In the modern world, periods in which individuals actively search for romantic partners often alternate with phases spent in relationships. What explains the fear of losing a relationship? How do men and women differ in terms of this fear, and why? The study “A Formula for Love: Partner Merit and Appreciation Beget Actor Significance” emphasizes the role of differences in the need for intimacy and emotional support within romantic partnerships as an important explanation for variations in the fear of a breakup. This commentary highlights the role of institutional and economic reasons for gender differences and focuses on the life trajectories that follow the end of a relationship.

Searching for a new relationship after a breakup is costly. Frictions play a crucial role in romantic partner search markets. Individuals encounter potential partners only intermittently and must manage life as singles in the meantime. They need to get to know potential partners, evaluate compatibility, and potentially even “test” cohabitation. A relationship only forms when both parties agree. Institutions and social conventions shaping romantic partner searches are not necessarily gender-neutral and may have gender-specific consequences for search behavior and quality thresholds for accepting a new relationship. Research on search and matching markets suggests several relevant factors: How quickly do individuals meet attractive new prospects? How desirable are they themselves in the dating market? What is the “quality” of the potential partners encountered? How supportive is one’s social environment in facilitating connections? How time-consuming, costly, and frustrating is the process of getting to know someone? What social norms govern these interactions? This is especially important when relationship quality is driven not by objectively ranked traits (as in Burdett & Coles, Reference Burdett and Coles1997), but by subjective factors such as love and affection, which can be unequally felt when assessing a new relationship (Konrad & Lommerud, Reference Konrad and Lommerud2010; Hofmann & Qari, Reference Hofmann and Qari2011). If, for instance, social or economic reasons cause one gender to have systematically lower thresholds, the other may effectively have all the choice. Furthermore, the rise of speed dating and dating apps (Hitsch, Hortacsu, & Ariely, Reference Hitsch, Hortacsu and Ariely2010; Konrad, Reference Konrad2015) has undoubtedly reshaped the search market (Hobbs, Owen, & Gerber, Reference Hobbs, Owen and Gerber2016). Acceptance thresholds for a new partner and gender differences can therefore vary widely in history.

Conventions and institutional factors may explain gender asymmetries in well-being if a relationship ends. A key example is the traditional gender role assigning men the breadwinner role. This leads to unequal incentives for human capital investment during a relationship, often leaving women at a disadvantage following divorce (James, Reference James1996). This holds true even when specialization decisions are made while accounting for divorce risk (Cremer, Pestieau, & Roeder, Reference Cremer, Pestieau and Roeder2015). Leopold (Reference Leopold2018) finds that while men often suffer stronger short-term consequences after divorce, women face more significant medium-term hardships. Avellar and Smock (Reference Avellar and Smock2005) similarly report adverse outcomes for women following the dissolution of cohabiting unions.

Premarital customs and social norms on courtship efforts can also influence the cost to end a relationship. Male courtship behaviors often involve one-sided investments that foster commitment. For example, Ng (Reference Ng1987) discusses engagement rings as tools for solidifying emerging bonds. Courtship rituals date back millennia and generate complex incentive structures regarding asset transfers (Bronsert, Glazer, & Konrad, Reference Bronsert, Glazer and Konrad2017). These past investments may create asymmetries when considering separation. Conversely, leaving a relationship may be less attractive to women if a dowry is expected in future partnerships (see Ottakkam Thodukayil, Palaniswamy, & Kunjumon, Reference Ottakkam Thodukayil, Palaniswamy and Kunjumon2025, on dowry’s role in Indian marriage dissolution). Legal frameworks (Oldham, Reference Oldham2008) may also contribute to gender differences – alimony payments being an example. For a comprehensive discussion on the legal and economic dimensions of marriage contracts, see Smith (Reference Smith2003).

In summary, it can be stated that institutional and economic factors can contribute to gender differences in well-being after the end of a relationship. These disparities likely influence differences in how men and women fear a breakup. Institutional differences across societies could provide a basis for testable hypotheses regarding gendered breakup fears and encourage cross-cultural comparisons on this topic.