When in Doubt, Reach Out

Abstract

Social support is critical to personal and relational well-being. Yet, receiving support appears to be contingent upon adequately conveying need to a receptive partner who both understands and is willing to provide said support. Or is it? We provide the first evidence of a covert haptic support system between adult intimates, showing that literally reaching out to a loved one can result in feeling supported even when the receiver of haptic support requests does not perceive them as bids for comfort. We tested this by unobtrusively observing support interactions between dating partners. As expected, those experiencing distress were more likely to seek touch from their partners, which elicited responsive touch-even though receivers failed to discern need from support-seekers' touch. Importantly, those who received responsive touch from their romantic partners felt more supported. Because touch begets touch, clear communication between intimates is not always necessary for successful support interactions.

Improvement of Conflict Handling: Hand-Holding During and After Conflict Discussions Affects Heart Rate, Mood, and Observed Communication Behavior in Romantic Partners

“…Unexpected was the absence of effect on self-reported negative affect both during and after the conflict discussion in both sexes. This finding is contrary to the hypothesis of a stress-reducing effect of hand-holding, and inconsistent with a previous study (Robinson et al, 2015). One reason for this might be a low base rate of negative affect during the conflict discussion, suggesting the discussion was less stressful than anticipated.…”

“…This appeared to be the lower positive affect during the conflict discussion in study 1 student women which contradicted with their increased constructive communication behavior. No such contradiction was found prior to a stressor in previous studies (Ditzen et al, 2007;Grewen et al, 2003;Robinson et al, 2015), during a conflict discussion (Jakubiak & Feeney, 2019) or after a conflict discussion (the current study 2). Perhaps women experienced the obligation to physically touch the partner while discussing relational problems as a constriction in expressing themselves which may have resulted in an internal conflict explaining the opposite effects on affect and communication behavior.…”

“…Enhancement of positive affect and reduction of negative affect is therefore important in making conflict handling more constructive. Touch was found to be associated with positive affect in an observational study (Debrot, Schoebi, Perrez, & Horn, 2013), whereas experimental studies found reductions of self-reported and observed stress by touch after a laboratory task (Robinson, Hoplock, & Cameron, 2015) and, importantly, during a conflict discussion between partners (Jakubiak & Feeney, 2019).…”

“…(2) enhanced affect (Conty et al, 2016;Debrot et al, 2013;Robinson et al, 2015) in studies 1 and 2; and (3) enhanced communication behavior (Ditzen et al, 2009;Feldman, 2012;Jakubiak & Feeney, 2019) in study 1.…”

An Integrative Contextual Behavioral Science Model of Intimate Relations

“…In contrast, appropriate, responsive touch, such as a hug or pat on the back, can be a pivotal component of providing safety, especially in response to more intense, non-verbal expressions of emotion (Christophe & Rimé, 1997;Schachner, Shaver, & Mikulincer, 2005). Intimate partners are likely to seek responsive touch when in distress (Robinson, Hoplock, & Cameron, 2015), likely because it improves emotional regulation (Coan, Schaefer, & Davidson, 2006;Debrot, Schoebi, Perrez, & Horn, 2014), perceptions of support (Robinson et al, 2015), positive affect and intimacy in both partners, and psychological well-being (Debrot, Schoebi, Perrez, & Horn, 2013).…”