The methodology adopted for this study was qualitative with a phenomenological design as it will allow for reflecting the participants’ experiences and perceptions of this phenomenon. Specifically, hermeneutic phenomenology (van Manen, 2015) will be adopted as the objective is to study the lived experience, as well as the explanation of phenomena as participants become aware of them.

The participants, which included six couples (12 women) who were in a same-sex relationship (Table 1), were recruited using purposive, convenience sampling. The inclusion criteria were being a woman, being a university student aged 20–30 years, identifying as lesbians, attending a private university in Metropolitan Lima, and being in a relationship for at least three months exclusively with a person of the same sex at the time of the interview. Additionally, minors were excluded from the study. Choosing the number of participants was based on practical criteria of convenience, considering the difficulty of accessing this type of population in Peru. Participants were reached out to after key informants published a call for this study through a university social network (Robinson, 2014).

The participants were 20-27 years old (M = 23). 67% participants stated that they had been in a relationship for a year or longer. Further, 83% reported having had a romantic relationship before the current one, whereas the rest were experiencing their first relationship.

A semi-structured interview was conducted as it allowed for delving into the phenomenon under study (Brinkmann, 2013). The interview guide was developed based on a categorization matrix according to the research objectives (Elo et al., 2014) and the theoretical model proposed by Castelló (2012) and subsequently reviewed by three expert judges. A pilot interview was conducted with a couple who met the inclusion criteria, after which it was concluded that the questions in the instrument were clear, coherent, and representative (Table 2).

The administrators of the social networks of LGBTI groups formed within a private university were contacted, and they were informed of the research objective. Later, the study team communicated with the individuals who met the study criteria and wished to contribute to this research. Once contacted, the study team, objectives, and interests were introduced. Next, online synchronic interviews were scheduled, which were to be attended by participants at their homes. The informed consent was read to them before conducting each interview, verbally accepted by those who wished to participate in the study. For ethical purposes, the identity of all participants was protected using pseudonyms. Moreover, they were informed that the interview would be recorded, also mentioning the confidential nature of the collected data. The interviews were held in April 2020, included both members of the couple, and lasted 40 minutes on average; the interviews were conducted by the first and last research authors (degree in clinical psychology and PhD/professor in psychology, respectively). None of the individuals refused to participate or dropped out of the study, and repeat interviews were not required. Furthermore, interviewers used a field journal to record the primary insights from the interviews.

As for the quality criteria (Mertens, 2015), dependency was considered, through the development of an analysis protocol detailing each step of the process; credibility, which involved checking the accuracy of the transcriptions, reviewed and commented on by the participants; and confirmability, from which the results are based on a logical chain of evidence present in the data analysis (Yin, 2018).

A hybrid thematic content analysis was carried out (Swain, 2018) based on the proposal by Braun and Clarke (2013). This modality was deemed relevant in terms of design as it allows for theoretically and empirically delving into the understanding of the phenomenon under study. The analysis was conducted using ATLAS.ti 9 software, taking into account the following steps: (1) a preliminary deductive codebook was constructed, followed by (2) data familiarization, where interviews were literally transcribed (first author), and preliminary quotations were generated after reading. Next, inductive codes were created based on the empirical data analysis conducted. The coding process was carried out by the main researcher, and checked by the research team. This was followed by (3) the theme search and review, where categories of meaning were created from the data obtained. A semantic map and coding matrices were developed. The fourth step entailed (4) the theme definition and naming, for which the constant comparative method was used and the categories generated were verified. This process was carried out until data saturation was achieved, applying the criterion of representativeness, frequency, and density of categories (Miles et al., 2014). Finally, (5) results were prepared. At the end of the results preparation process, they were returned to the participants for their comments, after which the findings could be refined.

The research followed the standards set forth in the Helsinki declaration, as well as the ethical criteria indicated by the Colegio de Psicólogos del Perú (College of Psychologists of Peru) (Consejo Directivo Nacional, 2017).

This priority is experienced as an excessive desire not to allow anything to hinder the development of the bond with the partner. This leads to a modification in daily activities, where one of the members of the couple becomes the focus of attention of the other. Therefore, individual central plans begin taking a back seat to spending more time with their partners.

I used to hang out with my friends more often, sometimes going to the movies, other times to the park. Once I got into the relationship, I stopped doing all that out of respect, because I’m with her. I have to leave all that behind, although I don’t stop talking to people, but I have to respect her [...] then, apart from all that, I think that’s the only thing that has changed. As for the rest, I make the same plans as usual and keep doing what I used to do.

In line with the above, it is extremely important to point out that this is experienced as an everyday part of the relationship, as a way of paying respect to the partner and, finally, they downplay or normalize the dependent nature of the relationship.

Hunger for affection is experienced as an excessive need of the dependent individuals to remain close to their partners, either in person, virtually (through social networks), or symbolically, to avoid dealing with the absence of that person, the subject of dependency. This category is experienced through a constant search for contact and the need for attention, with the utmost desire to be in their partner’s company and to have continuous communication to be aware of what may be happening in their lives.

Throughout the day, she can take a minute to text me, send me a voice message, or call me to let me know, for example: “my friends are coming over” or “I’m going to meet someone” […] or “I’ll call someone on the phone,” etc. It’s not a big deal […] I feel she should tell me those things at some point.

As with the previous category, this hunger for affection is hidden behind discourses of care and concern for their partners. Moreover, the participants conclude that their partners fail to give them enough time, thereby demonstrating their need for attention and reinforcing their dependency.

This need arises in dependent individuals as a search for satisfaction from their partner in various contexts, waiting for their approval to perform a given activity. In this sense, participants experience guilt as they feel the responsibility of bearing the burden of the relationship problems. This illustrates the value that the interviewees place on the position of their partners, with a tendency to change their opinions or attitudes to satisfy them and maintain the illusion of harmony in the relationship.

When I came back from work, she started saying that I’ve been in the house all day, that I’ve not worked for a month, just doing nothing, and I can’t even make the bed. So, to avoid that, I just make the bed or take out the garbage, you know what I mean? Or […] I don’t know, I tidy the house and do the laundry. I mean, if I was too lazy to wash my own clothes, imagine washing hers and mine, but I have to do it. I feel like I have to do things to avoid causing trouble.

As can be seen, the participants sacrifice their own interests to avoid problems. It is inferred that the blame for this stems from the feeling of not having duly complied with their self-demands.

In the couple, one partner experiences fear that the other may stop being affectionate and thinks that dealing with the possibility of not being in a relationship may be an unpleasant event. This is expressed as the fear of breaking up, which gives rise to the need to please the other. They experience sadness, guilt, and the desire to reverse the situation, no matter what must be done.

I’d be sad, probably crying if it’s for something that no longer has a solution. I would try to restrain the desire to look for her, but I would of course be super sad or depressed. If it were something that might have a solution, I’d be depressed, but I would try to look for her if I were to blame […] I’d call her, write to her, or something like that.

The results allow us to introduce the phenomenon of emotional dependency, exposing its dynamics through interrelated categories and subcategories. It is important to note that these categories are made explicit in the everyday environment, which normalizes this situation and even makes it desirable, as a model of a relationship in which the partner stops doing or does things for the benefit of the other. Consequently, the relationship is built upon a feeling of fear of rejection.