Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-8p85h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T19:54:23.070Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Significance is not enough: The biopsychological foundations of romantic love

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2026

Lorenza Lucchi Basili  and
Pier Luigi Sacco Open the ORCID record for Pier Luigi Sacco [Opens in a new window]
Lorenza Lucchi Basili
Affiliation:
Gender Strategies Center, Chieti, Italy lorenza.lucchi.basili@gmail.com
Pier Luigi Sacco*
Affiliation:
Department of Neuroscience, Imaging and Clinical Studies, University of Chieti-Pescara, Chieti, Italy pierluigi.sacco@unich.it metaLAB (at) Harvard, Cambridge, MA, USA
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Kruglanski et al.’s significance-based model overlooks fundamental biopsychological mechanisms driving romantic love. The Tie-Up Theory reveals how women’s subconscious biological compatibility assessments through physical, chemical, and behavioral signals operate independently of conscious significance calculations. Their gender-neutral framework ignores how men’s receptive emotional orientation differs from women’s active emotional competence. By reducing love to significance enhancement, the model cannot explain irrational attractions, persistent relationships despite low “merit,” or gendered dissolution patterns determined by reward cycle breakdowns.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e2
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Feinberg, D. R., Jones, B. C., Little, A. C., Burt, D. M., & Perrett, D. I. (2005). Manipulations of fundamental and formant frequencies influence the attractiveness of human male voices. Animal Behaviour, 69(3), 561–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewitt, B., & Turrell, G. (2011). Short-term functional health and well-being after marital separation: Does initiator status make a difference?. American Journal of Epidemiology, 173(11), 1308–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hönekopp, J., Rudolph, U., Beier, L., Liebert, A., & Müller, C. (2007). Physical attractiveness of face and body as indicators of physical fitness in men. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2), 106–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K., & Newton, T. L. (2001). Marriage and health: His and hers. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 472–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucchi Basili, L., & Sacco, P. L. (2016). Tie-up cycles in long-term mating. Part I: Theory. Challenges, 7(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe7010012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucchi Basili, L., & Sacco, P. L. (2020). What makes a partner ideal, and for whom? Compatibility tests, filter tests, and the mating stability matrix. Behavioral Sciences, 10(2), 48. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs10020048 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provost, M. P., Troje, N. F., & Quinsey, V. L. (2008). Short-term mating strategies and attraction to masculinity in point-light walkers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29(1), 65–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: Potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 98–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saxton, T. K., Lyndon, A., Little, A. C., & Roberts, S. C. (2008). Evidence that androstadienone, a putative human chemosignal, modulates women’s attributions of men’s attractiveness. Hormones and Behavior, 54(5), 597–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed