The Three Myths of the Spark
Stop chasing instant chemistry and start building lasting connection
Logan Ury, Director of Relationship Science at Hinge, identifies the spark as her 'nemesis' because it drives three destructive myths that sabotage dating. Myth 1: If you don't feel a spark in the beginning, it can't grow. Research shows this is absolutely false - many of the strongest relationships develop gradually from friendship or mild initial interest. Myth 2: If you feel a spark, it's a good sign. Often the opposite - intense initial chemistry frequently correlates with anxious-avoidant attachment dynamics that feel exciting but create unstable relationships. Myth 3: The spark is essential. People reject perfectly compatible partners because they're waiting for a lightning bolt that Hollywood taught them to expect. Ury reframes dating from a discovery process (finding 'the one') to a building process (creating a great relationship with a compatible person). Great relationships are built, not found - and understanding this takes the impossible pressure off of finding the 'perfect' person and replaces it with the empowering reality that you can build something extraordinary with someone who shares your values.
- Great relationships are built, not discovered - this takes the pressure off finding the perfect person
- The spark often correlates with anxious attachment patterns, not genuine compatibility
- Chemistry can grow from initial warmth and curiosity - it doesn't require instant fireworks
- You should switch the mindset from 'find someone with no problems' to 'find problems you can deal with'
- Dating is a skill - you're born knowing how to love but not knowing how to date
- Debunk Your Spark ExpectationsExamine where your beliefs about instant chemistry come from. Usually it's romantic movies, novels, and cultural narratives that portray 'real love' as an immediate thunderbolt. In reality, research on long-term happy couples shows that many started with mild interest or friendship that deepened over time. Challenge yourself to go on second and third dates with people who feel warm and safe but don't create butterflies. The butterflies you're chasing may actually be anxiety, not love.Pro tipUry's test: instead of asking 'Did I feel a spark?' after a date, ask 'Did I feel comfortable? Was I curious about this person? Did I feel like I could be myself?'WarningThis doesn't mean ignoring attraction entirely. Some baseline physical attraction is important. But it doesn't need to be instant or overwhelming.
- Choose Your Battles WiselyStop looking for someone with no problems and start choosing someone whose problems you can live with. Everyone has baggage - the question is not whether your partner has issues but whether their issues are ones you can handle. Some problems are deal-breakers (addiction, abuse, fundamental value misalignment). Others are annoying but manageable (different sleep schedules, messiness, different communication styles). Distinguish between the two and focus your filtering accordingly.Pro tipMake two lists: 'problems I absolutely cannot tolerate' and 'problems that are annoying but I can handle.' Use the first list to filter, not the second.WarningDon't use 'choosing your battles' as justification for staying with someone who treats you badly. Deal-breakers should be honored without exception.
- Treat Dating as a Skill to DevelopDating is a skill, and like any skill, it improves with practice and intentional learning. Most people approach dating as a passive experience - hoping the right person appears - rather than as an active skill to develop. Learn to ask better questions, to listen more deeply, to share vulnerability appropriately, and to evaluate compatibility systematically rather than emotionally. Each date, successful or not, is practice that makes you better.Pro tipAfter each date, journal three things: what you learned about the other person, what you learned about yourself, and one thing you'd do differently next time.
- Build Rather Than DiscoverShift from the 'soulmate' model (there's one perfect person waiting to be found) to the 'building' model (great relationships are created through intentional effort with compatible partners). This reframe is liberating because it means you don't need to find perfection - you need to find compatibility and then invest in building something extraordinary together. The building model means conflicts become opportunities for growth rather than evidence that you chose wrong.Pro tipWhen evaluating a potential partner, ask: 'Can I build with this person?' not 'Is this person already perfect?'
As Director of Relationship Science at Hinge, Ury has access to data from millions of dating interactions. Analysis shows that the matches most likely to lead to lasting relationships are not the ones with the highest initial excitement ratings but the ones where both parties reported feeling comfortable, curious, and genuine.
Ury developed this framework as Director of Relationship Science at Hinge, where she has access to data from millions of dating interactions. She observed that the most successful relationships on the platform often didn't start with fireworks - they started with genuine curiosity and grew through intentional connection. Her behavioral science background at Harvard helped her identify the cognitive biases (particularly the affect heuristic and familiarity bias) that make people mistake anxious attachment for romantic chemistry.