Most people believe that rejection from a potential lover is much more painful than rejection from a future friend. However, new research results show that European Journal of Social Psychology This suggests that when we do experience rejection, its emotional impact is surprisingly similar, whether it comes from romantic or platonic causes.
In part because modern society places high emotional expectations on romantic relationships, romantic rejection is often seen as uniquely devastating. However, researchers have long noted that humans are broadly motivated by a fundamental need for belonging. Social rejection tends to hurt in all situations because it threatens shared psychological needs, such as feeling valued, in control, and having meaning.
What is less clear is whether rejection from a potential romantic partner is more painful than rejection in a friendship context. Given the high expectations placed on romantic relationships, which are often expected to satisfy a variety of emotional and personal needs, it seems plausible that being denied such relationships is particularly painful.
To test these assumptions, researchers conducted three related studies. The first study asked 1,500 American adults which type of rejection they found more painful: rejection from a potential romantic partner or rejection from a potential friend. The responses largely reflected common intuitions: about half expected romantic rejection to be worse, about a quarter expected platonic rejection to be more painful, while the remaining participants thought both were equally painful.
The team, led by Natasha R. Wood from Leiden University in the Netherlands, then tested real-time responses to rejection in a controlled experimental environment. In Study 2, 934 single adults ages 18 to 29 (57.9% female, mean age 23.4 years) were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: acceptance or rejection by a potential romantic partner or platonic friend.
Participants utilized a simulated app environment designed to resemble a dating or social networking platform and received positive or negative feedback from profiles purported to represent other users. They then reported how they felt on a variety of measures capturing a sense of belonging, self-esteem, and psychological well-being.
The researchers found that rejection reliably reduces happiness and acceptance reliably increases happiness, but the type of relationship framework (romantic or platonic) has no effect on emotional outcomes. The researchers also tested whether romantic instrumental emotions (seeing your partner as someone who can help you achieve more of your life goals) and remorse could explain romantic-platonic differences in pain. Neither emerged as a meaningful driving force.
A third study with 477 participants (73.6% female, mean age 20.3 years) compared predicted emotional responses to actual emotional experiences. The researchers also added a “stranger control” group, telling participants that they were not expected to form any kind of relationship.
Participants were asked to predict how they would feel before receiving the feedback and then report how they felt. Again, relationship type had no significant effect on emotional responses. Rejection from a stranger can hurt just as much as rejection from a date. Furthermore, participants consistently overestimated the intensity of both outcomes, especially the pain of rejection.
Wood and colleagues put it simply: “The experience of acceptance is so positive and the experience of rejection so negative that it doesn’t seem to matter who does it.”
However, there are important caveats to keep in mind. For example, this study was conducted only with American participants, which limits how well the findings can be generalized across different cultures, where the values of romantic and platonic relationships may differ. Furthermore, the simulated app environment may not fully capture the intense emotions of face-to-face rejection.
The study, “What Could Have Been: Predicted and Actual Exclusion by Potential Romantic Partners and Platonic Friends,” was authored by Natasha R. Wood, Sydney G. Wicks, Adam J. Beam, Elijah P. Mudryk, Ellie Bray, and Andrew H. Hales.
