 Relationships (Outline) |
|---|
Limerence is themental state of being madly in love[1][2] or intensely infatuated[3][4] when reciprocation of the feeling is uncertain. This state is characterized byintrusive thoughts and idealization of the loved one (also called "crystallization"), typically with a desire for reciprocation to form arelationship. This is accompanied by feelings ofecstasy ordespair, depending on whether one's feelings seem to be reciprocated or not.[5] Research on thebiology of romantic love indicates that the early stage of intenseromantic love (also calledpassionate love) resemblesaddiction, but academics do not currently agree on howlove addictions are defined.[6][7][8]
ThepsychologistDorothy Tennov coined the term "limerence" as an alteration of the word "amorance" without other etymologies.[9][10][11] The concept grew out of her work in the 1960s when she interviewed over 500 people on the topic of love, originally published in her bookLove and Limerence.[12][13][14][15] According to Tennov, "to be in a state of limerence is to feel what is usually termed 'being in love.'"[16] She coined the term to disambiguate the state from other less-overwhelming emotions and to avoid the implication that people who don't experience it are incapable of love.[17][18] Tennov was inspired to study romantic love after encountering people in her post as a professor who experienced severeheartbreak and personal perils.[19][12] Tennov's research suggested to her that limerence is normal (although illogical), and a 2025 survey suggested that as many as 50–60% of the population had experienced it.[20][21][22]
Limerence is a descriptive concept, rather than adiagnosis ordisorder; it is not in theDSM.[23] Thepolysemous nature oflove words has led to semantic confusion which Tennov meant to clarify, although there is even still disagreement on how "limerence" is defined.[24][18][25] Love research has never adopted a unified terminology or definitions.[6][24] According to Tennov and others, limerence can be considered intense romantic love,[26][9][27]falling in love,[28][29][30] love madness,[1][31][2] intenseinfatuation,[4][32][30] passionate love with obsessive elements[15][6][33] orlovesickness.[13][34][35] Limerence andobsessive love are similar, but obsessive love has connotations of possessive and self-defeating behavior.[36][25][37] Limerence is also sometimes compared to and contrasted with acrush, with limerence being much more intense and impacting day-to-day functioning more: "when a crush has taken over your life".[38][39][40]
Love and Limerence has been called the seminal work on romantic love, with Tennov's survey results and the various personal accounts recounted in the book largely marking the start of data collection on the phenomenon.[6][41]
Dorothy Tennov's research was intended to be ascientific attempt at understanding the nature ofromantic love.[42] She identified a suite ofpsychological properties associated with a state she calledlimerence—usually termed "being in love", but distinguishable from other types ofattraction patterns that the phrase "in love" might also refer to.[43][44][2][45] Other authors have considered limerence to be anemotional andmotivational state for focusingattention on a preferredmating partner[44][46] or anattachment process.[47][48]
Joe Beam calls limerence the feeling of being "madly in love".[49][2]Nicky Hayes describes it as "a kind of infatuated, all-absorbing passion", the type of loveDante felt towardsBeatrice or that ofRomeo and Juliet.[3] An unfulfilled, intense longing defines the state, where the individual becomes "more or less obsessed by that person and spends much of their time fantasising about them". Hayes suggests it is "the unobtainable nature of the goal which makes the feeling so powerful", and occasional,intermittent reinforcement may be required to support the underlying feelings.[3]Arthur andElaine Aron noted a "constant, overwhelming, and even debilitating absorption in the unrequited desire" in their characterization of limerence.[26]Stanton Peele compares it to "severe emotional disability", with an often inappropriate love object.[50]Frank Tallis calls it "love that does not need liking—love that may even thrive in response to rejection or contempt" and notes the "striking similarities" withaddiction.[51][52]
A central feature of limerence, for Tennov, was that her participants really saw the personal flaws of the object of their affection but overlooked them or found them attractive.[53][54] Tennov calls this "crystallization", after a description by the French writerStendhal. This "crystallized" object of passionate desire is what Tennov calls a "limerent object" (LO), "because to the degree that your reaction to a person is limerent, you respond toyour construction of LO's qualities".[55]
Limerence has psychological properties akin to the concept ofpassionate love,[56][57][46] but in Tennov's conception, limerence begins before anintimate relationship and before the person experiencing it knows for certain whether it is reciprocated.[58][59] Limerence is frequentlyunrequited and turns into alovesickness that can be difficult to escape.[60][3][61][62] Tennov argues that some situational uncertainty is required for the mental preoccupation and feelings to intensify, for example: mixed messages, physical or social obstacles, or even an LO's unsuitability as a partner.[63]
Not everyone experiences limerence.[64] Tennov estimated that 50% of women and 35% of men experience limerence based on answers to certain survey questions she administered.[65] Another survey administered byneuroscientist and limerence blogger Tom Bellamy indicated that 64% had experienced it at least once, and 32% "found it so distressing that it was hard to enjoy life".[22]
It can be difficult for people who have not experienced limerence to understand it, and it is often derided and dismissed as some pathology, or an invention of romantic fiction.[66] According to Tennov, limerence is not amental illness, although it can be "highly disruptive and extremely painful", called "irrational, silly, embarrassing, and abnormal" or sometimes "the greatest happiness" depending on who is asked.[67]
The original components of limerence were:[68]
— Dorothy Tennov, Love and Limerence: The Experience of Being in Love
- intrusive thinking about the object of your passionate desire (the limerent object or "LO"), who is a possible sexual partner
- acute longing for reciprocation
- dependency of mood on LO's actions or, more accurately, your interpretation of LO's actions with respect to the probability of reciprocation
- inability to reactlimerently to more than one person at a time (exceptions occur only when limerence is at low ebb—early on or in the last fading)
- some fleeting and transient relief from unrequited limerent passion through vivid imagination of action by LO that means reciprocation
- fear of rejection and sometimes incapacitating but always unsettling shyness in LO's presence, especially in the beginning and whenever uncertainty strikes
- intensification through adversity (at least, up to a point)
- acute sensitivity to any act or thought or condition that can be interpreted favorably, and an extraordinary ability to devise or invent "reasonable" explanations for why the neutrality that the disinterested observer might see is in fact a sign of hidden passion in the LO
- an aching of the "heart" (a region in the center front of the chest) when uncertainty is strong
- buoyancy (a feeling of walking on air) when reciprocation seems evident
- a general intensity of feeling that leaves other concerns in the background
- a remarkable ability to emphasize what is truly admirable in LO and to avoid dwelling on the negative, even to respond with a compassion for the negative and render it, emotionally if not perceptually, into another positive attribute.
Dorothy Tennov gives several reasons for inventing a term for the state denoted by limerence (usually termed "being in love").[86] One principle reason is to resolve ambiguities with the word "love" being used both to refer to anact (which is chosen), as well as to astate (which is endured):[18]
Many writers on love have complained about semantic difficulties. The dictionary lists two dozen different meanings of the word "love". And how does one distinguish between love and affection, liking, fondness, caring, concern, infatuation, attraction, or desire? [...] Acknowledgment of a distinction between love as a verb, as an action taken by the individual, and love as a state is awkward. Never having fallen in love is not at all a matter of not loving, if loving is defined as caring. Furthermore, this state of "being in love" included feelings that do not properly fit with love defined as concern.
(The type of love that focuses on caring for others is calledcompassionate love oragape.)[24]
The other principle reason given is that she encountered people who do not experience limerence. The first such person Tennov discovered was a long-time friend, Helen Payne, whose unfamiliarity with the state emerged during a conversation on an airplane flight together.[64] Tennov writes that "describing the intricacies of romantic attachments" to Helen was "like trying to describe the color red to one blind from birth".[87] A person not currently experiencing limerence is called "nonlimerent", but Tennov cautions that it seemed to her that there is no "nonlimerent personality" and that potentially anyone could experience limerence.[88] Tennov says:[18]
I adopted the view that never being in this state was neither more nor less pathological than experiencing it. I wanted to be able to speak about this reliably identifiable condition without giving love's advocates the feeling something precious was being destroyed. Even more important, if using the term "love" denoted the presence of the state, there was the danger that absence of the state would receive negative connotations.
Tennov addresses the issue of whether limerence is love in other passages.[89] In one passage she clearly says that limerence is love, at least in certain cases:[90]
In fully developed limerence, you feeladditionally what is, in other contexts as well, called love—an extreme degree of feeling that you want LO to be safe, cared for, happy, and all those other positive and noble feelings [...]. That's probably why limerence is called love in all languages. [...] Surely limerence is love at its highest and most glorious peak.
However, Tennov switches in tone and continues on with a fairly negative story of the pain felt by a woman reminiscing over the time she wasted pining for a man she now feels nothing towards, something which occupied her in a time when her father was still alive and her children "were adorable babies who needed their mother's attention." Tennov says this is why we distinguish limerence (this "love") from other loves.[90] In another passage, Tennov says that while affection and fondness do not demand anything in return, the return of feelings desired in the limerent state means that "Other aspects of your life, including love, are sacrificed in behalf of the all-consuming need." and that "While limerence has been called love, it is not love."[91]
_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg)
Dorothy Tennov sometimes considers limerence to be synonymous with "romantic love",[94][95][9] a term with a complicated history and definition. A cultural ancestor to Tennov's concept was the literary tradition of romantic love, involving often tragic or unfulfilled love, or early depictions of limerence.[96][94][3] Literature and poetry provided early self-reports of the kind of experience Tennov was interested in studying.[97] Some examples of romantic love stories in this vein areLayla and Majnun,Tristan and Iseult,Dante andBeatrice (fromLa Vita Nuova),Romeo and Juliet andThe Sorrows of Young Werther.[98][3]Anakin andPadmé fromStar Wars are a modern depiction.[99][100][101]
The literary genre dates back totroubadour poetry from theMiddle Ages (or earlier), also known as "courtly love".[102] Tennov creditsAndreas Capellanus as describing limerence "very accurately" inThe Art of Courtly Love, a book of statutes for the "proper" conduct of lovers.[103][104] The work includes rules such as "A true lover is constantly and without intermission possessed by the thoughts of his beloved." and "The easy attainment of love makes it of little value; difficulty of attainment makes it prized."[105] The work is believed to have helped spread romantic love culture throughoutEurope.[105][106] Romantic love in this sense is sometimes held to besocially constructed (often by critics), but Tennov argues that limerence has a biological basis.[107][108]
Tennov sometimes considers limerence synonymous with "falling in love",[109][110] a concept which also has origins in the romantic tradition and the idea that love is tragic—evoking a connotation of physically falling over or losing consciousness.[110]
"Romantic love" originally referenced this courtly idea, but then came to have other connotations.[111] In modern scientific literature, "romantic love" is instead often used as a synonym for "passionate love", a more general concept, also often associated with limerence.[6][112][113] In her era, Tennov called the scientific literature "confused and contradictory".[114]John Alan Lee has also complained about this reduction to a monolithic typology, or "one true love".[115][116]Helen Fisher commented that she preferred the term "romantic love" for its meaning in society.[117]
Limerence is often associated with "passionate love", withElaine Hatfield considering them synonymous, and commenting in 2016 that they're "much the same".[15][118][113] Many researchers have considered them synonymous.[30][46][6][33] Passionate love is:[119]
A state of intense longing for union with an other. Reciprocated love (union with the other) is associated with fulfillment and ecstasy. Unrequited love (separation) with emptiness; with anxiety, or despair. A state of profound physiological arousal.
Passionate love is linked topassion, as in intenseemotion: for example,joy andfulfillment, but alsoanguish andagony.[120] According to Hatfield, passion is a "hodgepodge of conflicting emotions", and the original meaning "was agony—as inChrist's passion."[121][120] Passionate love is contrasted with the less intense "companionate love": "theaffection we feel for those with whom our lives are deeply entwined".[122][6]
InLove and Limerence,Dorothy Tennov also lists passionate love among her synonyms for limerence, and refers to Hatfield's early writings on the concept.[123] Tennov's study, however, focused on the aspects of love which cause distress, and on individuals over relationships.[124][125] Another problem she encountered in her research was that informants would use terms like "passionate love", "romantic love" and "being in love" to refer to mental states other than what she refers to as limerence.[126] Informants would use the word "obsession", yet not report theintrusive thoughts necessary to limerence, only that "thoughts of the person are frequent and pleasurable".[127]
Passionate love is commonly measured with thePassionate Love Scale (PLS), originally designed to measure the same state denoted by limerence.[113][128][129] Later research found the PLS has overly broad questions, and it actually has two general components (calledfactors): anobsession factor and anon-obsession factor.[130][33] The PLS obsession factor has items like "Sometimes I feel I can't control my thoughts; they are obsessively on my partner." and "An existence without my partner would be dark and dismal."[33][131] Limerence is comparable to passionate love with obsession:[33]
Passionate love, "a state of intense longing for union with another" [...], also referred to as [...] "limerence" (Tennov, 1979), includes an obsessive element, characterized by intrusive thinking, uncertainty, and mood swings.
The PLS non-obsession factor has items like "For me, my partner is the perfect romantic partner." and "I want my partner—physically, emotionally, and mentally."[33] These love feelings (without obsession) can sustain over a longer period, according to newer research.[132][133][33]
"Infatuation" has been considered synonymous with concepts likepassionate love, "being in love" and limerence,[30][46][33] but limerence is supposed to be more intense than a simple infatuation.[2]Dorothy Tennov has stated that she did not use the word "infatuation" because while there is overlap, the word evokes different connotations.[125] In one type of distinction, people use "infatuation" to express disapproval or to refer to unsatisfactory relationships, and "love" to refer to satisfactory ones.[134] InLove and Limerence, Tennov considers "infatuation" to bepejorative, for example, being used to labelteenage fantasizing about acelebrity which is actually limerence.[135]
In thetriangular theory of love, byRobert Sternberg, "infatuation" refers to romantic passion without intimacy (or closeness) and without commitment, which he has stated is essentially the same as limerence.[136][137]
Helen Fisher's popular theory ofindependent emotion systems posits that there are three primary systems involved with humanreproduction,mating andparenting:lust (the sex drive, or sexual desire),attraction (passionate love, infatuation or limerence) andattachment (companionate love). These three systems regularly work in concert together but serve different purposes and can also work independently.[44][46][138] According to Fisher, lust, attraction and attachment can occur in any order.[139][140] Independent emotions theory has been critiqued as being oversimplified, but the general idea of separate systems remains useful.[138]
When limerence is a component in anaffair, for example, Fisher's theory can be used to help explain this.[46][141] Fisher's theory is that a person can feel deep attachment for a long-term spouse,while they're in limerence with somebody else,while they can be sexually attracted to still yet other people.[46][142]Joe Beam comments that if somebody in a committed relationship ends up in limerence like this, it will pull them out of their relationship.[49]
Fisher's theory has also been used to explain "platonic" limerence (withoutsexual desire), because romantic love and sexual desire are functionally distinct.[30][143] Tennov encountered this occasionally in her own research, finding cases of otherwiseheterosexual women experiencing limerence for an older woman (compared to "hero worship"), but dismissed it as being outside her theory.[144]Lisa Diamond argues this is possible (even in contradiction tosexual orientation) because the brain systems evolved byrepurposing the systems for mother-infant bonding (a process calledexaptation). According to this theory, it would not have been adaptive for a parent to only be able to bond with an opposite sex child, so the systems must have evolved independent of sexual orientation.[30]
John Bowlby's concept of "attachment" refers to a system evolved to keep infants in proximity of their caregiver (or "attachment figure").[30][47][24] An attachment figure is a "secure base" for safety while exploring the environment, the child seeks proximity with the attachment figure when threatened, and suffers distress when separated.[24][47] A prominent theory suggests this system is reused for adultpair bonds, as anexaptation or co-option, whereby a given trait takes on a new purpose.[47][138][30] "Attachment style" refers to differences in thoughts and behaviors, relating to the concept of security vs. insecurity.[145][47] This is split into components of anxiety (worrying the partner is available, attentive and responsive) and avoidance (preference not to rely on others or open up emotionally).[145]
InHelen Fisher's theory, limerence and attachment are considered different systems with different purposes.[44][46] In the past, it has also been suggested that limerence could be related to the anxious attachment style.[47][48] However, in their original 1987 paper about this,Cindy Hazan andPhillip Shaver caution they aren't implying the early phase ofromance is equivalent to being attached.[47] Other prominent authors have also argued that attachment theory cannot replace concepts like love styles or types of love.[146][24] Limerence is considered a unique state which is distinct from attachment style, although people who have an anxious attachment style are more likely to have experienced it according to one survey.[147]
A 1990 study found considerable overlap of distributions between all three attachment styles and limerence (reported at similar frequencies), but the 15% of participants with an anxious attachment style scored about 10–20% higher on obsessive preoccupation and emotional dependence, and avoidants idealized more.[48][148] Along with scoring highly on limerence, the anxious group also scored highly on theagape love attitude, for selfless, all-giving love.[48]
The concept of a "love style" was invented by thesociologistJohn Alan Lee, to distinguish between different ways to love, or different types of love stories.[149][150] Limerence is considered similar or related to the love stylemania (or manic love), named after theAncient Greektheia mania (the madness from the gods).[151][48][26][152] Lee developed his mania concept from sources similar to Tennov, likeAndreas Capellanus andcourtly love.[153][154][106] Both Lee and Tennov refer to "love madness", and Peele & Brodsky'sLove and Addiction.[155][1][156][157]
A manic lover is obsessively preoccupied with the beloved.[158] When asked to recall their childhood, a typical manic lover recalls it as unhappy, and they're usually lonely, dissatisfied adults.[159] They're anxious to fall in love, but they're unsure of which physical type they prefer.[149] Because they're unsure of who to fall in love with, they often fall in love with somebody quite inappropriate (a stranger, or even somebody they initially dislike) and project onto them the qualities they want but don't actually have.[160][161] According to Lee, "Mania can become almost an addiction nearly impossible for the addict to end on his own initiative."[162] Mania is often the first love style of a young person, but others may not experience it until middle age—for example, after amarriage has lost interest.[161] According to Lee, a cycle of manic loves is often caused by a desperate need to be in love, the cause of which the manic lover must locate and remedy to break free.[163]
Lee describes the manic lover asjealous,[158] but Tennov believes that a person can be limerent and not be jealous.[164]
Among the other love styles, mania can be closely compared toeros (erotic love, or love of beauty).[165][166] Both are often considered "romantic love", both involve "falling in love", and taken together they correspond to the way thePassionate Love Scale is defined.[165][167][33] An erotic lover isalso intensely preoccupied with their beloved, but the thoughts are optimistic, while a manic lover is insecure.[168]Unlike a manic lover, however, the erotic lover is aware of a physical type they consider ideal.[169] As such, eros begins with a powerful initial attraction, referred to byStendhal as "a sudden sensation of recognition and hope".[170] The eros love style is not "blind", then.[171] According to Lee, only manic lovers typically "crystallize" (as Stendhal described it) and ignore shortcomings and flaws in their beloved.[172] The erotic lover also recalls their childhood as happy, and eros has been associated withsecure attachment, while mania has been associated withattachment anxiety andneuroticism.[173][174][175] A third style, manic eros, is a mixture "moving either toward a more stable eros or toward full-blown mania". Some are erotic lovers under a temporary strain (moving toward mania), while others are manic lovers with a self-confident and helping partner (moving toward eros).[176]
According to Lee, the love styleludus (noncommittal love as a game, avoidance and juggling multiple partners, e.g.Don Juan) and mania possess a "fatal attraction" for one another. It's surprisingly common, but not a good match for happy, mutual love.[177] According to Tennov, Don Juan was probably nonlimerent, "more interested in exploiting the feeling in others for his own sexual gratification", although nonlimerence doesn't necessitate this.[12][178]
"Love addiction" is aheterogeneous construct under discussion as a potentialmental disorder, but does not yet exist in anypsychiatricnosology (e.g. not in theDSM).[179][180][181] Academics do not currently agree on when love is an addiction or when it needs to be treated. In a narrow view, love could be considered addiction only when it involves abnormal processes carrying negative consequences; alternatively, a broader view is that all love might be addiction, or simply anappetite, similar to how humans are dependent onfood.[8] Authors such asHelen Fisher have also included those "who have been rejected or broken up with" as love addicts.[182][7]
Limerence has been included in this discussion, and likened to a love addiction.[50][183][184]Stanton Peele, a pioneering author on love addiction,[180] has commented on limerence, calling it a "clinical condition" which "leads people (primarily women) desperately to pursue often inappropriate love objects, frequently to fail at relationships, and to be incapable of learning from such experiences".[50]Sharon Brehm has wondered what limerence[185] would feel like "if there were a cultural tradition encouraging us to work with it rather than be assailed by it".[186]
Limerence is different fromerotomania, adelusional disorder where the sufferer falsely believes their love is secretly reciprocated when it isn't, and invents ways to interpret outright rejections as unserious.[23][187] A person in limerence by comparison might "grasp for hope" and misinterpret signals, orimagine reciprocation in afantasy, but they will understand a rejection.[188]Helen Fisher and colleagues have stated that erotomania may be a type ofschizophrenia, and may not involve the same brainreward system activity asromantic love.[7]
Dorothy Tennov's speculation was that limerence has anevolutionary purpose.[190][191]
For what ultimate cause might the state of limerence be a proximate cause? In other words, why were people who became limerent successful, maybe more successful than others, in passing their genes on to succeeding generations[.] Did limerence evolve to cement a relationship long enough to get the offspring up and running? [...] The most consistent result of limerence is mating, not merely sexual interaction but also commitment, the establishment of a shared domicile in the form of a cozy nest built for the enjoyment of ecstasy, for reproduction, and for the rearing of children.
According to the evolutionary theory by theanthropologistHelen Fisher, limerence is the activation of a motivation system for choosing and focusing energy on a potential mating partner. This brain system evolved for mammalianmate choice, also called "courtship attraction". In this phenomenon, a preferred mating partner is chosen based on a display of physical traits (such as apeacock's tail feathers) or other behaviors.[44][46][192] Fisher also includes the attraction topersonality traits and other characteristics in her mate choice theory for humans.[193][194][195] Who a person falls in love with then is determined by their "love map", a largely unconscious list of traits they desire in an ideal partner. Love maps begin forming during childhood based on experiences with parents and friends, among other associations, but also change over time.[196][197] In most species, courtship attraction is brief, but intense romantic love can last much longer in humans.[192] A competing evolutionary theory to Fisher's is that courtship attraction only encompasses something likelove at first sight attraction, and the obsessive thoughts and intense attraction associated with early-stage romantic love instead evolved byco-opting (or re-using) the brain systems for mother-infant bonding. In this theory, romantic love may serve the function of mate choice but the brain systems were not originally for this.[6][138][30]
Theneuroscientist Tom Bellamy believes that limerence evolved as a form of high-risk "extreme pair bonding" which can be explained as a handicap signal.[189] Thehandicap principle in evolutionary theory is based on a contention between honest and fakesignaling. When realemotions evolve, a niche is created for sham emotions (e.g. fake facial expressions) which are less risky to express. One explanation for why honest signals can evolve without becoming worthless (because of competing fakers) is that the honest signal can evolve if it's too expensive to fake. One example in nature is the peacock's tail, an example ofconspicuous consumption, a cumbersome display which consumes nutrients. Only a healthy peacock can afford it, so in that case it may have evolvedbecause it was a handicap, and used by females of the species as an indicator of health.[198] Limerence can be seen as a handicap signal meant to prove one's true commitment to their limerent object. Limerence might have evolved to leave the person experiencing it so insanely besotted that they would not leave for another mate, even a more valuable one.[189] According to Helen Fisher's theory,monogamy emerged at a time when mothers needed extra food and protection (whenbipedalism evolved, and then infantaltriciality later), so romantic love evolved to last long enough while a mother cares for an infant.[199][7]
Tennov suggested that if the neural "machinery" for limerence is not a universal among all humans, then having bothphenotypes (limerent and nonlimerent) in the population might be beneficial and anevolutionarily stable strategy.[200] Limerents and nonlimerents tend not to always get along, nor have compatible relationship interests.[201] Limerence would also be affected by culture, according to Tennov. A culture which idealizes limerence might cause the nonlimerent LO to be more tolerant (or even imitate it), whereas a culture which is hostile to limerence might cause it to be denied, hidden or suppressed.[202]
Limerence has been called anaddiction.[157][38][203] The early stage ofromantic love is being compared to abehavioral addiction (i.e. addiction to a non-substance) but the "substance" involved is the loved person.[52][7][204][205] A team led byHelen Fisher usedfMRI to find that people who had "just fallen madly in love" showed activation in an area of thebrain called theventral tegmental area (VTA) while looking at a photograph of their beloved.[46][128][7] The VTA is an area in themidbrain which producesdopamine and projects to otherreward system areas, like thenucleus accumbens andcaudate nucleus which have also been active in brain scans of romantic love.[128][7][206][207] Dopamine signaling in the VTA is the origin of a phenomenon calledincentive salience, also called "wanting" (in quotes). This is the property by which cues in the environment stand out to a person and become attention-grabbing and attractive, like a "motivational magnet" which pulls a person towards a particular reward.[208][206][207] People in love are thought to experience incentive salience in response to their beloved.[7]
In addiction research, a distinction is drawn between "wanting" a reward (i.e. incentive salience, tied tomesocorticolimbic dopamine) and "liking" a reward (i.e. pleasure, tied tohedonic hotspots), aspects which are dissociable.[208][206] People can be addicted to drugs andcompulsively seek them out, even when taking the drug no longer results in a high or the addiction is detrimental to one's life.[7] They can also "want" (i.e. feel compelled towards, in the sense of incentive salience) something which they do notcognitively wish for.[208] In a similar way, people who are in love may "want" a loved person even when interactions with them are not pleasurable. For example, they may want to contact an ex-partner after a rejection, even when the experience will only be painful.[7] It is also possible for a person to be "in love" with somebody they do not like, or who treats them poorly.[209] Fisher's team proposes that romantic love is a "positive addiction" (i.e. not harmful) when requited and a "negative addiction" when unrequited or inappropriate.[7]
For a person in limerence that goes unrequited, the pleasurable aspects tend to diminish over time, with the person becoming lovesick and the addiction being maintained more by avoidance of the pain of separation.[52][61][35][62]
Usually limerence isunrequited, and a horrible experience for the limerent person, even debilitating for some.[212][62]Lovesickness is the resultingmental state, characterized byaddictive cravings,frustration,depression, melancholy andintrusive thinking.[61][35][62] InDorothy Tennov's survey group, 42% reported being "severely depressed about a love affair" and 17% said they "often thought of committingsuicide".[213]Helen Fisher'sfMRI scans of rejected lovers showed activation in brain areas associated with physical pain, craving and assessing one's gains and losses.[7] A limerent person can self-isolate, or bedistracted, even to the detriment of school or job performance.[214][62]
Ashyness andconfusion manifests out of fear of rejection when an LO is around—sometimes even in those normally confident, with the limerent person "terribly worried that [their] own actions may bring about disaster".[215] A 28-year-old truck driver says it's "like what you might call stage fright [...]. I was awkward as hell."[216] The physiological effects of limerence includetrembling,pallor,flushing,weakness,sweating,butterflies in the stomach and apounding heart.[215][217] When Tennov asked her informants where the sensation of limerence was felt, "they pointed unerringly to the midpoint in their chest. So consistently did this occur that it would seem to be another indication that the state described is indeed limerence".[218]
In a 1987 survey byShere Hite in which many participants described relationships which were clearly limerent, 69% of married women and 48% of single women "neither liked, nor trusted, being in love", and their responses indicated being in love was mostly distressing. 17% "could no longer take love seriously".[219] Tennov describes being under the spell herself: "Before it happened, I couldn't have imagined it[.] Now, I wouldn't want to have it happen again."[13] Some people even described to her incidents ofself-harm, but Tennov maintains that such tragedies involve limerence "augmented and distorted" by other factors.[220]
There's debate among academics over when love can be consideredaddiction, and whether addiction is really a "true"mental illness.[8][52] Lovesickness has been pathologized in previous centuries, but is not currently in theICD-10,ICPC orDSM-5.[35][221] The lovers described by Tennov bear a particular resemblance to addicts, but limerence was not intended to denote an abnormal state.[52] The author andclinical psychologistFrank Tallis has made the argument that all love—even normal love—is largely indistinguishable from mental illness.[222]
For should I see thee a little moment,
Straight is my voice hushed;
Yea, my tongue is broken, and
through and through me
'Neath the flesh, impalpable fire
runs tingling;
Nothing see mine eyes, and a
voice of roaring
Waves in my ear sounds;
Sweat runs down in rivers, a
tremor seizes
All my limbs, and paler than
grass in autumn,
Caught by pains of menacing
death, I falter,
Lost in the love-trance.
The symptoms of lovesickness still bear resemblance to entries in the DSM, which now includes some addictions, and there are other entries which also resemble core symptoms offalling in love: preoccupation, episodes of melancholy, rapture and instability of mood.[224][221] These correspond to conventional diagnoses of obsessionality (orOCD),depression,mania (orhypomania) andmanic depression.[225][221] Other examples are physical symptoms resemblingpanic attacks (pounding heart,trembling,shortness of breath andlightheadedness), excessive worrying about the future resemblinggeneralized anxiety disorder, appetite disturbance and sensitivity about one's appearance resemblinganorexia nervosa, and the feeling that life has become a dream resemblingderealization anddepersonalization.[226]
It has been argued that falling in love is involuntary, but whether one's subsequentbehavior could be consideredautonomous may depend on whether addictive love is viewed as a normal or abnormal state.[8] Tallis argues that love evolved to overriderationality so that one finds a lover to reproduce with, regardless of the personal costs of bearing and raising a child:[227]
At first sight, it seems extraordinary that evolutionary forces might conspire to shape something that looks like a mental illness to ensure reproductive success. Yet, there are many reasons why love should have evolved to share with madness several features—the most notable of which is the loss of reason. Like the ancienthumoral model of love sickness, evolutionary principles seem to have necessitated a blurring of the distinction between normal and abnormal states. Evolution expects us to love madly, lest we fail to love at all.
According to Tennov, "Love has been called a madness and an affliction at least since the time of theancient Greeks and probably earlier than that."[228] Historically, lovesickness has been attributed to arrows shot byEros, a sickness entering through the eyes (likeevil eye), excess ofblack bile,spells,potions and othermagic. The first known treatise on the subject isRemedia Amoris, by the poetOvid. People have tried to treat lovesickness with a variety of natural products, charms and rituals.[35] ThebioethicistBrian Earp and his colleagues have argued that the voluntary use of anti-love drugs (made to cause a person to fall out of love) could be ethical, but there's no drug now which is a realistic candidate.[229][230][231][35]
Intrusive thinking is a hallmark or cardinal trait of romantic love.[138][128][6][236] Tennov wrote that "Limerence is first and foremost a condition of cognitive obsession."[237] One study found that on average people in love spent 65% of their waking hours thinking of their beloved.[236]Arthur Aron says "It is obsessive-compulsive when you're feeling it. It's the center of your life."[27] At the height of obsessive fantasy, a person in limerence can spend 85 to nearly 100% of their days and nights doting in reverie, lose their ability to focus and become distracted.[54]
A limerent person can spend time fantasizing about future events even if they never come true, as the anticipation on its own yieldsdopamine.[38] According to Tennov, limerent fantasy is unsatisfactory unless rooted in reality, because the fantasy must seem realistic enough to be somewhat possible.[238][239] Fantasies can nevertheless be wildly unrealistic: one person recalled an elaborate rescue, in which he saves an LO's 5-year-old cousin from motorcycles, only to be killed by a snake in the lap of his LO as she tells him "I love you".[240] This fantasizing along with the replaying of actual memories forms a bridge between ordinary life and the eventual hoped-for moment: consummation. Tennov says that limerent fantasy is "inescapable", something that just "happens" as opposed to something one "does".[241]
Ellen Berscheid &Elaine Hatfield (cited by Tennov)[242] state on the importance of fantasy:[243]
When the lover closes his eyes and daydreams, he can summon up a flawless partner—a partner who instantaneously satisfies all his unspoken, conflicting, and fleeting desires. In fantasy he may receive unlimited reward or he mayanticipate that he would receive unlimited reward were he ever to actually meet his ideal. Compared to our grandiose fantasies, the level of reward we receive in our real interactions is severely circumscribed. As a consequence, sometimes the most extreme passion is aroused by partners who exist only in imagination or partners who are barely known.
One theory of obsessive thinking draws a parallel withdrug addiction: the early stage of romantic love is compared to addiction, and drug addicts also exhibit obsessive thoughts about drug use.[204][52] Tennov conceived of limerent fantasy (based in reality) as "intricate strategy planning".[244] In the late 1990s, it was also speculated that falling in love loweredserotonin levels in the brain, believed to cause intrusive thoughts.[44][245] This was based on a comparison toobsessive–compulsive disorder, but the experiments were ambiguous.[246][245][6] The experiments also measuredblood levels rather than in thecentral nervous system, making the results difficult to interpret. The first experiment found thatserotonin transporter levels were lower, but a second experiment found that blood serotonin levels in men and women were affected differently.[6][236][245] This second experiment found that obsessive thinking was actually associated with increased serotonin in women.[236]SSRI use also seemed to not have an effect on obsessive thinking in a 2025 study.[247]
For some people whofear intimacy or have a history oftrauma, limerent fantasy might be an escape, without the threat of real intimacy.[184][248]
Crystallization, for Tennov, is the "remarkable ability to emphasize what is truly admirable in LO and to avoid dwelling on the negative, even to respond with a compassion for the negative and render it, emotionally if not perceptually, into another positive attribute."[249][44] The term comes from the French writerStendhal's 1821 treatise on love,De l'Amour, in which he describes an analogy where a tree branch is tossed into asalt mine. After several months, the tree branch (or twig) becomes covered in salt crystals which transform it "into an object of shimmering beauty". In the same way, unattractive characteristics of an LO are given little to no attention, so that the LO is seen in the most favorable light.[250][251] One of Tennov's informants says:[252]
Yes I knew he gambled, I knew he sometimes drank too much, and I knew he didn't read a book from one year to the next.I knew and I didn't know. [...] I dwelt on his wavy hair, the way he looked at me, the thought of his driving to work in the morning, his charm (that I believed must surely affect everyone he met), the flowers he sent, [...]. Okay! I know it's crazy, that my list of 'positives' sounds silly, but thoseare the things I think of, remember, and, yes, want back again!
This kind of "misperception" or "love is blind"cognitive bias[6][54] is more often referred to as "idealization",[253] which modern research considers to be a form ofpositive illusions.[6][254] Past authors have sometimes depicted idealization as a malady, but significant scientific evidence has shown that positive illusions actually contribute to relationship satisfaction, long-term well-being and decreased risk for relationship discontinuation.[254][255][256] Tennov argues against the term "idealization", because she says it implies that the image seen by the person experiencing romantic passion "is molded to fit a preformed, externally derived, or emotionally needed conception".[253] In crystallization, the term she prefers, "the actual and existing features of LO merely undergo enhancement."[253]
A limerent person may overlook red flags or incompatibilities.[248][85] Crystallization can be an impediment to recovery, as one of Tennov's informants relates:[257]
I decided to make a list in block letters of everything about Elsie that I found unpleasant or annoying. It was a very long list. On the other side of the paper, I listed her good points. It was a short list. But it didn't help at all. The good points seemedso much more important, and the bad things, well, in Elsie they weren't so bad, or they were things I felt I could help her with.
Some people have a heightened susceptibility to limerence, a state Tennov calls "readiness", "longing for limerence" or being "in love with love".[258][259] This can occur due to biological factors (likeadolescence), but also psychological factors (likeloneliness or discontent). Sometimes readiness can be so intense that a personfalls in love with somebody with only minimal appeal.[259] The psychoanalystsFreud andReik believed thatunhappy people tend to be the most vulnerable to love and fantasy;Elaine Hatfield concurs, saying "the greater our need, the more grandiose our fantasies".[260][259][261] Theseclinical theorists have been interpreted as dealing with the same ("hot, passionate") aspects of love as Tennov, although they were writing before her.[262]
Shaver &Hazan observed that lonely people are more susceptible to limerence,[263] arguing that if people have many unmet social needs and are unaware, then a sign somebody is interested in them may become magnified into something quite unrealistic.[264]
According toDorothy Tennov, as an elaboration on a theory byStendhal, "uncertainty" is a key element to limerence:[265][266]
The recognition that some uncertainty must exist has been commented on and complained about by virtually everyone who has undertaken a serious study of the phenomenon of romantic love. PsychologistsEllen Berscheid andElaine Walster discussed this common observation made, they note, bySocrates,Ovid, theKama Sutra, and "Dear Abby," that the presentation of a hard-to-get as opposed to an immediately yielding exterior is a help in eliciting passion.
Rather than being anemotion itself,romantic love is amotivational state which elicits different emotions depending on the situation:[231][44] positive feelings when things go well and negative feelings when things go awry.[57] The "goal" according to Tennov's analysis is "oneness" with the LO, i.e. mutual reciprocation or return of feelings; a person in limerence is emotionally dependent on the perceived probability of this reciprocation.[267] In thereward theory of attraction, an LO is seen as areinforcer because of the potential for a rewarding experience in their presence.[262][268][269]
According to Tennov's theory, two elements are required for limerence to develop and intensify: hope and uncertainty. There must be at least some hope that an LO will reciprocate, but uncertainty over their true feelings is required for the preoccupation and mood changes to intensify.[270] In some cases, uncertain reciprocation can produce mood swings which are so abrupt as to cause emotional volatility, even in generally stable people. One of Tennov's informants recalls: "When I felt [Barry] loved me, I was intensely in love and deliriously happy; when he seemed rejecting, I was still intensely in love, only miserable beyond words."[271]
Limerence normally subsides when either:[59][272]
In even some further cases ("and this is the madness of it", Tennov says), thelovesickness andintrusive thoughts canstill remain, even after all hope is exhausted and the sufferer wants to be rid of the state.[61] After a transition toaddiction, theexecutive brain is sidestepped, and some reactions and behavioralhabits become essentially automatic.[273]
The uncertainty of limerence has been interpreted asintermittent reinforcement byRobert Sternberg,[262] keeping the brain "hooked" in.[38] When people behave inconsistently or contrary to expectations, this can spark interest and be a fuel forpassion (eitherecstasy oragony).[275] This relies on a mechanic ofdopamine, which does not encode reward per se, but rather encodes a "reward prediction error" signal: whether a given reward is better than, equal to, or worse than expected.[276][277][278][279] Aslot machine involves a comparable situation, where the rewards are designed to be always unpredictable so thegambler cannot understand the pattern. Unable tohabituate to the experience, for some people the exhilarating high from the unexpected wins leads togambling addiction andcompulsions. If the machine paid out on a regular interval (so that the rewards were expected), it would not be as exciting.[276] The uncertainty of receiving an occasionalmessage from an LO is "gasoline poured on the fire", according toJudson Brewer.[38]
Uncertainty can also be introduced by the presence of barriers to a relationship, like parental interference or a deceived spouse.[280] This "intensification through adversity" was crucial to the mutual limerence ofRomeo and Juliet, hence this is often called "theRomeo and Juliet effect".[84]Helen Fisher called it "frustration attraction",[54][281] and believed that separation evokespanic andstress, which activates thehypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis. It's ironic, she says, because this can also produce dopamine, so "as the adored one slips away, the very chemicals that contribute to feelings of romance grow even more potent".[282][283] According to Tennov, "It is limerence, not love, that increases when lovers are able to meet only infrequently or when there is anger between them."[91]
One can attempt to extinguish limerence by removing any hope that an LO will reciprocate.[284][59][262] An individual who is the object of unwanted limerent attraction should give the clearest possible rejection, rather than something ambiguous such as "I like you as a friend, but...".[285]
Although limerence is usuallyunrequited, it can lead to arelationship in some cases.[287][212][3][59] According to Tennov's theory and observations, small doses of attention from an LO (along with uncertainty) increase the intensity of limerence, and a sensation of buoyancy or "walking on air" is felt when reciprocation seems near.[58][288] "Reciprocation leads to euphoria, followed by a union that might be stable or unstable, and that might or might not endure."[58] This "ecstatic union" (a phrase coined bySimone de Beauvoir) is recalled by one of Tennov's informants: "The landlord had given me notice and the bank loan had not gone through, and I could not bring myself to care! Whatever happened, it would be wonderful somehow. My delight in simply existing eclipsed everything else".[289] 95% of her survey group called love "a beautiful experience".[290]
A 2025 study of the largest cross-cultural survey ofcurrently in-love people (who were also in relationships) categorized 29.42% of their sample as "intense" romantic lovers, and 28.57% of those fell in love before their relationship. (That is, only 8.4% of the study wereboth intensely in loveand also fell in love before their relationship. The majority of intense lovers fell in loveafter their relationship started, with one month after being the average.)[291]
Normally then, limerence diminishes inside a relationship, with reciprocity.[292][59] Desire fades because of ahabituation effect ondopamine activity: as a reward is more easily and predictably obtained, the dopamine release in response to reward cues decreases.[293][294] Research also suggests thatoxytocin activity might inhibit the more excessive effects ofaddiction, with oxytocin from theattachment system being more active in reciprocated, well-functioning relationships compared to unrequited situations.[204][295][138] In some cases, however, just getting into a relationship by itself may still not be enough for limerence to diminish, if reciprocation is insufficient.[59][296] According to Tennov, reciprocation must be "sustained and believable", else limerence can continue inside a relationship if the partner (LO) behaves in a nonlimerent way.[59] Limerence and uncertainty theory have also been interpreted in terms ofattachment anxiety, worsening the symptoms.[297][147] This can be causedboth by ananxious attachment styleor a situation where (for example) anavoidant partner can make a normallysecure person feel and act anxious (as in theperson–situation debate).[47][298] One man interviewed by Tennov described being caught in one-sided limerence with hiswife "in constant fear ofdivorce" for 25 years (until she died); later, however, he found a different partner whom he did not have this reaction to.[296][299][259] Under the attachment view,passion wanes as a relationship becomes more secure (as uncertainty is reduced).[262]
ThePassionate Love Scale obsession factor (compared to limerence) has beencorrelated with relationship satisfaction in short-term relationships; however, studies have also found that as romantic obsession continues inside a relationship over a longer time, the correlation is with decreased satisfaction. This is speculated to be due to lowself-esteem and insecure or anxious attachment.[33][300] Other studies have found that anxious attachmentmediated the relationship betweenneuroticism and its relatedlove styles, and themania love attitude (which has been related to limerence) mediated the relationship between neuroticism and relationship satisfaction.[301][48]
In some cases, limerence can be extinguished quite quickly after a relationship is established, because with more routine contact the participants begin to notice things they don't like about each other.[3][262] A reminiscent concept fromtriangular theory of love is "fatuous love" (passion, with commitment, without intimacy): as in new passionate lovers who commit tomarry without really knowing each other. Usually this fatuous passion fades and turns into just an unhappy commitment by itself, called "empty love".[302] ThephilosopherBertrand Russell is quoted by Tennov in her discussion of uncertainty,[265] quipping that "when a man has no difficulty in obtaining a woman, his feeling towards her does not take the form of romantic love", but Russell goes on to say that "I think it is good—that romantic love should form the motive for a marriage, but it should be understood that the kind of love which will enable a marriage to remain happy and to fulfil its social purpose is not romantic but is something more intimate, affectionate, and realistic. In romantic love the beloved object is not seen accurately, but through a glamorous mist".[303]
According to Tennov, ideally limerence will be replaced by another type of love.[59] In this way, feelings may evolve: "Those whose limerence was replaced by affectional bonding with the same partner might say, 'We were very much in love when we married; today we love each other very much.'"[304] The more stable type of love which is usually the characteristic of long-term relationships is commonly calledcompanionate love,storge orattachment.[33][24][46] AnfMRI experiment of people who were in happy, long-term relationships (10 years or more) but professed to still be "madly" in love found brain activations in dopamine-rich reward areas (interpreted as "wanting" or "desire for union"), but also activity in theglobus palludus, a site foropiate receptors identified as a hedonic hotspot ("liking"). Unlike people who were newly in love, these participants also did not show activity in areas associated withanxiety andfear, and reported far less obsessional features.[133][131][33]
Tennov estimates based on her questionnaire and interviews that limerence most frequently lasts between 18 months and 3 years, with an average of 2 years, but may be as short as mere days or as long as a lifetime.[306] One woman wrote to Tennov about her mother's limerence which lasted 65 years.[13] Tennov calls it the worst case when the limerent person cannot get away, because the LO is a coworker or lives nearby.[13] Limerence can last indefinitely sometimes whenunrequited, especially when reciprocation is uncertain: withintermittent reinforcement and mixed signals, for example, an LO ignoring the limerent person for awhile and then suddenly calling.[212][262][38] Stringing a limerent person along with intermittent communication is called "breadcrumbing".[38][307]
Tennov's estimate of 18 months to 3 years is sometimes used as the normal duration ofromantic love.[308][6] The other common estimate, 12–18 months, comes from Donatella Marazziti's experiment comparingserotonin transporter levels of people in love withOCD patients.[7][245] In this experiment, subjects who had fallen in love within the past 6 months (who were in a relationship) were measured to haveserotonin transporter levels which were different from controls, levels which returned to normal after 12–18 months.[245]
Love regulation, studied by thepsychologistSandra Langeslag, is "the use of behavioral or cognitive strategies to change the intensity of current feelings of romantic love".[309] Langeslag works withHelen Fisher's model (lust,attraction andattachment, i.e.independent emotion systems), but uses the terms infatuation (i.e. passionate love) and attachment (i.e. companionate love).[310][231] It's a common misconception that love feelings areuncontrollable, or even should not be controlled; however studies usingEEG andpsychometrics have shown that love regulation is possible and can be useful.[231][309]
In a technique called cognitive reappraisal, one focuses on positive or negative aspects of their beloved, the relationship, or imagined future scenarios:
Preliminary results from a 2024 study of online limerence communities conducted by Langeslag found that negative reappraisal decreased limerence for the study participants.[313][314] A therapist named Brandy Wyant has also had her limerent clients list reasons their LO is not perfect, or reasons they and their LO are not compatible.[38] Love regulation doesn't switch feelings on or off immediately, so Langeslag recommends writing a list of things once a day as an example.[315]
Theneuroscientist Tom Bellamy is recommending what he calls the "daymare" strategy: if a person in limerence finds themselves lost in a romantic daydream, they should "spoil the rewards" by changing the end of the story into a nightmare.[316][317] Ruining reward-seeking habits like this is recommended as a kind of "deprogramming" to "accelerate the overwriting of memories linking LO to reward".[317]
Based on the addiction theory of romantic love,Helen Fisher and colleagues recommend that rejected lovers remove all reminders of their beloved, such as letters or photos, and avoid contact with the rejecting partner. Reminders can cause cravings which prolong recovery. They also suggest that positive contact with friends could reduce cravings. Rejected lovers should stay busy to distract themselves, and engage in self-expanding activities.[7] Setting a "no contact" rule during recovery can facilitate self-care and time to reflect on the situation.[318]
However, if limerence is being sustained by a fantasy (making the reward more potent), then getting to know the person for real can also be the fastest way to get over them.[319]
In 2008, Albert Wakin, a professor who knew Tennov at theUniversity of Bridgeport but did not assist in her research, and Duyen Vo, a graduate student, suggested that limerence is similar toobsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) andsubstance use disorder (SUD). They presented work to an American Association of Behavioral and Social Sciences conference, but suggested that much more research is needed before it could be proposed to theAPA that limerence be included in theDSM. They began conducting an unpublished study and reported toUSA Today that about 25% or 30% of their participants had experienced a limerent relationship as they defined it.[27] Wakin has stated that his concept involves people inrelationships, where a person is obsessed with their partner to the detriment of the relationship, even to the point of abreakup.[27][118][320]
The concepts of limerence,romantic love,passionate love (and so on) have been compared to OCD since 1998, according to a theory invented by other authors.[44][246][6][138] This was partly based on a theoretical comparison between preoccupation features, like worries about a family member being harmed and a need for things to be "just right".[246][138] This is also sometimes paired with a theory involving theneurotransmitterserotonin, but experimental evidence for that is ambiguous.[44][46][6][247] A 2025 study found no association betweenSSRI use and obsessive thinking about a loved one or the intensity of romantic love.[247]Neuroscientist blogger Tom Bellamy has argued that limerence is distinct from OCD on the basis of psychological and neurobiological differences. OCD is characterized by compulsions to perform rituals that ease some type of fear, whereas limerence initially starts with a period of joy and only reaches a stage of anxiety when a pair bond cannot be formed.[232]
Helen Fisher has commented on Wakin & Vo in 2008, stating that limerence is romantic love and that "They are associating the negative aspects of it with the term, and that can be a disorder."[27] Fisher is one of the original authors to compare limerence to OCD, and has proposed that romantic love is a "natural addiction" which can be either positive or negative depending on the situation.[7][44] Fisher stated again in 2024 that she does not think there is any difference between limerence and romantic love.[117]
In 2017, Wakin has stated that he feels that brain scans of limerence would help establish it as "something unlike everything that has been diagnosed already",[321] but brain scans have been described by Fisher's team since as far back as 2002.[46][27][2][322] In Fisher et al.'s original brain scan experiments, all participants spent more than 85% of their waking hours thinking about their loved one.[7] Wakin also claims that a person experiencing limerence can never be satiated, even if their feelings are reciprocated.[321][320] Tennov found many cases of nonlimerent people who described their limerent partners being "stricken with a kind of insatiability", and that "no degree of attentiveness was ever sufficient".[323] According to Tennov's theory, the intensity of limerence diminishes with reciprocity, and it's prolonged inside a relationship when the LO behaves in a nonlimerent way.[59][324] Other mainstream authors have stated that obsession inside a relationship when it's a problem could be related toself-esteem and an insecureattachment style.[33][325][326][300]
In the 1999 preface to her revised edition ofLove and Limerence,Dorothy Tennov describes limerence as an aspect of basichuman nature and remarks that "Reaction to limerence theory depends partly on acquaintance with the evidence for it and partly on personal experience. People who have not experienced limerence are baffled by descriptions of it and are often resistant to the evidence that it exists. To such outside observers, limerence seems pathological."[157] Tennov states that her studies suggest limerence is normal,[20][327][328] that it's too often interpreted as "mental illness", and that even those who experienced limerence of a distressing variety were "fully functioning, rational, emotionally stable, normal, nonneurotic, nonpathological members of society", "characterized as responsible and quite sane". Tragedies such asviolence, she says, involve limerence when it's "augmented and distorted" by other conditions.[329][330]
In a 2005 Q&A, Tennov was asked if limerence could ever lead to a situation like the movieFatal Attraction (which has been called "obsessive love"), but Tennov replied that the movie seemed to depict a caricature.[331][332] Limerence andstalking are separate phenomena with different causes.[25][23] Most romantic stalkers are anex-partner,erotomanic, have apersonality disorder, areintellectually limited orsocially incompetent.[333][7] One writer who investigated the phenomenon of limerence videos onTikTok in 2024 wrote that it seemed to her that the many videos created by therelationship coaches there were actually aboutsocial media stalking rather than having anything at all to do with limerence.[334]
Despite [the] attempts to define and describe romantic love, no single term or definition has been universally adopted in the literature. The psychological literature often uses the terms 'romantic love,' 'love,' and 'passionate love' [...]. Seminal work called it 'limerence' (Tennov, 1979). The biological literature generally uses the term 'romantic love' [...] or being 'in love' [...]. In this review, what we term 'romantic love' encompasses all of these definitions, descriptions, and terms.
One of the most illuminating sessions was when Dorothy Tennov [...] described her attempts to find a suitable term for 'romantic love.' [...] 'I first used the term "amorance" then changed it back to "limerence",' she told her audience. 'It has no roots whatsoever. It looks nice. It works well in French. Take it from me it has no etymology whatsoever.'
Numerous researchers accord with a basic distinction between infatuation (also known as [...] limerence) and attachment [...]. [...] Tennov (1979) found that infatuation was characterized by intense desires for proximity and physical contact, resistance to separation, feelings of excitement and euphoria when receiving attention and affection from the partner, fascination with the partner's behavior and appearance, extreme sensitivity to his or her moods and signs of interest, and intrusive thoughts of the partner.
[U]nlike other forms of love, obsessive love is marked by unequal commitment, lack of reciprocation, and repulsed approaches. Obsessive love is similar to infatuation, lust, a 'crush,' and limerence, all of which are viewed as an involuntary and emotional state of intense romantic desire for another person.
In humans, the attraction system (standardly called romantic love, obsessive love, passionate love, being in love, infatuation, or limerence) is also characterized by feelings of exhilaration, 'intrusive thinking' about the love object, and a craving for emotional union with this partner or potential partner. [...] [A] list of 13 psychophysiological properties often associated with this excitatory state was compiled (see Fisher, 1998; Hatfield & Sprecher, 1986; Harris, 1995; Tennov, 1979). [...] Then 72-item questionnaire was compiled, based on these common properties [...]. [...] So this questionnaire was subsequently administered (along with several others) to all participants prior to their participation in Phase II of this study which involved fMRI of the brains of individuals who reported that they had 'just fallen madly in love.'
I don't think there is any difference [between romantic love and limerence]. I used to know [Dorothy Tennov] and I guess she wanted to invent a new term, and that was fine. I don't mind that, but I actually like the term of romantic love. Her concept of limerence was a rather sad one. It had a sad component to it. Anyway, she created a new term. It's a perfectly fine term. I could have used it myself. I decided not to because I felt that the term romantic love had meaning in society and I didn't see the need for a new term. But I certainly liked her work. I certainly read her book. I certainly knew her. I admired her. And I didn't happen to adopt the term limerence, but if people want to use it, fine with me. [...] My memory of [limerence]—and this is—she wrote that book in 1979, so I—and then she died pretty recently—and she was sick, and even the day that I met her at a conference, she was with her son who she really needed for, I don't know, for emotional or physical support. From my reading of it, she sort of felt that limerence was a somewhat unhealthy experience, that it so overtook you and could lead to some disaster.
[M]ost researchers acknowledge a distinction between the earlier 'passionate' stage of love, sometimes called 'limerence' (Tennov, 1979), and the later-developing 'companionate' stage of love [...]. Although it may be easy to imagine sexual desire without romantic love, the notion of 'pure,' 'platonic,' or 'nonsexual' romantic love is somewhat more controversial. Yet empirical evidence indicates that sexual desire is not a prerequisite for romantic love, even in its earliest, passionate stages. Many men and women report having experienced romantic passion in the absence of sexual desire (Tennov, 1979) [...].
Passionate love, obsessive love, being in love, whatever you wish to call it. [...] In short, Explorers preferentially sought Explorers, Builders sought other Builders, and Directors and Negotiators were drawn to one another.
Impulsive behaviours are often accompanied by feelings of pleasure or gratification, but compulsions in disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder are often performed to reduce tension or anxiety from obsessive thoughts. In this context, individuals move from impulsivity to compulsivity, and the drive for drug-taking behaviour is paralleled by shifts from positive to negative reinforcement.
Thus, addiction is created by positive reinforcement and incentive salience from DA; by reward from opioids; and, in the case of partner addiction, by enhanced salience of social cues by OT and AVP. Once the addiction is formed, it is maintained by altered DA signaling and by withdrawal-related changes in CRF and KOR signaling.
Before limerence begins, a person may be in a state of readiness and heightened susceptibility for limerence (Tennov, 1979; Money, 1981). Biological factors, such as the surge in hormone levels during adolescence or the level of general arousal and energy, undoubtedly play a role. However, several authors have emphasized the importance of psychological factors such as preceding loneliness, discontent, and alienation (Reik, 1941; Fromm, 1956; Shor and Sanville, 1979). [...] Sometimes, the sense of readiness and longing can be so intense that a critical threshold seems to be reached and the person falls in love with anybody who meets minimal criteria of acceptability (Tennov, 1979).
