A bit of background
Spotting the pattern that kept repeating
Over the years, this aspiring relationship analyst found themselves replaying past connections like a film critic with too much time on their hands. Some relationships sparkled, some fizzled, and some politely excused themselves out the back door. The more they examined the themes, the clearer it became: shared values offered ease and depth, while mismatched ones guaranteed a plot twist nobody asked for. This insight eventually sparked the creation of this tool.
Think of this as the digital equivalent of a well-worn notebook filled with observations, experiments, and the occasional doodle. It mixes practical insight with curiosity and leaves room for humor—because if dating has taught anything, it’s that sometimes things get weird, and it helps to laugh.
- Therapists and mentors who specialized in asking questions far more interesting than “How was your day?”
- Late-night conversations with friends that unexpectedly turned into philosophy salons
- The Examined Existence community for their ongoing inspiration and good-natured encouragement
The science bit
đź§ Which Psychologists or Schools of Thought Developed This?
The modern view of values in relationships doesn’t belong to one lone genius. It’s a mashup of humanistic psychology, values theory, attachment research, evolutionary psychology, social exchange theory, and the Gottman Institute’s work on shared meaning. In short: a brainy supergroup of ideas that all point to the same message—shared values reduce friction and fuel connection.
- Humanistic psychology (Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow): authenticity, congruence, self-actualization.
- Values theory (Milton Rokeach; Shalom Schwartz): mapping universal value categories and how they cluster.
- Attachment theory (Bowlby, Ainsworth, Hazan & Shaver): early bonding shapes how we value intimacy and autonomy.
- Evolutionary psychology (Buss, Tooby, Cosmides): values as survival strategies—stability, trust, parenting readiness.
- Social exchange theory (Homans, Thibaut & Kelley): choosing partners who maximize long-term value.
- Gottman research: shared meaning and values alignment predict longevity.
“Using values to choose or understand partners is based on the idea that relationships work best when both people share deeper life principles—not just interests or attraction.”
Link to sources
Curated reading list
| Theory / Psychologist | Primary Source (Title) | Type | Direct Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shalom H. Schwartz – Basic Human Values Theory | “An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values” | Peer-reviewed article | ScholarWorks |
| Milton Rokeach – Rokeach Value Survey | The Nature of Human Values (1973) | Foundational book | Archive.org |
| Carl Rogers – Humanistic Psychology | On Becoming a Person (1961) | Foundational book | Archive.org |
| Abraham Maslow – Self-Actualization | A Theory of Human Motivation (1943) | Original paper | Psych Classics |
| Attachment Theory – Bowlby | Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (1969) | Foundational book | Archive.org |
| Hazan & Shaver – Adult Attachment in Romance | Romantic Love Conceptualized as an Attachment Process (1987) | Research article | |
| Evolutionary Psychology – Mate Selection | The Evolution of Desire (1994, rev. ed. 2003) | Seminal book | Archive.org |
| Social Exchange Theory – Homans, Thibaut & Kelley | Core papers on reciprocity and long-term value | Research portal | Gottman Research |
| Gottman Institute – Shared Meaning | The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work (1999) | Core text | Archive.org |
Personal note
Want to dive deeper?
Explore more essays, experiments, and reflections on The Examined Existence. Bring your curiosity—and maybe a sense of humor—to keep mapping what matters most.