Use of the term “romantic love” in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences

There is a big problem in psychology and related disciplines related to the inconsistent use of the terminology of love in romantic relationships. The biggest problem is the use of the term "romantic love." On the one hand, a majority of researchers use the term to describe the motivational state that commonly occurs in the early stages of romantic relationships characterized by particularly intense cognitions, emotions, and behaviors (narrow sense of the term; e.g., Bode (Marta Kowal et al., 2025). This dual use of the term leads to bad science as a result of misunderstanding, wasting of time and resources, and false beliefs about love in romantic relationships. There is a convention that the term "romantic love" is used in the narrow sense in the evolutionary social and behavioral science of love that should be adhered to. I am writing this opinion to lay out this convention and to advocate for researchers in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences to follow this convention. In essence, I argue that the term "romantic love" should be used in the narrow sense, which is in line with convention in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences (e.g., Bode, Kavanagh, Hatfield Hatfield Walster H. E. Fisher, Xu, Aron, Wang et al., 2020;Zou, Song, Zhang, Sorokowski et al., 2023) although data forom the Romantic Love Survey 2022 (Bode Sternberg, 1997) are robust cross culturally (Sorokowski et al., 2021). Papers are occasionally published which use Sternberg's (1986) terminological framework of love types (e.g., (Ribeiro-Gonçalves, Pocinho, Costa, Marta Kowal et al., 2025), perhaps misguiding those unfamiliar with the literature.I have pondered the potential costs of adhering to the convention that uses "romantic love" in the narrow sense. I have identified none, except for potentially the opportunity costs of choosing to use the term in the broad sense. I have spoken with multiple love researchers about this topic, and I am utterly unconvinced by any supposed benefits of using the term in thea broad sense. These supposed benefits all seem to relate to a more harmonious typology of love which aligns with the term "romantic relationship.".1.1.7.3 Benefits of Using the Term "Romantic Love" in the Narrow SenseThe benefits of using the term "romantic love" in the narrow sense are consequential. The first benefit relates to an avoidance of confusion about the meaning of the term "romantic love." At present, there is little confusion in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences. Maintaining that convention minimizes confusion in the future. This will achieve the single meaning requirement of scientific terminology (Cabré Castellví et al., 1999). The second substantial benefit is increased precision of the term (Cabré Castellví et al., 1999). An imperfect, but much improved biological definition of romantic love has been proposed in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences (Bode & Kushnick, 2021). This definition is accompanied by a lengthy review of the biological science of "romantic love" providing exactness to what is being termed "romantic love." The third substantial benefit relates to embedding the evolutionary social and behavioral science of love within a framework provided by biopsychology. The evolutionary social and behavioral sciences have their roots in evolutionary biology, and draw extensively on biological research (see Bode, 2023). It makes sense that terminology and concepts should be easily transplanted from other biological fields to the evolutionary social and behavioral science of love. This helps the term "romantic love" fall within a logical, structured, and consistent organisation of terms and concepts (Cabré Castellví et al., 1999). It also ensures that the evolutionary social and behavioural sciences use the term in line with the English-language and American Psychological Association definitions.In this opinion article, I have attempted to raise an issue which I think is of importance to both the science of love and to the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences. The use of the term "romantic love" should be consistent with the principles of scientific terminology. I argue that the correct use of the term is in line with the concept of passionate love (in a narrow sense). This approach is consistent with the convention in the evolutionary social and behavioral sciences, the English-language definition, the American Psychological Association definition, the general definition according to the Triangular Theory of Love, and the convention among biopsychologists. Inconsistency in the use of the term leads to bad science and we should all want to avoid bad science.The benefits of using the term "romantic love" in the narrow sense far outweigh any supposed costs. As a result, I call on evolutionary social and behavioral scientists to be ruthless in their application of relevant love terminology, and for editors and reviewers at associated journals to enforce the convention. By doing so, we will avoid some of the problems that plague social psychology and can ensure that the evolutionary science of love is of the highest quality possible.