Higher individualism predicts lower intensity of experienced love: Data from 91 countries
Le résumé fourni par la source
Love is a near-universal human experience. However, while it transcends cultural boundaries, its intensity varies significantly across individuals and societies. We hypothesize that this variability is partly driven by socio-cultural factors, particularly individualism—a cultural orientation prioritizing personal goals over group interests. As individualism continues to rise globally, its implications for romantic relationships remain underexplored. Here, we address this by examining the link between individualism and love in two large-scale cross-cultural studies. In Study 1, we collected data from a convenience sample of 61,067 partnered individuals from 81 countries. In Study 2, we selected nationally representative samples from 50 countries, with controlled distributions of gender, age, and residential area (N = 6,620). The results were consistent across both studies—as individualism increased, both men and women reported lower levels of experienced love. In Study 2, individualism was additionally linked to a lower expressed desire for love, suggesting that individualism may erode the perceived importance of love. As people become increasingly individualistic, our findings provoke questions about the future of love. They also carry implications for societal challenges such as rising divorce rates, fertility issues, and depression—all of which have been linked to unfulfilled or unhappy love.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Higher individualism predicts lower intensity of experienced love: Data from 91 countries
- Date Crossref
- 03/03/2025
- Éditeur
- Center for Open Science
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.