Shared positive activities, such as engaging conversations and interactive play, enhance relationships and buffer the consequences of negative interactions. The current research tested whether affectionate touch (a prime target for intervention) encourages people to prioritize other shared positive activities and to view shared activities more positively. In a pre-registered dyadic diary study of married couples (Study 1), greater affectionate touch on one day predicted increases in shared positive activities concurrently and prospectively. In a pre-registered dyadic experiment (Study 2), a brief affectionate touch intervention increased self-reported (but not observer-rated) shared positive activities immediately and increased shared positive activities over the following week for people who do not typically engage in such activities. Participants assigned to touch (particularly those low in attachment anxiety) also perceived their partners more positively during shared activities. These results suggest that touch may facilitate positive relationship experiences broadly and supports a theoretical model of affectionate touch.
AronA.NormanC.AronE.McKennaC.HeymanR. (2000). Couples’ shared participation in novel and arousing activities and experienced relationship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.78.2.273
3.
BatesD.MachlerM.BolderB.WalkerS. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
4.
BolgerN.LaurenceauJ. P. (2012). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling research. Guilford Press.
5.
BrennanK. A.ClarkC. L.ShaverP. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In SimpsonJ. A.RholesW. S. (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). Guilford Press.
6.
CarmichaelC. L.GoldbergM. H.CoyleM. A. (2021). Security-based differences in touch behavior and its relational benefits. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12, 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620929164
7.
CollinsN. L.ReadS. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644–663. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644
8.
DebrotA.StellarJ. E.MacDonaldG.KeltnerD.ImpettE. A. (2020). Is touch in romantic relationships universally beneficial for psychological well-being? The role of attachment avoidance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47, 1495–1509. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220977709
9.
DriverJ. L.GottmanJ. M. (2004). Daily marital interactions and positive affect during marital conflict among newlywed couples. Family Process, 43(3), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.00024.x
10.
DurbinK. B.DebrotA.KarremansJ.van der WalR. (2021). Can we use smart-phones to increase physical affection, intimacy and security in couples? Preliminary support from an attachment perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38, 1035–1045. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520970278
11.
FeeneyB. C.LemayE. P. (2012). Surviving relationship threats: The role of emotional capital. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(8), 1004–1017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212442971
12.
GenadekK. R.FloodS. M.RomanJ. G. (2016). Trends in spouses’ shared time in the United States, 1965–2012. Demography, 53(6), 1801–1820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-016-0512-8
GirmeY. U.OverallN. C.FaingataaS. (2014). “Date nights” take two: The maintenance function of shared relationship activities. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 125–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12020
15.
HillM. S. (1988). Marital stability and spouses’ shared time: A multidisciplinary hypothesis. Journal of Family Issues, 9(4), 427–451.
16.
Holt-LunstadJ.BirminghamW. A.LightK. C. (2008). Influence of a “warm touch” support enhancement intervention among married couples on ambulatory blood pressure, oxytocin, alpha amylase, and cortisol. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(9), 976–985. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0b013e318187aef7
17.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2016a). A sense of security: Touch promotes state attachment security. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7, 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616646427
18.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2016b). Daily goal progress is facilitated by spousal support and promotes psychological, physical, and relational well-being throughout adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 317–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000062.supp
19.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2017). Affectionate touch to promote relational, psychological, and physical well-being in adulthood: A theoretical model and review of the research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316650307
20.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2019a). Interpersonal touch as a resource to facilitate positive personal and relational outcomes during stress discussions. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(9), 2918–2936. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518804666
21.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2019b). Hand-in-hand combat: Affectionate touch promotes relational well-being and buffers stress during conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218788556
22.
JakubiakB. K.FuentesJ. D.FeeneyB. C. (2021). Individual and relational differences in desire for touch in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38, 2029–2052. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211003331
23.
JohnsonM. D.AndersonJ. R. (2013). The longitudinal association of marital confidence, time spent together, and marital satisfaction. Family Process, 52(2), 244–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2012.01417.x
24.
JohnsonH. A.ZabriskieR. B.HillB. (2006). The contribution of couple leisure iInvolvement, leisure time, and leisure satisfaction to marital satisfaction. Marriage & Family Review, 40(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1300/J002v40n01_05
25.
JolinkT. A.ChangY.-P.AlgoeS. B. (2022). Perceived partner responsiveness forecasts behavioral intimacy as measured by affectionate touch. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(2), 203–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167221993349
26.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford Press.
27.
KimK. J.FeeneyB. C.JakubiakB. K. (2018). Touch reduces romantic jealousy in the anxiously attached. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35, 1019–1041. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407517702012
28.
LakeyB.OrehekE. (2011). Relational regulation theory: A new approach to explain the link between perceived social support and mental health. Psychological Review, 118, 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023477
29.
LemayE. P.NealA. M. (2013). The wishful memory of interpersonal responsiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(4), 653–672. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030422
30.
LukeM.SedikidesC.CarnelleyK. (2012). Your love lifts me higher! The energizing quality of secure relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 721–733. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211436117
31.
McDanielB. T.GalovanA. M.DrouinM. (2021). Daily technoference, technology use during couple leisure time, and relationship quality. Media Psychology, 24, 637–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2020.1783561
32.
MilekA.ButlerE. A.BodenmannG. (2015). The interplay of couple’s shared time, women’s intimacy, and intradyadic stress. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(6), 831–842. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000133
33.
MullanK.ChatzitheochariS. (2019). Changing times together? A time-diary analysis of family time in the digital age in the United Kingdom. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(4), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12564
34.
MurrayS. L.HolmesJ. G.CollinsN. L. (2006). Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 641–666. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.641
35.
PetersB. J.ReisH. T.GableS. L. (2018). Making the good even better: A review and theoretical model of interpersonal capitalization. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 12(7), e12407. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12407
36.
PinheiroJ.BatesD.DebRoyS.SarkarD., & R Core Team. (2020). nlme: Linear and nonlinear mixed effects models (3.1–149) [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=nlme
37.
ReisH. T.CrastaD.RoggeR. D.ManiaciM. R.CarmichaelC. L. (2017). Perceived Partner Responsiveness Scale (PPRS). In WorthingtonD. L.BodieG. D. (Eds.), The sourcebook of listening research (pp. 516–521). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119102991.ch57
38.
RevelleW. (2020). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research (2.0.9) [Computer software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
Van LangeP. A. M.RusbultC. E.DrigotasS. M.ArriagaX. B.WitcherB. S.CoxC. L. (1997). Willingness to sacrifice in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1373–1395. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1373
41.
WeiM.RussellD. W.MallinckrodtB.VogelD. L. (2007). The experiences in close relationship scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701268041
42.
WickhamH.AverickM.BryanJ.ChangW.McGowanL.FrançoisR.GrolemundG.HayesA.HenryL.HesterJ.KuhnM.PedersenT.MillerE.BacheS.MüllerK.OomsJ.RobinsonD.SeidelD.SpinuV.. . .YutaniH. (2019). Welcome to the Tidyverse. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
