankowiak, W. and Fischer, E. (1992) ‘A cross‑cultural perspective on romantic love’, Ethnology, 31(1), pp. 23–48.
Johnson, S.M., Hunsley, J., Greenberg, L. and Schindler, D. (1999) ‘Emotionally focused couples therapy: Status and challenges’, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6(1), pp. 67–79.
Le, B. and Agnew, C.R. (2003) ‘Commitment and its theorized determinants: A meta‑analysis of the Investment Model’, Personal Relationships, 10(1), pp. 37–57.
Levine, R.V., Sato, S., Hashimoto, T. and Verma, J. (1995) ‘Love and marriage in eleven cultures’, Journal of Cross‑Cultural Psychology, 26(5), pp. 554–571.
Mikulincer, M. and Shaver, P.R. (2007) Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press.
Moll, J., Krueger, F., Zahn, R., Pardini, M., de Oliveira‑Souza, R. and Grafman, J. (2006) ‘Human fronto‑mesolimbic networks guide decisions about charitable donation’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(42), pp. 15623–15628.
Reis, H.T. and Shaver, P. (1988) ‘Intimacy as an interpersonal process’, in Duck, S. (ed.) Handbook of Personal Relationships. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 367–389.
Robles, T.F., Slatcher, R.B., Trombello, J.M. and McGinn, M.M. (2014) ‘Marital quality and health: A meta‑analytic review’, Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), pp. 140–187.
Rusbult, C.E. (1980) ‘Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16(2), pp. 172–186.
Schulz, R. and Beach, S.R. (1999) ‘Caregiving as a risk factor for mortality: The Caregiver Health Effects Study’, JAMA, 282(23), pp. 2215–2220.
Sprecher, S. and Fehr, B. (2005) ‘Compassionate love for close others and humanity’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(5), pp. 629–651.
Sternberg, R.J. (1986) ‘A triangular theory of love’, Psychological Review, 93(2), pp. 119–135.
WHO (World Health Organization) (2013) Responding to intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women: WHO clinical and policy guidelines. Geneva: WHO.
Young, L.J. and Wang, Z. (2004) ‘The neurobiology of pair bonding’, Nature Neuroscience, 7(10), pp. 1048–1054.
Fisher, H.E., Aron, A. and Brown, L.L. (2005) ‘Romantic love: An fMRI study of a neural mechanism for mate choice’, Journal of Comparative Neurology [Note: often cited via Journal of Neurophysiology; see 94(1), pp. 327–337].
How to cite this article
Therapy Near Me (2025) ‘What is love? A psychologist’s evidence‑based guide’. Available at: https://therapynearme.com.au
