Ask any pair of Harvard lovebirds how they met, and chances are, the answer will be filled with a nostalgic dose of serendipity. Many relationships begin as a result of good fortune, with two people instantly attracted to one another during an unexpected interaction. In fact, a Pforzheimer House resident once justified his use of the Quad shuttles in lieu of bicycling by boasting, "Nearly 60% of Quad students meet their future spouses on the morning bus, and I figure this beats a dating service." While his figures are probably biased and possibly on the brink of sheer exaggeration, they reflect testimonies from other students proclaiming that chance meetings in Lamont Café or the Science Center computer lab have sparked lasting romances. Quite frankly, haven't we all been there? Everyone has experienced the unexpected thrill of locking eyes with a stranger across the room and being mesmerized at first glance. Interestingly, this instantaneous attraction often transcends the level of shallow, physical interest to some degree. We often note that he or she might not be the best looking person within sight, although his or her presence seems to take over the entire room. One way or another, humans appear to have an intrinsic sixth sense for the perfect partner. We seem to be able to tell who is compatible with us, even before words have been exchanged. Surprisingly, our sixth senses are frequently right. Perplexed by this reoccurring phenomenon, we might ask ourselves, "how?" While skeptics may argue that this type of falling in love boils down to luck, many psychologists present convincing data that we are able to thin-slice prospects on a subconscious level, soaking in countless subtle cues that catch our attention and tell us, "That's the one." The theories surrounding this activity raise fundamental questions regarding the mechanisms that finely tune the selection process to personal preferences and the level of influence we might possess over them.

Imagine catching the eye of a stranger in Lamont and instantly feeling that jolt of attraction. While the surge of emotion may feel random and instantaneous, an amalgam of neurological processes is stealthily taking place completely under our radar. Several studies point to abrupt spikes in central dopamine levels. Known for inducing a slew of other common love-stricken symptoms including "exhilaration, euphoria, increased energy, sleeplessness, loss appetite, trembling, a pounding heart, and accelerated breathing," dopamine has been championed as the miracle molecule behind instant romance and its many side effects (Colle & Wise 1998, Fisher 1998). In addition, these dopamine spikes occur in reaction to "exposure to a novel environment" and typically result in "heightened and focused attention" as the basis of fascination with a captivating person (Kiyalkin 1995). Furthermore, some scientists propose that significant reduction in the levels of serotonin intensify the sensation of mesmerization with a given person of interest (Flament, Rapoport, & Bert 1985, Fisher 1998).

With increasing knowledge concerning the chemistry behind our behavior, recent research has started to unravel the wonder of love at first sight, a mystery that has perplexed psychologists for years, by taking a neuroimaging approach. These studies have successfully determined the neural circuits that are activated when we find ourselves interested in someone. In an experiment conducted by Aron, Fisher, Mashek, Strong, Li, and Brown (2005), subjects viewed projected photographs of a recent crush or partner in a newly formed relationship (a positive stimulus for romantic attraction) followed by a picture of a friend or acquaintance (an emotionally neutral stimulus). Functional MRI (fMRI) scanning was utilized to record the neurological activity during exposure to both stimuli, taking advantage of a distraction procedure between each test to effectively erase any remaining neural activity from the sight of a loved one. The resulting fMRI data displayed activation in the ventral tegmental area (VTA) and dorsal caudate body. The increased activity of the VTA region is extremely significant, since the VTA has dopaminergenic cells that are highly connected with regions of the caudate, which also exhibited activation during the experiment (Caan, Perrett, & Rolls 1984, Horvitz, Stewart, & Jacobs1997). Since dopamine has already been implicated as a major chemical in attraction, activation in these areas provides converging evidence that attraction has a chemical and neurological basis. However, while this scientific evidence elucidates the various chemical pathways and neural systems at work as we become drawn to a complete stranger, the reported studies forget to mention the very spark that initiates all of this extraordinary machinery.

In order for us to feel attracted to someone else, a variety of cognitive parsing events must be carried out. Collectively, these processes constitute the act of "thin slicing". Thin slicing refers to the act of scrutinizing a potential romantic candidate without any conscious control. Before any profound contemplation takes place, our minds have already subjected the person of interest to a several point inspection, evaluating whether or not he or she meets an amalgam of our specific standards. Interestingly, fairly decisive decisions are made instantaneously and we rarely question this intuition. Should this notion be unsettling? Are we positive that we can trust ourselves on autopilot? Since it appears that we make important decisions regarding love at first glance based on intuition alone, how can we be convinced that the core qualities we actually value in a potential partner are being detected logically? In the widely-acclaimed novel, Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinkingi>, author Malcolm Gladwell tackles this philosophical issue, questioning if we have any control over what turns us on.

Gladwell's theory regarding the basis of instant attraction is framed around speed-dating, which, in his opinion, represents "the distillation of dating to a snap judgment" (63). The premise is simple: in the first few seconds of an initial encounter, the participant either feels a spark of interest or a sense of apathy towards the individual across the table; "they lost me at hello" or "had a kind of contagious winning spark." Typically, this gut decision is rather blunt, and can range from a thoughtless rejection to a haphazard crush full speed ahead. As one speed-dater noted, "They know in the first minute, 'Do I like this guy, can I take him home to my parents, or is he just a wham-bam kind of jerk?'" (63). However, the question remains: when we feel attracted to an individual, are our attractions logically sound? Can we be sure that the "spark" felt by our instinct is compatible with our logical partner preferences? Aided by the research results of Columbia University professors Sheena Iyengar and Raymond Fisman, Gladwell presents a convincing case regarding the intrinsic contradiction between our well-thought-out preferences for significant others and our in-the-moment desires. According to Gladwell's argument, the gut decisions governing the initiation or lack of attraction are tightly controlled by the "machinery of our unconsciousness," the component of our own psyche that operates covertly. If our conscious notion of an ideal partner has a minimal influence upon split-second decisions regarding attraction, we might not be so in touch with what we really look for in a man or woman after all. Consequently, the intrinsic sixth sense we utilize to automatically pinpoint the right partner must not be entirely of our own calculated design. But if this is the case, who is behind the steering wheel?

When comparing a speed dater's preconceived notion of their ideal counterpart with the participants they eventually fall for during the event, there is frequently a conflict between participants' presumed knowledge of themselves and their genuine taste in men or women. For example, if a woman says beforehand that she likes "sincere" men but in turn pursues "funny" bad boys all night long, she will typically proclaim the following day that she looks for "funny" men, a 180 degree change from her initial sentiments. However, it only takes her about a month or so to openly revert back to her old preference and confidently declare sincerity as her number one priority in choosing her partner. What type of man does she truly prefer? This case brings the notion of selfhood into question, asking if true identity is something that an individual can fully understand and accurately describe or rather an innate characteristic that is only revealed through actions. Perhaps the two conceptions of "self" are not mutually exclusive. Maybe the real you and me lies somewhere in the gray area between those two interpretations of identity. In Gladwell's opinion, "The description that [anyone] starts with is [a] conscious ideal: what [you believe you want] when [you sit] down and think about it. But what [you] cannot be as certain about are the criteria [you use] to form [predilection] in that first instant of meeting someone face-to-face" (66).

While attraction remains a mysterious and widely disputed topic in the world of neuroscience, speculation and creative hypotheses might provide sound explanations for this realm of human behavior. Perhaps the basis of instant attraction is not completely isolated from consciously developed notions of an ideal partner. It is plausible that individuals begin the pursuit of romance with a primitive mechanism that registers attraction based on criteria inherent to our respective personalities. In this early stage, the search for love is guided by our allegiance to an innate partner type. Along these lines, we often hear of teenage girls having soft spots for the rugged, neighborhood bad boy revving his Harley Davidson. Likewise, what adolescent boy doesn't feel his heart drop when a convertible-driving woman in sunglasses and red lipstick whizzes by with her hair seductively blowing in the air? Over time, we progressively acquire more refined tastes as the experiences of unsuccessful relationships and bouts with incompatibility produce novel reservations that help screen our sea of candidates and sift friends from lovers. We in a sense spend our single lives molding this innate type into something more practical and accurate in order to find true love. The knowledge we gain regarding the traits our ideal partner should possess might slowly integrate itself into our screening systems, culminating in the maturation of a sixth sense for that special someone.

Beyond the manner in which attraction evolves, the key to explaining how a total stranger can ignite a powerful spark of interest may additionally hinge upon fundamental patterns seen as people progress to later phases of life. When the average person finds him- or herself bogged down by the monotony of an increasingly focused lifestyle, finding a counterpart who grants access to an entirely novel ideology and unfamiliar social spheres can provide a new lease on life. Along those lines, the exhilaration felt during instantaneous attraction is derived from our certainty that the person across the room or table has something to offer us that we can't seem to find elsewhere. The intense attraction is cued by the characteristics of someone's aura that make us wonder what their secret is and leave us eager to know more. Whether the person at hand displays subtle hints of a mischievous side, pursues a refreshing career path, or simply exhibits an unexpected sense of humor, their ability to place our curiosity in high gear serves as a powerful basis for attraction. Time and again, "opposites attract" as their differences in lifestyle and personalities compliment one another to create strong natural chemistry. Although counterintuitive, we sometimes find love with the people whose sentences we can't always complete.