How are different types of love and desire communicated? (Typology & universals)

Love and desire permeate our existence and have been argued to be universal across cultures [11]. But are love and desire communicated in the same ways across cultures? If so, what are the universals of communicating love and desire? While the current research suggests that there are important overlaps [11], it has also been acknowledged that some aspects of the field are heavily skewed towards WEIRD samples [20]. Thus, most of our understanding of how love and desire are communicated may not enable us to reach larger-scale cross-cultural conclusions. The conference will particularly welcome papers that will contribute to this area, especially with respect to potential miscommunication. Another aim of this conference is to explicitly reflect on the representation of different types of love and desire within and across different disciplines. A closer look at diverse disciplinary approaches reveals that some scholars/disciplines focus on one rather than the other in the absence of the other [11;20]. The third typologically oriented aim of the conference therefore is to bring scholars together who do not tend to consider the role of both in their work.

How do we communicate love and desire successfully?

When we communicate different types of love and desire, what makes the communication process successful? Less work exists in this area, although the implications of understanding successful communication of love and desire can have broader-scale societal impact [2;7-9], especially in the current times of political upheavals and uncertainty.

Is communicating love and desire limited only to human-human interactions?

While it could be said that love is at the core of being human [16], love is nevertheless not limited to human-human interactions. Firstly, relationships with different forms of attachment exist between human and non-human animals [10;14] as well as human animals and non-animals, such as plants and AI [4;6]. Pet-directed speech [5] and most recently the emergence of bonding relationships with AI [17] provide relevant examples. With the advent of highly developed interactive AI, the world of dating apps has also seen the use of AI in shaping the users’ interactions with potential human partners [18]. The third goal of the conference is to reach an overview of academic and societal questions we should be asking ourselves in this area of communicating love and desire.

How are discourses of love utilised for the greater societal good?

Finally, the last question of the conference builds on the previous three. Some scholars have suggested that love studies and love discourses are crucial in tackling many of the wicked problems [1;19], including for instance discrimination and global climate change [15]. But how exactly can scholars working on communicative aspects of love and desire contribute towards greater societal good?  What are some of the practical steps we can take.

Reference list

1. Adams, R.J. 2016. Education for Wicked Problems and the Reconciliation of Opposites A Theory of Bi-Relational Development. London: Routledge.
2. Baumeister, R.F.; Vohs, K.D. 2004. Sexual economics: sex as female resource for social exchange in heterosexual interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Review 8(4): 339-363.
3. Berlant, L. 2012. Love/Desire. Brooklyn: punctum books.
4. Brook, I. 2003. Making here like there: place attachment, displacement and the urge to garden. A Journal of Philosophy & Geography 6(3): 227-234.
5. Burnham, D.; Opacic, M; Vollmer-Conna, U. 2024. Vocal emotion in pet-directed and infant-directed speech: similar sounds and functions, but different determinants. Anthrozoös 37(4): 791-810.
6. Ciriello, R. 2025. Exploring attachment and trust in AI companion use. Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS 2024), Canberra, Australia.
7. Foucault, M. 1978. The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1. Vintage Books.
8. Giddens, A. 1992. The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
9. Illouz, E. 1997. Consuming the Romantic Utopia: Love and the Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism. University of California Press.
10. Jones, O. 2000. (Un)ethical geographies of human—nonhuman relations. Encounters, collectives and spaces. In Animal Spaces, Beastly Places, edited by C. Philo & C. Wilbert. London: Routledge.
11. Karandashev, V. 2017. Romantic Love in Cultural Contexts. Springer.
12. Karandashev, V. 2022. Cultural Typologies of Love. Springer.
13. Kunkel, A.; Burleson, B. 2003. Relational implications of communication skill evaluations and love styles. Southern Communication Journal 68(3): 181-197.
14. Latimer, J.; Miele, M. 2013. Naturecultures? Science, affect and the non-human. Theory, Culture & Society 30(7-8).
15. Martin, L. 2024. Tracing the fundamental necessity to love through systems, monkeys, and humans. Talk presented at the 2^nd International Conference on Love Studies, March 2024.
16. Oord, T.J. 2010. Defining Love. A Philosophical, Scientific, and Theological Engagement. USA: Brazos Press.
17. Quian, Y.; Wan, X. 2025. Co-experiencing with AI: Effects on social bonding and empathy in human-AI relationships. Technology in Society 83: 103009.
18. Shen, C.; Xu, Y.; Lu, Z. 2025. Seeking soulmate via voice: understanding promises and challenges of online synchronised voice-based mobile dating. CHI ’24: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 921: 1-14.
19. Strandell, J. 2012. On the Possibilities and Impossibilities of Love: Mapping the Discursive Field of Love-Relationships, its Components, Conflicts and Challenges. MA thesis. Halmstad University.
20. Šturm, P.; Hejná, M.; Tylečková, L. Under review. Perceived vocal attractiveness of breathiness in Danish. Journal of Phonetics.