Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 29, Issue 2 , Pages 119-126, March 2008

Love, desire, and the suppression of thoughts of romantic alternatives☆

  • Gian C. Gonzaga

      Affiliations

    • eHarmony Labs, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA
    • University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. eHarmony Labs, 888 East Walnut St. 2nd floor, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA.
    • ,
  • Martie G. Haselton

      Affiliations

    • University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
    • ,
  • Julie Smurda

      Affiliations

    • University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
    • ,
  • Mari sian Davies

      Affiliations

    • University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
    • ,
  • Joshua C. Poore

      Affiliations

    • University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Received 30 July 2007; accepted 13 November 2007.

Abstract 

Across human societies, people form long-term romantic bonds that can last a lifetime. Many theorists have proposed that the emotion love plays a causal role in maintaining these bonds, but no work to date has tested this hypothesis directly. In this study, we predicted that feeling love for a romantic partner would facilitate suppressing thoughts of attractive alternative mates. We used a relived emotion task to induce love or sexual desire for a romantic partner and asked participants to suppress thoughts of an attractive alternative. After suppression, participants in the love condition reported fewer thoughts of the attractive alternative and accurately recalled fewer attractiveness-related details about the alternative than those in the desire condition. Reports of love, but not sexual desire, predicted greater commitment to the current partner during the study. These results suggest that love serves a function distinct from desire and that love can operate as a commitment device.

Keywords: Commitment, Love, Intimate Relationships, Attractive Alternatives

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

☆ The current work was produced, in part, at eHarmony Labs, which is associated with eHarmony.com. Although the current work does not directly test any product of eHarmony.com or use data collected by or at eHarmony.com, its publication may positively impact the financial success of eHarmony.com. Thus, the reader should be aware that the first author is employed by eHarmony and has a significant financial interest in the success of eHarmony.com, the parent organization of eHarmony Labs. The University of California, Los Angeles psychology department has not endorsed eHarmony's commercial selection/matching procedures. Portions of study data were presented at the 2002 Meetings of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Los Angeles, California.

PII: S1090-5138(07)00117-1

doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.11.003

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 29, Issue 2 , Pages 119-126, March 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution