People who pursue romantic relationships because they genuinely want connection and intimacy—not because of pressure or insecurity—are more likely to end up in a relationship, according to new research published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. The study introduced a new scale to measure people’s reasons for seeking romance and found that motivations based on personal interest and values predicted a greater likelihood of partnering six months later.
Romantic relationships are often seen as a near-universal life goal, with many theories assuming that most people naturally desire love, sex, and companionship. But not everyone is drawn to dating for the same reasons—or even at all. Some people feel pressure from family or society, while others may avoid dating entirely because they value independence or feel ambivalent about romance. The researchers behind this new study wanted to capture this wide range of motivations in a single, organized framework.
To do this, they turned to self-determination theory, a well-established model in psychology that describes different kinds of motivation. According to the theory, motivations fall on a spectrum from external and pressured to internal and freely chosen. For example, someone might pursue a relationship to meet others’ expectations, to avoid feeling lonely or inadequate, or because they genuinely enjoy romantic connection. The theory also includes amotivation—when people feel no particular drive or see no reason to pursue a relationship at all.
The study was led by Geoff MacDonald, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, who became interested in this topic through his research on both singlehood and romantic relationships.
“Relationship researchers tend to approach people’s reasons for dating from the perspective that people just enjoy relationships, for example, because of evolutionary drives,” he explained. “In singlehood research, people talk more about the social structures and pressures that incentivize partnering (e.g., tax breaks for married people), as well as the people who aren’t interested in romantic relationships at all. I felt like both perspectives had good points, and wanted to integrate them into one model.”
“Self-Determination Theory was useful because it focuses on a variety of reasons people pursue goals including intrinsic (because it’s enjoyable), identified (because it is an important life goal), introjected (to feel better about myself), extrinsic (to please others), and amotivation (not interested in the goal). And I think most people know that there is some mix of these at play when they are thinking about dating. We used this model to develop a scale so that people could tell us how much each of these motives influenced their desire to be in a relationship, and we were able to use that information to predict who was more likely to actually be partnered six months later.”
The new measure is called the Autonomous Motivation for Romantic Pursuit Scale (AMRPS), a 24-item questionnaire that assesses six types of relationship motivation: intrinsic, identified, positive introjected, negative introjected, external, and amotivation. These range from highly autonomous to more controlled, as well as no motivation at all.
Intrinsic motivation involves seeking a relationship because it is genuinely enjoyable or emotionally fulfilling—people with this motivation value the experience itself. Identified motivation reflects a sense that being in a relationship aligns with one’s personal values or life goals, such as wanting to build a family or grow with a partner. Positive introjected motivation involves pursuing a relationship to boost one’s self-esteem or feel proud of being partnered.
In contrast, negative introjected motivation is driven by a desire to avoid negative feelings like shame, guilt, or a sense of failure for being single. External motivation comes from outside pressure, such as wanting to meet others’ expectations or avoid social stigma. Lastly, amotivation reflects a lack of any clear reason or drive to pursue a relationship—people with this mindset may feel uncertain, disinterested, or disconnected from the idea of partnering.
In the first part of the study, the researchers tested how these six types of motivation relate to existing psychological traits and relationship preferences. They surveyed two large samples of single adults—over 1,200 people in total—who were not currently in relationships. Participants completed the AMRPS and other questionnaires measuring things like attachment style, social goals, fear of being single, communal strength, and desire for romantic involvement.
People who scored high on intrinsic and identified motivations—those who valued relationships for personal meaning or enjoyment—tended to have a more secure attachment style, stronger social goals, and greater interest in committed relationships. Those who scored high on introjected and external motivations were more likely to fear being single or have anxious attachment patterns. Amotivation, meanwhile, was associated with avoidant attachment and less interest in serious romantic involvement.
These patterns helped validate the scale and showed that the AMRPS can distinguish between different reasons people might (or might not) want a partner. For example, people high in fear of being single were especially likely to report negative introjected and external motivations—suggesting they might seek relationships to avoid feeling inadequate or to satisfy others’ expectations rather than for intrinsic reasons.
To test whether these motivations predicted actual relationship outcomes, MacDonald and his colleagues conducted a second study. They followed more than 3,000 single adults between the ages of 18 and 39 over a six-month period. At the beginning of the study, participants completed the AMRPS and reported on their relationship desires, intentions, and life satisfaction. Six months later, they reported whether they had entered a romantic relationship.
The results showed that people with more autonomous motivations—particularly those who scored high on intrinsic or identified reasons—were significantly more likely to have partnered by the follow-up. In contrast, those who reported high levels of negative introjected motivation (such as not wanting to feel like a failure) were less likely to find a partner.
“The people who both reported that they felt more ready for a relationship and were more likely to be partnered six months later were those who said they were interested in a relationship because they enjoy them and because it was an important life goal,” MacDonald told PsyPost. “We think if you feel that way about relationships, you’re probably in a good place to date. If not, maybe you’re one of the kinds of people who benefit from some time being single.”
“In fact, the people who were more strongly motivated to be in a relationship to avoid feeling bad about themselves were particularly unlikely to be in a relationship six months later. This is consistent with other research suggesting that these are people who get in their own way by being a bit of a tryhard. It’s boring old wisdom, but I think there is something to the idea that you need to get right with yourself first before putting yourself out there. When you get to a place where a relationship seems like it would be enjoyable and meaningful for its own sake, and not so much about validating your ego, that might be a sign that you’re ready.”
These patterns held up even after controlling for age, gender, life satisfaction, and how strongly people said they wanted a relationship. In other words, it wasn’t just that people who wanted a relationship more were more likely to get one—it mattered why they wanted it.
One unexpected finding was that people who scored higher on amotivation were also slightly more likely to have entered a relationship, once other types of motivation were statistically controlled. Amotivated individuals who became partnered also reported higher satisfaction with alternative options outside the relationship, suggesting they may not have viewed the relationship as their primary goal.
“One of our analyses suggested that people who were higher in amotivation (without the goal to be in a relationship) were more likely to be partnered six months later,” MacDonald said. “Without going too much into the nuts and bolts of the analyses, we think this is because there are two kinds of amotivated people when it comes to dating. One kind is low in romantic desire and tends to be relatively happy in singlehood without dating, like aromantic people.”
“Another kind has romantic desire, but is satisfying it with casual relationships. So they are not amotivated for sex and dating, but they are amotivated for being in a committed relationship. One clue here was that people who endorsed being amotivated for relationships tended to be higher in sexual satisfaction, so it does seem like a lot of them are sexually active. But our studies have shown before that sexually satisfied singles, although they say they have less desire for a relationship, are more likely to end up in a relationship down the line. Basically, we think these sexually active amotivated singles catch feelings, and despite themselves end up being partnered.”
The researchers emphasize that the AMRPS is not intended to judge whether someone should or shouldn’t want a relationship. Instead, it provides a structured way to understand the diverse motivations people bring to dating. In doing so, it can help organize future research on romantic behavior and shed light on why some singles feel stuck or ambivalent, while others actively seek connection.
The study also highlights that social pressure to date—whether from parents, friends, or cultural norms—doesn’t appear to make people more likely to find a partner. This challenges the idea that pressure or stigma around being single is an effective motivator for relationship success.
But as with all research, there are some limitations. Most participants were young adults living in Western countries, so the findings may not apply to older adults or people in cultures where family plays a stronger role in relationship decisions.
“We purposely limited our sample in our main study to people under 40, because an important aspect of our research was predicting who got partnered, and that happens more with younger than older adults,” MacDonald noted. “So we’re less sure how our results apply to older adults.”
The study also couldn’t identify exactly why certain motivations lead to better relationship outcomes—whether it’s persistence, confidence, attractiveness, or other factors.
“We would like to know more about how these motivations affect people’s approach to dating,” MacDonald said. “For example, we asked our participants when they were single to tell us in their own words what their dating goals were. We’re finding some interesting links between their motivations for dating and the types of goals they have for dating and relationships. Stay tuned.”
The study, “Why Do You Want a Romantic Relationship? Individual Differences in Motives for Romantic Relationship Pursuit,” was authored by Geoff MacDonald, Serena Thapar, William S. Ryan, Joanne M. Chung, Elaine Hoan, and Yoobin Park.
