Rewriting Romance: The Psychological and Cultural Implications of Gen Z’s Relationship Slang

This paper explores the social and psychological impact of relationship slang used by Generation Z, examining how terms like “situationship,” “ghosting,” and “breadcrumbing” are changing the way young people approach romance. These slang terms reflect more fluid and less committed relationship structures, allowing for easier emotional regulation, boundary-setting, and detachment in a culture where direct and instant communication is highly valued. The paper looks at the psychological effects of these terms, suggesting they help people navigate complex emotions without the need for formal confrontation, often as a response to the pressures of modern digital dating. Additionally, the study considers the broader cultural impact of this shift in language, showing how these terms mirror generational attitudes toward romance, commitment, and personal expression. The integration of these terms into pop culture and media has helped solidify their place in modern conversations about relationships. Drawing on sociological and psychological theories, the paper explores whether these changes in language are temporary trends or part of a larger, more permanent shift in romantic norms. Finally, the paper highlights areas for future research, particularly in examining how Gen Z’s relationship slang may evolve as they enter longer-term relationships, marriage, or parenthood.

Gen Z, Relationship Slang, Emotional Regulation

1. Anderson, K. P., & Richards, L. M. (2023). Slang, social media, and generational identity: How relationship language is shaping Gen Z. Journal of Digital Culture, 15(2), 134-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374447.2023.1812356 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baker, M. (2017). Ghosting: The digital end of romance. Psychology Today. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Baker, S., & Green, A. (2018). Emotional Detachment in the Digital Age: The Role of Social Media in Shaping Modern Relationships. Journal of Digital Culture & Society. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bauman, Z. (2003). Liquid Love: On the Frailty of Human Bonds. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bogle, K. A. (2008). Hooking up: Sex, dating, and relationships on campus. New York University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Volume I. Attachment. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Brown, A. P., & Harris, J. T. (2024). Digital romance: The impact of online platforms on casual dating and relationship slang. Journal of Social Media Studies, 12(1), 55-71. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511022.2024.2023246 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Brown, J. S., Johnson, L. M., & Howard, M. A. (2023). Relationship avoidance in the digital era: The role of slang in emotional detachment. CyberPsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 26(5), 337-342. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2022.0573 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Clark, P. A., & Patel, D. S. (2022). Emotional detachment in modern relationships: A psychological perspective on avoidance behaviors. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 42(3), 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/jscp.12539 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Cohen, D., & Kitayama, S. (2016). The cultural shaping of self and emotion: Implications for social relationships. In L. A. P. A. Smith (Ed.), Handbook of Emotion Regulation (pp. 91-108). The Guilford Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Collier, A. (2020). Cuffing season: The social dynamics of dating in winter months. Journal of Social Psychology, 46(2), 141-154. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dimitrova, D. (2021). The viral spread of slang: The impact of social media on the dissemination of language. International Journal of Social Media Studies, 15(1), 32-47. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Eble, C. (1996). Slang and Sociability: In-Group Language in College Years. University of North Carolina Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gibbs, J. L., Ellison, N. B., & Lai, C. H. (2006). First comes love, then comes Google: An investigation of uncertainty reduction strategies and self-disclosure in online dating. Communication Research, 33(1), 32-55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Giles, H. (1973). Communication Accommodation Theory. In P. J. Robinson (Ed.), Social Psychology and Language (pp. 203-227). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Giles, H. (2016). Communication Accommodation Theory: Negotiating Personal Relationships and Social Identities across Contexts. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love, and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Polity Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Johnson, K., Mitchell, B., & Wallace, T. L. (2023). Gen Z’s emotional resilience: Understanding relational slang and its impact on emotional processing. Journal of Adolescent Psychology, 38(4), 204-218. https://doi.org/10.1037/ajp.2023.45 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Johnson, M., & Lee, A. (2022). The role of relationship slang in managing emotional detachment: A qualitative analysis of Gen Z communication. Journal of Contemporary Social Issues, 48(6), 473-486. https://doi.org/10.1080/20905616.2022.1961508 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Jones, L., & Walker, M. (2024). Ghosting and emotional detachment: The consequences of avoiding relationship closure. Journal of Modern Relationships, 39(3), 201-217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-024-1222-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. University of Pennsylvania Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Lee, S., & Wang, R. (2023). Shorthand for modern love: The role of slang in shaping Gen Z’s romantic communication. Communication Studies, 30(2), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.1007/cs.2023.0512 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. McHugh, S. (2020). The fluidity of modern relationships: New media, digital platforms, and contemporary romantic behavior. Journal of Contemporary Social Science, 48(2), 76-92. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Miller, D. (2021). Redefining Love: The Evolution of Romance in the Digital Age. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Miller, D., & Evans, C. (2023). Relationship slang and digital culture: Generational shifts in romantic behavior. Digital Culture and Society, 6(4), 127-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.digcul.2023.03.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Miller, L., & Stevens, P. (2021). Detachment in the digital age: Exploring the emotional regulation of modern relationships. Psychology of Popular Media, 19(2), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000327 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Sapir, E. (1929). The Status of Linguistics as a Science. Language. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Schwartz, S. H. (2019). Self-Determination Theory and the Role of Identity in Relation to Social Resilience. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Schwartz, S. H., Brown, A., & Harris, J. (2024). Relationship evolution: The sociocultural impact of digital language on Gen Z’s romance norms. Sociology of Relationships, 29(2), 78-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/01417789.2024.1988776 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Smith, R. J., & Wallace, P. (2022). Resilience through shared language: How slang strengthens Gen Z’s emotional connections. Journal of Youth Studies, 25(1), 57-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/13676261.2022.2012209 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Stern, D. (2021). Flexing in the digital age: The rise of performative love and relationships online. Journal of Digital Communication, 24(2), 78-93. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Tagliamonte, S. A. (2016). Teen Talk: The Language of Adolescents. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Toma, C. L. (2020). Perceptions of authenticity in online dating profiles. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(2), 239-256. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy–and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood–and What That Means for the Rest of Us. Atria Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Synonymy in the Songs of Ummaru Bagobiri: A Contextual Linguistics Analysis
• Aspect of Compounding and Affixation in Bassa-Nge
• Kinayah (Metonymy) in Malay: An Analysis Based on the Science of Balaghah
• Optimality Theory: Application of Dahl’s law in Kindia
• Selling Diversity: The Politics of Representation in Global Advertising