We're not that choosy: Emerging evidence of a progression bias in romantic relationships

Abstract

Dating is widely thought of as a test phase for romantic relationships, during which new romantic partners carefully evaluate each other for long-term fit. However, this cultural narrative assumes that people are well-equipped to reject poorly suited partners. In this paper, we argue that humans are biased toward pro-relationship decisions: decisions that favor the initiation, advancement, and maintenance of romantic relationships. We first review evidence for a progression bias in the context of relationship initiation, investment, and breakup decisions. We next consider possible theoretical underpinnings—both evolutionary and cultural—that may explain why getting into a relationship is often easier than getting out of one, and why being in a less desirable relationship is often preferred over being in no relationship at all. We discuss potential boundary conditions that the phenomenon may have, as well as its implications for existing theoretical models of mate selection and relationship development.

A sociology of regret

“…Becker argued that any biographical choice contains multiple side bets predisposing an individual to proceed in the chosen direction. A similar idea surfaces in various studies of loyalty to the working place (Meyer & Allen, 1984), romantic relationships (Joel & MacDonald, 2021) and leisure preferences (Buchanan, 1985). Overall, it seems that the shadow of the past becomes darker as an individual successfully passes any recognizable course of action, including one's life-course in general.…”

A Worldwide Test of the Predictive Validity of Ideal Partner Preference-Matching

“…Americans, by virtue of their higher relational mobility, might be more likely than Taiwanese to "try out" relationships that mismatch Preference-Matching Worldwide 27 their ideals, perhaps especially if they presume that they could later end the relationship with minimal consequences. Then, if people are motivated on average to feel positively about their partners after investing time and energy into the relationship (Joel & MacDonald, 2021), high relational mobility populations may include a larger proportion of people with ideal-mismatching partners who nevertheless report high satisfaction. A second potentially relevant distinction is individualism-collectivism (Triandis & Gelfand, 1998), as individuals in collectivistic cultures may be especially likely to adopt the ideal partner preferences of their parents (Locke et al, 2020).…”