A Triangular Theory of Love: Robert Stemberg

Psychological Review
1986, Vol. 93, No. 2, 119-135 Copyright 1986 by the American Psychological Association, lnc.
0033-295X/86/$00.75
A Triangular Theory of Love

Robert J. Stemberg
Yale University
This article presents a triangular theory of !ove. According to the theory, !ove has three components:
(a) intimacy, which encompasses the feelings of closeness, connectedness, and bondedness one ex-
periences in loving relationships; (b) passion, which encompasses the drives that lead to romance,
physical attraction, and sexual consummation; and (e) decision/commitment, which encompasses, in
the short term, the decision that one !oves another, and in the long term, the commitment to maintain
that !ove. The amount of !ove one experiences depends on the absolute strength of these three com-
ponents, and the kind of !ove one experiences depends on their strengths relative to each other. The
three components interact with each other and with the actions that they produce and that produce
them so as to form a number of ditferent kinds of loving experiences. The triangular theory of !ove
subsumes certain other theories and can account for a number of empírica! findings in the research
literature, as well as for a number of experiences with which many are familiar firsthand. It is
proposed that the triangular theory provides a rather comprehensive basis for understanding many
aspects of the !ove that underlies close relationships.
What does it mean "to love" someone? Does it always mean The intimacy component refers to feelings of closeness, con-
the same thing, and if not, in what ways do loves ditfer from each nectedness, and bondedness in loving relationships. It thus in-
other? Why do certain loves seem to last, whereas others disappear eludes within its purview those feelings that give rise, essentially,
almost as quickly as they are formed? This article seeks to answer to the experience of warmth in a loving relationship.
these and other questions through a triangular theory of love. The passion component refers to the drives that lead to ro-
This tripartite theory deals both with the nature oflove and with mance, physical attraction, sexual consummation, and related
loves in various kinds of relationships. phenomena in loving relationships. The passion component thus
The presentation ofthe theory will be divided into three main includes within its purview those sources of motivational and
parts. In the first part, the main tenets of the theory will be other forms of arousal that lead to the experience of passion in
explained and discussed, and the theory will be compared with a loving relationship.
other theories oflove. In the second part, the implications ofthe The decision/commitment component refers to, in the short
theory for close relationships and satisfaction in them will be term, the decision that one loves someone else, and in the long
described. In the third part, the theory will be shown to account term, the commitment to maintain that love. The decision/com-
for many of the empirical phenomena that have been observed mitment component thus includes within its purview the cog-
with regard to love. nitive elements that are involved in decision making about the
existence of and potential long-term commitment to a loving
The Triangle of Love relationship.
In general, the intimacy component might be viewed as largely,
Three Components1 but not exclusively, deriving from emotional investment in the
relationship; the passion component as deriving largely, although
The triangular theory oflove holds that love can be understood
not exclusively, from motivational involvement in the relation-
in terms of three components that together can be viewed as
ship; and the decision/commitment component as deriving
forming the vertices of a triangle. These three components are
largely, although not exclusively, from cognitive decision in and
intimacy (the top vertex of the triangle), passion (the left-hand
commitment to the relationship. From one point of view, the
vertex ofthe triangle), and decision/commitment (the right-hand
intimacy component might be viewed as a "warm" one, the pas-
vertex of the triangle). (The assignment of components to vertices
sion component as a "hot" one, and the decision/commitment
is arbitrary.) Each of these three terms can be used in many
component as a "cold" one.
ditferent ways, so it is important at the outset to clarify their
The experience of love can be partitioned in a number of
meanings in the context of the present theory.
ways, and so it is important to note at the outset that the present
partitioning into intimacy, passion, and decision/commitment
I am grateful to Michael Bames, Susan Grajek, and Sandra Wright is not the only one possible, nor is it even valid for ali possible
for their collaborations in my empírica! research on !ove, and to Ellen purposes. Nevertheless, the argument will be made that the pro-
Berscheid, Keith Davis, Elaine Hatfield, Martín Hotfman, and George
Levinger for their excellent comments on an earlier version ofthis
article. Correspondence conceming this article should be addressed to
I
My use ofthe term components in this article ditfers from my use
Robert of the term in my theorizing about intelligence (e.g., Stemberg, 1985),
J. Stemberg, Department of Psychology, Yale University, Box 11 A Yale where the term is used to refer to a mental process.
Station, New Haven, Connecticut 06520.
119
120 ROBERT J. STERNBERG
posed partitioning is particularly useful for understanding the Table 1
elements of !ove, and how they function in close relationships. Properties ofTriangle Vertices
Although !ove, like other psychological phenomena, can be
partitioned into various kinds of components, it is important Component
not to lose sight of the whole in the analysis of its parts. Love
is Decision/
a complex whole that appears to derive in part from genetically Property Intimacy Passion commitment
transmitted instincts and drives but probably in larger part from
socially learned role modeling that, through observation, comes Stability Moderately Low Moderately
high high
to be defined as !ove. To a large extent, then, !ove is prototypically Conscious controllability Moderate Low High
organized (Rosch, 1978), such that certain feelings, drives, Experiential salience Variable High Variable
thoughts, and behaviors appear as more highly characteristic of Typical importance in Moderate High Low
shortterm
!ove as it is socially defined, whereas others appear as less char relationships
2
acteristic. Indeed, one way to study love would be through the Typical importance in High Moderate High
examination of people's conceptions or implicit theories oflove longterm
relationships
(Barnes & Sternberg, 1986, are currently involved in such an Commonality across High Low Moderate
investigation). Such an investigation capitalizes on principies of loving relationships
descriptive psychology in order to provide a framework for love Psychophysiological Moderate High Low
related phenomena (Davis & Roberts, 1985; Ossorio, 1985). A involvement
Susceptibility to Moderately High Moderately
theory oflove, therefore, can help one understand the range and conscious awareness low high
composition of the phenomenon of love but should not result
in the whole's being lost in its parts.
The similarities and differences among the three components
of love may be better understood by examining their respective such a relationship without at least sorne degree ofinvolvement
properties, sorne of which are summarized in Table 1. and commitment. In contrast, the passíon component typícally
plays only a moderate part, and its role may decline somewhat
over time.
Properties of the Components of The three components oflove also differ in their commonality
Love across loving relationships. The intimacy component appears to
be at the core of many loving relationships (Sternberg & Grajek,
The three components oflove differ with respect to a number 1984), whether that relationship is toward a parent, a sibling, a
of their properties. For example, the emotional and other in lover, or a close friend. The passion component tends to be limited
volvement of the intimacy component and the cognitive com to just certain kinds of loving relationships, especially romantic
mitment of the decision/commitment component seem to be ones, whereas the decision/commitment component can be highly
relatively stable in close relationships, whereas the motivational variable across the different kinds of loving relationships. For
and other arousal ofthe passion component tends to be relatively example, commitment tends to be very high in one's love for
unstable and to come and go on a somewhat unpredictable basis. one's children, but relatively low in one's love for those friends
One has sorne degree of conscious control over the feelings of that come and go throughout the span of one's lifetime.
the intimacy component that one experiences (if one is aware of The three components also differ in the amount of psycho
them), a high degree of control over the commitment of the physiological involvement they offer. The passion component is
decision/commitment component that one invests in the rela highly dependent on psychophysiological involvement, whereas
tionship (again, assuming awareness), but very little control over the decision/commitment component appears to involve only a
the amount of motivational and other arousal of the passion modest amount of psychophysiological response. The intimacy
component one experiences as a result of being with or even component involves an intermediate amount of psychophysio
looking at another person. One is usually quite aware and con logical involvement.
scious ofthe passion component, but one's awareness ofthe in In sum, the three components oflove have somewhat different
timacy and decision/commitment components can be highly properties, which tend to highlight sorne of the ways in which
variable. Sometimes one experiences warm feelings of intimacy they function in the experiences of love as they occur in various
without being aware of them or without being able to label them. kinds of close relatíonships.
Similarly, one is often not certain of how committed one is to a
relationship until people or events intervene to challenge that Composition ofthe Triangle
commitment.
The importance of each of the three components oflove differs, The intimacy component. In the context of the triangular
on the average, as a function of whether a loving relationship is theory, the intimacy component refers to those feelings in a re
shortterm or longterm. In shortterm involvements, and espe lationship that promote closeness, bondedness, and connected
cially romantic ones, the passion component tends to play a large ness. Our research indicates that it includes, among other things,
part. The intimacy component may play only a moderate part, feelings of(a) desire to promote the welfare ofthe loved one, (b)
and the decision/commitment component may play hardly any
part at all. In contrast, the intimacy component and the decision/ 2
I am grateful to Keith Davis for making this observation.
commitment component typically play relatively large parts in
a longterm close relationship. Indeed, it is difficult to sustain
TRIANGULAR THEORY OF LOVE 121
experienced happiness with the loved one, (e) high regard for "Spearmanían" Model
e
the loved one, (d) being able to count on the loved one in times
ofneed, (e) mutual understanding with the loved one, (f') sharing
of one's self and one's possessions with the loved one, (g) receipt
of emotional support from the loved one, (h) giving of
emotional support to the loved one, (i) intimate
communication with the loved one, and (j) valuing the loved
one in one's life (Stemberg
& Grajek, 1984). These feelings form only a subset ofthe possible
ones that can be experienced in the intimacy component oflove,
and moreover, it is not necessary to experience ali ofthese
feelings in order to experience !ove. To the contrary, our research
indicates that one experiences the intimacy component of !ove
when one samples a sufficient number of these feelings, with love
the number that is sufficient probably differing from one person
to another. The feelings are usually not experienced
independently; to the contrary, they may be experienced as one
overa!! feeling. Nev ertheless, they appear to be at least "Thurstontan" Model
partially decomposable, as in the listing here.
Stemberg and Grajek ( 1984) actually tested three altemative
theories of the nature of !ove, focusing upon its intimacy com
ponent. They referred to the three theories as Spearmanian, affects,
cognltlons,
Thomsonian, and Thurstonian. The nature ofthe three theories motlvatlons
is illustrated in Figure 1. Ali three theories are based on structural
models of intelligence.
The Spearmanian theory is based on Spearman's ( 1927) theory
of general intelligence (g). In terms of a structural model of !
ove, one might conceptualize !ove partly in terms of a single g, Figure 1. Three alternative models of !ove.
which would be an undifferentiated "glob" of highly positive
feelings that is essentially nondecomposable. To experience ! the measures of loving and liking for one's lover, but also for
ove would be to experience this glob of highly positive feelings. measures of loving and liking for one's mother, father, sibling
The Thomsonian model is based on Thomson's ( 1939) theory
closest in age, and best friend of the same sex. Subjects in the
of the "bonds" of intelligence. In terms of a structural model study were 35 men and 50 women in southem Connecticut,
of
ranging in age from 18 to 70 years, with a mean of 32 years.
!ove, one might conceptualize !ove partly in terms of feelings Factor analysis of the data of these subjects for each of the
that, when sampled together, yield the composite experience that close relationships supported a Thomsonian model: A general
we label !ove. On this view, though, the composite is not an un factor emerged even after varimax rotation of the principalaxis
differentiated unity; rather, it can be decomposed into a large solution (which tends to obscure rather than to highlight a general
number of underlying bonds that tend to cooccur in certain factor), but the general factor proved to be decomposable through
close relationships and that in combination result in the global hierarchical cluster analysis. In other words, the factor analysis
experience that we view as !ove. supported either the Spearmanian model or the Thomsonian
The Thurstonian theory is based on Thurstone's ( 1938) theory model, both of which are consistent with a general factor, but
of primary factors. In terms of a structural model of love, one not the Thurstonian model, which is not consistent with a general
would emerge with a theory viewing love partly in terms of a factor (at least at the first order of analysis). The decomposability
small, consistent set of feelings that have approximately equal of the general factor supported the Thomsonian model but not
importance and salience in the overall experience we describe the Spearmanian one, in that Spearman's model does not allow
as !ove. Love is not one main thing, whether decomposable for the decomposability of the general factor.
(Thomsonian model) or not (Spearmanian model). Rather, it is In the StembergGrajek (1984) study, the Thomsonian model
a set of primary structures that are best understood separately was viewed as applying to the three components oflove considered
rather than as an integrated whole. Ali contribute simultaneously jointly. However, a subsequent examination of the contents of
to the experience of love. According to this notion, global ex the Rubin and Levinger et al. scales revealed that they focus
periences such as love can be decomposed into multiple over primarily on the intimacy component of close relationships rather
lapping (correlated) factors, and one could essentially combine than on passion or decision/commitment. Hence, the analysis
factor seores to obtain an overall index of the strength of the of these scales is seen as applying most directly to the intimacy
love. component.
Stemberg and Grajek (1984) used factor and clusteranalytic An interesting and, to sorne extent, surprising finding of the
methods to distinguish among these three theories. These meth StembergGrajek (1984) study was that the structure ofintimacy
ods were applied to the Rubin Loving and Liking Scales as well in love does not appear to differ consequentially from one loving
as to the Scale of Interpersonal Involvement used by Levinger,
Rands, and Talaber ( 1977). The data were analyzed not only for
relationship to another. In other words, the general factor and from the amount of !ove one experiences for one's best friend
ensuing clusters that were obtained for each relationship were of the same sex. In other words, amounts of !ove tend to be
about the same. This finding suggests that the intimacy com predictable within but not outside of the nuclear family.
ponent of !ove forms a common core in loving relationships. In As noted above, the SternbergGrajek (1984) study focused
other words, whereas the passion and decision/commitment on the intimacy component of !ove. However, there is more to
components appear to be unique to loving relationships with !ove than just the intimacy component. Consider in turn the
certain classes of individuals, the intimacy component does not passion and decision/commitment components.
appear to be limited to just certain loving relationships. The passion component. The passion component of !ove
Consider, for example, !oves for a mother, a father, a sibling, comprises those motivational and other sources of arousal that
a best friend ofthe same sex, anda lover. According to the present lead to the experience of passion. It includes what Hatfield and
point of view, the intimacy component forms a common core Walster (1981) refer to as "a state of intense longing for
in each of these loving relationships. However, the passion and union with the other" (p. 9). In a loving relationship, sexual
decision/commitment components are experienced more selec needs may well predominate in this experience. However, other
tively. For example, the passion component probably plays a needs, such as those for selfesteem, succorance, nurturance,
major part in !ove for a lover, but only a minor part, if any at affiliation, dominance, submission, and selfactualization, may
ali, in !ove for a parent, especially a samesex parent. Similarly, also con tribute to the experiencing of passion. The strengths
the decision/commitment component is likely to play an im of these various needs will almost certainly vary across persons,
portant role in certain loving relationships, especially those with situations, and kinds ofloving relationships. For example, sexual
members of one's nuclear family (e.g., the mother, father, and fulfillment is likely to be a strong need in romantic relationships
siblings, if any). However, commitment over the long term need but not in filial ones. The manifestations of these needs are
not play an important role, or any role at ali, in !ove for a lover. through psy chological arousal and physiological arousal,
Indeed, many romantic !oves are short term and are never in although these two kinds of arousal are not easily separable.
tended to be anything else. (Note that the term commitment is Indeed, psychological arousal will almost inevitably interact with
used here and elsewhere in this article to refer to longterm in physiological arousal, with arousal of one kind leading to
vestment in a loving relationship, not to refer to the degree of arousal of the other kind.
responsibility one feels for another in a loving relationship.) The passion component oflove will almost certainly be highly
Although the structure of the intimacy component of !ove and reciprocally interactive with intimacy. One will feel, for ex
may be roughly the same from one loving relationship to another, ample, intimacy in a relationship in large part as a function of
the amounts of !ove one feels toward various individuals may the extent to which the relationship meets one's needs for passion.
differ considerably. For example, in the SternbergGrajek ( 1984) Conversely, passion may be aroused by intimacy. In sorne close
study, we found that men tend both to !ove and to like their lover relationships with members ofthe opposite sex, for example, the
more than their mother, father, sibling closest in age, or best passion component develops almost immediately, and it is only
friend. Women, on the other hand, were found to !ove their lover after a while that the intimacy component develops. The passion
and their best friend of the same sex about equally, but to like component is what may draw the individual to the relationship
their best friend of the same sex somewhat more than they like in the first place, but the intimacy component helps sustain
their lover. For the women, as for the men, loving and liking of closeness in the relationship. In other close relationships, however,
the lover and best friend exceeded that ofthe mother, father, and the passion component, especially as it applies to physical at
sibling closest in age. For both men and women, the sibling closest traction, develops only after the intimacy one. Two close friends
in age was loved and liked least of ali from among this group of of the opposite sex may find themselves developing a physical
individuals. Our pattern of results is generally comparable to attraction for each other that did not develop immediately, and
that of Swensen ( 1972), who used a different set of measures in indeed did not develop until they achieved a certain leve! of
order to obtain his results. Thus, both of these sets of results intimacy with each other.
suggest that there are consistent differences in typical amounts The intimacy and passion components need not always covary
of !ove across different close relationships. positively. In certain kinds of relationships, for example, those
Sternberg and Grajek ( 1984) also found that the predictability with prostitutes, individuals may seek out another who maximizes
of the amount of !ove one feels for one individual from the fulfillment of needs for passion while purposefully minimizing
amount of !ove one feels for other individuals differs across re intimacy. Negative covariation between the intimacy and passion
lationships. In particular, they found that the amount of !ove components can be a function of person as well as of situation:
one experiences for one member of one's nuclear family (mother, Sorne people find that the attainment of emotional closeness and
father, sibling closest in age) tends to be predictable from the intimacy actually interferes with their attainment of sexual ful
amount of !ove one feels for another member of that nuclear fillment. The point to be made, quite simply, is that although
family. However, amounts of !ove experienced toward members the form of interaction between the intimacy and passion com
of the nuclear family do not predict amounts of !ove one expe ponents will vary across persons and situations, the two com
riences for individuals outside the nuclear family. In other words, ponents of !ove will almost certainly interact in close relation
whereas the amount of !ove one experiences for one's mother, ships, in one way or another.
father, and sibling closest in age are mutually predictive, these The decision/commitment component. The decision/com
amounts of !ove are not predictive of the amount of !ove one mitment component oflove consists oftwo aspects, a shortterm
feels for one's lover or one's best friend of the same sex. Nor is one anda longterm one. The shortterm one is the decision that
the amount of !ove one experiences for one's lover predictable one !oves a certain other. The longterm aspect is the commitment
to maintain that !ove. These two aspects of the decision/com
mitment component oflove do not necessarily go together. The Table 2
decision to love does not necessarily imply a commitment to Taxonomy of Kinds ofLave
love. Oddly enough, commitment does not necessarily imply
decision. Many people are committed to the Iove of another Cornponent
without necessarily even admitting that they love or are in love
Decision/
with the other. Most often, however, decision will precede com Kind oflove lntirnacy Passion cornrnitrnent
mitment both temporally and logically. Indeed, the institution
of marriage represents a legalization of the commitment to a Nonlove
Liking +
decision to love another throughout one's life. lnfatuated love +
It is important not to neglect the decision/commmitment Ernpty love +
component of love just because it does not have the "heat" or Rornantic love + +
"charge" ofthe intimacy and passion components oflove. Loving Cornpanionate love + +
relationships almost inevitably have their ups and downs, and
Fatuous !ove + +
there may be times in such relationships when the decision/com
Consurnrnate !ove + + +
mitment component is ali or almost all that keeps the relationship Note. + = cornponent present; = cornponent absent. These kinds of
going. This component can be essential for getting through hard love represent lirniting cases based on the triangular theory. Most loving
times and for returning to better ones. In ignoring it or separating relationships will fit between categories, because the various cornponents
of love are expressed along continua, not discretely.
it from )ove, one may be missing exactly that component ofloving
relationships that enables one to get through the hard times as
well as the easy ones.
The decision/commitment component of love interacts with
Kinds of
both the intimacy and the passion components. For most people, Love
it results from emotional and other involvement ofthe intimacy The components of !ove and their interrelationships can better
component or the motivational and other arousal ofthe passion be understood by considering the kinds of love to which they
component. However, intimate involvement or passionate arousal may give rise in different combinations. These various kinds of
can follow from commitment, as would be the case in certain Iove are summarized in Table 2.
arranged marriages or in close relationships in which one does There are eight possible subsets ofthe various components of
not have a choice of partners. For example, one does not get to love. Each ofthese subsets differs in the kind ofloving experience
choose one's mother, father, siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins, or to which it gives rise. Consider the limiting cases.
the like. In at Ieast sorne ofthese close relationships, one is likely l. Non/ove. Nonlove refers simply to the absence of ali three
to find that whatever intimacy or passion one experiences results components oflove. Nonlove characterizes the large majority of
from one's cognitive commitment to the relationship, rather than our personal relationships, which are simply casual interactions
the other way around. Thus, love can start off as a decision, and that do not partake of love at ali.
whatever else follows may follow from that decision. 2. Liking. Liking results when one experiences only the in
The decision is not always one that promotes involvement or timacy component oflove in the absence ofpassion and decision/
arousal. For example, a married individual may meet another commitment. The term liking is used here in a nontrivial sense,
with whom he or she falls in love. Whereas it can be difficult to not merely to describe the feelings one has toward casual ac
control the intimacy component oflove and exceedingly difficult quaintances and passersby in one's life. Rather, it refers to the
to control passion, the decision/commitment component is one set of feelings one experiences in relationships that can truly be
over which one has considerable control, and this control may characterized as friendships. One feels closeness, bondedness,
prevent the further development of the relationship into a full and warmth toward the other, without feelings of intense passion
fledged romance. Of course, the decision can also go the other or longterm commitment. Stated in another way, one feels emo
way. The point to be made, simply, is that the decisional aspect tionally close to the friend, but the friend does not "turn one
can control the other aspects ofthe relationship. It is important on," nor does the friend arouse the thought that "one !oves the
to distinguish the decisional aspect from the commitment aspect, friend" or that one plans to )ove the friend for the rest of one's
however. In the example of the married individual who meets life.
another with whom he or she falls in love, the decision to pursue It is possible for friendships to have elements of passionate
that relationship does not necessarily irnply a commitment to arousal or longterm commitment, but in such cases, the friend
it. Husbands and wives who discover that their spouses are having ship goes beyond mere liking and is best classified in one of the
affairs often leap immediately to conclusions on the basis ofthis categories below. A test that can distinguish mere liking from
knowledge about the decision of the spouse to have an affair. love that goes beyond liking is the absence test. If a typical friend
The more important information, however, might be the com whom one likes goes away, even for an extended period oftime,
mitment of the spouse to that affair and to the relationship that one may miss the friend, but one does not tend to dwell on the
generated it. Ioss. One can pick up the friendship sorne years later, often in a
In sum, the three components are ali important parts ofloving different form, without even having thought much about the
relationships, although their importance differs from one rela friendship during the intervening years. When a close relationship
tionship to another. Moreover, the importance of these compo goes beyond liking, however, one's reaction to the absence test
nents of love may differ over time within a relationship as well is quite different. One actively misses the other person and tends
as across relationships at a given time. to dwell on or be preoccupied with that person's absence. The
other is actively rather than passively missed, and the absence
has a substantial and fairly Iongterm effect both on one's life ofthe passion and decision/commitment components in the ab
and on one's reactions to one's life. When the absence of the sence ofthe intimacy component. It is the kind oflove we some
other arouses strong feelings of intimacy, passion, or commit times associate with Hollywood, or with whirlwind courtships,
ment, it is best to classify the relationship as going beyond liking; in which a couple meets on Day X, gets engaged two weeks later,
thus, to classify it in one of the categories described below is and marries the next month. It is fatuous in the sense that a
appropriate. commitment is made on the basis of passion without the stabi
3. Infatuated !ove. Infatuated love is "love at first sight." In lizing element of intimate involvement. Although the passion
fatuated ]ove, or simply, infatuation, results from the experiencing component can develop almost instantaneously, the intimacy
ofpassionate arousal in the absence ofthe intimacy and decision/ component cannot, and hence relationships based on fatuous
commitment components of love. Infatuations are usually rather love are at risk for termination and, in the case of shotgun mar
easy to spot, although they tend to be somewhat easier for others riages, for divorce.
to spot than for the individual who is experiencing the infatuation. 8. Consummate !ove. Consummate, or complete, love results
lnfatuations can arise almost instantaneously and dissipate as from the full combination of the three components. It is a kind
quickly under the right circumstances. They tend to be char of love toward which many of us strive, especially in romantic
acterized by a high degree of psychophysiological arousal, man relationships. Attaining consummate love can be analogous in
ifested in somatic symptoms such as increased heartbeat or even at least one respect to meeting one's target in a weightreduction
palpitations of the heart, increased hormonal secretions, erection program: Reaching the goal is often easier than maintaining it.
of genitals (penis or clitoris), and so on. lnfatuation is essentially The attainment of consummate love is no guarantee that it will
the same as what Tennov ( 1979) calls "limerence," and like Ten last. Indeed, its loss is sometimes analogous to the gain of weight
nov's limerence, it can be quite Iasting in duration under certain after a weightreduction program: One is often not aware ofthe
circumstances. loss of the goal until it is far gone.
4. Empty !ove. This kind oflove emanates from the decision I do not believe that ali manifestations of consummate love
that one ]oves another and has commitment to that Iove in the are necessarily difficult either to develop or maintain. For ex
absence of both the intimacy and passion components of Iove. ample, one's love for one's children often carries with it the deep
It is the kind oflove one sometimes finds in stagnant relationships emotional involvement ofthe intimacy component, the satisfac
that have been going on for years but that have lost both the tion of motivational needs (e.g., nurturance, selfesteem, self
mutual emotional involvement and physical attraction that once actualization) ofthe passion component, and the firm commit
characterized them. Unless the commitment to the love is very ment of the decision/commitment component. For many but
strong, such love can be close to none at ali, because commitment not ali parents, formation and maintenance of this love is non
can be so susceptible to conscious modification. Although in our problematical. Perhaps the bonding between parents and children
society we are most accustomed to empty love as it occurs as a at birth renders this love relatively easier to maintain, or perhaps
final or nearfinal stage of a longterm relationship, in other so evolutionary forces are at work to ensure that parentchild
cieties, empty love may be the first stage of a longterm relation bonding survives at least those formative years in which the child
ship. For example, in societies where marriages are arranged, must depend very heavily on the parent's love and support.
the marital partners may start with the commitment to love each Whichever of these may be the case (and it may be more than
other, or to try to love each other, and not much more. Such one), consummate love can be easier or more difficult to form
relationships point out how empty love need not be the terminal and maintain, depending on the relationship and the situation
state of a longterm relationship. Indeed, it can be the beginning in which it is developed and maintained.
rather than the end!
5. Romantic !ove. This kind oflove derives from a combination
of the intimacy and passion components of ]ove. In essence, it Relations of Triangular Theory to Other
is Iiking with an added element, namely, the arousal brought Theories of
about by physical attraction and its concomitants. According to Lave
this view, then, romantic lovers are not only drawn physically to
each other but are also bonded emotionally. This view of romantic The framework for understanding ]ove generated by the tri
love seems to be similar to that found in classic works ofliterature, angular theory seems to make intuitive sense in terms of people's
such as Romeo and Juliet and Tristan and Isolde. This view of everyday experience and also seems to capture sorne ofthe kinds
romantic love differs, however, from that ofHatfield and Walster oflove that are perhaps missed by frameworks that are not theo
( 1981 ), who argue that romantic love <loes not differ from retically generated. For example, the BerscheidWalster (1978)
in distinction between romantic and companionate love is useful,
fatuation. but according to the present framework, it is incomplete and not
6. Companionate !ove. This kind oflove evolves from a com quite correct in that it <loes not distinguish between infatuated
bination ofthe intimacy and decision/commitment components and romantic love. Similarly, Maslow's ( 1962) distinction between
of love. It is essentially a longterrn, committed friendship, the Dlove (Deficiency love) and Blove (Being ]ove) seems incomplete
kind that frequently occurs in marriages in which the physical in light of the framework presented above. Dlove is closest to
attraction (a major source of passion) has died down. This view what is referred to here as infatuated love, whereas Blove is
is captured in the title of Duck's ( 1983) book, Friends for Life. closest to consummate love. However, there seem to be many
This view of companionate love is also essentially the same as other kinds of love as well. As noted earlier, Tennov's ( 1979)
that ofBerscheid and Walster (1978). concept of limerence deals only with what is referred to here as
7. Fatuous /ove. Fatuous love results from the combination infatuated love. Concepts similar to Maslow's Dlove and Ten
nov's limerence derive from other clinical psychologists such as love without expectation of reciprocation; and (f) pragma, a
Reik ( 1944), who viewed !ove as the search for salvation, and practica! style involving conscious consideration of the demo
Freud ( 1922), who viewed !ove !argely in terms of striving for an graphic characteristics of the loved one. Although Lee's theory
ego ideal. According to the present framework, though, !ove in is related to the triangular theory in spirit, its content is quite
at least sorne of its forms is much more than the search for different. For example, eros would be regarded in the triangular
salvation oran ego ideal. Similarly, it potentially comprises more theory as fairly close to infatuated !ove, whereas mania would
than the decisional and commitment aspects emphasized by Peck be regarded as infatuated !ove gone berserk. Ludus would not
(1978). be viewed as a kind oflove but rather as a style of interrelating
The taxonomy above also differs in spirit from sorne recent that people can use in various kinds of loving relationships. For
theories that have emanated from or at least have been closely example, infatuated lovers, romantic lovers, and companionate
associated with questionnaire studies. For example, Rubin ( 1970, lovers, as well as lovers of the other kinds, are ali capable of
1973) has used psychometric methods to derive what he has playing games with one another. Storge would be viewed as quite
called a Love Scale, which he has distinguished from a Liking close to companionate love. Agape would be viewed as a con
Scale. The Love Scale is based on a threecomponent theory of comitant to the !ove that characterizes the loving relationships
!ove: affiliation or dependent need, predisposition to help, and of persons with an altruistic disposition in their personalities.
exclusiveness and absorption. Rubin's Love Scale measures sorne Finally, pragma would not be viewed as a kind of !ove at ali but
elements of ali three vertices of the !ove triangle but probably rather as a pragmatic style of search for a lover, as its name
measures most reliably and validly the vertex of the intimacy implies. Indeed, an overly pragmatic style can get in the way of
component. It is perhaps because of this concentration on the ever finding any kind of !ove at ali. Those who exhibit pragma
measurement ofthis vertex that seores on the Rubin Liking and may be searching for physical, financia!, or other forms of comfort
Loving Scales are fairly highly correlated. In our own data, we rather than love.
have obtained a correlation of . 72 between the two scales for Lasswell and Lobsenz ( 1980) used Lee's theory as the basis
liking and loving of a lover and higher correlations for liking and for the construction of a Love Scale Questionnaire. Their ques
loving of a mother (.73), father (.81), and sibling (.80), but a tionnaire was designed to measure each of the six kinds of love
slightly lower correlation for liking and loving of a best friend in Lee's theory. We administered the LasswellLobsenz ques
(.66; Sternberg & Grajek, 1984). Rubin (1970) obtained some tionnaire to the 85 subjects in our own experiment on the nature
what lower correlations between the two scales for lovers, but of !ove, but our factoranalytic results failed to uphold the ty
his lower correlations were based on a collegestudent sample of pology proposed by Lee. However, the triangular theory has never
couples who answered a newspaper advertisement directed at been tested against Lee's theory, and so the issue of the relative
"dating couples." This sample was probably somewhat restricted empirical validities of the two theories remains an open question.
in range in a number of respects. Our own sample consisted of Indeed, the triangular theory is at present being tested as a whole
adults (not necessarily tested in couples) ranging in age from 18 for the first time (Sternberg, 1986).
to 70 years, with a mean age of 32, ali of whom were presently Whereas the triangular theory seeks an integration of a number
or recently involved in !ove relationships. Thus, it is proposed of relationshipbased phenomena into !ove, other theories seek
that the Rubin Love Scale is differentiated from the Rubin Liking more of a separation. For example, sorne would view
Scale to the extent that it measures the passion and decision/ infatuation as wholly distinct from !ove (e.g., Peck, 1978).
commitment components of !ove as well as intimacy, Others would view commitment as distinct from !ove (e.g.,
Another recent theory, that ofDavis (1985), is logically rather Kelley, 1983; Lund,
than factor analytically derived but has been tested using ques 1985). Yet, both clinical and empirical data suggest the difficulties
tionnaire data. Davis has proposed that love differs from liking of making clean separations. Exhaustive reviews of the
by the addition oftwo clusters, a physical attraction cluster and literature (e.g., Brehm, 1985; Duck, 1983; Hinde, 1979) show
a caring cluster. Whereas the triangular theory would view phys how intri cately woven together are concepts and feelings of
ical attraction as separating infatuated or romantic !ove from love and ro mance, or infatuation, in contemporary western
liking, it would not separate caring from the liking involved in civilization, and how difficult it is statistically even to separate
a friendship. According to the triangular theory, caring is typically romantic love from
a part ofthe liking in a friendship, and indeed, Davis's own data !ove in general. Moreover, the data of Lund indicate a high cor
may not clearly support his separation ofthe caring cluster from relation between measures of !ove and commitment, even after
the liking involved in good friendships. items with very high correlations have been weeded out of a
A taxonomy that is related in spirit, although perhaps not in commitment scale. As Kelley ( 1983) notes, even though he "has
content, to that generated by the triangular theory is that of Lee drawn a distinction between !ove and commitment, ...
( 1977), who has proposed what he refers to as "a typology of [he] has recognized the considerable overlap between the two"
styles of loving," His taxonomy includes (a) eros, the love style (p.
characterized by the search for a beloved whose physical pre 312). The data ofthose who have studied the various phenomena
sentation of self embodies an image already held in the mind of of close relationships strongly suggest the wisdom of retaining
the lover; (b) ludus, which is Ovid's term for playful or gamelike conceptual distinctions among these phenomena (as in the three
love; (e) storge, a style based on slowly developing affection and components of the triangular theory), while at the same time
companionship; (d) mania, a love style characterized by obses recognizing their strong correlation in loving relationships. Al
sion, jealousy, and great emotional intensity; (e) agape, which is though pure, limiting cases of separation among components of
altruistic !ove in which the lover views it as his or her duty to !ove can be conceptualized and identified, it is perhaps better to
view these components as interactive aspects of !ove rather than
as independent phenomena to be conceived of and studied in
isolation from each other.
Respective Courses of the Components of Love
Each of the three components of love has a different course,
and the differing temporal courses of the components almost >,
o
inevitably result in changes in the nature of a given loving re e
E
e:
lationship over time. Consider each component of love in turn.
.:
The intimacy component. The course of the intimacy com ...
·... ·..
ponent of love, as presented here, is based on Berscheid's ( l 983) o · . ·. •
.
/
theory of emotion in close relationships, which is itselfbased on Q)
Mandler's ( 1980) more general theory of emotion. Although the >

j
intimacy component is not synonymous with an emotional
component, it is largely composed of emotional elements and
seems to function in ways quite akin to those of emotions as
conceptualized by Berscheid. Thus, the theory is viewed as rel
evant for consideration of the intimacy component, or at least Duration of Relationship
the emotional aspect of it. According to Berscheid, emotion in
close relationships is experienced only as the result of interruption Latent Level Manifest Level
of paired action sequences, or what might be referred to as scripts of lntimacy of lntimacy
(Schank & Abelson, 1977). As two individuals get to know each -·- Successful Relationship
other, they form increasingly large numbers ofthese paired action ----····· Failed Relationship
sequences, or scripts. Early during a relationship, there will be Figure 2. The course of intimacy as a function of duration of
a high degree of uncertainty in the relationship, because one has relationship,
not yet become able to predict the other's actions, as well as
emotions, motivations, and cognitions. There will be frequent
interruptions and disruptions in interpersonal relations as the intentional or unintentional, that one learns of the amount of
two individuals get to know each other. As time goes on, the intimacy one has or has had in a relationship. For example,
frequency of interruptions is likely to decrease because the in when a partner dies, one is often surprised, as are others, by the
dividuals become more predictable to each other and dependent amount of grief and distress that is experienced. Following Ber
on each other for predictable interactions. According to Ber scheid ( 1983), even couples that argued and never seemed to get
scheid's theory, as the amount of interruption decreases, so will along can have considerable amounts of intimacy invested in the
the amount of experienced emotion. Eventually, one might find relationship, whatever the nature of that intimacy may be or
oneself experiencing little or no emotion at all. It is perhaps this have been. The death of a spouse is one of the surest ways of
course of emotion in close relationships that led Livingston ( 1980) finding out the amount of intimacy one had invested in the re
to refer to love as a process of uncertainty reduction. lationship. Similarly, individuals who divorce are often surprised
The decreasing experiencing of intimacy in a close relationship, by the amount ofpostdecisional regret, or at least emotion, they
especially a romantic relationship, has both a positive anda neg experience. Often they had no idea of the amount of intimacy
ative side. The positive side is that the decrease in experienced they had in the relationship until they forceably ended the re
intimacy is the result of an increased amount of interpersonal lationship. lndeed, the divorce may have stemmed in part from
bonding. In other words, it results from the relationship's be their unawareness of their own and the other's intimate invest
coming closer, not more distant. Thus, one might view the re ment. This view of the course of intimacy in close relationships
lationship as having a large amount of latent intimacy, even renders it essential that interpersonally involved individuals create
though that intimacy is not manifest. The negative side is that minor interruptions in order to discern their levels of intimate
it often becomes difficult to distinguish the close relationship involvement before they create major interruptions, wherever
from no relationship at all because of the lack of observable possible. A perfectly good relationship may be destroyed for lack
intimacy. This situation is represented in Figure 2, which shows ofknowledge about the nature ofintimate involvement in close
both latent and experienced levels of intimacy as a function of relationships.
the temporal course of the relationship. The failed or failing The passion component. The course ofthe passion component
relationship will differ from the successful relationship primarily in close relationships is quite different from that of the intimacy
in terms of the latent intimacy rather than in terms of the ex component. The view presented here is based on Solomon's
perienced or manifest intimacy. ( l 980) opponentprocess theory of acquired motivation.
Fortunately, there are ways of distinguishing a live relationship The passion component probably <loes not draw exclusively
from one that is dying or dead. The most obvious way is to from motivational arousal for its substance, but it appears to
generate sorne kind of interruption in order to observe the draw very heavily on such arousal. Moreover, its course bears a
amount of intimacy that this interruption generates. For example, close resemblance to that predicted by Solomon's theory. Thus,
the lover's going away, even for a brief period of time, can help this theory is viewed as providing a characterization ofthe tem
one ascertain the amount of feeling one still has left for the lover. poral course ofthe passion component, or at least its motivational
Or, changing established routines, as on a joint vacation, can be aspects.
useful in assessing the state of intimacy in a relationship. According to Solomon's theory, experienced motivation for a
Sometimes it is only through extreme interventions, whether person or an object is a function of two underlying opponent
processes. The first, positive process, is quick to develop but also
quick to fade. The second, negative or opponent process, is slow
to develop and also slow to fade. The result of the two processes
working in conjunction is a motivational course somewhat like ....
+
that depicted in Figure 3. e
o
, <.
Q)
According to the theory as used here, a surge in passion can -
' \' . ..
be experienced almost instantaneously upon meeting another E
Q) \
individual to whom one is attracted, whether physically or oth
+
erwise. This passionate arousal increases quickly but also peaks > ·-
fairly rapidly. The peak of arousal corresponds to just that point a> E
...J E ...
before the opponent process of passion begins to recruit. Once "O o
this opponent process begins to recruit, the experienced leve! of

a >
u
g '' \\
passion decreases, or habituates, as the positive force remains w�
, \
constant and the negative force results in decreasing levels of \
a> e \
arousal. Eventually, one reaches a more or less stable and ha ·.... ·-
bituated leve! of arousal toward the individual or object. At this oQ) (/)
Duration of Relationship
point, both the positive and the negative forces are stable and in o
)
equilibrium. Should one lose the individual (or object), one <loes .·
not merely go back to baseline, that is, the null level of passionate ( o Successful Relationship
arousal one felt before ever having encountered the individual

Flagging Relationship
or object. Rather, one sinks below baseline, resulting in likely
feelings of depression, remorse, and extreme discomfort. The Failed Relationship
transition to belowbaseline status of positive arousal results from Figure 4. The course of
the loss of the positive passionate force (the person or object is decision/commitment as a function of
gone) but the continuance of the negative force (the effects of duration of relationship.
the absence continue to be felt). It is only gradually that the
effects of the negative force, which is slow to disappear, begin to
moderate and one eventually returns to a state at or close to longer has the same effect or produces the same high that it once
baseline. did. Eventually one reaches a habituated state where one needs
It is useful to think of the motivational model in terms of to continue use of the substance merely to prevent entry into a
addictions to various kinds of substances. Indeed, it is the analogy state of withdrawal, with its resulting symptoms of depression,
of the passion component of love to the motivational aspect of irritability, and craving for the substance. Should one cease use
addictions that has led Peele and Brodsky ( 1976) to refer to love of the substance, there will be a difficult withdrawal period in
as an addiction. Consider, for example, addictive substances such which one will experience a variety of unpleasant psychological
as drugs, cigarettes, or coffee (choose your poison!). Initially, one and somatic symptoms. After the withdrawal period has ended,
has no particular motivation toward or need for the addictive one can, at best, return to baseline.
substance. When one starts use of the addictive substance, one The decision/commitment component. The course ofthe de
feels a "high" as a result. One is then likely to increase use of cision/commitment component of love over the duration of a
the substance. However, as one increases use of the substance, close relationship depends in large part on the success of that
one starts to habituate: A given amount of the substance no relationship (and vice versa). Generally, this level starts ata zero
baseline before one meets or gets to know the individual and
then starts increasing. Usually, if the relationship is to become
a longterm one, the increase in level of commitment in the
decision/commitment component will be gradual at first and
then speed up. If the relationship continues over the long term,
the amount of commitment will generally level off, yielding an
e
.
o ¡¡;
· Sshaped curve. If the relationship begins to flag, the level of
-.,
e,
n, commitment will begin a period of descent, and ifthe relationship
o fails, in the sense of approaching an ending, the level of com
.;
> mitment may go back down to baseline .
....1
As always, the smoothness of the hypothetical curve <loes not
take into account the rockiness of many relationships. Even the
most successful relationships will have their ups and downs, with
the commitment curve varying accordingly. Figure 4 shows an
Durotion \ of Relotionship
idealized curve of decision/commitment over the duration of a
\
relationship, without the bumps that almost inevitably occur
along the way.
- Experienced Level To conclude this section, it can be noted that the respective
-·- Positive Orive }
. . Opponent Processes curves representing amounts of intimacy, passion, and decision/
---· N eqottve 0 rive
Figure 3. The course of passion as a function of duration ofrelationship. commitment show somewhat different forms. The differences
can be even greater than those shown here because of individual
differences in close relationships. Because ofthe different forms BALANCEO TRIANGLE
of the curve, relationships will change over time. It is necessary
to have sorne way within the theory of conceptualizing the nature
of these changes. A way of conceptualizing such changes is con
sidered in the next section.
Beyond the Basic Triangle

To this point, the discussion has proceeded as though all tri
angles oflove are the same, and as though there is only one such UNBALANCED TRIANGLES
triangle. However, both of these assumptions are oversimplifi
cations. It is now necessary to extend the triangular theory to
take into account the greater complexity of love in close rela
tionships.
Geometry
Triangle
of the Love ��L>,
Possion Oecisi�n I
Cornrnitment
The geometry of the love triangle depends upon two factors: Figure 6. Shape of triangle as a function of kind of love.
amount of love and balance of
love.
Amount of love: A rea of the triangle. Figure 5 shows three
timacy component plays a large part and the passion and decision/
different triangles differing only in area. These differences in area
commitment components play smaller parts. This triangle rep
represent differences in amounts of love experienced in three
resents a relationship in which the two lovers are very good
hypothetical relationships: the larger the triangle, the greater the
friends and are close to each other but the physical aspects
amount of experienced love. It is actually possible to specify
and com mitment to the future are more marginal. The fourth,
coordinates for the three components oflove, with higher absolute
a scalene triangle pointing to the right side, represents a
values of coordinates representing greater amounts of each of
relationship in which the decision/commitment component
the three hypothetical constructs.
predominates over intimacy and passion. This triangle
Balance of love: Shape of the triang/e. Figure 6 shows four
represents the highly com mitted relationship in which
distinct triangles that are dissimilar in shape. The equilateral
intimacy and physical attraction have waned or in which those
triangle at the top represents a balanceó love in which all three
components were never there in the first place.
compoilents oflove are roughly equally matched. The second, a By varying both the area and the shape of the triangle of l�ve,
scalene triangle pointing to the left side, represents a relationship it becomes possible to represent a wide variety of different kinds
in which the passion component of love is emphasized over the of relationships, and particularly to represent the course of a
others. This relationship is likely to be one in which physical close relationship over time. It should be noted that the triangle
attraction plays a large part but in which the intimacy and de is only a gross representation of the subtleties of love in a rela
cision/commitment components play smaller parts. The third, tionship. As mentioned earlier, the constituents of the intimacy
an isosceles triangle, represents a relationship in which the in component experienced in a loving relationship are not a single
lntimacy
entity but rather a union of many different entities (as per the
Less Love
Thomsonian model). Similarly, many different sources of passion
may enter into love in a close relationship, and a variety of cog
nitions in the decision/commitment component yield the decision
to love someone and the decision to remain committed to that
love. Hence, a detailed diagnosis of the state of a relationship
Decision/
Pass ion Commitment would necessitate going beyond looking only at the area and
shape ofthe triangle. Nevertheless, these elements ofthe geometry
of the triangle are useful in conceptualizing different kinds of
relationships that can evolve as loving relationships.
Mu/tiple Triangles of Love

Love does not involve only a single triangle. Rather, it involves
a great number of triangles, only sorne of which are of major
theoretical and practical interest. The main triangles will be con
sidered here.
Real versus ideal triangles. One not only has the triangle
representing his or her love for the other in a close rela�onsh�p,
More Love but also a triangle representing an ideal other for that relationship.
This ideal may be based in part on experience in previous re
Figure 5. Area of triangle as an index of amount of love.
lationships ofthe same kind, which form what Thibaut and Kel lntimacy
ley ( 1959) refer to as a "comparison level," and in part on ex
pectations of what the close relationship can be. These expec
tations may or may not be grounded in reality. Figure 7 represents Perfectly Matched
four of the possible relations between real and ideal triangles. lnvolvements
The first panel shows real and ideal triangles as coincident: In
other words, the actual relationship corresponds essentially per �
fectly to the ideal for that relationship. The second panel shows Decision I
Pass ion Commitment
underinvolvement: The person's triangle in the actual relationship
is at lower levels ofthe three components than the person ideally
would like. The third panel shows overinvolvement: Levels of
the three components are greater than the individual would like. Closely Matched
The fourth triangle shows misinvolvement: In this particular in lnvolvements
stance, levels of intimacy and passion are less than what ideally
might be desired, but the leve! of decision/commitment is greater
than what ideally might be desired. Note that whereas the second
and third triangles involve mismatches primarily in area, the
fourth triangle involves mismatch primarily in shape. Of course,
Moderately
Mismatched
it is possible to have mismatches in both area and shape or to lnvolvements
have mismatches in neither, as in the first triangle.
Our research suggests that the overlapping area between the
real and ideal triangles is associated with satisfaction in close
relationships, whereas the nonoverlapping area between the two
triangles is associated with dissatisfaction (Stemberg & Bames, Severely
1985). The greater the degree of discrepancy between the two
Mismatched
lnvolvements
triangles, the less satisfied an individual will be in a loving re
lntimacy -- Self - -- Other

Figure 8. Relations between involvements of
two individuals in a relationship.
Ideal lnvolvement
lationship. If the discrepancy from the ideal is too great, the
Decision / relationship can be in serious jeopardy.
Pass ion Commitment Selfversus other triangles. There are always at least two people
involved in interpersonal !ove relationships, and each of them
experiences a triangle of !ove. Hence, one can conceptualize the
Underinvolvement degree of match or mismatch between the triangles of the
partners in the loving relationship. Figure 8 shows four of the
possible relations between the triangles of two individuals. In
the first panel, the triangles are almost perfectly matched. Such a
relation between triangles is unlikely in practice, of course. The
second panel shows closely matched involvements, the third
shows moderately mismatched involvements, and the fourtb
shows se verely mismatched involvements. Involvements can
Over i nvolvement differ both in area and shape ofthe respective triangles. Again,
our research suggests that overlapping area between the two
triangles is as sociated with satisfaction in loving relationships,
whereas non overlapping area is associated with dissatisfaction
/\
/ \ (Stemberg & Bames, 1985).
/ \
/ \ Self-perceived versus other-perceived triang/es. Finally, it is
� Misin,ol,,.,ment possible to distinguish between selfperceived and otherperceived
triangles. In a loving relationship, one has a triangle that rep
l.!. - resents one's love for the other. However, there is no guarantee
that this triangle will be experienced by the other in the same
-Real way that it is experienced by the self. In other words, the partner
--- Ideal in a loving relationship may not perceive one's levels ofthe tbree
Figure 7. Relations between real and ideal levels of involvement. components oflove in the same way that the levels are perceived
lntimacy oneself, or between the way one would ideally like the other to
I \
feel about the self and the way the other actually feels about the
I '- self. Figure 1 O depicts geometrically the various kinds of
� � seores that were generated by the data.
Matched
Perceptions In addition to filling out the Rubin and Levinger et al. seales,
subjects also filled out a questionnaire querying feelings about
the quality of the relationship, assigning ratings of 1 through 9
to (a) satisfaction with the relationship, (b) success of the rela
tionship, (e) closeness of the relationship, (d) exclusivity of the
\
relationship, (e) degree to which they feel "in love" with the
I
/' \ partner, (f) communication in the relationship, (g) predicted du
/ \ ration of the relationship, (h) extent to which needs are met in
I \
the relationship, (i) extent to which the subjects believe their
L1
Unmatched partner's needs are met in the relationship, (j) extent to which
Perceptions
the subjects believe they measure up to their partner's ideal, (k)
\\
extent to which the partner measures up to their own ideal, (1)
�� their commitment to the relationship, and (m) the partner's per
ceived commitment to the relationship. These ratings were ali
- - - Other- highly intercorrelated, with the exception ofthe exclusivity rating,
-Self- Perceived
Perceived and so they were combined into a single seore representing overall
Figure 9. Relations between perceptions of two relationship satisfaction. Both absolute and signed difference
individuals in a relationship. seores were computed, although the absolute difference seores
proved to be more revealing than the signed ones. A number of
by the self. Hence, there can be discrepancies between an indi interesting findings emerged from the SternbergBarnes ( 1985)
vidual's triangle as experienced by the self and as experienced study, only sorne of which will be diseussed here.
by the other. Figure 9 shows two possible levels of discrepancy, First, consider the question of whether ideal others matter for
one with a minor discrepancy and one with a major discrepancy satisfaction in a romantic relationship, or matter for satisfaction
between self and otherperceived triangles.
lnteractions among the !ove triangles. The three pairs oftri
angles generate eight (23 ) different triangles in a single close re SIMPLE SCORES
lationship. Of course, one can generate further such triangles,
for example, how one perceives the other perceiving oneself.
However, these further triangles become rather esoteric and not
terribly interesting. Sternberg and Barnes ( 1985) sought to study ( Mole or Fema le)
the effects of these eight triangles on satisfaction in close rela
tionships. They had 48 subjects24 Yale undergraduate and
graduate student couplesfill out the Rubin Love Scale, the
DIFFERENCE SCORES
Rubin Liking Scale, and the Levinger et al. Scale of Interpersonal
Involvement in four different ways. In particular, they had sub
jects produce ratings for (a) how one feels about the other, (b) Within Subject
how one believes the other feels about oneself, (e) how one would s o¡ ,, Ors
, ,,.,,."
wish to feel about an ideal other, and (d) how one would wish ', ,,. ...
,.,,.,,."'',,
an ideal other to feel about oneself. Because both members of
each loving couple were tested, this procedure produced eight -: <.
sOp OpS
different seores, four for each individual. Moreover, it was
possible ( Mole or Female)
to look at a variety of difference seores as well as simple seores.
The simple seores are simply the four seores generated by the
four different kinds of ratings provided. The difference seores Between Subjects
are generated by subtracting certain seores from other seores.
For example, it is possible to compute the difference between
how one feels about the other and how one would ideally like to
Fema le
feel about the other, or between how one feels about the other
and how one perceives the other to feel about oneself. Both of
these seores are withinperson difference seores in that they are
generated from the data of a single subject. It was also possible Mole
to compute betweensubjects difference seores that were generated
by subtracting across rather than within subjects' seores. For
example, it is possible to compute the difference between the
way one feels about the other and the way the other feels about Figure 1 O. Geometric representations of simple and difference seores.
as much as do real others. Five of six correlations of ideal Fifth, consider the question of how differences between the
others with satisfaction were statistically significant but of ways two people feel about each other compare, in their effects
relatively modest magnitude (.28 to .41). These correlations did on relationship satisfaction, with differences between the ways
not even overlap the range of the six correlations concerning each individual feels, on the one hand, and perceives the other
real others (.55 to .75). Thus, looked at in their own right, to feel, on the other hand. In other words, consider the difference
feelings about ideal others seemed to matter, but they mattered between each individual's perception of the way the other feels
less then feelings about actual others. versus the way the other actually feels. Our study indicated clearly
Second, consider the question of whether perceptions of how that it is the perceived rather than the actual feelings that best
the other feels about oneself matter for satisfaction in romantic predicted satisfaction in romantic relationships. The median
relationships, or matter as much as do one's own feelings toward magnitude of correlation with satisfaction for withinperson dif
the other. We found that one's perceptions ofthe other's feelings ference seores was .66, whereas the median magnitude of cor
toward oneself clearly do matter for satisfaction, and at a leve! relation with satisfaction for betweenpersons difference seores
roughly comparable to that of one's feelings toward the other. was only .34.
Thus, in evaluating a relationship, one takes into account one's Sixth, consider the interrelationships between the four basic
perceptions of the feelings of the other toward oneself at about ratings of self to other, other to self, self to ideal other, and ideal
the same leve! as one takes into account one's feelings toward other to self, as computed from the two Rubin scales and the
the other. Levinger scale. The intercorrelations tended to be quite high,
Third, consider the question of kinds of comparison levels. with a median of .68. Clearly, there tended to be a high degree
Whereas a single comparison leve! could be defined in terms of of correspondence among the various feelings and perceptions
a difference between how one feels about the other and how one of feelings.
might feel about an ideal other (the ThibautKelley, 1959, com Seventh, consider the question ofwhether there are differences
parison leve! for an ideal other), other comparison levels can be in the magnitudes of ratings of feelings concerning real versus
defined as well by taking the various possible difference seores ideal others. Analysis of'variance clearly revealed that ideal others
into account. In a sense, then, our set of difference seores rep received more favorable ratings than did actual others.
resented a generalization ofThibaut and Kelley's ( 1959) concept Eighth, consider the question of whether there are differences
of a comparison leve!. As it turns out, five of the six comparison in the magnitudes of ratings from the self to the other, on the
levels defined within person by these difference seores related one hand, and ratings of the perceived other to the self, on the
significantly and substantially to satisfaction within romantic re other. Analysis of variance revealed no mean difference between
lationships. The correlations ranged in magnitude from .66 to these two ratings. Thus, actual relationships fall below ideal
. 73 for the Rubín Love Scale, from .34 to .59 for the Rubín standards, on the average, but they are not perceived as being
Liking Scale, and from . 70 to .80 for the Levinger et al. Inter asymmetrical, on the average.
personal Involvement Scale. The standard (ThibautKelley) Finally, consider the question of whether it is possible to prediet
comparisonlevel score is no more powerful than the five other satisfaction in romantic relationships on the basis of rated
meaningful ones, and indeed it may be less powerful than the feelings from and to real and ideal others. The results of
strongest predictor of relationship satisfaction. simple and multiple correlational analysis indicated that it is
Fourth, consider the question ofjust what is the strongest pre possible to make such predictions, and at a high leve! of
dictor of relationship satisfaction. We found it to be the difference accuracy. The use ofjust two ratings (difference between
between how the other is perceived to feel about the self and how perception of actual other to self and ideal other to self; self to
the ideal other would feel about the self. In other words, one is other) yielded multiple cor relations with satisfaction in excess
satisfied when the way the other is perceived to feel corresponds of .8.
to the way one ideally would want the other to feel, and one is To conclude this section, the multipletriangles framework
dissatisfied as the discrepancy between the real and ideal in proves to be viable for understanding loving relationships and
creases. It is interesting to note, therefore, that the strongest pre for predicting satisfaction in these relationships, or at least in
dictor of relationship satisfaction was not one's feelings for the the romantic ones we have studied so far. By looking at ali of
other but rather a function of the way the other is perceived to the various triangles in combination, it is possible to understand
feel and the way the other ideally would be perceived to feel in sorne depth the dynamics of two people's feelings about
about the self. It is possible to speculate on why this difference each other in such relationships.
score might be such a powerful predictor of relationship satis
faction. When the other is perceived to be overinvolved, this Action Triangle
perception often results in one's drawing away from the other in
order to establish the desired distance. However, this withdrawal It was noted earlier that the triangle representing the way an
often leads to an intervention on the other's part to bring one individual feels toward another may not be perceived by the other
closer. This intervention in turn leads to a further drawing away in the same way that it is perceived by the self. There can be any
by the self, and so on. In other words, the asymmetry between number of sources of this discrepancy in perceptions, but almost
feelings can lead to progressively greater asymmetry, and even certainly one of the most powerful sources is the failure of many
tually to the relationship's falling apart. Apparently, one can individuals to express their !ove fully in action. It is one thing to
tolerate varying degrees of both self and otherinvolvement in feel a certain way but another thing altogether to express these
relationships, but this tolerance depends on the perception of feelings, and often the feelings fail to be communicated because
these two levels of involvement as being relatively similar. ofthe inability or unwillingness ofthe individual to translate the
three components of !ove into actions. Hence, it is necessary to
think in terms of an "action triangle" that represents the three erativity. Moreover, other nonisomorphic geometric represen
components of love as translated into action. tations might be considered as well. In sum, it is important to
The actions that convey each ofthe three components oflove distinguish between the claims of the theory and the particular
differ. For example, sorne ofthe ways in which one might express metaphor used to represent these claims. The theory could be
the intimacy component are by (a) communicating inner feelings; represented by other metaphors, but at least so far the triangle
(b) promoting the other's wellbeing; (e) sharing one's possessions, has proved to be a useful one.
time, and self; (d) expressing empathy for the other; and (e) of This section concludes the presentation ofthe basic elements
fering emotional and material support to the other. Sorne ways of the triangular theory of !ove. This presentation has included
of expressing the passion component include (a) kissing, (b) hug not only basic elements of the theory but also a summary of
ging, (e) gazing, (d) touching, and (e) making love. Sorne ways data that are consistent with the theory. Although none of these
of expressing the decision/commitment component include (a) data were originally collected in order to test the theory, in that
pledging, (b) fidelity, (e) staying in a relationship through hard the development of the theory followed the various studies de
times, (d) engagement, and (e) marriage. Of course, the actions scribed, the data suggest that the triangular theory has at least
that express a particular component of love can differ somewhat sorne merit in helping us understand !ove in close relationships.
from one person to another, from one relationship to another, However, it is necessary to look beyond one's own data in as
and from one situation to another. Nevertheless, it is important sessing the empirical viability of a psychological theory. In the
to consider the triangle of love as it is expressed through action, next section, empirical findings from the literature on interper
because action has so many effects on a relationship. sonal attraction in close relationships are considered in terms of
What are sorne of the effects of action on love in a close re how they would be accounted for by the triangular theory of
lationship? First, one's actions can actually affect one's levels of love.
the three components. Selfperception theory (Bem, 1972) in
dicates that one's feelings and thoughts can be affected by one's
actions just as one's actions can be affected by one's feelings and Empirical Phenomena as Viewed Through the Lens
thoughts. In other words, the way people act shapes the way they of the Triangular Theory
feel and think, possibly as much as the way they feel and think The triangular theory oflove can account for a number ofthe
shapes the way they act. Second, certain actions lead to other main empirical phenomena in the literature on love and close
actions. In other words, acting in certain ways tends to produce relationships. It is possible to provide here only a brief review
acting in other ways and, thus, to build up a network of actions. of findings and their interface with the triangular theory. Nev
Expressing one's love through action can lead to further expres ertheless, such a review helps show how the theory can be used
sion ofthis love through action, whereas failure ofselfexpression to understand various kinds of data in the literature and in peo
can lead to further failure of this kind. Third, the way one acts ple's experiences.
is likely to affect the way the other feels and thinks about oneself. Sorne ofthe main empirical and anecdotal data have already
In other words, one's actions can be expected to have an effect been dealt with in one way or another in this article. For example,
on the other's triangle of love for oneself. Fourth and finally, the range in kinds of love that one can experience is dealt with
one's actions will almost inevitably have an effect on the other's in theory primarily by the different possible combinations of
actions, thereby leading to a mutually reinforcing series of paired intimacy, passion, and decision/commitment, as shown in Table
action sequences. 2. The role of comparison levels, and especially of ideals, is
The point to be made is that a theory of !ove should not get dealt
lost within the individuals involved in the relationship. It is nec with by the various love triangles discussed in the section on the
essary to take into account the ways in which individuals express multiple triangles of love, and the role of action is also discussed
their !ove. Without expression, even the greatest ofloves can die. in this section. There are a number of other phenomena, not
The triangle serves as a useful geometric metaphor for con discussed above, that can also be understood in terms of the
ceptualizing the interrelations among the three components of triangular theory.
love and for conceptualizing relations between the various in One such phenomenon is the finding by Walster, Aronson,
stantiations of these three components of !ove: for the self, for Abrahams, and Rottman ( 1966) that on initial dates, physical
the other, for the ideal self, for the ideal other, and for action. In attractiveness is about ali that matters for satisfaction with the
the triangular theory, the locations of points represent coordinates date. According to the triangular theory, the passion component
for each of the three components oflove, but there is no intention oflove is the quickest to recruit; the other two components take
for the distances between points to represent, in any sense, the more time. As a result, there may be relatively little basis for
distances between the various components, or for the cosines of judgment of a partner as suitable for a loving relationshipafter a
the angles at the vertices to represent correlations between the first dateother than passion criteria, such as physical attrac
three components. In other words, the triangle is used as a heu tiveness.
ristic, not as a fullfledged geometric model partaking of ali of Yet another related finding is that of Dutton and Aron ( 1974 ),
the properties of analytic geometry. The triangular metaphor is who found that individuals who are physiologically aroused are
useful only to the extent that it serves as a worthwhile heuristic. more likely to take a romantic interest in a member of the op
There are an infinite number of other possible geometric and posite sex whom they meet during the period of that arousal
nongeometric metaphors that would be isomorphic to the tri than are individuals who are not so aroused. In particular, these
angular metaphor, and the only property that truly serves to dis investigators had their subjects walk across either a bridge that
tinguish the infinite number of representations is heuristic gen swayed from side to side as one walked across it or a bridge that
was more stable and closer to the ground. Men who walked across
the unstable bridge were more likely to be romantically interested spondingly less nonoverlapping area. Such relationships are pre
in a confederate who was at the scene of the crossing. dicted to be more satisfactory. Hence, to the extent that greater
Peele and Brodsky (1976) have referred to love asan addiction, similarity in background, attitudes about life, and attitudes about
and it is easy to understand this reference in terms of the tri the particular relationship affect the !ove triangles of the two
angular theory. According to the theory, only one of the three individuals so as to make them more similar, the couple is more
components of love behaves in a manner comparable to that of likely to be happy in their relationship.
addiction, but this componentpassionfollows a pattern very One of the odder findings in the literature is what is sometimes
similar to that of addiction. The course of acquired motivations referred to as the "exposure effect" (Saegert, Swap, & Zajonc,
described earlier, after the theory of Solomon ( 1980), applies at 197 3 ). It has been found that mere exposure to another
least as well to dependencies on things such as drugs, alcohol, individual
cigarettes, and coffee as it <loes to dependency on other persons. can foster liking, although it is much less clear that mere exposure
One might argue that these other dependencies are physiological, fosters loving. This finding fits in with the triangular theory.
whereas dependency on another person is psychological. This Whereas mere exposure is not likely to generate physical attrac
argument seems incomplete, however. Substance dependencies tion in and of itself, it is likely to generate at least sorne elements
have a major psychological component as well as a physiological of emotional connectedness. It is difficult to be with a person
component. It is for this reason that readdiction to the substances over an extended period of time and not to form sorne kind of
is so likely, even after the physiological dependency has been emotional bond. And it is the emotional bond that is responsible
conquered. Moreover, dependencies on other people probably for liking in the triangular theory. Hence, the exposure effect is
acquire physiological as well as psychological properties. (Indeed, likely to promote liking, but not passionate or necessarily com
one might argue that psychological states always have physio mitted !ove.
logical substrates.) When one is jilted by a lover, for example, Once a relationship is attained, it goes through a certain course.
there can be massive psychological effects, and massive physio Theorists have different ideas about what this course is, and a
logical effects as well. Symptoms such as irritability, loss of ap number of them posit stage models of the development and, in
petite, depression, and inability to concentrate have physiological sorne cases, dissolution ofrelationships (e.g., Kerckhoff & Davis,
correlates that correspond to the psychological manifestations. 1962; Levinger, 1983; Murstein, 1976; Reiss, 1960). The trian
One of the most common observations in everyday life is that gular theory predicts that relationships will almost inevitably
people want what they cannot have. In the domain of interper have a course that will result in qualitative shifts over time. The
sonal relationships, the phenomenon is simply that of the at reason for such shifts is the different courses over time of the
traction ofthe individual who is "hard to get," The status ofthe three components of love.
hardtoget phenomenon is not totally clear. For example, Walster, One ofthe frequent findings, both in people's experience and
Walster, Piliavin, and Schmidt (1973) found that people tended in the literature on interpersonal attraction, is that it is difficult
to be attracted not to those who were hard to get, in general, but to maintain romantic !ove overa long period oftime (Berscheid
to those who were hard to get for others but relatively easier to & Walster, 1978). This aspect of the course of relationships is
get for themselves. However, the interpretation of this study ap predicted by the rapid rise but also the relatively rapid fall of
pears to be open to at least sorne question (Wright & Contrada, the motivational curve in close relationships. Habituation of
1983). The Walster et al. (1973) findings notwithstanding, the romance, as well as of other motivated states, can be relatively
hardtoget phenomenon appears to be one that is well entrenched rapid to develop. However, the rate at which habituation develops
in people's experience as well as in literature and even in a mu will depend on the relative strength of the positive and negative
sical, The Fantasticks. In the psychological literature, there is a forces in the opponentproccess account of motivation, and the
theoryreactance theorythat seeks to explain psychologically why relative strengths ofthese two forces are likely to differ as a func
people should want what they have difficulty getting (Brehm, tion ofthe particular motivational needs involved. For example,
1966; Brehm & Brehm, 1981). the motivational needs that lead us to desire sexual fulfillment
In terms of the triangular theory, the locus of reactance in may last long beyond the needs that lead us to desire sexual
interpersonal relationships would be in the passion component fulfillment from any one particular person. The needs that lead
oflove. The inability to attain a desired goal state coupled with many of us to feel unconditional love for our children also seem
the belief that the desired goal state is not beyond attainment to be remarkably persistent, for reasons that are not at present
would lead to increasing the level ofthe passion component and, altogether clear. The general point is that relationships will go
usually, behavioral attempts to attain that goal state. After a through different states and possibly stages as a function of the
certain point, these attempts can start to feed on themselves and course of the three components, and although there will be dif
to persist, even in the absence of realism regarding the likelihood ferences across persons, relationships, and situations in the exact
that the goal state will be attained. shapes of the respective curves, there will always be changes in
One of the most robust findings in the literature on attraction the nature ofthe relationship with changes over time in the three
in close relationships is the finding that similarity works in close components of !ove.
relationships. In other words, people are more likely to form One aspect of development in virtually all successful relation
relationships with and later marry people who are more similar ships will be what Altman and Taylor (1973) refer to as "social
to themselves, and also to be happier in relationships with such penetration," Social penetration refers to the increasing depth
people (Burgess & Wallin, 1953; Byrne, 1971). In the triangular and breadth that characterize relationships as people get to
theory, greater similarity in each ofthe three components oflove know each other over time. In the triangular theory, social pene
will lead to triangles with more overlapping area and corre tration has its most immediate effects on the intimacy component
of a relationship. Indeed, the results of the SternbergGrajek
(1984) study suggest that ability to communicate effectively is of the three components in a Joving relationship, then under
almost a sine qua non of a successful Joving relationship. In suitable situational circumstances, that relationship seems likely
traditional conceptions of sex roles, women tend to stress inti to be one that will last and thrive.
macy and social penetration more in their Iives than do men, To conclude, a triangular theory of love has been presented
and one might speculate that the SternbergGrajek (1984) finding that attempts to explain and characterize a variety of loverelated
that women like their best friend of the same sex more than they phenomena. The theory analyzes love in terms of three com
like their lover stems from the women's success in finding greater ponentsintimacy, passion, and decision/commitmentat tempting
communicational intimacy in closeness with other women than to provide at the same time both a descriptive and an
with men. explanatory framework for how these components can combine
The divorce rate today is approaching 50% in the United States, into different forms oflove (see Ossorio, 1985; also Shweder &
and it seems fitting to conclude this article with sorne comments Miller, 1985). Although the theory remains at this point an in
on what kinds ofthings can sustain each ofthe three components complete statement, it provides at least one step toward under
of love in close relationships. standing the nature of love in everyday life.
First, consider the intimacy component of love. If we
accept
Berscheid's ( 1983) view that emotion in close relationships is References
felt when there is sorne kind of interruption or disruption of a Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The
paired behavioral chain between two people, then it would appear deve/opment of interpersonal re/ationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart
that the worst enemy ofthe intimacy component oflove is stag & Winston. Barnes, M., & Stemberg, R. J. (1986). Implicit theories oflove.
nation. Although people want sorne predictability from a loving Manuscript
relationship, too much predictability can probably undermine in preparation.
the amount of intimacy experienced in a close relationship. Bem, D. J. (1972). Selfperception theory. Advances in Experimental So-
Hence, it is necessary always to introduce sorne elements of cial Psycho/ogy. 6, 162.
Berscheid, E. (1983). Emotion. In H. H. Kelley et al. (Eds.), C/ose
change and variationto keep the relationship growing. Ob re/a-
viously, there will be different ways in which change and growth tionships (pp. 110168). New York: Freeman.
might take place. For sorne people, the elements of change will Berscheid, E., & Walster, E. H. ( 1978). Interpersonal attraction (2nd ed.).
be through vacations. For others, it will be through developing Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
new mutual interests. For still others, it will be through experi Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychologica/ reactance. New York:
menting with new behavioral patterns in the relationship. The Academic Press.
meaos of growth and change must be individualized to the re Brehm, S. S. (1985). lntimate relationships. New York: Random House.
lationship, but the need for these two elements is probably com Brehm, S. S., & Brehm, J. W. (1981). Psycho/ogica/ reactance: A theory
mon across Jongterm relationships. offreedom and control. New York: Academic Press.
Burgess, E. W., & Wallin, P. (1953). Engagement and marriage.
Second, consider the passion component oflove. In sorne Phila
sense, delphia: Lippincott.
this component is probably the most difficult to sustain, because Byrne, D. ( 1971 ). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.
it is least subject to conscious control and most subject to ha Davis, K. E. ( 1985, February). Near and dear: Friendship and love
bituation. It is well known from conditioning theory that inter com
mittent reinforcement is probably the best maintainer ofbehavior pared. Psycho/ogy 'Ioday. pp. 2230.
that results from acquired motivation. However, intermittent re Davis, K. E., & Roberts, M. K. (1985). Relationships in the real world:
inforcement in the context of a longterrn close relationship can The descriptive approach to personal relationships. In K. J. Gergen &
potentially take on a rather sinister character. In sorne cases, the K. E. Davis (Eds.), The social construction of the person (pp. 145
163). New York: SpringerVerlag,
administration of intermittent reinforcement can border on the
Duck, S. (1983). Friendsfor lije. New York: St.
manipulative or actually become manipulative. Perhaps the best Martin's.
way to maximize the passion component of !ove over the long Dutton, D. G., & Aron, A. P. (1974). Sorne evidence for heightened
term is, first, to analyze the needs the relationship is fulfilling sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal
and to do what one can to make sure that these needs continue ofPersonality and Social Psychology; 30, 510517.
to be fulfilled and, second, to analyze what needs the relationship Freud, S. ( 1922). Certain neurotic mechanisms in jealousy, paranoia, and
is not fulfilling and to try to develop the relationship so that it homosexuality. In Col/ected Papers (Vol. 2). London: Hogarth.
can meet these needs as well. Again, the particular set of needs Hatfield, E., & Walster, G. W. (1981). A new /ook at /ove. Reading, MA:
AddisonWesley.
and the ways in which they are best met will probably differ
Hinde, R. A. (1979). Towards understanding relationships. London: Ac
somewhat from one relationship to another. ademic Press.
Third, consider the decision/commitment component oflove. Kelley, H. H. ( 1983). Love and commitment. In H. H. Kelley et al. (Eds.),
This is the component in which intervention is easiest because Close re/ationships (pp. 265314). New York: Freeman.
it is most subject to conscious control. The best way to maintain Kerckhoff, A. C., & Davis, K. E. ( 1962). Value consensus and need com
commitment in a relationship is probably both to maintain the plementarity in mate selection. American Sociological Review, 27, 295
importance of the relationship in the couple's Iives and to max 303.
imize the happiness one achieves through the relationship. Doing Lasswell, M., & Lobsenz, N. M. ( 1980). Styles ofloving. New York:
Bal
these things entails working on the intimacy and passion com
lantine.
ponents of love, and especially expressing these components as
Lee, J. A. ( 1977). A typology of styles of loving. Personality and
well as one's commitment to the relationship through action. If Social
one can attain the consummate Iove that results from high degrees Psycho/ogy Bul/etin, 3, 173182.
Levinger, G. (1983). Development and change. In H. H. Kelley et al.
(Eds.), C/ose relationships (pp. 315359). New York: Freeman.
Levinger, G., Rands, M., & Talaber, R. (1977). The assessment of in-
volvement and rewardingness in e/ose and casual pair relationships
(National Science Foundation Tech. Rep. DK). Amherst: University Shweder, R. A., & Miller, J. G. (1985). The social construction of the
of Massachusetts. person: How is it possible? In K. J. Gergen & K. E. Davis (Eds.), The
Livingston, K. R. ( 1980). Love as a process of reducing uncertainty. In social construction ofthe person (pp. 4169). New York: SpringerVerlag.
K. S. Pope (Ed.), On /ove and loving (pp. 133151). San Francisco: Solomon, R. L. ( 1980). The opponentprocess theory of acquired moti
JosseyBass. vation: The costs of pleasure and the beneftts of pain. American Psy-
Lund, M. ( 1985). The development of investment and commitment scales cho/ogist, 35, 691712.
for predicting continuity of personal relationships. Journal of Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities ofman. New York: Macmillan.
Social and Personal Relationships, 2, 323. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond JQ: A triarchic theory of human
Mandler, G. ( 1980). The generation of emotion: A psychological theory. intel/i-
In R. Plutchik & H. Kellerman (Eds.), Emotion: Theory, research and gence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
experience. Vol. 1: Theories ofemotion (pp. 219243). New York: Ac Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Construct va/idation of a triangular theory of
ademic Press. /ove. Manuscript in preparation.
Maslow, A. H. ( 1962). Toward a psycho/ogy ofbeing. Princeton, NJ: Van Sternberg, R. J., & Barnes, M. (1985). Real and ideal others in romantic
Nostrand. relationships: Is four a crowd? Journal ofPersonality and Social Psy-
Murstein, B. l. ( 1976). Who will marry whom? Theories and research chology, 49, 15861608.
in marital choice. New York: Springer. Sternberg, R. J., & Grajek, S. (1984). The nature of love. Joumal of
Ossorio, P. G. (1985). An overview of descriptive psychology. In K. J. Persona/ity and Social Psychology, 47, 312329.
Gergen & K. E. Davis (Eds.), The social construction ofthe person (pp. Swensen, C. H. (1972). The behavior oflove. In H. A. Otto (Ed.), Love
1940). New York: SpringerVerlag. today (pp. 86101 ). New York: Association Press.
Peck, M. S. (1978). The road less traveled: A new psychology of /ove, Tennov, D. ( 1979). Love and /imerence. New York: Stein & Day.
traditional values and spiritual growth. New York: Simon & Schuster. Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology ofgroups.
Peele, S., & Brodsky, A. (1976). Lave and addiction. New York: New New York: Wiley.
American Library. Thomson, G. H. ( 1939). Thefactorial analysis ofhuman ability. London:
Reik, T. ( 1944). A psychologist /ooks at !ove. New York: Farrar & Rinehart. University of London Press.
· Reiss, l. L. ( 1960). Premarital sexual standards in America. New York: Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University
Free Press. of Chicago Press.
Rosch, E. ( 1978). Principies of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D., & Rottman, L. (1966). Impor
(Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 2748). Hillsdale, NJ: Erl tance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. Joumal
baum. ofPersonality and Social Psycho/ogy, 4, 508516.
Rubin, Z. ( 1970). Measurement of romantic !ove. Journal ofPersonality Walster, E., Walster, G., Piliavin, J., & Schmidt, L. ( 1973). "Playing hard
and Social Psycho/ogy, 16, 265273. toget": Understanding an elusive phenomenon. Journal ofPersonality
Rubin, Z. ( 1973). Liking and /oving: An invitation to social psycho/ogy. and Social Psycho/ogy, 26, 113121.
New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Wright, R. A., & Centrada, R. J. (1983). Dating se/ectivity and interper-
Saegert, S. C., Swap, W., & Zajonc, R. (1973). Exposure, context, and sonal attractiveness: Support for a "common sense" analysis. Unpub
interpersonal attraction. Journal ofPersonality and Social lished manuscript, University of Texas, Austin.
Psycho/ogy,
25, 234242.
Schank, R., & Abelson, R. ( 1977). Scripts, p/ans, goa/s, and understanding. Received April l, 1985
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Revision received November 6, 1985 •

A Triangular Theory of Love: Robert Stemberg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Triangular Theory of Love: Robert Stemberg

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Triangular Theory of Love: Robert Stemberg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Psychological Review

A Triangular Theory of Love

Mandler's ( 1980) more general theory of emotion. Although the >

this opponent process begins to recruit, the experienced leve! of

arousal one felt before ever having encountered the individual

Beyond the Basic Triangle

Mu/tiple Triangles of Love

lntimacy -- Self - -- Other

You might also like