The Science of Being Single: Why the Data Disagrees With Your Inner Critic

Key findings

1. 2005

   Single adults are targets of stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination — 'singlism' — rooted in an 'Ideology of Marriage and Family' whose assumptions (that a sexual partnership is the one truly important peer relationship, and that partnered people are happier and more fulfilled) shaped both everyday culture and scientific claims about singles. ↗

2. 2006

   The stereotyping and discrimination against singles is largely unrecognized and often unapologetic: compared with married people, singles are judged as less mature, less well-adjusted and more self-centered, and face disadvantages in domains from housing to pay — while such treatment is rarely seen as prejudice at all. ↗

Key findings

1. 2008

   In a longitudinal study of students in relationships, those who broke up were substantially less distressed after the breakup than they themselves had forecast — people systematically overestimate the emotional impact of romantic loss. ↗

2. 2008

   In a speed-dating study, participants' stated ideal-partner preferences — measured before the event — failed to predict what actually inspired their desire when meeting real people face to face; the classic sex differences in stated preferences vanished in live attraction. ↗

Key findings

1. 2012

   Online dating differs fundamentally from offline dating in access, communication and matching — but the claim that proprietary matching algorithms produce superior romantic outcomes lacks scientific validity, and browsing profiles can reduce partners to searchable attributes. ↗

2. 2008

   Ideal-partner preferences stated in the abstract do not predict attraction to real people: in speed-dating data, participants' pre-event preferences for attractiveness or earning prospects bore no relation to which live partners actually drew their romantic interest. ↗

Key findings

1. 1996

   Rejection sensitivity — anxiously expecting, readily perceiving, and overreacting to rejection — leads people to read intentional rejection into ambiguous behavior of new partners, and both rejection-sensitive people and their partners report lower relationship satisfaction. ↗

2. 1998

   Rejection expectancies operate as a self-fulfilling prophecy: in daily-diary and observational studies of couples, high rejection sensitivity predicted conflict processes that eroded relationships, and couples with a high-rejection-sensitive woman were far more likely to have broken up a year later (44% vs 15%). ↗