Is there a psychological concept or dynamic for two things: when you like someone romantically and you have this short circuit when you weren’t expecting to see them vs when you are expecting to see them so you repress your true feelings in favor of harmony?

Yes, there are several psychological concepts that help explain these dynamics!

For the first scenario - that “short circuit” when unexpectedly seeing someone you like - this relates to cognitive load theory and emotional regulation. When we’re unprepared, our prefrontal cortex (responsible for emotional regulation and social filtering) hasn’t had time to engage its typical control mechanisms. The surprise triggers an immediate emotional response before our conscious mind can modulate it. This is why people often describe feeling flustered, tongue-tied, or experiencing physical reactions like blushing or increased heart rate in these moments.

The second dynamic - repressing feelings when you expect to see someone - involves emotional suppression and impression management. When we anticipate an interaction, we mentally prepare by activating our social regulation systems. This involves what psychologists call “expressive suppression,” where we consciously or unconsciously dampen our emotional display to maintain social harmony or avoid vulnerability.

There’s also an element of cognitive dissonance at play in the second scenario. The conflict between your genuine feelings and your decision to suppress them creates internal tension, which people often resolve by convincing themselves the feelings aren’t that strong or aren’t worth expressing.

The contrast between these two states highlights how much our emotional expression depends on our level of preparation and the activation of our social regulatory systems. When caught off guard, we’re more likely to show our authentic emotional state, while anticipated interactions give us time to construct a more controlled social persona.

Why people, maybe particularly women, when they like you, they will do anything to be with you. Whereas if she doesn't, she requires more for her attention. Almost like a pricing, lower price if she likes you, higher if she doesn't?

• Social Exchange Theory
• Investment Model Theory
• Approach vs. Avoidance Motivation: When attracted, people are in "approach mode" - they're motivated to get closer and will lower their usual barriers. When uninterested, they're in "avoidance mode" and may actually raise barriers to discourage pursuit.
• Cognitive Dissonance: Interestingly, people also tend to value more highly the things they work harder for. So someone who's initially neutral might actually become more interested if they end up investing effort, while someone already interested doesn't need that psychological mechanism.
• Attraction, Value, and Emotional Pricing

Is there a theory on having many options? Also, is there a theroy on not expecting everything out of one person but rather only go to people for the best they give (such as not expecting a boyfriend/girlfriend to be able to be able to be the therapist, romantic, friend, hiker, etc)

Is there anything like baseline theory, that when you experience something tramutic or undergo a significant mentallity change, that your baseline for the small little things go away and your tolerance level increases?

Hedonic Adaptation - This describes how people tend to return to a relatively stable level of happiness despite major positive or negative events. After trauma, your baseline for what constitutes a "big deal" shifts dramatically upward.

Stress Inoculation - Exposure to significant stressors can increase your tolerance for future stress. People who've survived major trauma often find they can handle everyday stressors that would overwhelm others.

Emotional Numbing/Blunting - This is common in PTSD and depression, where the capacity to feel both positive and negative emotions becomes dampened. Small pleasures or irritations that once registered strongly may barely register at all.

Contrast Effect - Your brain judges experiences relative to your most extreme reference points. If you've experienced severe trauma, minor inconveniences pale in comparison and may not trigger the same emotional response they once did.

Learned Helplessness vs. Learned Resilience - Depending on how you processed the trauma, you might develop either a sense that nothing you do matters (helplessness) or that you can handle almost anything (resilience).

This recalibration can be both protective and problematic. While it might help you stay calm in crises, it can also make it harder to enjoy simple pleasures or recognize when you need help with smaller but still significant issues. Many trauma survivors describe feeling like they're living life with the emotional volume turned down.

When you hit your lowest point, you are open to the greatest amount of change/ when there is no other options, you become desperate for a solution

• Rock Bottom Theory is perhaps the most direct match - the idea that people often need to reach their absolute lowest point before they’re motivated to make significant changes. This is commonly referenced in addiction recovery, where hitting “rock bottom” can serve as a catalyst for seeking treatment.
• Crisis Theory describes how periods of intense difficulty can create windows of opportunity for transformation. When normal coping mechanisms fail, people become more open to new solutions and perspectives they might have previously rejected.
• Psychological Reactance Reduction explains how desperation can actually make us more receptive to help. When we have fewer options, we’re less likely to resist suggestions or maintain our usual defenses against change.
• The concept also relates to Learned Helplessness - though in a paradoxical way. While learned helplessness can trap people in negative patterns, sometimes the complete breakdown of control can shock someone into recognizing they need to try entirely different approaches.
• Post-Traumatic Growth research shows that severe adversity can sometimes lead to positive psychological changes, including new possibilities, deeper relationships, and personal strength - but often only after people have exhausted their usual ways of coping.
• Cognitive Dissonance Theory also applies here. When the gap between our current reality and desired state becomes unbearably large, we’re motivated to take dramatic action to reduce that dissonance.

The key insight across these concepts is that extreme discomfort can override our natural resistance to change, making us more willing to take risks and try solutions we’d normally avoid.