Psychological Explanations of Love
Outline and evaluate two or more psychological explanations of love. (24)
 Theory One – Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love
A01 Sternberg’s triangular theory of love proposed that there are three basic components
that make up love: intimacy, passion and commitment. He proposed that the presence,
absence, strength of these components determine the various love types.
Passion is the sexual desire and physical attraction experienced within a
relationship. Commitment is the ‘cognitive controller’ in a loving relationship. In
short term, this involves accepting a love relationship; and in the long time this is the
effort put into it in order to maintain a relationship.
Whilst intimacy is the mutual understanding between couples within a relationship
and the feelings of closeness – all the emotional aspects of love.
The ideal balanced situation – the perfect love – would be when all aspects of the 3
components are experienced with efficient intensity (consummate love). Sternberg
developed love types which can be identified by combining different points of the
triangle. For instance, if, within a relationship, there was passion and commitment,
then this would be fatuous love. However if all three components were missing, then
this would be no love. Commitment on its own is empty love.
A01Sternberg believed that individuals actually have two different types of triangle, one
that characterises their ideal relationship (based on their own theory of love) and one
that characterises their current relationship. Successful relationships are those where a
person’s current relationship matches their ideal relationship.
Sternberg’s theory allows us to make comparisons between the shape and size of the
triangles for 2 partners in a relationship. He suggested that the satisfaction that two
partners experience in a relationship is based on the amount of overlap between the
partners’ individual triangle.
+
Triangle
A
Triangle
B
.
Overlapping of partner’s
triangles
Passion
Intimacy
Commitment
1
Psychological Explanations of Love
Sternberg recognised a limitation with his own triangular theory. This theory only
showed where you were in a relationship (i.e. the level of commitment, intimacy), but
did not show how one got to those stages/levels.
He developed his theory suggesting that people from early childhood form stories of
what they think love should be like, which were learnt from books, parents and
television. Thus giving them romantic expectations. In 1998 he interviewed students
about their romantic expectations and identified 25 common stories used to describe
love such as the ‘fairytale’ story and the ‘gardening’ story – the idea that love grows,
the more you put into it the more you get out i.e. effort.
 General Evaluation for Sternberg’s Triangular Theory of Love
A02Sternberg based his love types on extensive interviews with students at Yale
University in real life relationships, which, unlike many other studies, are based on
hypothetical relationships.
Fehr provided further research for Sternberg’s findings as he asked people to
describe love in their own words, and found that these mapped closely onto the types
suggested by Sternberg, giving his theory further reliability.
However, there are cultural differences in terms of what components are seen to be
important. While in western cultures passion is the most important component at the
outset of a relationship, commitment is of central importance in non-western cultures.
Although happy couples appear to have similar kinds of stories, there are also
gender differences in terms of what men and woman believe to be important in love.
For example, women prefer the travel story (belief that love is like a journey) and men
the art (physical attractiveness is essential) and the pornography (it is important to
satisfy your partner’s sexual desires).
An advantage of Sternberg’s theory is that it has practical applications – it is
possible to measure the components in the two parties and then analyse the
differences in the types of love shown by each partner. It helps pinpoint areas where
change and compromise may be necessary.
One criticism of Sternberg’s theory is that it is a reductionist. This is because the
theory reduces the complex phenomena of love to simple types. This reductionist
explanation could prevent us gaining a more realistic understanding of love.
However, Sternberg’s theory can help us to understand the various relationships we
have by looking at three dimensions. It therefore allows greater understanding of how
intimate relationships may change over time.
 Theory Two – Love as an Attachment Process (Hazan and Shaver 1987)
A01 –
Bowlby’s theory of attachment suggests that the way caregivers treat their infants
determines how their adult personalities develop.
Way main caregiver treats child
= child personality traits.
2
Psychological Explanations of Love
Ainsworth observed babies and their mothers and identified three distinct
attachment styles: secure, insecure resistant and insecure avoidant. Babies who
develop confidence later onwards in life are those that generally had mothers who
were reliable in their response to their babies. Mothers who are cold and unresponsive
tend to produce children who are distant and detached. And mothers who are slow to
respond but eventually respond, produce children who are generally anxious.
Hazan and Shaver extended Bowlby’s idea that later relationships are likely to be
characterised by a continuation of early attachment styles – the continuity hypothesis.
It is believed the mother’s behaviour creates an internal working model of
relationships for the child (acting like a template).
The relationships that outcome in adulthood in relation to the child’s attachment
styles in early childhood are shown in the table below:
Secure adults
Insecure Resistant
(anxious) adults
Preoccupied by ♥.
Different love
experiences
Adult views of
relationships
Relationships are
+ve.
Trusts in others.
Falls in love easily.
Believe in enduring Finds it difficult to
love.
find true ♥.
Memories of the
mother-child
relationship
Positive image of
mother as being
dependable and
caring.
Conflicting
memories of
mother being
positive as well as
rejecting.
Insecure Avoidant
adults
Fearful of
closeness.
Love is neither
durable nor is it
necessary for
happiness.
Remembers mother
as being cold and
rejecting.
Shaver (1988) suggested different aspects of love which are integrated together to
form what we experience as ‘love ♥’. These are three learned behavioural (leant and
mapped) systems:
attachment, caregiving and
sexuality.
 Attachment and caregiving = develops during infancy.
 Caregiving is learned by modelling the behaviour of
the primary attachment figure. Caregiving is knowledge
about how one cares for someone else.
 Sexuality system is learned in relation to
early attachment.
For instance, avoidant individuals are more likely to hold the view that sex without
love is pleasurable.
The 3 systems interact to produce the adult love style and the individual’s attitude to
love as a whole (SEE TABLE ABOVE).
3
Psychological Explanations of Love
Shaver also believed the three aspects of love (intimacy, passion, commitment)
could take a different course during our adult life. This would therefore cause the
development of different subtypes.
For instance, the subtype (a type within a type - a type that is a subdivision of a
larger type) of companionate love would include attachment and caregiving but not
necessarily sexuality. Conversely, passionate love might only involve sexuality.
Companionate
love
=
Caregiving
+Attachment
Sexuality
 General Evaluation for Hazen and Shaver’s Love as an Attachment Process
(1987)
A02Support for the continuity hypothesis comes from Hazan and Shaver who
compiled the love quiz. They found that patterns of adult loving reflected the type of
attachment styles that individuals demonstrated in infancy.
Securely attached people were trusting, confident and had stable relationships.
Whereas those who were (insecure resistant) anxiously attached were uncertain and
insecure in their relationships. Those who were avoidantly attached were detached
and unresponsive in their adult relationships.
Hazen and Shaver’s findings have been supported by other studies. Feeney and
Noller, 1990, found that securely attached adults had the most enduring long term
relationships, and insecurely avoidant attached people had the most short lived and
the least intense (serious) relationships.
However, many of these studies rely on retrospective (looking back to the past by
self) classification, by asking adults questions about their early lives in order to assess
infant attachment.
Such recollections are likely to be flawed. However, longitudinal studies map
closely with the findings found by Feeney and Noller, 1990.
McCarthy (1999) studied women whose attachment types had been recorded in
infancy. Those who had been classified as avoidant had the greatest difficulty in
romantic relationships, and those classified as resistant had the poorest friendships.
Women who were securely attached as infants had the most successful romantic
relationships and friendships.
McCarthy studied
\women] –
Found that
Avoidants =
greatest difficultly
in ♥ relationships.
Insecure Resistant
= poorest 
friendships .
4
Psychological Explanations of Love
Another issue with this research is that it is correlational rather than being
experimental, thus we cannot claim that the relationship between early attachment and
later love style is one of cause and effect.
innate temperament
It could be that it is the
of the
individual that is responsible for both their attachment style formed with their parents,
and the romantic relationship they form with their partners. Some infants are born
with temperaments (personalities – easy or difficult) that determine the quality of the
mother-infant relationship and attachment style. This innate temperament affects
relationships throughout life because it is a continuity of style. For instance, if a
child or individual is born grumpy, it is likely that this trait will stay with them until
adulthood and beyond.
 So now you think you know your stuff? Answer the
following essay questions from memory then -- under
timed conditions. 
a) Describe and evaluate one or more psychological
explanations of love. (24 marks) – maximum of 30 mins.
b) “Psychologists have struggled to understand the most
human of emotions.” Critically consider psychological
research (explanations and/or studies) into the nature
of love. (24 marks) – maximum of 30 mins.
* Accreditation is equally balanced – 12 marks for A01 and 12 marks for
A02 – ensure you write enough for both.
5