What Is Sugar Dating? What 27 Scientific Studies Say

When people talk about sugar dating, they often picture a very specific relationship: an older, wealthy man offering money to a younger woman in exchange for companionship, intimacy, or sex. That image, however, is far from capturing the full variety found in the scientific literature.

A 2026 review by Madeline Stenersen and colleagues, Sugar coated connections: A scoping review of sugar dating, published in Current Psychology, shows that there is no single, agreed-upon definition of a sugar relationship. The authors screened 2,825 references and included 27 studies in the review, finding significant differences in how researchers define sugaring, interpret its motivations, and assess the power dynamics between participants.

A flexible definition

Broadly, researchers describe sugar dating as a relationship involving some kind of exchange between material resources and companionship, intimacy, or attention. But the boundaries of that definition are quite flexible. Some relationships involve sex; others don't. Some resemble conventional dating, others a companionship arrangement. They may also involve travel, gifts, luxury experiences, advice, or networking.

That's why researchers disagree on whether sugar dating should be understood as a relationship, a form of sex work, or something in between. This ambiguity matters: if every sugar relationship is automatically seen as trading sex for money, other aspects of participants' experiences disappear.

Why do people enter sugar relationships?

The review found three broad groups of motives: financial, experiential, and social. Financial motives were the most common. Among sugar babies, they include wanting to earn money, pay expenses, fund their studies, or improve their financial situation. For sugar daddies and sugar mommies, the literature often describes income or wealth available to share.

But money isn't the only draw. Some people seek experiences that would normally be out of reach: expensive restaurants, travel, shopping, and events. There is also a social dimension, including companionship, intimacy, romance, sex, friendship, mentorship, and networking. In one of the included studies, women cited everything from money and material goods to love, curiosity, fun, companionship, and learning opportunities.

A relationship can start for financial reasons and take on other characteristics over time. What is mainly a source of income for one person may also be companionship or access to new experiences for another.

The possible benefits

For students, the money can serve as supplementary income and help pay for college, while flexible scheduling lets them balance the relationship with their studies. Other participants mention travel, entertainment, and access to places they couldn't afford on their own, as well as companionship, advice, mentorship, and networking. Some women reported higher self-esteem, a sense of autonomy, and greater self-acceptance.

These findings help explain why the review challenges interpretations that treat every sugar relationship as necessarily negative. Many participants describe their choices as deliberate and report concrete benefits.

The downsides and risks

That doesn't mean these relationships are free of problems. One of the most recurring themes is stigma: 10 of the 27 studies addressed it directly. Participants report shame, fear of judgment, and the need to hide their relationships, especially when they are associated with sex work.

There are also risks tied to differences in age and resources. One person may have far more money, experience, or bargaining power than the other. Some researchers see this as a potential source of exploitation; others point out that sugar babies often report being able to set boundaries, negotiate terms, and decide when to take part in or leave the relationship.

Neither "good" nor "bad"

The question isn't simply whether sugar dating is good or bad. The literature shows a complex phenomenon, with economic, social, and experiential benefits, but also stigma, unequal resources, and the possibility of exploitation.

Perhaps the review's main conclusion is this: before asking whether a sugar relationship is positive or negative, we need to ask what it means to the people involved. The lack of a universal definition shows that different relationships can have completely different goals, boundaries, and experiences. And, according to the authors, larger and more diverse studies are still needed to properly understand their benefits and downsides.