Monogamy vs. non-monogamy: the surprising tie on satisfaction

I didn’t expect a tie.

Like a lot of people, I grew up with a simple script: monogamy is the gold standard, everything else is an experiment.

Then, reporting on relationships over the years, I kept meeting couples who didn’t fit that script—some quietly open, some proudly polyamorous, some navigating long-term exclusivity with the same intentionality you’d bring to running a small company.

Different structures, different vocabularies; the common thread was the work, not the labels.

So when a new meta-analysis landed on my desk indicating no measurable difference in overall relationship or sexual satisfaction between monogamous and consensually non-monogamous partners, I felt two things at once.

First, curiosity—because a tie challenges the cultural hierarchy we rarely question.

Second, relief—because a tie gives people permission to choose what fits without the moral panic.

What follows is what the research actually found, why it matters, and where the limits are—so you can make sense of the tie in your own life.

What researchers found

On March 26, 2025, The Journal of Sex Research published a meta-analysis pooling 35 studies and 24,489 participants across the U.S. and Europe.

The headline finding: people in consensually non-monogamous relationships (think open relationships, swinging, polyamory) reported comparable levels of relationship and sexual satisfaction to people in monogamous relationships. No broad advantage emerged for monogamy when you aggregate the evidence.

The Guardian’s write-up puts it plainly: non-monogamous individuals “report levels of happiness and satisfaction” on par with those in traditional pairings. The analysis also held across heterosexual and LGBTQ+ participants.

In other words, the tie wasn’t just a quirk of one subgroup.

If you’ve grown up with the idea that monogamy is the only road to intimacy and stability, this might sound counterintuitive. But it’s what the combined data say—at least in the countries studied.

How they measured it

This wasn’t just one survey popping into the news cycle.

A meta-analysis looks across many peer-reviewed studies, harmonizing different measures of “relationship satisfaction” and “sexual satisfaction” to estimate an overall effect. The team—led by Associate Professor Joel Anderson at La Trobe University—found no significant differences between the two relationship structures once results were aggregated.

La Trobe’s release explains the scope succinctly: the dataset covered North America and parts of Europe and Australia, and the finding held “across different demographics… and different types of consensual non-monogamous arrangements.” That breadth is the point—when you zoom out, the average pattern is a draw.

As noted by Anderson, the study challenges what he and colleagues call the “monogamy-superiority myth.” In his words, “Our findings challenge this long-standing assumption… people in consensually non-monogamous relationships experience similar levels of satisfaction.” (La Trobe University media release).

Why this matters

For years, common wisdom has implied that exclusivity equals quality—that monogamy is simply better for love, trust, or good sex.

The new evidence says satisfaction depends less on the structure and more on how people communicate, set boundaries, and handle expectations inside that structure. The Guardian highlights exactly this: what predicts fulfillment is the quality of connection and communication, not whether a couple is exclusive.

That tracks with what I’ve seen while reporting on the psychology of everyday choices. When couples—monogamous or not—set clear agreements, check in on jealousy without shame, and align on time/energy, satisfaction follows. When they don’t, the structure can’t save them.

And there’s a practical sub-plot here. As Anderson notes, non-monogamous arrangements often transform what would be “infidelity” in monogamy into negotiated behavior—with rules, transparency, and consent.

In his view, removing “infidelity” from the equation may reduce a major cause of relationship breakdown for those who choose non-monogamy.

The caveats

All science stories need their “but.” The authors are clear about limits:

• Samples and culture. Most data come from Western countries. The tie might look different elsewhere, where norms and risks vary. 

• Self-report. Satisfaction is measured by how people say they feel, which can be shaped by stigma or defensiveness in any direction.

• Online recruitment. Many studies use online samples. That’s great for reaching niche communities but not a perfect mirror of the population.

None of these invalidate the findings. They do remind us that “no difference on average” isn’t license to assume any structure will fit any person. It means the structure itself isn’t a magic lever for happiness.

How the culture is catching up

If you’ve noticed more friends quietly trialing an open relationship or more podcasts unpacking polyamory, you’re not imagining it. Media interest has risen, and research focus has widened—from simple “who’s happier?” questions to how couples communicate about sex, time, and jealousy.

One recent paper in the Journal of Family Psychology found that people in open relationships often report better sexual communication than monogamous peers—without a difference in overall satisfaction. In other words, different structures can cultivate different skills, yet yield similar end states of contentment.

As a writer who grew up with tech and reads a lot of behavioral science, I’m fascinated by how quickly norms shift when data refute old stories. It doesn’t mean everyone should try non-monogamy. It means we can stop assuming it’s a downgrade.

What this means for personal choice

Here’s the lived-experience angle. Years ago, on a photography trip, I stayed with a couple who were open. Over dinner, they talked about their weekly “state of the union” chat.

It wasn’t glamorous—more calendar sync than erotic—but it was honest. They were crystal clear on their agreements, which probably explains why the relationship felt calm, not chaotic.

I’ve mentioned this before, but clarity beats improvisation in relationships. The new research gives you permission to choose the structure that fits your values, not the neighborhood’s expectations. If you thrive on exclusivity, own it. If you feel expansive and deeply communicative, non-monogamy might fit. The average satisfaction score won’t decide for you.

Bottom line

This isn’t a “monogamy is over” story. It’s a “monogamy isn’t automatically better” story.

The latest, largest look we have says satisfaction is a function of consent, clarity, and communication—whatever shape your relationship takes.

That’s good news for choice.

And for those of us who like our decisions grounded in both data and lived experience, it’s a clean, surprising tie.