Past research has shown consistent benefits associated with and resulting from affectionate touch, though past research is based almost exclusively on highly satisfied and otherwise non-representative samples. The current research used two nationally representative samples to test correlates (Study 1) and anticipated consequences (Study 2) of affectionate touch in romantic relationships. In Study 1, greater kissing frequency was associated with greater individual well-being, and these links were especially pronounced in the most satisfying relationships. In Study 2, participants who were randomly assigned to imagine receiving affectionate touch from their spouse anticipated greater individual well-being (less stress and greater life satisfaction) and relational benefits (greater perceived partner affection, state security, cognitive interdependence, and relationship quality). These benefits were stronger among people with moderate or high relationship satisfaction but observed even for the subset of individuals (approximately one-third of the sample) who rated their relationships as “distressed.” Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
BartonA. W.LavnerJ. A.StanleyS. M.JohnsonM. D.RhoadesG. K. (2020). “Will you complete this survey too?” Differences between individual versus dyadic samples in relationship research. Journal of Family Psychology, 34(2), 196–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0000583
BurlesonM. H.TrevathanW. R.ToddM. (2007). In the mood for love or vice versa? Exploring the relations among sexual activity, physical affection, affect, and stress in the daily lives of mid-aged women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36(3), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-006-9071-1
4.
CarmichaelC. L.GoldbergM. H.CoyleM. A. (2021). Security-based differences in touch behavior and its relational benefits. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 12(4), 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620929164
5.
ClarkL. A.WatsonD. (1991). Tripartite model of anxiety and depression: Psychometric evidence and taxonomic implications. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100(3), 316–336. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.100.3.316
6.
CoanJ. A.BeckesL.GonzalezM. Z.MareshE. L.BrownC. L.HasselmoK. (2017). Relationship status and perceived support in the social regulation of neural responses to threat. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 12(10), 1574–1583. https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsx091
7.
CoanJ. A.SchaeferH. S.DavidsonR. J. (2006). Lending a hand: Social regulation of the neural response to threat. Psychological Science, 17(12), 1032–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01832.x
8.
CohenS.KamarckT.MermelsteinR. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24(4), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404
9.
ConradiH. J.NoordhofA.ArntzA. (2020). Improvement of conflict handling: Hand-holding during and after conflict discussions affects heart rate, mood, and observed communication behavior in romantic partners. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 46(5), 419–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/0092623X.2020.1748778
10.
DebrotA.SchoebiD.PerrezM.HornA. B. (2013). Touch as an interpersonal emotion regulation process in couples’ daily lives: The mediating role of psychological intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(10), 1373–1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213497592
11.
DienerE. D.EmmonsR. A.LarsenR. J.GriffinS. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
12.
DitzenB.HoppmannC.KlumbP. (2008). Positive couple interactions and daily cortisol: On the stress-protecting role of intimacy. Psychosomatic Medicine, 70(8), 883–889. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0b013e318185c4fc
13.
DitzenB.NeumannI. D.BodenmannG.von DawansB.TurnerR. A.EhlertU.HeinrichsM. (2007). Effects of different kinds of couple interaction on cortisol and heart rate responses to stress in women. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 32(5), 565–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2007.03.011
14.
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(3), 1035–1045. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520970278
15.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavioral Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
16.
FinchamF. D.BeachS.NelsonG. (1987). Attribution processes in distress and nondistressed couples: Causal and responsibility attributions. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 11(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01183133
17.
FinchamF. D.RoggeR. (2010). Understanding relationship quality: Theoretical challenges and new tools for assessment. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 2(4), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-2589.2010.00059.x
18.
FloydK. (2006). Human affection exchange: XII. Affectionate communication is associated with diurnal variation in salivary free cortisol. Western Journal of Communication, 70(1), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310500506649
19.
FloydK.BorenJ. P.HannawaA. F.HesseC.McEwanB.VekslerA. E. (2009). Kissing in marital and cohabiting relationships: Effects on blood lipids, stress, and relationship satisfaction. Western Journal of Communication, 73(2), 113–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310902856071
20.
FloydK.HesseC.GenerousM. A. (2017). Affection exchange theory: A bio-evolutionary look at affectionate communication. In BraithwaiteD. O.SuterE. A.FloydK. (Eds.), Engaging theories in family communication (pp. 17–26). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315204321-2
21.
FunkJ. L.RoggeR. D. (2007). Testing the ruler with item response theory: Increasing precision of measurement for relationship satisfaction with the couples satisfaction index. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.21.4.572
22.
GirmeY. U. (2020). Step out of line: Modeling nonlinear effects and dynamics in close-relationships research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420920598
23.
GraffT. C.LukeS. G.BirminghamW. C. (2019). Supportive hand-holding attenuates pupillary responses to stress in adult couples. PLoS ONE, 14(2), Article e0212703. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212703
24.
GulledgeA. K.GulledgeM. H.StahmannnR. F. (2003). Romantic physical affection types and relationship satisfaction. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 31(4), 233–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180390201936
25.
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
26.
JakubiakB. K.DebrotA.KimJ.ImpettE. A. (2021a). Approach and avoidance motives for touch are predicted by attachment and predict daily relationship well-being. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(1), 256–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520961178
27.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2016a). Keep in touch: The effects of imagined touch support on stress and exploration. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.04.001
28.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2016b). A sense of security: Touch promotes state attachment security. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(7), 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550616646427
29.
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(3), 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316650307
30.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2018). 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
31.
JakubiakB. K.FeeneyB. C. (2019). Hand-in-hand combat: Affectionate touch promotes relational well-being and buffers stress during conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(3), 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218788556
32.
JakubiakB. K.FuentesJ. D.FeeneyB. C. (2021b). Individual and relational differences in desire for touch in romantic relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(7), 2029–2052. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075211003331
33.
JohnsonS. M.Burgess MoserM.BeckesL.SmithA.DalgleishT.HalchukR.HasselmoK.GreenmanP. S.MeraliZ.CoanJ. A. (2013). Soothing the threatened brain: Leveraging contact comfort with emotionally focused therapy. PLoS ONE, 8(11), Article e79314. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079314
34.
KingC. E.ChristensenA. (1983). The relationship events scale: A Guttman scaling of progress in courtship. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 45(3), 671. https://doi.org/10.2307/351672
35.
LukeM.SedikidesC.CarnelleyK. (2012). Your love lifts me higher! The energizing quality of secure relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(6), 721–733. http://psp.sagepub.com/content/38/6/721.short
MuiseA.GiangE.ImpettE. A. (2014). Post sex affectionate exchanges promote sexual and relationship satisfaction. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43(7), 1391–1402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-014-0305-3
39.
PavotW.DienerE. (1993). The affective and cognitive context of self-reported measures of subjective well-being. Social Indicators Research, 28(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01086714
40.
RobinsonK. J.HoplockL. B.CameronJ. J. (2015). When in doubt, reach out: Touch is a covert but effective mode of soliciting and providing social support. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(7), 831–839. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615584197
41.
RussellD. W. (1996). UCLA loneliness scale (version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66(1), 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2
42.
RyffC.AlmeidaD. M.AyanianJ. Z.BinkleyN.CarrD. S.CoeC.WilliamsD. R., et al. (2017). Midlife in the United States (MIDUS Refresher 1), 2011-2014. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36532.v3
43.
SchusterT. L.KesslerR. C.AseltineR. H. (1990). Supportive interactions, negative interactions, and depressive mood. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18(3), 423–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00938116
44.
SnyderD. K.HeymanR. E.HaynesS. N. (2009). Assessing couples. In ButcherJ. N. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of personality assessment (pp. 457–484). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195366877.013.0024
45.
SorokowskaA.SalujaS.SorokowskiP.FrąckowiakT.KarwowskiM.AavikT.CroyI. (2021). Affective interpersonal touch in close relationships: A cross-cultural perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 47(12), 1705–1721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167220988373
46.
SuvilehtoJ. T.NummenmaaL.HaradaT.DunbarR. I. M.HariR.TurnerR.SadatoN.KitadaR. (2019). Cross-cultural similarity in relationshipspecific social touching. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 286(1901), Article 20190467. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.0467
47.
TriscoliC.CroyI.OlaussonH.SailerU. (2017). Touch between romantic partners: Being stroked is more pleasant than stroking and decelerates heart rate. Physiology & Behavior, 177, 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2017.05.006
48.
UmbersonD.WilliamsK.PowersD. A.LiuH.NeedhamB. (2006). You make me sick: Marital quality and health over the life course. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 47(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040295
VanLaninghamJ.JohnsonD. R.AmatoP. (2001). Marital happiness, marital duration, and the U-shaped curve: Evidence from a five-wave panel study. Social Forces, 79(4), 1313–1341. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2001.0055
51.
WagnerS. A.MattsonR. E.DavilaJ.JohnsonM. D.CameronN. M. (2020). Touch me just enough: The intersection of adult attachment, intimate touch, and marital satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 37(6), 1945–1967. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520910791
52.
WeinsteinM.RyffC. D.SeemanT. E. (2019). Midlife in the United States (MIDUS Refresher 1): Biomarker Project, 2012-2016. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36901.v6
53.
WhalenH. R.LachmanM. E. (2000). Social support and strain from partner, family and friends: Costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17(1), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500171001
54.
WhismanM. A.SnyderD. K.BeachS. R. H. (2009). Screening for marital and relationship discord. Journal of Family Psychology, 23(2), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014476
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.
