A new study published in Personality and Individual Differences identifies three primary ways people end romantic relationships. The research highlights how most individuals tend to handle breakups, offering insights that can help Thai families, educators, and mental health professionals support healthier transitions.
Breakups are a common life event with emotional, social, and psychological effects. In Thai communities, where family harmony and social reputation are highly valued, understanding breakup approaches can help reduce harm and preserve dignity for everyone involved. The study provides a scientific foundation for guiding couples through difficult moments with empathy and practical steps.
The research was conducted by a team at the University of Nicosia, led by a professor of evolutionary psychology. In the first study, 228 Greek-speaking adults described how they would end an unhappy relationship. This analysis yielded 45 distinct methods, which were grouped into nine strategies, including explaining the reasons, taking the blame, and avoiding a face-to-face ending. A follow-up study with 392 participants measured how likely people were to use each method, revealing patterns linked to personality traits.
Ultimately, the researchers distilled the findings into three main breakup approaches:
- Soften the Blow: The most common method, used by roughly 86% of participants, involves direct, honest communication about the reasons for the breakup, taking personal responsibility, and emphasizing that separation can benefit both parties.
- Take a Break: About 24% of participants favored suggesting a temporary separation to reassess feelings and future prospects.
- Avoid Confrontation: The least common approach, used by around 16%, involved fading away or ghosting—ending the relationship without a clear explanation.
The study’s lead researcher notes that many people prefer to soften the blow by plainly explaining reasons, sharing responsibility, and signaling that separation serves双方 best interests. Fewer people opt for a break or for avoiding confrontation. These patterns suggest a general aim to minimize harm and preserve self-esteem and social respect, even amid hurt.
Personality plays a role, but its influence is moderate. Those high in agreeableness tend to avoid distant or abrupt breakups. Individuals with higher Machiavellian traits lean toward distant methods, while those scoring higher in psychopathy may place blame on the partner. Overall, social norms and learned behavior appear to have a stronger influence than personality alone.
Across gender, age, and most personality factors, the study found no strong differences in strategy use. The lead researcher emphasized that expectations of pronounced sex or age effects were not met, indicating broad, common patterns in how people end relationships.
The researchers offer ideas about why these strategies persist. Softening the blow and direct communication may have evolved to protect social reputation, reduce conflict, and safeguard personal safety. In close-knit Thai contexts, where family networks matter, choosing respectful, compassionate endings can prevent long-lasting social friction within communities.
Limitations include the study’s Greek-speaking sample and online recruitment, which may affect how findings translate to Thai culture. Participants described intended actions rather than actual behavior, and social desirability could influence responses. Despite these caveats, the study provides practical implications for Thailand, where indirect communication and face-saving remain important in sensitive interpersonal situations.
Thai professionals and educators can use these insights to support healthier endings. School counselors can teach adolescents constructive communication skills for breakups. Therapists and community leaders can host workshops that promote respectful, empathetic endings—particularly in a digital dating era where messaging and ghosting can complicate emotions and expectations.
Historically, Thai society has shifted from arranged marriages and strong family involvement toward modern notions of romantic love and individual autonomy. This shift increases the importance of clear, compassionate communication and emotional well-being when relationships end. The challenge remains to end partnerships with dignity and care for all parties involved.
Looking ahead, researchers call for more cross-cultural studies to determine whether these strategies are universal or culturally specific. For Thailand, local investigations could address questions about gender differences in direct versus indirect methods, urban versus rural practices, and how age, education, and family expectations shape endings. Public health campaigns or school programs could help reduce psychological harm linked to breakups.
Practical guidance for Thai readers facing a breakup includes: pursue open, honest, and respectful conversation; acknowledge your role and avoid blaming others; avoid disappearing or indirect methods, which can create confusion and prolonged distress; lean on trusted friends, family, or professional counselors; and remember that breakups are a normal life event that can be handled with compassion and dignity.
For those supporting others—families, counselors, or community leaders—offer nonjudgmental guidance that emphasizes healthy communication and emotional safety. Create safe spaces for both initiators and recipients to process feelings and rebuild self-esteem.
Understanding breakup dynamics is not just academic; it matters for building healthier, more resilient communities in a changing world. As Thai society continues to modernize while valuing kreng jai (consideration) and mai pen rai (relaxed, harmonious living), research-informed approaches can help navigate relationship transitions with empathy and clarity.
For further context, researchers and journalists stress that findings from one culture may not fully generalize elsewhere. Local studies in Thailand could illuminate how direct and indirect strategies play out in different regions, communities, and age groups.