1. Motivations in romantic relationships

The psychology of romantic relationships: motivations and mate preferences (Tartakovsky 2023)

This study surveyed 1,121 young adults (age 18-30) about why they seek romantic relationships: love & care, status/resources, sex/adventure, family/children. PMC
Key takeaway: The strongest motivation for both men and women was love & care (give & receive emotional support). Sex/adventure came second; status/resources and family/children were lower priorities. PMC
Implication: People look for emotional investment, not just novelty or external benefits — which ties into the idea that consistent communication matters.

2. Communication quality and attraction

Sweet Talk: The Importance of Perceived Communication Quality in Attraction (Sprecher 1994)

This earlier paper found that how people perceive the quality of communication during an interaction impacts how much attraction / friendship they feel afterward. SAGE Journals
In other words: It’s not just about “did they answer”, but how the communication felt (responsive, engaged, attentive).
This supports your idea: If someone isn’t showing up (in terms of communication) they’re signalling something about priorities.

3. Large-scale mobile-dating communication behaviour

What Happens After You Both Swipe Right: A Statistical Description of Mobile Dating Communications (Zhang & Yasseri 2016)

Analysis of 400,000 heterosexual users, ~2 million conversations, on a mobile-dating app. arXiv
Findings: Men initiated ~79% of conversations. About half of initial messages got responses. Conversations that were reciprocated often led to phone-number exchange within ~20 messages.
Insight: Early responsiveness (or lack thereof) is a strong filter in modern dating. If someone isn’t responding early, odds of “moving to next stage” are lower.

4. Factors in interpersonal attraction (general review)

Attraction in Close Relationships (Regan 2015)

A broad review of the science of attraction and relationship development: proximity, similarity, responsiveness, physical attractiveness, etc. ResearchGate
It explains that in voluntary relationships (like dating) a major factor is how each partner initiates and responds — behaviour matters from the start.
So again: If someone is not initiating, not responding, not engaging, the underlying “attraction machine” isn’t being triggered from their side.

5. Similarity in relationships

Similarity in Relationships : How Shared Traits Foster Attraction (2024 summary)

Recent summary shows that similarity (in interests, traits) strongly predicts relationship satisfaction and longevity. Psychology Town
Meaning: Beyond initial spark, if someone is really interested they’ll invest effort to find common ground, show up, align. If they don’t — this alignment likely won’t happen.

6. Commitment and perceived attractiveness

Committing to a romantic partner: Does attractiveness matter? (Avilés 2021)

Found that both men and women in relationships were more committed when they perceived their partner as more attractive. ScienceDirect
Application: If someone is investing effort (which often correlates with “finding the other attractive/worthy”), commitment is higher. Lack of effort may reflect lower valuation/interest.

7. Communication and online dating dynamics

This overlaps with #3, but the takeaway: Online/digital context changes timing and expectations of communication (e.g., responsiveness, initiation). The large-scale study shows messaging behaviour matters. (See #3.)

8. Additional useful theoretical frame: “Predicted Outcome Value Theory”

While not a study per se, this theory suggests people assess early interactions to decide whether to continue a relationship. Wikipedia

If early cues (communication, responsiveness, interest) suggest positive outcome → more efforts; if negative cues → disengagement.
So when someone doesn’t respond, you’re getting a signal about their predicted outcome value of you.

How this links to your earlier article/points

Statement: “If a man truly wanted to be with you, they would make it happen.” These studies show that behavioural signals (communication, responsiveness, effort) are real predictors.
Recognising cues of disinterest; the large-scale study shows non-response is a real filter in digital-age dating (#3).
Emotional intelligence and choosing who you allow in your life; the motivation study (#1) and similarity (#5) show why one might prioritise people showing active interest vs. just passive availability.
The communication quality study (#2) backs your focus on the “how” of communication, not just “did it happen”.

Quick list of what to keep in mind (based on research)

Early responses matter: Initiation & reciprocation are predictive.
Communication quality and responsiveness matter more than random messaging.
Similarity, shared values/interests, show up when someone engages meaningfully.
Motivation/components: Wanting emotional support/love is more common than purely status/resources — so someone ignoring you is likely signalling they’re not aligned with that core motivation.
The initial “will-they show up” phase is real: If they don’t show up early, research suggests the relationship is less likely to escalate.

By Linda C J Turner

Trauma Therapist | Neuroscience & Emotional Intelligence Practitioner | Advocate for Women’s Empowerment