Do they actually like me?

You can’t tell from their story views, their reply speed or how many emojis they used, and in the talking stage the signals genuinely are noisy, so it’s not just you. What tells you more is whether they seem to pick you specifically, and whether texting ever turns into plans, which is also why asking directly usually beats another night of decoding.

Why is it so hard to tell in the talking stage?

Meet Jordan, 24. Three weeks ago she matched with Eli. They texted every day for the first week, met for drinks, and had a genuinely good time. Since then: he watches every story within minutes, sends a laughing reaction to her memes, and once said “we should go to that rooftop thing sometime.” Sometime has not arrived. Jordan has asked two friends and gotten two opposite answers.

Part of the problem is that people are bad at reading interest early, and wrong in predictable directions. In a 2012 speed-meeting study, Carin Perilloux, Judith Easton and David Buss had 199 undergraduates talk for three minutes with each of five potential partners, then looked at how accurately they read each other’s interest.1 Men tended to overestimate women’s sexual interest, and women tended to underestimate men’s.1 That study was about one kind of interest, in very short meetings, but the lesson travels: when you have little to go on, your guess fills the gap.

Apps add more noise. In a survey of Spanish adults aged 18 to 40, Raúl Navarro and colleagues found that roughly two in ten had been ghosted and about three in ten had been breadcrumbed in the past year, meaning someone kept up sporadic, low-effort contact without moving things forward.3 Using dating apps and having more short-term relationships were both linked to higher odds of it.3 Mixed signals aren’t rare in your twenties. They’re close to the default.

What counts as a real signal?

Two things hold up better than the rest.

Do they pick you, or everyone? In speed-dating research with 156 undergraduates, Paul Eastwick, Eli Finkel and colleagues found that when someone’s desire was specific to one person, more than to their other options, it tended to be returned.2 People who were into everyone were less desired themselves.2 For you, that means generic warmth (likes on everything, “haha” to everyone’s stories) says less than attention aimed at you: remembering what you said, asking a follow-up, reacting to something only you would send.

Does texting turn into time together? Interest that’s real tends to want more of the person. Plans with a day and a place are the clearest version. A string of “we should” with no date attached is a hope, not a plan.

And give it a little time. In lab studies of strangers getting acquainted, Harry Reis and colleagues found that the more people interacted, the more they liked each other.4 The boost came from feeling the other person was responsive, getting more comfortable, and simply knowing them better.4 Those were same-sex strangers in a lab, not dates. Still, if you’ve met once, a lukewarm first read is not a final answer.

How do you separate the facts from the spiral?

Back to Jordan. Split it four ways:

• What happened: one good date, daily texts that slowed down, story views, one vague “sometime.”
• The reading: “He’s keeping me as a backup.”
• The fear: “I’m going to like him more than he likes me, again.”
• The next step: propose one plan and see what he does with it.

The first line is genuinely mixed. It could be someone who’s busy and bad at planning, someone mildly interested, or someone who’s talking to three people. Nothing in the thread can sort those apart. A specific invitation can, because now he has to answer something real.

Why not just wait and see?

Because waiting in this stage mostly means watching. You check whether he’s online, you notice he viewed your story but didn’t reply, you read the “haha” for tone. That’s a lot of energy spent on the least informative signals available. Asking takes thirty seconds and gives you an actual data point, even when the answer is “I’m not really looking for anything serious.” That answer stings, and it also frees up your next month.

What to do this week

• Make one clear plan. Use the first script or your own. Day, place, time.
• Stop counting views. Mute the urge for a week and see whether contact still happens without you starting it.
• Track effort, not volume. A thoughtful message every two days beats twenty reactions.
• Ask, if it’s been weeks. The second script is for that. “Either is fine to say” makes an honest answer easier to give.
• Notice if this is every talking stage. If you always end up wondering whether someone likes you, no matter who they are, that pattern is worth looking at on its own. And if the worry is taking over your sleep, classes or work, talking to a licensed mental health professional is a solid move.

What doesn’t the research show?

• The misperception study measured sexual interest in three-minute meetings, with college students, not liking after weeks of talking.1
• The speed-dating findings are about averages in brief first meetings, not a rule for any one person.2
• The ghosting and breadcrumbing figures come from Spain, from people up to age 40.3
• The familiarity study used same-sex strangers in a lab.4
• None of it can tell you what one person feels. It can tell you which signals are worth watching, and when it’s time to just ask.