Valentine’s Day has come and gone, and I spent it alone. I fall once again into the clutches of Hinge to satisfy either a craving for intimacy or for evidence that there isn’t something fundamentally wrong with me. Hinge proposes itself as the dating app “designed to be deleted”. However, the app has not been deleted from my phone, even after I explicitly define that I am looking for a partner who will match my love language of “quality time”. Is connection so easily predicted? Can random profile information be the secret behind a successful romance? What if the truth is that nobody can match my freak? This February, I turned to science in an attempt to understand love and the five apparent love languages.
So, how are the youth faring these days? Not only is Dublin the most populous county, but it is also Ireland’s online dating capital. Single people under 25 years old date online more than any other age group. However, according to a 2023 study of US Gen Z and college students, 79% said they do not regularly use dating apps. The decline in usage of these apps reflects the fatigue and burnout experienced in our gamified digital landscape. Endless swiping and maintaining multiple conversations is exhausting and can feel like a constant cycle of brief connection and immediate disappointment. The pressure of having to represent your entire self in five photos and phrases is tough to stomach, and is linked to a rise in more “natural” ways to meet people, through run clubs or other social activities. In a report from 2025, speed dating events in Ireland have spiked by 63% since 2022.
A relationship psychologist stated for the Irish Examiner that “finding love is an art and a science. Oftentimes, people focus on the art”. I will focus on love languages and their lack of scientific credibility. They were introduced in 1992 by a pastor and marriage counsellor, Gary Chapman, who proposed five main ways that people express and receive love: gift giving, words of affirmation, quality time, acts of service and physical touch. His framework was widely popularised, especially on the internet in 2019, when his book was the top seller of the year. People liked it as it created a simplified explanation of matchmaking and promised reasoning behind relationship success. There is some validity to this in the manner that people appreciate having their needs met in a relationship. If someone likes to receive gifts, they will find comfort in a companion who enjoys gift giving. Alas, it takes more than that to predict the success of a relationship!
The book on love languages was based on Chapman’s personal counseling experience with couples through his church, not scientific research. Actual research has proved that most people have no single primary love language, and people’s way of expressing love changes throughout life and situational context. When researchers asked people to rate the value of each expression of love, people tended to rate them all highly. In a 2023 conference, research found that “expressions of all love languages were positively associated with relationship satisfaction regardless of a person’s preference, with very little evidence of matching effects”.
Defining only five love languages also ignores natural human complexity. The creator of the theories almost exclusively worked with heterosexual couples in his Baptist church, leading to strong gender stereotyping and reinforcement of traditional societal expectations. Like other sensationalised psychological theories, Chapman’s book and concept became prevalent because they were marketable. A psychology professor at UC Davis told Live Science: “I usually tell people that the love languages are fine, and using them with your partner will generally make your partner feel appreciated and loved. But there’s no evidence for ‘matching’ whatsoever, and there is no shortcut to meaningful and effective communication”.
So, what’s the appeal? All this science and statistics is good and fun. I can put my height and star sign and love language into my app profile, but what about literally everything else? There are copious complex factors going into the success of a relationship, more than can be summarised in a Buzzfeed quiz, Instagram reel or profile blurb. Not that I know much about it, but apparently, love is not simple. I wonder if dissecting the concept of love turns dating into a science experiment or a high-stakes game.
It’s tempting to think that romance is easy. How nice would it be if the love of your life (or at least your next public makeout partner) is just a few swipes away? It would be simple if all that mattered was the enjoyment of giving and receiving gifts or touch. A dating app algorithm or a love language test appeals to the innate human desire to establish reason and causation, to have a semblance of control. Choosing one of five options and using that to define your relationship and possible relationship success is an incredibly attractive idea, but not a reliable substitute to conversation and intimacy. Instead of hunting for an Aquarius or someone who expresses love through quality time, maybe keep an eye out for a companion who makes you feel loved, supported and understood.
