People who believe in 'the one' are more likely to ghost. The research suggests why.

Ghosting usually gets explained as a character problem. The person was a coward, or careless, or never cared much to begin with.

The first study to go looking for a predictor found something less satisfying and considerably more useful. It found a belief.

Worth being exact about what that does and does not settle. The researchers measured beliefs about relationships. They did not measure cruelty, carelessness or nerve, so nothing here rules those out as part of the story. What it shows is that you can predict something about ghosting without reaching for character at all.

What the study did

In 2019, Gili Freedman, Darcey Powell, Benjamin Le and Kipling Williams published Ghosting and destiny: Implicit theories of relationships predict beliefs about ghosting in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. Two studies: an exploratory one on Mechanical Turk covering romantic relationships (554 participants), then a confirmatory one on Prolific that repeated the romantic findings and extended them to friendships (747 participants).

Everyone was measured on the 22-item Implicit Theories of Relationships Scale (Knee 1998; Knee, Patrick and Lonsbary 2003), which separates two beliefs people hold about how relationships work.

Destiny beliefs are the idea that two people are either compatible or they are not. Under this model a relationship is a fact to be discovered. It works from the start or it was never going to.

Growth beliefs are the idea that a relationship is built. Problems are the normal material of the work rather than proof of a mismatch.

Most people hold some of each. The two are measured separately rather than as opposite ends of one dial.

What they found

Participants with stronger destiny beliefs felt more positively about ghosting, reported stronger intentions to use it in the future, and were more likely to say they had already ended a relationship that way. In the first study, they were also less likely to think poorly of someone else who ghosted.

Growth beliefs went the other direction on how acceptable ghosting seemed and on intentions to use it.

One honest qualification, which the authors state plainly and most write-ups drop: growth beliefs showed fewer associations overall than destiny beliefs did. In the first study, the specific growth finding was narrow, that people with stronger growth beliefs were less likely to consider ghosting an acceptable way to end a long-term relationship. The destiny side of this is the stronger and more consistent half of the result.

On prevalence, of the 554 people in the first study, 140 (25.3 percent) said a former romantic partner had ghosted them, and about a fifth said they had ghosted a partner themselves.

Why the belief and the behavior fit together

Here the paper stops and the reasoning starts, so treat this next part as an interpretation rather than a finding.

If you believe compatibility is a fact waiting to be discovered, then a relationship that stops working has simply revealed itself. The test came back negative. There is nothing to repair, because there was never anything under construction, and so there is nothing much to say.

The exit conversation only has a job if you think the thing was being built. Then ending it is a decision somebody made, decisions have reasons, and the other person is owed the reason.

Under a destiny model, a breakup is a result. Under a growth model, it is a choice. Only one of those comes with something to explain.

That reframes what ghosting communicates. It reads to the person on the receiving end as a verdict about them. On this evidence it is closer to a report on how the ghoster understands relationships in general.

What this research does not show

The limits matter, and the authors are direct about them.

This is correlational. Nobody assigned anyone a belief and watched what happened, so the arrow could point either way. It is at least as plausible that people who have ghosted adopt destiny beliefs afterwards, because a compatibility story is a comfortable account of an exit you would rather not examine.

The data are self-reported. The authors note that because ghosting is generally viewed badly, people probably under-report doing it, which means the true rates are likely higher than a quarter and a fifth.

Both samples were American and recruited from crowdsourcing platforms. The authors flag that people who work on those platforms may be more comfortable with technology, and therefore possibly more prone to ghosting, than the general population. And they describe the work as a first step, which is the right description of two studies on a question this large.

None of that undoes the result. It means you should hold it as a real association with an unproven direction, not as a law.

What to do with it

If you are ending something, send the message. One or two sentences. No inventory of their flaws, no opening for negotiation, no apology long enough to sound like an invitation. "I've enjoyed meeting you and I don't think this is a fit for me. Take care." That is the whole thing, and the awkwardness of writing it lasts about four minutes.

Watch for the compatibility story in your own head. "We just were not compatible" is often perfectly true. It is also the exact sentence that makes an exit feel like it needs no conversation. When you catch yourself reaching for it, the question is whether it is a conclusion or a permission slip.

If you were ghosted, read it as information about them. Their model of relationships had no slot for the conversation. That is a real thing you learned about a person, and it arrived cheaply compared to learning it in year two.

Expect to be on both sides. A quarter of that sample had been ghosted and a fifth had done it. The study reports those as separate rates and does not cross-tabulate them, so how far the two groups overlap is unknown. What the numbers do rule out is a tidy split into a small population of offenders and everybody else.

Notice the special case for length. The growth-belief association turned up for ending a long-term relationship, and not for ending things after one or two dates. That is an absence of a detected difference rather than evidence that anyone approves of ghosting early, and the distinction matters. Something short is still a different social situation from something long, and the research gives no reason to treat the two identically.

Built, not found

The reason this study keeps coming to mind is that the belief it measures is not really about endings.

The same destiny model that makes a silent exit feel reasonable also makes an ordinary bad month feel like evidence, and makes the work that follows every early period look like a sign you picked wrong. It changes what a person does at the beginning, in the middle, and on the way out.

What the larger body of relationship research keeps finding is that qualities of the relationship itself predict how a couple does substantially better than facts about the two individuals do, which we covered in what makes a relationship last. Individual traits are not irrelevant, they are simply outperformed. And the qualities that do the work accumulate, which means they cannot be read in advance, because they do not exist yet.

You cannot argue yourself into a belief on demand. You can notice which one you are running, especially at the moment you are about to close a tab on someone.

Bloom is pre-launch, starting in Utah along the Wasatch Front. The only thing to do today is join the waitlist and grow with us.