According to (Forster, Ozelsel, & Epstude, 2010) the definition love is the “wishes to self-expand and caring for or identifying with a person, including feelings of infatuation and emotional bonding”, while lust is the “wish, need, or drive to seek out sexual objects or to engage in sexual activities, including feelings of sexual desire”.
Usually we think of romantic love having certain attachment objects [ (Mikulincer, 1998); (Milkulincer & Shaver, 2007)] and the most important goal of commitment along with leading a happy life together s “foreverness”. On the other hand, lust is just in and out within a relationship and it cannot be said that it is a long-term part, and such a concept can very clearly be seen in the idea of a “one-night stand” (Sprecher & Regan, 1998). The reasoning we come to is that such desires, behaviours or theories regarding the subject of love and lust can form representations within memory and might lead to there being various types of processing styles. Social cognition research has found out that when people are going particular kinds of situations in which they are experiencing particular kinds of thinking styles, when later they remember such situations even subtly, those styles are triggered (Forster, Friedman, Butterbach, & Sassenberg, 2005); (Kruglanski, Shah, Fishbach, Friedman, Chun, & Sleeth-Keppler, 2002); (Schooler, 2002); (Shah, The motivational looking glass: How significant others implicitly affect goal appraisals, 2003a); (Shah, Automatic for the people: How representations of significant others implicitly affect goal pursuit, 2003b)]. Due to there being such a strong link between a long-term viewpoint and the idea behind love, even slight reminders regarding love are able to usually engender an international manner of handling information, while slight cues of lust on their own lead to initiation of a local kind of processing.