Abstract: Although singlehood has become increasingly prevalent in contemporary societies, academic discussions remain shaped by stereotypical assumptions. Much of the existing literature treats single individuals as a homogeneous category, thereby neglecting the heterogeneity that arises from different motivational bases and levels of identity recognition. This oversight restricts a deeper and more nuanced understanding of single individuals' psychological states. To address this gap, the present study integrates Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and Social Identity Theory (SIT) to propose a two-dimensional typological model of singlehood. Specifically, the model is built upon two core dimensions: motivational autonomy, reflecting the degree to which remaining single is driven by self-endorsed versus externally imposed motives; and social identity recognition, capturing the extent to which singlehood is positively or negatively internalized as part of one's self-concept. Crossing these two axes, the study delineates four distinct types of singlehood: autonomous singlehood, identity-based singlehood, passive singlehood, and adaptive singlehood.
Within this framework, singlehood is conceptualized not as a static status, but as a dynamic process susceptible to change across time and contexts. The transformation of singlehood types is understood through the dynamic interplay between motivational autonomy and social identity recognition. Psychological factors such as attachment style, past relationship experiences, developmental stage, and gender socialization shape individuals' relationship motivations, causing fluctuations in their level of autonomy. These fluctuations can potentially drive transitions, for instance, from passive to adaptive singlehood, or from identity-based to autonomous singlehood.
Simultaneously, social identity recognition, as an equally critical and interrelated dimension, plays a decisive role. Singlehood identity is not formed spontaneously but is continuously shaped by broader social norms, others' evaluations, and cultural contexts, reflecting an ongoing process of identity construction within social interaction. Furthermore, identity recognition itself can evolve with changing social contexts and personal cognitions, and such transformations can directly catalyze the evolution of singlehood types. For example, when an individual gradually forms and strengthens their singlehood identity through social interactions, it may drive a transition from passive to identity-based singlehood. Conversely, when this identity is weakened by persistent social pressure, it may lead to a reversion from autonomous to adaptive or even passive singlehood. Therefore, transitions between singlehood types are not the product of a single dimension but emerge from the dynamic interplay between motivational autonomy and social identity recognition, jointly influenced by psychological, social, and cultural factors. By conceptualizing singlehood as a multidimensional and dynamic phenomenon, this study offers three major theoretical contributions. First, it enriches the field by reframing singlehood as a heterogeneous experience shaped by the interaction of motivational and identity-based processes, thereby extending the explanatory capacity of both SDT and SIT. Second, it highlights the dynamic conversion mechanisms that explain why singlehood is not a fixed category but one subject to transformation through developmental changes, social evaluation, and cultural norms. Third, it provides an integrative theoretical framework that can guide empirical inquiry, intervention design, and cross-cultural comparisons in future research.
Looking ahead, future research should advance this line of inquiry along four interrelated directions. First, it is necessary to deepen the study of dynamic conversion mechanisms of singlehood types. Longitudinal studies and experimental manipulations can help trace how motivational autonomy and identity recognition interact to produce shifts across singlehood categories. Second, efforts should be devoted to developing and validating measurement tools tailored to the two-dimensional model. Such instruments should capture both motivational and identity processes, while also incorporating context-specific variables such as gender norms, familial expectations, and stigma, especially in non-Western societies. Third, researchers should explore the impact of new relational forms in the era of artificial intelligence, such as AI companions and virtual partners, on the motivational and identity bases of singlehood. These emerging relational modalities may reshape how individuals maintain autonomy, negotiate identity, and adapt to social expectations. Finally, greater attention should be paid to cultural and gender differences in singlehood. Cross-cultural studies are needed to examine whether the structure and dynamics of the two-dimensional model hold across diverse societies, while investigating how cultural values, family systems, and gender socialization shape type distribution and conversion pathways. Particularly in Confucian contexts such as China, the intersection of cultural norms and gender expectations creates distinct pressures on men and women, which may condition their singlehood experiences in unique ways.
In conclusion, the two-dimensional typological model of singlehood proposed in this study advances theoretical understanding by moving beyond static and homogeneous depictions. By integrating motivational and identity perspectives, it provides a systematic framework for explaining the diversity, psychological adaptation, and potential transitions of single individuals. Moreover, it offers clear hypotheses and methodological directions for future empirical work, thereby laying the foundation for developing a more comprehensive, culturally sensitive, and practically relevant theory of singlehood.

Key words: singlehood, autonomy, social identity, two-dimensional classification model of singlehood