The stakes of this question are high. Decades of developmental research show that romantic relationships are a central task of adolescence and young adulthood, and that their quality carries lasting consequences. High-quality early relationships have been linked to greater self-esteem, lower alienation, better self-image, and stronger commitment in later partnerships, while poor-quality relationships are associated with more depressive symptoms, substance use, and difficulties in academic and social adjustment. Crucially, researchers argue that it is not involvement itself but the balance of positive and negative interactions that shapes well-being. That makes the psychological machinery underlying constructive interaction—understanding a partner’s feelings, managing one’s own emotional arousal, and accurately reading a partner’s intentions—a prime target for scientific scrutiny, particularly at the developmental moment when both relationships and these abilities are still maturing.

The review followed PRISMA 2020 guidelines, searching PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed quantitative studies of unmarried, non-cohabiting young people. From 701 retrieved records, 26 studies met all inclusion criteria, with sample sizes ranging from 22 to 1,527 participants. Methodological quality, assessed with the AXIS appraisal tool, was moderate to high on average, though weaknesses clustered around sampling: only six studies justified their sample size, and most relied on non-representative convenience samples. Because the studies were too heterogeneous in design and measures for meta-analysis, the authors synthesized findings through structured vote counting based on the direction of effects, tabulating each reported association as positive, negative, or null and mixed.

Emotion regulation emerged as the most heavily studied domain, contributing 23 effect estimates across 14 studies, and the pattern was strikingly strategy-specific. Cognitive reappraisal—reinterpreting emotional events to change their impact—was consistently beneficial: of nine estimates for adaptive regulation and reappraisal combined, none were negative. Experimental work showed that minimizing reappraisal reduced relationship satisfaction and conflict-resolution self-efficacy relative to control conditions. Expressive suppression, by contrast, in which outward emotional expression is inhibited, showed the mirror image: five of eight estimates were negative and none positive. Suppression lowered satisfaction and increased loneliness, particularly for women suppressing negative emotions, reduced conversation quality and felt connectedness for the suppressor, and hindered post-breakup growth. This is developmentally troubling because suppression is precisely the strategy adolescents increasingly rely on as they learn to control emotional expression, meaning the tool young people adopt most readily during their first relationships is the one carrying the steepest relational cost.

Notably, global measures of regulatory difficulty produced the most inconsistent results, and the inconsistency itself is informative. Two studies found no direct link between regulatory difficulties and satisfaction, yet one dyadic study revealed a significant indirect pathway: difficulties predicted greater withdrawal during conflict, which in turn eroded satisfaction for both partners. The authors interpret such null direct effects not as evidence that regulation is irrelevant, but as a sign that its influence is often transmitted through behavioral mechanisms—like pulling away from a difficult conversation—that simple direct-effect models fail to capture. Gender and age qualified the picture further: boys’ withdrawal damaged both partners’ satisfaction more than girls’, the relational cost of dysregulation was greater for younger individuals and attenuated with age, and a person-centered analysis found that a proactive profile of active communication and reappraisal reported the highest satisfaction, while an inhibiting profile marked by suppression and avoidance reported the lowest.

Empathy told a similarly dual story. Across seven studies, the relational value of empathy depended on whether it took an other-focused or self-focused form. Empathic concern—compassion directed outward toward a partner’s difficulties—was consistently associated with higher satisfaction and more constructive conflict resolution. Personal distress, which turns the emotional response inward into one’s own fear and stress, showed the opposite association, particularly among women. One especially intriguing finding concerned the source of the benefit: partner-perceived empathic concern predicted satisfaction whereas the actor’s own empathic concern did not, suggesting that feeling understood by one’s partner may matter more than one’s own dispositional tendency to care. Daily-diary evidence reinforced this, with day-to-day fluctuations in state empathy tracking daily satisfaction over a two-week period. Empathy also operated through mediation and moderation: it carried the effect of negative arousability on satisfaction, mediated links between mindfulness and daily satisfaction, and in one study empathy, humility, and forgiveness together explained 43.4 percent of the variance in satisfaction.

The review’s most surprising finding was almost the complete absence of research on theory of mind—the ability to attribute beliefs, intentions, feelings, and desires to oneself and others—in the romantic lives of young people. Only two studies qualified, though both pointed in promising directions. One found that lower mentalization in adolescent girls was associated with greater emotion-regulation difficulties, with a bidirectional link in which poor mentalization hindered regulation while dysregulation impaired mentalizing under stress. The other, a neuroimaging study, showed that young adults who considered their partner’s beliefs were more likely to support their partner’s well-being that day and the next—an effect specific to romantic partners and moderated by neural selectivity during mentalizing. Because so few studies addressed theory of mind directly, the authors added perspective-taking, a closely related ability, which showed consistent positive associations across five studies with no negative direct effects, partly through more positive problem-solving and constructive conflict resolution.

Woven together, the findings suggest these abilities may function as an interlocking system rather than independent traits. The authors ground this in Decety and Jackson’s functional model of empathy, in which affective responding, mental-state representation, and emotion regulation operate as interacting components, and in the vulnerability–stress–adaptation model of relationships, in which stable individual characteristics shape relationship quality through adaptive processes like communication and conflict resolution. From this view, weak socio-cognitive abilities act as enduring vulnerabilities while strong ones act as resources. The review also identified an intriguing asymmetry between actor and partner effects: for empathy and perspective-taking, partner effects tended to outweigh actor effects—feeling understood mattered more than being understanding—whereas for suppression, the costs fell first and most strongly on the suppressor, with partner effects largely absent. The authors caution that this asymmetry rests on few dyadic studies and should be treated as a hypothesis for future research rather than an established finding.

The limitations are candidly acknowledged. The broad 14-to-35 age range introduces developmental heterogeneity, the evidence base is skewed toward Europe and the United States—particularly relevant for suppression, whose costs may be weaker in cultures where emotional restraint carries different social meaning—and most studies were cross-sectional, restricting causal inference. Strikingly, no included study examined these abilities in digitally mediated romantic contexts, despite the fact that young people’s relationships increasingly unfold on platforms that introduce unique stressors such as heightened jealousy and relational uncertainty. Early neuroscience hints at what screen-mediated interaction may do: remote communication increases activation in theory-of-mind regions like the temporal-parietal junction as the brain works harder to fill in missing social cues, while decreasing amygdala activation, suggesting reduced emotional engagement. Whether these shifts alter how young people learn to read and care for romantic partners remains entirely unknown. For now, the review stands as the first to place empathy, emotion regulation, and theory of mind side by side in early romance, and its message is clear: helping young people reappraise rather than suppress, feel concern rather than distress, and genuinely understand their partners may be among the most practical investments science can offer the next generation of relationships.

Subject of Research: The role of empathy, emotion regulation, and theory of mind in adolescent and young adult romantic relationships

Article Title: The role of socio-cognitive abilities in adolescent and young adult romantic relationships: a systematic review

Article References: Polak, N., Confalonieri, E., & Milani, L. (2026). The role of socio-cognitive abilities in adolescent and young adult romantic relationships: a systematic review. Current Psychology, 45(19), Article 1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-10100-0

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s12144-026-10100-0

Keywords: empathy, emotion regulation, theory of mind, perspective-taking, romantic relationships, adolescence, young adults, relationship satisfaction, cognitive reappraisal, expressive suppression, systematic review, social cognition