Toxicity in relationships is commonly described in terms of psychological damage and dysfunctionality. However, processes such as intermittent reward, the activation of dopaminergic systems and the perception of a high emotional investment help to explain why these dynamics can sometimes be paradoxically attractive, despite their unquestionably harmful nature.
Before delving into the topic, it is useful to delimit the scope of analysis. We will not specifically talk about emotional dependence, intentional manipulation, dynamics of abuse or the psychological fragilities that can lead a person to remain trapped in harmful relationships. These are complex and delicate topics, which would require a specifically dedicated space. The objective is to understand why toxicity is able to activate our cognitive and emotional mechanisms, making it interesting or attractive even before the onset of deeply harmful dynamics. In other words, we will not ask ourselves why certain behaviors are bad, but why they are able to attract despite gender, age, orientation or relational nature.
The answers come from psychology, neuroscience and behavioral psychology, and tell how our brain reacts to stimuli such as uncertainty, emotional intensity and novelty, elements which, under certain conditions, can transform what is dysfunctional into something surprisingly fascinating.
In general, we are not attracted to toxicity itself, but to what toxicity activates within us.
What is meant by toxicity in relationships
When we talk about “toxicity” in the psychological field, the term is used to indicate a set of traits and behaviors characterized by emotional instability, ambiguity, unpredictability, control dynamics, emotional intensity and dysfunctional communication. Elements that tend to generate tension, confusion and strong emotional attraction in those who come into contact with them. The consequence, almost always, is a significant damage to the emotional, cognitive and identity well-being of the people involved (especially when they come into contact for long periods of time and repeatedly).
In any case, remaining in the focus of the topic, toxicity does not necessarily concern couple relationships, nor does it always imply dependence or prolonged involvement. It can manifest itself in short interactions, in social and work dynamics, or simply in certain attitudes that strike, destabilize and capture attention. And this is precisely the central point: toxicity in itself often has an attractive component.
Regardless of the final outcome or type of bond, some toxic traits seem to exert a particular fascination on the human brain. Intense, unpredictable, or emotionally charged behaviors can appear magnetic, intriguing, even stimulating, even when we are perfectly aware that they do not represent something healthy or functional.
Having made the necessary assumptions, let’s now see what some of the psychological and emotional mechanisms that are activated by toxic dynamics may be.
The neurobiological processes of toxic relationships: Emotional roller coasters and dopamine
One of the most powerful elements of attraction to toxic figures is the dynamics of the so-called emotional roller coaster. Moments of intense involvement suddenly alternate with detachment, ambiguity or coldness, creating an unpredictable dynamic. On a neurobiological level, this inconsistency stimulates the release of dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with the reward system. Importantly, dopamine does not increase when something is consistently pleasurable, but when the reward is uncertain and intermittent. Precisely for this reason, discontinuous reinforcement is particularly effective in maintaining attention and emotional investment. This is the same mechanism underlying gambling: not knowing when the win will arrive makes the experience more engaging, pushing the brain to remain “waiting” even in the face of numerous losses.
The brain does not always seek what is healthy, but what is stimulating
Evolutionarily, the human brain is not designed to chase emotional well-being, but stimulation. What is new, unpredictable, emotionally intense, tends to capture more attention than what is stable and coherent. Toxicity, precisely because of its characteristics, easily intercepts these mechanisms. Not because it is desirable in a rational sense, but because it activates neurobiological circuits related to reward, alertness and motivation. Consequently, toxic dynamics generate a sort of emotional intensity: the alternation between closeness and distance, between approval and rejection, create a stimulation that the brain tends to interpret as a signal of deep involvement.
A relationship, a brief dialogic exchange, or even just a gesture characterized by toxicity, does not simply appear important: it appears urgent, central, full of meaning.
The scarcity bias: what is scarce is more valuable
“Toxic” people often tend not to openly pursue others: they withhold confirmation, dose out praise, remain emotionally opaque or difficult to read. From a psychological point of view, this behavior activates the scarcity bias: a cognitive mechanism whereby what is less available is automatically perceived as more valuable. The rarer the confirmations, the more their subjective value increases and the more the desire to obtain them grows. The brain interprets the lack of validation not as disinterest, but as a challenge: “If I can get it, it means I’m worth it.” Attraction is therefore not fueled by the presence of the other, but rather by his absence.
Security, insecurity and emotional availability
Another frequent effect of toxicity is its ability to reactivate deep-seated insecurities. Ambiguous, inconsistent or devaluing behaviors can bring out, even unconsciously, the feeling of “not being enough”. This internal state fuels a vicious circle: the more insecurity grows, the more the drive to seek approval increases. This search is often interpreted as emotional intensity or strong emotional involvement, when in reality it is a response to relational stress. In this context, instability is often confused with passion and anxiety with emotional connection, while the nervous system remains in a constant state of alert.
Many toxic traits are accompanied by a strong perception of security: autonomy, independence, apparent imperturbability. However, when this security is not balanced by real emotional availability, it can become particularly attractive. Emotionally unavailable people, in fact, tend to be more difficult to “reach”, they struggle to open up and appear transparent. The human brain is naturally led to desire what is not easily accessible, so unavailability becomes a sort of “object to be unlocked” and the focus shifts from connection to conquest.
Culture also contributes to strengthening these mechanisms. Films, TV series and romantic narratives that often associate love with instability, drama and suffering. The rebellious, emotionally distant or tormented character is portrayed as more endearing and desirable. As a result, stability is perceived as boring, while chaos is mistaken for emotional intensity. The brain, repeatedly exposed to these narratives, learns to confuse disorder with depth.
The toxicity between society’s romanticization and childhood wounds
Some forms of attraction to toxicity may arise from an unconscious mechanism. The brain tends to feel “at home” in already known emotional patterns, even when they are dysfunctional. Unpredictable, distant or critical figures can reactivate relational models learned early. Not because they are healthy, but because they are familiar. Our nervous system often prefers familiar pain to unfamiliar peace.
An additional factor of attraction is the illusion of uniqueness and depth that often accompanies toxic figures. The person perceived as toxic tends to show himself selectively vulnerable, to describe himself as complex, hurt, or misunderstood, favoring in the other the feeling of being special, the only one capable of truly understanding. This activates dynamics of emotional hyper-responsibility and the desire to “save” or repair the other, strengthening the emotional investment even in the absence of real reciprocity.
Self-esteem
In the initial stages, toxic dynamics can strongly stimulate self-esteem, through processes of intense idealization. The other appears as a privileged source of identity confirmation: it valorises, exalts, recognises. When this validation is subsequently withdrawn or made unstable, the individual does not question the relationship, but tends to question himself, working harder to regain that initial version of the bond. In this way the relationship becomes a terrain of continuous self-verification, rather than a space of balanced exchange.
It is important to clarify that, although toxic relationships take root more easily in the presence of previous emotional wounds, this does not mean that we are attracted to them only because they are “fragile”. To some extent, we can all experience attraction to intense, unpredictable, stimulating dynamics in every area of life (friendships, work and love). Furthermore, concepts such as emotional dependence, narcissism and intentional manipulation, although often associated with the topic, represent distinct phenomena and do not necessarily coincide with the mechanisms described in this article. Here the attention is not placed on clinical or moral categories, but on psychological and neurobiological processes that help to understand why toxicity, in all its forms, despite being harmful, can be so powerful from an attractive point of view.
