Are We Dating or Just Constantly Talking? The Confusing Era of Situationships

You talk every day. You know how they take their coffee, what their workday looked like and which family issue has been stressing them out. They know when you have had a difficult day. You spend weekends together, go out for dinner, sleep over and send each other things that remind you of one another.

There is affection. There is attraction. There is intimacy.

There is just one problem: nobody has actually said what you are.

“We’re just talking.”

“We’re seeing where things go.”

“I’m not looking for anything serious right now.”

The phrases have become familiar in modern dating, where two people can behave like a couple without ever agreeing that they are one. This is the territory of the situationship: a romantic connection that carries elements of a relationship but remains undefined, usually without a clear commitment or label.

The term may sound relatively new, but the experience is not. What has changed is how openly people talk about it and how common the language around undefined relationships has become.

A January 2024 YouGov survey of 1,110 US adults found that 39 per cent said they had been in a situationship. Among respondents aged 18 to 34, that figure rose to 50 per cent. The survey also found that most situationships began in person, although social media played a role, particularly among younger respondents.

The figures are US-specific and do not establish how widespread situationships are elsewhere. But they do show that the concept has moved well beyond internet slang.

And perhaps the more interesting question is not why situationships exist.

It is why so many people remain in them.

When “Just Talking” Starts Looking Like a Relationship

Photo: Deposit Pictures

Most situationships do not begin with two people agreeing to keep things undefined.

They develop.

Two people meet. The conversation becomes regular. Then it becomes daily. Dates become routine. Physical intimacy may enter the picture. They begin making plans together, checking in throughout the day and becoming part of each other’s routines.

Eventually, the connection may look like a relationship to everyone watching from the outside.

Except the two people involved have never actually agreed on what it is.

That distinction matters because behaviour and expectations do not always move at the same pace.

One person may see regular dates, emotional intimacy and constant communication as signs that the relationship is naturally progressing. The other may enjoy the same closeness without seeing it as a step towards commitment.

They can therefore experience exactly the same relationship while attaching completely different meanings to it.

A 2025 study published in Sexuality & Culture examined why people maintain situationships. The researchers interviewed 10 people who were currently or recently in situationships and surveyed another 109 people with similar experiences. They found that factors including investment, whether needs were being met, exclusivity, effort, trust and conversations about the future influenced why people stayed.

That complicates the usual assumption that everyone in a situationship is secretly waiting for a relationship.

Sometimes, people genuinely like what they have.

The Problem Is Not Always the Lack of a Label

There is nothing inherently wrong with taking your time before defining a relationship.

Some people prefer to date without immediately attaching a title to the connection. Others may be coming out of a previous relationship, navigating a demanding period of their lives or simply trying to determine whether there is enough compatibility for something more serious.

A label is not a substitute for a healthy relationship.

But the absence of one can become a problem when the two people involved have different expectations.

One person may think they are casually getting to know someone. The other may already be emotionally invested and quietly expecting exclusivity or commitment.

That is where “we’re just talking” starts to carry more weight.

Research published in 2026 looked specifically at situationships, communication and trust among emerging adults. The study analysed 261 participants and found that 34.1 per cent of their reported relationship experiences involved situationships. Situationship status was associated with lower reported trust in a partner across several forms of communication, including face-to-face conversations, phone calls and video calls.

The study has important limitations. Its participants were recruited from one US university, the sample was predominantly White and female, and the research was cross-sectional, meaning it cannot establish that being in a situationship causes lower trust.

Still, the findings point to something familiar about ambiguous relationships: communication can be frequent without necessarily creating clarity.

You can talk to someone all day and still have no idea where you stand.

Why People Stay

The easiest explanation is that someone in a situationship is afraid of commitment.

Real life is usually more complicated.

Some people genuinely prefer a relationship without immediate expectations. Others want companionship and intimacy without the responsibilities of a committed relationship. Some are hoping the connection eventually develops into something more serious, while others are happy to leave the future open.

The 2025 study found that investment in the relationship, conversations about the future and prioritising the connection were associated with greater satisfaction and commitment among people in situationships.

That is an important distinction.

An undefined relationship is not automatically an unhappy relationship.

A situationship can work when both people understand what they are doing and want broadly the same thing.

The difficulty comes when ambiguity benefits one person while leaving the other person waiting for clarity.

When Every Little Thing Needs Interpreting

The most exhausting part of an undefined relationship may not be the absence of a title.

It is the constant interpretation.

Why did they take six hours to reply?

Why do they want to see you every weekend but never make plans more than a few days ahead?

Why are you intimate but not exclusive?

Why do they behave like your partner in private but avoid the subject whenever you ask what you are?

In a defined relationship, these questions may have straightforward answers. In an ambiguous one, almost every behaviour can become something to decode.

A delayed reply becomes a theory. A cancelled date becomes evidence. A social media post becomes a clue.

And because there is no agreed definition of the relationship, there is no agreed framework for interpreting what happens inside it.

This is where situationships can become emotionally draining, particularly when one person wants more certainty than the other is prepared to provide.

The 2026 study on situationships and trust reinforces the distinction between communication and clarity. The researchers found that communication frequency was associated with trust across several forms of interaction, but situationship status itself remained associated with lower trust in several models.

More messages, then, do not necessarily solve uncertainty.

Sometimes, the conversation that matters is the one people keep avoiding.

The “Maybe Later” Problem

Photo: iStock

There is another version of the situationship that is particularly difficult to navigate: the relationship that is not a commitment now but is always presented as something that could become one.

“I’m not ready for a relationship.”

“Let’s see where this goes.”

“I really like you, but I have a lot going on.”

“Maybe later.”

None of these statements is automatically dishonest. Someone can genuinely like another person and still not be ready for a committed relationship.

The important question is whether both people are comfortable with what that means.

If one person hears “not ready right now” and understands it as “give me some time”, while the other means “I do not want a relationship with you”, the two people are effectively participating in different arrangements.

That is where hope can become part of the situationship.

A person may remain because they believe the relationship is moving somewhere, while the other person is simply enjoying the present without intending to change its terms.

Dating Apps Did Not Invent This

It is tempting to blame dating apps for the rise of undefined relationships.

They have certainly changed how people meet, how quickly they encounter potential partners and how easily they can remain connected. But situationships are not simply a consequence of swiping.

People have always had relationships that existed somewhere between friendship, casual dating and commitment.

Technology has simply made it easier to maintain the connection.

A person can remain in constant contact through WhatsApp, Instagram, text messages, calls and video chats without ever having the conversation that establishes what the relationship actually means.

And that constant access can create an unusual illusion of closeness.

You know what the person ate for lunch. You know what happened at work. You know when they got home.

But you may still not know whether they see a future with you.

The Shift Towards More Clarity

Interestingly, the current dating conversation appears to be moving in the opposite direction.

Tinder’s 2025 Year in Swipe report identified clearer communication and emotional honesty as significant priorities among young singles. According to the company’s global data, 64 per cent of young singles said emotional honesty is what dating needs most, while 60 per cent wanted clearer communication around intentions.

Those figures come from Tinder’s own research rather than an independent population study, so they should be viewed in that context.

But the sentiment reflects a broader conversation around modern dating: people are increasingly talking about the exhaustion of decoding mixed signals and trying to work out what someone means from their behaviour.

The desire for clarity does not necessarily mean everyone wants a traditional relationship.

Someone can want something casual and still be clear about it.

Someone can want exclusivity and say so.

Someone can be unsure and admit that too.

The problem is not necessarily uncertainty.

It is pretending uncertainty does not exist.

So, Are We Dating?

Photo: Shutterstock

Perhaps the most useful question is not whether a situationship is a “real” relationship.

It is whether the two people involved have the same understanding of it.

There is nothing wrong with taking your time. There is nothing wrong with casual dating. There is nothing wrong with wanting a committed relationship.

What becomes difficult is when two people want fundamentally different things but continue behaving as though they are on the same page.

If one person is happy keeping things casual, they should be able to say that. If the other person wants commitment, exclusivity or a relationship with a clear direction, they should be able to say that too.

The conversation may not produce the answer either person wants.

But it produces something a situationship often lacks: information.

And perhaps that is the real complication of modern dating. It is not that people have forgotten how to connect. They clearly have.

It is that we have become very good at building relationships before deciding what we are willing to call them.