The Five Love Languages: Crap or Clever?

I read Gary Chapman’s book The 5 Love Languages several years ago, and to me it was one of those books that you feel is true in your bones because it clarifies all of your lived experience. It was like Chapman gave structure and order to everything I knew about relationships, like walking into a newly organized pantry and feeling relief that I could quickly find what I need to bring a recipe to life.

Earlier this year a study was published and it made big news. NPR: Love Languages and Other Relationship Myths, Debunked. The Washington Post: Does your “love language” really matter? Scientists are skeptical. The Guardian: Love languages are hugely popular— but there’s very little evidence they exist at all.

Immediately upon seeing these headlines I felt grumpy and resentful toward the study authors. How dare they try to destroy that which I love!? But then I read the study. What the study in question actually says is:

The process of maintaining successful, loving relationships is akin to keeping a healthy, balanced diet…. Although people might be able to successfully maintain their relationships even if they are missing a particular ingredient (e.g., lack of physical touch in long-distance relationships), the best relationships will be ones in which partners spend time together (quality time; Aron et al., 2022), express appreciation (words of affirmation; Algoe, 2012), show affection (physical touch; Jakubiak & Feeney, 2019), help and support each other (acts of service; Feeney & Collins, 2015), and make each other feel special (which is presumably the intention behind gifts; Komiya et al., 2019), among other behaviors (e.g., support for personal goals and autonomy) not captured in Chapman’s five love languages.

Do you see what the study authors are doing there? They’re basically saying that the healthiest relationships are ones where the two people involved support each other’s fulfillment of their Six Needs: supporting each other’s autonomy, helping with physiological needs (physical touch through affection, acts of service—e.g. cooking for a loved one, ferrying them to doctor’s appointments, etc.), providing safety for each other (affection, acts of service), allowing space for growth (supporting personal goals), fufilling social needs (which is almost inherent with all of the love languages), and boosting esteem (making them feel special by expressing any or all of the love languages).

Thus, I couldn’t be resentful for too long since their message aligns perfectly with the Right Hand of Long-Term Happiness. In truth, this is the guiding principle I use for maintaining all of my relationships—how do I best help my teammates with their Six Needs?

However, I do still think Gary Chapman’s book has value and will continue to hold up as a classic. What he did is get people to think about how they express love, and he showed that there are multiple ways to do so. Putting forth only a handful of love languages, he gave us a list that’s easy to remember and call forth when we’re struggling to find the right ways to connect. I hope and expect The Right Hand of Long-term Happiness will do all of this, too, but I think the different perspectives may inspire different personalities in different ways.

Are you a fan of The Five Love Languages? Has it helped you in your relationships?