A Look at the Neuroscience of Love

     Artists of varying mediums throughout the theatrical, musical, visual and written arts have tried to describe the human condition that is most commonly known in the Western World as “falling in love”. Investigations into the neuroscience underlying mammalian bonding have revealed some of the processes during different phases of attachment and bonding. While there are still many unknowns about the emotional interactions between human beings, neuroendocrinology shows clear patterns indicating that much of what artists have strived to explain through metaphors about “falling in love” may be definitively explained by science. When people fall in love, they often describe it as a magical, mysterious connection between two individual people that could only be the way that it is between that specific pair. Will neuroscience successfully break the connection between lovers down into sequential, compartmentalized components and facts?

     Neuroendocrine science is based on the study of the interactions between the neurological and endocrine systems. With regards to love and related behavioral states, research has revealed the interplay between hormones such as oxytocin and vasopressin, and the neurotransmitter dopamine. The ratios of oxytocin, vasopressin and dopamine vary according to relationship phases (De Boer, Van Buel and Ter Horst 120).

     Oxytocin and vasopressin promote trust, bonding and affection. Oxytocin has been referred to as the “love hormone”. It is released in large quantities in both mothers and infants during birth and breastfeeding, it is released in large quantities when people are physically affectionate with each other, and it is an important component of the “bonding glue” between people in long term relationships (Mikolajczak1, Gross2, Lane1, et al 1). Vasopressin has been referred to as the “monogamy” hormone, when vasopressin levels are adjusted in prairie and mountain voles their relationship longevity in terms of promiscuity or monogamy are predictably altered (Lim, Hammock, Young).

     Dopamine is released when we feel euphoric pleasure; we learn to seek out more of whatever that something was to get more dopamine. According to neurologists it’s not what we are doing that feels good, it is the shot of dopamine that transmits messages of pleasure through the brain’s reward system that feels good. Dopamine is strongly involved with the sensations of pleasure and reward that motivate addictions. It is for the shot of dopamine that the cocaine addict snorts one more line, that the compulsive gambler cashes in on his children’s trust fund to take the chance on a big win, and it is the almost universal craving for dopamine bliss that is at the root of a consumerist culture in which so many will dig themselves deeply into debt in order to buy unessential goods for the rush of acquisition.

     There are uncountable popular references to passionate love as an addiction. Robertson Davies writes “The pleasures of love are for those who are hopelessly addicted to another living creature. The reasons for such addiction are so many that I suspect they are never the same in any two cases.”(qtd. in Brundage, Lahey 422) Modern neuroscientists would most certainly disagree with Davies as it seems that the reason for the addictive quality of love is universally the same in all cases. The addiction to love is seen within the discipline of neuroscience as a basic addiction to the pleasure sensations that spurts of dopamine provide as a reward for romantic interaction that could lead to evolutionary propagation of the human species. The sensations of falling in love are the fodder for prose and songs throughout recorded time; the butterflies in the stomach, the bliss, the anxiety, effects that are explained by neuroscientists and endocrinologists as correlating with various hormonal and neurological processes and substances. But it is ultimately a craving for more dopamine that creates the sense of neediness for the object of our love. Dopamine is what drives us to want to do more of anything that results in a sense of pleasure, most obviously seen working when we observe the drive of the addict to get more of what they feel they can’t live without, including those who would describe themselves as being in love.

Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to the stuff, oh yeah

It's closer to the truth to say you can't get enough

You know you're gonna have to face it, you're addicted to love

-       Robert Palmer, 1986

 

When people describe themselves as being newly in love fMRI imaging reveals that their brains behave similarly to those of addicts (De Boer, Van Buel and Ter Horst 117). All the lover can think about is the object of their desire; they lose sleep, they often forget to eat, and they will obsess over every encounter and how, when, and where the next one can take place. Obsessive being an operative word, there is some evidence that passionate love resembles Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) in some individuals, due to similar patterns of serotonin levels, and that medications used to control OCD symptoms may actually inhibit passionate love symptoms (Langeslag). This could be problematic for OCD patients in their personal relationships; however it could also be a treatment for love “sickness” itself. Examples of where one could be treated for “love sickness” include those who are suffering from the neurobiological effects of love that is unrequited to a degree that it negatively impacts their lives, or the stalker who cannot easily resist the compulsion to be near their target.

You're my drug

And I don't ever know if I can give you up

Well you bring me colour where once I had just black and white

Now I have rainbows appearing round here in the night

-       Andy Partridge, 1987

 

     The development of neuroenhancing love drugs is also a possible reality in the not too distant future. Experiments on prairie voles that are socially monogamous in ways similar to humans have revealed that when their neurological and endocrine systems are manipulated the relationships and attractions between these animals can be consistently altered. It is unknown if similar manipulations on humans would work with the same consistent efficacy, but there are enough similarities in the neurobiology of humans and prairie voles to indicate the possibilities of pharmaceuticals that could enhance the amorous feelings towards individual and between partnered human beings. These could be use to enhance marital therapy, apparently inhaled oxytocin nasal sprays have been demonstrated to increase feelings of trust. More sinister possibilities include a whole new calibre of “date rape drugs” that could hypothetical compel the recipient to be receptive to an individual by stimulating the parts of the brain that activate trust, yearning, the desire for closeness, and the sensations associated with the perception of falling in love (Young).

     The development of neuroenhancing love drugs that would improve bonding and relationships between people brings up a number of ethical quandaries, for example if one must take drugs to maintain marital fidelity, is this “true” love as we think of and know it? What is the value of “true love”? Is it ethically any different than medicating people for ADHD or other behavioral issues? Would people feel pressured into taking these neuroenhancements in order to feel “in love” with spouses of their parents choosing, or to feel attracted to people they otherwise never would have for reasons of convenience? What is right or wrong about these ethical issues if one feels happily in love, attached, or bonded, regardless of how they got to feel that way? Most people would agree that it would be unethical to drug someone in this way without their consent, however such powerful “love potions” would surely make their way to the black markets, as most pharmaceuticals eventually do despite attempted controls. They may also be used in different ways within different cultures, for instance in many traditions marriage is not based on consent of both partners, nor is there universal emphasis on being “in love” as a prerequisite for marriage, could drugs be used to enhance the amorous feelings between pairs resistant to  arranged couplings?

     There is a body of collaborative research devoted to the study and discussion of neuroethics, in Canada there is substantial work in this field. Ethical questions around research techniques, discoveries and potential brain and behavioural modification developments within neuroscience research are not limited to love drugs, there are other issues involving many facets of this science. The Neuroethics New Emerging Team (NET), a Canadian multidisciplinary research group describes the magnitude of range these ethical quandaries envelope as “matters raised by advances in functional neuroimaging, brain implants and psychopharmacology as well as emerging issues relating to behaviour, personality, and consciousness.” (NET)

     While there are professional and academic bodies that are looking at neuroethics from a wide range of standpoints, it is undeniable that sexual enhancement drugs are popular items on the public markets. Neuroenhancing love drugs that stimulate oxytocin, vasopressin and dopamine productivity could be profitably enticing enough to motivate their rapid development by pharmaceutical interests regardless of what is determined by neuroethical research and collaborative organizations.

It is likely that the understandings revealed by neuroscience on the nature of human bonding, attraction and love will probably lead to shifts in how we understand what the artists throughout time have struggled to define. It is also probable that one day relationship troubles could be treated much in the way other human behavioral difficulties are with pharmaceutical interventions. Passionate love can be a beautiful state of being when it’s reciprocal, a dreadful one when it is not, and a longed for state that some people wish they could have within an existing relationship or with a potential partner for matters of practicality and convenience.  Bonded love can be threatened by any number of incompatibilities as indicated by high divorce rates. There are many circumstances under which individuals might appreciate the option to medicate their brain chemistry to correct processes that are perceived as detrimental to their lives, whether it’s to feel more or less love in its various phases.

     The sciences have been expanding our knowledge about the nature of the material world for centuries, yet our understandings about the neurobiology behind our behaviours, cognitive abilities and emotions are still in their infancy. There could be exciting treatment possibilities, ethical dilemmas, and dissonance between different belief systems as neuroscience unravels the mysteries of our brains and their interconnected physiological systems. Will this reduce the beautiful attempts by artists to describe magic and romance into superstitious drivel, or will the mysteries of our individuality be forever a weak spot untouchable by science, a reliable haven for creative metaphorical expressions to remain relevant?     
(Sources  available upon request)