Romantic relationships are interpersonal involvements in which the participants perceive the bond as romantic. As this definition suggests, romantic relationships are rooted in perception: a romantic relationship exists whenever the two partners believe that it does. As perceptions change, so, too, does the relationship. For example, a couple may consider their relationship “casual dating” but still define it as romantic (rather than friendly). But if one person feels romantic and the other does not, they don’t have a romantic relationship (Miller & Steinberg, 1975).
In addition to being affected by the partners’ perceptions, romantic relationships can vary in terms of the emotions that the partners feel toward each other.
Liking and Loving.Being in love is arguably the biggest distinction between romances and other relationship types, which center more on liking. What does it mean to be “in” love, and how does this differ from liking?
Most scholars agree that liking and loving are separate emotional states, with different causes and outcomes (Berscheid & Regan, 2005). Liking is a feeling of affection and respect that we often have for our friends, extended family members, and coworkers (Rubin, 1973). Affection is a sense of warmth and fondness toward another person, while respect is admiration for another person, regardless of how he or she treats or communicates with you.
Loving is a more intense emotional connection, consisting of intimacy, caring, and attachment (Rubin, 1973). Intimacy is a feeling of closeness and “union” between you and another person (Mashek & Aron, 2004). Caring is the concern you have for another person’s welfare and the desire to keep him or her happy. Attachment is a longing to be in another person’s presence as much as possible; in romantic involvements, this often takes the form of sexual desire. Although we may experience intimacy, caring, and attachment with close friends and family members, within romantic involvements, these feelings have a special intensity.
Click to view DOUBLE TAKE: PASSIONATE VS COMPANIONATE LOVE
Passionate and Companionate Love.Many people believe that to be in love, you have to feel constant and consuming sexual attraction toward a partner. In fact, the experience of romantic love covers a broad range of emotions. At one end of the spectrum is passionate love, a state of intense emotional and physical longing for union with another (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1992). Passionate love is experienced across cultures, genders, and ages. Men and women in all cultures report experiencing this type of love with equal frequency and intensity. Moreover, for adults, passionate love is integrally linked with sexuality and sexual desire (Berscheid & Regan, 2005). In one study, undergraduates were asked whether they thought there was a difference between “being in love” and “loving” another person (Ridge & Berscheid, 1989). Eighty-seven percent of respondents said that there was a difference and that sexual attraction was the critical distinguishing feature of being in love. However, passionate love is negatively related to relationship duration. Like it or not, the longer you’re with a romantic partner, the less intense your passionate love will feel (Berscheid, 2002).
At the other end of the romantic spectrum is companionate love: an intense form of liking defined by emotional investment and the close intertwining of two people’s lives (Berscheid & Walster, 1978). Many long-term romantic relationships begin as passionate love and then slowly evolve into companionate love, as the “fire” of passion cools with age and familiarity. For example, in The Descendants, Matt reflects on how his love for Joanie changed over the course of their relationship from passionate to companionate: “At weddings we roll our eyes at the burgeoning love around us, the vows that we know will morph into new kinds of promises: I vow not to kiss you when you’re trying to read; I will tolerate you in sickness and ignore you in health; I promise to let you watch the stupid news show about celebrities” (Hemmings, 2011, p. 46).