Charm Upgrade

Learn · Attraction without mythology

Attraction, attention and anxiety are different things

Lesson 1 of 7 in this module · about 7 minutes · Romantic communication

The idea

Attraction, attention, curiosity, uncertainty, rumination and anxiety all happen in you; her interest shows only in what she does and says. These are working definitions for this course, not research findings.

  • Attraction: Finding someone appealing and wanting to know them better.
  • Attention: Noticing someone who is new, striking or in front of you.
  • Curiosity: Wanting to find out more about a person.
  • Uncertainty: Not knowing where you stand with her, a gap in your information.
  • Rumination: Going over the same thoughts again and again.
  • Anxiety: Worry or tension about how it will go.

Each can be strong while she has barely noticed you, or while she is interested too. None tells you anything about her.

Two reviews of research on repetitive thought link rumination to depression and anxiety, and find that its effects depend on content and context 1. Repetitive thought can be constructive too, as when people plan or recover from something upsetting 1. So preoccupation is not always harmful. But being unable to stop thinking about something does not, by itself, show positive feeling 1. The reviews cover distress and problems, not someone you are attracted to, so applying them here is an extrapolation 1. How often you think about her is not a measurement of anything about her.

Anxiety about someone new is common. In four studies reported in one paper, anxiety about a particular romantic interest was higher before a relationship was established than after, and it went with seeking closeness 2. The samples were students and young adults, and the studies relied on self-report 2. Nervousness does not show that you care more or that she feels the same. It does not justify pursuing someone who declines 2.

Reward researchers separate wanting, the motivation to pursue something, from liking, the enjoyment of it. Kent Berridge’s work indicates that dopamine, a brain chemical often called the pleasure chemical, is more involved in wanting than in liking 3. That view is influential and disputed, and much of the evidence comes from rats 3. It is not a study of romance and does not make attraction “just chemicals”. As a loose analogy, a strong pull toward Dana does not promise you would enjoy her company, and it tells you nothing about how she feels.

In one study, self-selected students wrote about unreciprocated attraction from both sides. The person who had been attracted tended to believe the feeling was mutual and that they had been led on. Many people who had been the object of it called the persistent efforts intrusive 4. The accounts were written from memory, each side’s memory is shaped by its own position, and the study cannot say how often this happens 4. A sense of having been led on is a perception, not proof that the other person was unclear 4. The study supports one narrow point: how intensely one person is preoccupied is not evidence that the other feels the same 4.

Why it matters

Without this, a week of replaying a ten-minute conversation starts to feel like proof of a connection, and your own nerves get read as a sign about her.

What it looks like

Example

You met Dana, 31, at a friend’s housewarming and talked for ten minutes by the bookshelves. Since then you replay it most evenings. You keep what she did apart from the replaying: she asked about your job, laughed twice, and left when someone called her name. You tell yourself, “The replaying is about me. Those three things are all I know about her.”

The same moment, handled the other way

Counterexample

Same evening. You decide that thinking about Dana this much must mean she feels it too, and you text her that you have thought about her all week.

How much you think about her measures your side only. It says nothing about hers.

The one thing to remember

The rule

Treat your own preoccupation as a fact about you, and learn her interest only from what she does and says.

In this course, preoccupation is a fact about you and interest is a fact about her. A no ends the matter.

Try it now

Item 1 of this lesson’s set: “I can’t stop thinking about her”.

Open the exercise set

In the real world (optional)

If you like, the next time you catch yourself replaying a conversation, name it to yourself as replaying, and notice what you were doing just before.

What this doesn’t tell you

It does not say that attraction is only brain chemistry, that anxiety is a flaw, or that strong feelings are a bad sign. It does not say that thinking about someone means she is not interested: preoccupation carries no information about her either way. The research comes mostly from students and from studies of distress, so it describes tendencies, not any particular person.

Why do we believe this?

Each numbered mark in the text opens the evidence behind that sentence. Every claim in this course carries one of five labels.

Well supported
A meta-analysis or several independent studies agree, with no serious failure to replicate.
Supported with caveats
Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings.
Plausible
One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question.
Speculative
An idea or argument that hasn't been directly tested.
Marketing claim
Something a seller says about their product, without published evidence.
  1. Supported with caveatsThinking about something repeatedly is not a sign of positive feeling: reviews link repetitive thought and rumination to depression and anxiety, and its effects depend on content and context.

    Why this label

    Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. Nolen-Hoeksema and colleagues reviewed evidence that rumination worsens depression and problem solving and erodes social support. Watkins reviewed when repetitive thought is constructive (planning, recovery) versus unconstructive, depending on valence, context and abstract versus concrete thinking.

    What it does not show

    • Both sources are narrative reviews, not systematic reviews or meta-analyses, which is why the level is not well-supported.
    • Reviews concern rumination on distress and problems, not on a person one is attracted to; applying it to attraction is an extrapolation.
    • Much of the evidence is correlational and self-report, with an experimental subset.
    • Constructive repetitive thought exists, so the claim is that preoccupation is not diagnostic of attraction, not that it is always harmful.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Sources

  2. Supported with caveatsAnxiety about a particular new romantic interest is common in early relationships: partner-specific attachment anxiety was higher before a relationship was established than after.

    Why this label

    Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. Anxiety directed at a specific partner was higher before a relationship was established than after, and predicted approach and closeness-seeking outcomes.

    What it does not show

    • Self-report; mostly correlational, with one experiment.
    • Student and young-adult samples.
    • The studies did not test whether this state anxiety is distinct from a stable anxious attachment style in any one person.
    • Anxiety predicted approach behaviour, which is not the same as attraction being reciprocated; it does not justify pursuing someone who declines.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Source

  3. Supported with caveatsThe claim that dopamine equals pleasure is contested: Berridge's research indicates that dopamine is more important for wanting (motivation to pursue) than for liking (enjoyment).

    Why this label

    Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. Rats with almost all accumbens dopamine depleted still showed normal liking reactions to sweet taste. Berridge and Kringelbach later summarise liking as generated by small limbic hot spots and wanting by a larger distributed system, adding that textbook dopamine-pleasure ideas may be wrong.

    What it does not show

    • Mostly rat evidence, including taste-reactivity measures; human wanting and liking are measured differently.
    • The incentive-salience view is influential but disputed; rival accounts emphasise learning, effort or motivation more generally.
    • Wanting and liking are technical terms and can differ from everyday use.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Sources

  4. PlausibleIn retrospective written accounts of unrequited love, would-be lovers, unlike rejectors, believed the attraction had been mutual and that they were led on, while many rejectors described persistent efforts as intrusive, so one person's preoccupation is not evidence the other person feels the same.

    Why this label

    One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question. Baumeister, Wotman and Stillwell compared written accounts from both sides of unreciprocated attraction and found mismatched perceptions. This supports lessons that stress checking what the other person actually does and respecting a clear no.

    What it does not show

    • Retrospective, self-selected written accounts; each side's memory is motivated.
    • Student samples; the abstract was read in a truncated form.
    • Describes differing perceptions, not how often they occur.
    • A would-be lover's belief that they were led on is their perception; it does not show that the rejection was unclear.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Source

More practice

The rest of the set, Evidence check: what your own mind can and cannot tell you: 4 items, about 4 minutes. Decide what the evidence supports, and how well. Open the exercise set.