"Have you ever been in a relationship that never quite went anywhere, but somehow managed to persist? Perhaps you did couple-like things-went on dates, spent quality time together, practiced intimacy-but never took the time or effort to actually define your relationship with a label, or let alone as exclusive. These are what, today, are known as " situationships." In a March 2024 study, lead researcher Michael R. Langlais defined and characterized these dynamics as having:"
"In a follow-up study in June of this year, published in Sexuality & Culture, Langlais and his fellow researchers sought to uncover the reasons why individuals seek these half-romantic, half-noncommittal kinds of dynamics. In their 2025 study, by means of both a qualitative and quantitative study, the authors were able to uncover seven recurring themes in the participants' responses, all of which contributed to their reasons for maintaining their situationships: Exclusivity Investment Meeting of emotional needs Future talk Effort Prioritization of the situationship Trust"
Situationships lack clear labels and exhibit low commitment while showing similar affectionate, sexual behaviors and time spent together as exclusive couples. Situationships are generally less satisfying and of lower quality than exclusive romantic relationships. Seven recurring factors help explain why people maintain situationships: exclusivity, investment, meeting emotional needs, future talk, effort, prioritization of the situationship, and trust. The presence of even one of these factors can reduce motivation to leave, and multiple factors often coexist. These dynamics create inertia that keeps situationships ongoing and can function as a kind of relationship purgatory.
Read at Psychology Today
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]