Major Review Finds Only 27 Sugar-Dating Studies Met Its Criteria

A scoping review in Current Psychology screened 2,825 records and found only 27 empirical studies that met broad inclusion criteria for research focused primarily on sugar dating. Its central finding is not a single estimate about participant behavior, but that the evidence base remains small, uses inconsistent definitions and often reflects researchers’ assumptions. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Eligible work could come from any date, location, discipline or document type, but had to contain empirical results and focus mainly on sugaring.

Studies varied substantially in how they defined the exchange, which populations they examined and whether they interpreted participants primarily through exploitation, agency, sex-work or relationship frameworks. Motivations clustered into financial, experiential and social themes rather than one universal reason. Research on participant power found many sugar babies reporting agency while also describing stigma and shame. The review identified limited sample diversity and major gaps in long-term, cross-cultural and sponsor-focused evidence.

The review cautions against building policy, clinical guidance or product rules around a few narrow studies. Definitions determine who is counted, and moral assumptions can shape interpretation before data are collected. Better work needs clearer operational definitions, more diverse samples and designs that separate correlation, lived experience and harm. A scoping review maps a field rather than statistically combining comparable outcomes. Its 27-study count reflects the authors’ criteria and English-language inclusion, so it should not be read as every publication ever written about transactional intimacy.