While many people tend to think dealbreakers are clear boundary lines that determine what would break a relationship, study from Western University in Canada, found that dealbreakers are not things that end relationships right away. As a matter of fact, relationships end as a result of an accumulation of dealbenders.

The study had a total of 1585 participants. The participants followed a hypothetical relationship in a “pick-your-own-adventure” narrative where there were 17 junctures where they randomly encountered a so-called “dealbreaker” and had to decide whether to end the relationship or continue on with the story.

First thing the authors found was that men and women agreed for the most part on what are dealbreakers including hygienic appearances, sense of humor, living too far away, laziness, and whether or not to have children.

Also, while intangible values and traits are really important, such as trustworthiness and reliability, small everyday things that do not seem like a big deal can really add up and matter a lot.

As for the dealbreakers that the participants encountered leading to ending the hypothetical relationship includes wanting non-monogamy, anger issues, not receptive to interests, and bad hygiene.

The authors were quite surprised that dealbreakers were in fact not dealbreakers and participants usually stayed around for up to four dealbreakers before calling it off.

“People often say they would never date someone with different political beliefs but when you’re presented with a whole person and that’s just one facet of their personality, things aren’t as black-and-white,” said author, Nicolyn Charlot. “You may choose to stick it out anyway, unless you also notice other issues.”

However, this study is just a hypothetical relationship in a “pick-your-own-adventure” story. Real relationships have more on the line and more factors going into it.

S Joel and N Charlot. Dealbreakers, or dealbenders? Capturing the cumulative effects of partner information on mate choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104328