Participants were asked to rate their interest based on scenarios of potential partners who were described as either very easy to get (low availability); very hard to get (high availability); or in between (medium availability).
This finding supports the results of other studies indicating that playing hard to get is actually about being selective and discriminating—with people most desiring someone as a relationship partner who is attainable to them, but not to anyone else (Walster, Walster, Piliavin, and Schmidt, 1973). Given these results, it appears that some of the behaviors and tactics associated with playing hard to get succeed in making someone more desirable as a date or relationship partner.
They can also be a way to test a partner's level of interest and commitment.
You’ll feel great and get your crush’s attention in no time.
I have written several posts covering the research on playing hard to get.
In the past I've allowed myself to chase people that were hard to get. Lacking the balance to not spill my emotions completely, I got hurt a lot. and people who act like them can seem more attractive short term.
Looks like the comments so far are mostly from people who are projecting their own frustrating experience onto the general concept here.
A person having a balance of being "vulnerable enough to really connect" and also "having healthy boundaries so [he/she] doesn't get hurt." I agree, it's important to open up and connect, but simultaneously don't be an emotional library because you could end up getting hurt.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point, but that's how I've taken it. :) maybe what the researchers noticed but weren't intelligent enough to articulate was that people who are not desperate and who have a life are just more attractive than most people.
These explain how playing hard to get works on the social influence principles of scarcity and reactance; when it is best to play hard to get; and the best times for men and women to be aloof or responsive.