Two people text every day, see each other most weekends, and have never once said what this is. Another pair agreed in week six that they were done seeing other people, and they haven’t discussed it since. Same amount of time together, very different amounts of information.
This is a head-to-head between those two setups: a situationship and an exclusive relationship. It is a comparison of how each one works, not a ranking of which people are doing it right. If you are mid-talking-stage and want the full playbook, Monday’s guide to defining the relationship covers it.
First, the definitions
There is no institutional definition of either term, so these are ours. Exclusive means both people have said out loud that they are not dating or being romantic or sexual with anyone else. Situationship is the fuzzier one. A Florida State University psychologist describes situationships as relationships with passion and intimacy but no formal commitment. In practice the word covers everything from “we’re both happy keeping it loose” to “I have no idea what we are and I’m scared to ask.”
That range is why prevalence numbers wobble. A January 2024 YouGov poll of 1,110 US adults found 39% said they had been in a situationship, and 50% of those aged 18 to 34. Treat that as a rough signal: it is one online poll, no margin of error was reported, and we could not confirm the definition respondents were shown. Other percentages circulating online trace back to consumer sites or company data, so we left them out.
Round 1: Clarity of expectations
Winner: Exclusive.
An agreement is information. Silence is not. In one small qualitative study of 20 college students who were “just talking”, most assumed non-monogamy by default and only presumed monogamy after an explicit verbal agreement. That is a conference abstract from a convenience sample, so it describes what those students said, not a norm. It still makes the practical point: if nobody has said “exclusive”, you cannot assume the other person means it.
Round 2: Pressure and pace
Winner: Situationship, if both people picked it.
Nothing is expected of a loose arrangement beyond what you both agree to. There is no label to live up to and no script about meeting friends or planning a trip. For someone who is newly out of a long relationship, busy, or simply not sure yet, that can be exactly right. “I’m not ready to put a label on this” is a legitimate answer, and so is “I don’t want that.” love is respect, a project of the National Domestic Violence Hotline, notes that casual relationships still count as relationships, may or may not be exclusive, and deserve respect either way.
The qualifier matters. A situationship one person chose and the other tolerates is a different thing, which brings us to the next round.
Round 3: Risk of mismatch
Winner: Exclusive, when both agreed.
The failure state in both setups is the same: one person wants more than the other. A study of 315 unmarried couples found that when partners’ commitment levels differed a lot, both the more committed and the less committed partner reported worse adjustment and more conflict than partners in balanced couples. Read the limits: those couples were mostly further along than a talking stage, some lived together, the data are correlational, and nothing in the study shows that a DTR talk would have changed anything. What it does suggest is that mismatch hurts both sides, not just the person who wanted more.
Round 4: Emotional investment
Winner: Tie.
“Situationship” does not have to mean “low effort.” A 2025 mixed-methods study of college students, as reported in press coverage, found that within situationships, emotional investment, talking about the future, and prioritizing the other person went with higher satisfaction and stronger commitment. It is small, mostly female, non-representative, and cross-sectional, so it shows an association, not a cause. The hint is that the ingredients people rate highly look similar across both setups. The label mainly changes whether both of you have agreed to them.
Round 5: Where it goes next
Winner: Tie.
A loose start does not doom a relationship. One study of young adults who became exclusive found that those who began as friends with benefits showed little apparent difference in later functioning, over a short follow-up, though the findings were mixed. The sturdier idea is about drift. Researchers have proposed that couples can slide into bigger commitments without deciding, and that inertia then carries them along. That theory is about moving in together, not early dating, so we will not stretch it. Tuesday’s post on why the DTR talk feels so hard goes further on why drifting is not a plan.
Round 6: What people say they want
Winner: Depends on you.
Public data does not say one setup is better. Pew asked single adults who were looking in 2022, and 51% were open to either a committed relationship or casual dates, 31% wanted only a committed relationship, and 17% only casual. The subgroup is small, so read it loosely. The point holds: people want different things, and about half of those looking are open to either. The trouble starts when two of them assume they want the same one.
What nobody has measured
Here is the honest gap. We found no peer-reviewed study showing that having a DTR talk leads to better relationships, and none showing that situationships harm well-being. The research on both is thin, mostly small student samples. So treat any confident “situationships are toxic” or “just have the talk and it works out” as opinion, ours included.
The verdict
Exclusive wins clarity and mismatch risk. Situationship wins low pressure, when both people chose it. The rest is a tie. Neither is the default. The better setup is the one both people picked on purpose, and the worst is the one where one of you is playing co-op and the other is in a solo run.
How to find out which one you are in
Ask. love is respect suggests questions like these:
- Do we both have romantic feelings?
- Do we both want commitment?
- Do we see each other as exclusive?
- Are we open about this with friends?
Work out your own answers first. Our Friday post, how to have the DTR talk, with scripts, has wording for gamers who would rather not wing it. One university’s guidance on talking about relationships says to make it okay for the other person to disagree or decline.
That last part is the rule. “Not yet” and “no” are both valid answers, and nobody gets pressured into a label. In love is respect’s words on creating boundaries, “Pressure from a partner to redefine your limits is not okay.” If a conversation about where you stand involves pressure, fear, or someone getting angry when you set a limit, you can reach love is respect by calling 1-866-331-9474 or texting LOVEIS to 22522. In immediate danger, call 911.
One more thing, plainly. Not knowing where you stand can be stressful. If worry or low mood is persistent or getting in the way of daily life, that is worth raising with a doctor or other health care provider. A relationship, a label, or a partner is not a treatment. If you are thinking about suicide or self-harm, call or text 988.
If you want to meet people who are gamers and will tell you what they are looking for, download the LFGdating app or create a free account. Profiles are human-reviewed, and “I’m not sure what I want yet” is an acceptable thing to say.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.