Limerence: Escaping romantic obsession

Do you still think about your ex-partner months after the breakup? Do you check your phone several times per hour to reread old messages? Do you think about them when you wake up, when you go to sleep, sometimes struggling to focus on your daily tasks? Do you constantly replay conversations in your mind and analyze them? Do you imagine scenarios in which your ex regrets leaving you and everything works out? Are you unable to stop yourself from checking their social media? Do you ask yourself: “What could I have said or done differently so that we could still be together”? Do you know rationally that the relationship is over, that they ended it, but you feel you cannot let go? You may be experiencing a state of limerence. 

Definition and origin of limerence 

The term "limerence" was introduced in the late 1970’s by psychologist Dorothy Tennov, based on more than 300 interviews with people about their romantic experiences. It refers to a state of intense romantic obsession, an involuntary and overwhelming infatuation toward a person1.It is characterized by intense euphoria, with intrusive thoughts about the limerent object (LO)*. This experience strongly activates the brain’s dopaminergic system, which is linked to reward and motivation, while temporarily reducing the activity of certain regions of the prefrontal cortex involved in critical judgment and decision-making. The more you think about the person or consume content related to them on social media, the more your brain anticipates a reward (a response, a message, a sign). This results in physiological overactivation (energy), an obsessive desire for the other person, and a search for reciprocity, while your emotional regulation and capacity for decision-making and perspective-taking are limited2.

Studies on limerence are rare, but according to a survey by Tom Bellamy, neuroscientist and author of the book Smitten: Romantic Obsession, the Neuroscience of Limerence, and How to Make Love Last3, 64% of people report having experienced a state corresponding to limerence, and about half of these individuals report experiencing distress and a decrease in life satisfaction following this state, with no gender differences among participants.

Manifestations of limerence:

• Constant rumination (e.g., replaying situations involving the LO in your mind, rethinking interactions, searching for signs of reciprocity).
• Obsessive rituals interfering with daily responsibilities (e.g., spending time every day checking the LO’s social media or rereading conversations).
• Compulsive phone checking (e.g., to see whether the LO has replied or reacted to your message, or whether the LO has contacted you).
• Idealization of the LO and future-oriented relationship scripting (e.g., feeling that this person is perfect, spending time imagining scenarios in which this person chooses you or finally realizes they love you).
• Mental replay of interactions with the LO with interpretive micro-analysis of words, behaviors, or silences (e.g., replaying conversations in your mind, rehearsing your own perspective internally, dissecting interactions in search of signs that the other person loves you).
• Emotional dependence on validation signals (e.g., feeling happiness if the LO is present or gives you attention, feeling shut down and empty in their absence).
• Oscillation between excitement and distress, with euphoric mood elevation in response to positive cues and dysphoric collapse in response to real or perceived rejection, experienced physically and mentally (e.g., increased heart rate, sensation of heat or shock in the chest, stomach tension, shortness of breath, adrenaline surge, agitation, hypervigilance and anticipation, as if something decisive were about to happen).

In search of fireworks: When a stable relationship feels burdensome

Fred reports that he no longer feels anything for his partner: the person who once occupied a central place in his daily life no longer impresses him and now appears as an ordinary person with whom he sometimes has to manage conflicts. This sudden drop in emotional intensity can be understood within a dynamic where intensity itself becomes the sought-after object. Indeed, limerence can, at the beginning of a relationship, be experienced reciprocally and contribute to bond formation. This initial phase, marked by high emotional intensity, mutual idealization, and increased investment, can be functional when it evolves into a more stable and secure form of attachment.

However, in some trajectories, this transition does not occur. When the relationship moves toward stability—a feature of healthier love—it is perceived as insufficiently stimulating or even burdensome (“Before it was light and exciting, and now that the other person wants to deal with conflicts, it feels too heavy for me”). The search for constant fireworks thus hinders the emergence of lasting love. This type of situation also illustrates the fleeting nature of limerence, which can last anywhere from a few weeks to several decades.

The stages of limerence 

Tom Bellamy popularized limerence based on his own experience, which led him to discover the work of psychologist Dorothy Tennov. This process led him to start a blog and write about this concept in order to share his knowledge. He describes the development of limerence through three stages:

Stage one : The spark

It involves an initial activation, which is individual to each person: a glance, a feeling of deep connection (e.g., “She seemed really different from the others,” “We shared a look that made me feel a strong emotion,” “We connected,” “He confided in me a secret he had never told anyone else”).

Stage 2: Hope

The possibility of reciprocity: the LO flirts with you, laughs at your jokes, seems attracted to you, which creates hope that a fulfilling, stable, and satisfying relationship is truly possible.

Stage 3 : Uncertainty 

Uncertainty is a key element of problematic limerence. In a healthy romantic relationship (with or without limerence), the typical early ambiguity gradually resolves into a reciprocal and secure relationship. In problematic limerence, uncertainty persists or increases. It fuels obsession, intensifies rumination, and makes the desire for reciprocity overwhelming. This chronic uncertainty interferes with emotional regulation and maintains an intrusive state of relational hypervigilance. Several situations can trigger this problematic state of limerence:

• Changes in routines: e.g., the LO used to meet you every Friday after work for several months and suddenly changes this routine to spend time alone or with friends, which raises questions in the partner (“Do they love me less?”, “What has changed?”). This type of disruption in relational predictability can create an imbalance, where one partner is plunged into emotional uncertainty, becomes searching for answers and requests closeness, while the other becomes colder, more distant, inconsistent in engagement, or expresses feeling suffocated.
• Changes in the expression of interest (e.g., the LO talks to you intensely all evening and then ignores you or becomes cold the next day), which generates confusion and leads the person to question themselves (“Did I do something?”, “Is their interest decreasing?”).
• Changes in communication (e.g., the LO used to reply quickly to messages but now leaves you on “delivered” for long periods of time, even when you see them online), creating a mismatch between partners and fueling a state of uncertainty, where one seeks to restore closeness while the other seeks more distance or appears unpredictable.

Reward mechanisms 

At the neurobiological level, limerence involves the joint activation of reward, attachment, and arousal systems. It can be intoxicating, but becomes problematic when the LO becomes the sole or primary source of psychological gratification, producing an emotional “high.”

A key element of limerence is intermittent reinforcement*—a mechanism well known in cognitive and behavioral psychology for maintaining behavior in a particularly persistent way. When the expression of feelings is hindered (distance, restrictions, changes, ambiguity, sporadic contact), the addictive dynamic is intensified.

Social media as an aggravating factor

In an attempt to cope with distress and anxiety related to non-reciprocity or separation from the LO, some individuals experiencing limerence tend to turn to social media for relief4. This is problematic because social media promotes intermittent reinforcement through the LO’s online presence and absence of response, delayed reactions, or partial visibility of the LO’s life, which can create a false sense of closeness. In addition, the anonymity offered by social media allows the limerent person to maintain their limerent behaviors covertly and without social consequences5. A typical example of limerence that can be amplified by social media involves a person becoming intensely invested in someone who is completely unaware of their romantic feelings, such as an authority figure (teacher, coach). This relational asymmetry sustains obsession, as the lack of feedback encourages projection, idealization, and reward anticipation, making it even more problematic.

Signs to recognize that your limerence is problematic:

• Exceeds adaptive passion and involves persistent obsession;

• Leads to marked emotional volatility;

• Disrupts daily functioning (work, relationships, self-esteem);

• Persists despite distress and attempts to stop;

• Substitutes fantasy for reality (e.g., the person is unavailable or ignores your feelings);

• Resembles relational dependence, where the other becomes the main source of reward and the main source of craving or withdrawal.

Limerence is not a clinical diagnosis, but rather a descriptive concept useful for understanding certain forms of attachment and relational distress. It shows parallels with obsessive-compulsive disorder (e.g., intrusive thoughts, rituals) and substance use disorders (e.g., withdrawal with irritability, somatic chest discomfort, depressive symptoms and insomnia when the LO is absent, loss of control, and continued pursuit of the LO despite negative consequences such as distress or rejection).

How to recover from problematic limerence?

Recovery begins with awareness of the problem and a serious commitment: “I have a problem and I commit to working seriously to address it.”

An external structuring framework helps create calm and improve control over one’s internal world (thoughts, desires, impulses, behaviors). Sleep6, physical activity, and nutrition play a central role in the ability to manage intrusive thoughts and impulses7. This involves structuring daily life with regular sleep schedules, movement (e.g., walking, yoga), stable meals, and activities.

Recovery then involves deactivating the link between the LO and your reward system:

• Cutting off external reinforcements (stimulus → reward). Limiting contact with the LO and anything that activates the reward system (e.g., no longer checking their social media, avoiding associated places, reducing exchanges). The goal is to remove the “mini-rewards” that maintain limerence and accelerate the extinction process (when the brain stops associating the LO with a reward).
• De-idealization to achieve emotional neutrality. Moving out of idealization by reframing the LO as an ordinary person with both strengths and limitations. Concretely, this means modifying mental scenarios (e.g., replacing a fantasy of reunion with a neutral or even mundane interaction). The goal is not to develop dislike, but to cultivate a calm and realistic view that includes neutrality or emotional quiet when thinking about the LO, seeing them as a normal person with both positive and negative traits.
• Reclaiming attentional control (executive brain). Training oneself to actively redirect attention when intrusive thoughts arise (e.g., labeling “I am thinking about the LO,” then returning to a chosen task). The goal is to stop being passively driven by one’s internal mental world.
• Observing without acting (mindfulness). When urges arise (to write, check, fantasize), acknowledge them with acceptance (e.g., “I have the urge to look at their profile”), then impose a delay (e.g., 10 minutes) before acting. During this time, use grounding strategies (breathing, observing the environment). This delay weakens compulsive reflexes and restores agency. The urge is understood as a transient experience.
• Reinvesting energy elsewhere. Actively redirecting sources of gratification toward other experiences. This involves planning and repeating activities that provide pleasure, calm, or meaning (e.g., creative projects, secure social contact, physical activity, personal goals, restorative activities). The aim is to diversify and expand sources of well-being.
• Talking to trusted people. Sharing this experience with close others or a psychotherapist helps verbalize it, reduce isolation, and regulate emotional intensity. An external perspective can also help temper idealization and restore a more realistic view.

Conclusion

Limerence is a frequent, powerful, and sometimes destabilizing human state. It is not a pathology in itself, but it becomes problematic when it invades psychological life, impairs functioning, and feeds on uncertainty. Understanding it helps reduce suffering and distinguish desire from love, attachment from dependence, and hope from illusion.

• 1

  Tennov, D. (1979). Love and limerence: The experience of being in love. Stein and Day.

• 2

  Verhulst, J. (1984). Limerence: Notes on the nature and function of passionate love. Psychoanalysis & Contemporary Thought, 7(1), 115–138.

• 3

  Bellamy, T. (2025). Smitten. St. Martin’s Publishing.

• 4

  Willmott, L., & Bentley, E. (2015). Exploring the lived-experience of limerence: A journey toward authenticity. The Qualitative Report, 20(1), 20-38. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2015.1420

• 5

  Bradbury, P., Short, E. & Bleakley, P. (2025). Limerence, hidden obsession, fixation, and rumination: A scoping review of human behaviour. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 40, 417-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-024-09674-x

• 6

  Harrington, M. O., Ashton, J. E., Ngo, G. & Cairney, S. A. (2021).
  Sleep deprivation selectively impairs the suppression of unwanted thoughts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(15), e2019130118.
  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2019130118

• 7

  Brierley, M.-E. E., Albertella, L., Christensen, E., Rotaru, K., Jacka, F. N., Segrave, R. A., Richardson, K. E., Lee, R. S., Kayayan, E., Hughes, S., Yücel, M. & Fontenelle, L. F. (2022). Lifestyle risk factors for obsessive-compulsive symptoms and related phenomena: What should lifestyle interventions target? Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 57(3), 379–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/00048674221085923