Interpersonal touch seems to promote physical health through its effects on stress-sensitive parameters. However, less is known about the psychological effects of touch. The present study investigates associations between touch and romantic partners' affective state in daily life. We hypothesized that this association is established by promoting the recipient's experience of intimacy. Both partners of 102 dating couples completed an electronic diary 4 times a day during 1 week. Multilevel analyses revealed that touch was associated with enhanced affect in the partner. This association was mediated by the partner's psychological intimacy. Touch was also associated with intimacy and positive affect in the actor. Finally, participants who were touched more often during the diary study week reported better psychological well-being 6 months later. This study provides evidence that intimate partners benefit from touch on a psychological level, conveying a sense of strengthened bonds between them that enhances affect and well-being.

Given the powerful implications of relationship quality for health and well-being, a central mission of relationship science is explaining why some romantic relationships thrive more than others. This large-scale project used machine learning (i.e., Random Forests) to 1) quantify the extent to which relationship quality is predictable and 2) identify which constructs reliably predict relationship quality. Across 43 dyadic longitudinal datasets from 29 laboratories, the top relationship-specific predictors of relationship quality were perceived-partner commitment, appreciation, sexual satisfaction, perceived-partner satisfaction, and conflict. The top individual-difference predictors were life satisfaction, negative affect, depression, attachment avoidance, and attachment anxiety. Overall, relationship-specific variables predicted up to 45% of variance at baseline, and up to 18% of variance at the end of each study. Individual differences also performed well (21% and 12%, respectively). Actor-reported variables (i.e., own relationship-specific and individual-difference variables) predicted two to four times more variance than partner-reported variables (i.e., the partner’s ratings on those variables). Importantly, individual differences and partner reports had no predictive effects beyond actor-reported relationship-specific variables alone. These findings imply that the sum of all individual differences and partner experiences exert their influence on relationship quality via a person’s own relationship-specific experiences, and effects due to moderation by individual differences and moderation by partner-reports may be quite small. Finally, relationship-quality change (i.e., increases or decreases in relationship quality over the course of a study) was largely unpredictable from any combination of self-report variables. This collective effort should guide future models of relationships.

Maintaining a satisfying romantic relationship is vital to overall health and well-being, yet relationship quality might be hampered by stressors brought on by the recent Covid-19 pandemic. In the Love in the Time of Covid study, we examine whether Covid-related stressors (i.e., social isolation, financial strain, and stress) are associated with lower relationship quality and greater conflict in relationships, and test whether perceived partner responsiveness—the extent to which people believe their partner understands, validates, and cares for them—buffers these effects. In the current study (N = 3,593 participants from 57 countries), when people reported more Covid-related stressors, they also reported poorer relationship quality and more conflict with their partner. However, these associations were mitigated when people perceived their partner as more responsive to their needs.

Perceived responsiveness is a fundamental ingredient of satisfying romantic relationships, especially insofar as it facilitates the development of intimacy. This study investigates how partner's concrete responsive acts-named here enacted responsiveness-affect the perception of responsiveness in the daily life of dating couples. Additionally, the subsequent association of perceived partner responsiveness with intimacy was examined. Data from both partners in 102 young heterosexual couples were gathered simultaneously 4 times a day over one week. Multilevel analysis within the framework of the actor-partner interdependence mediation model showed that perception of responsiveness is predicted by partner's enacted responsiveness. However, own enacted responsiveness also predicts own perception of responsiveness in the partner, suggesting a projection process. Perception of responsiveness, in turn, predicts not only own but also partner's feelings of intimacy, demonstrating an intimacy enhancing effect of being perceived as a responsive partner. Mediation analysis showed that perception of responsiveness mediates the effects of both own and partner's enacted responsiveness on intimacy. It can be concluded that the development of intimacy in the daily life of romantic couples is truly an interactive process that ought to be investigated from a dyadic perspective.

External stressors can erode relationship quality, though little is known about what can mitigate these effects. We examined whether COVID-related stressors were associated with lower relationship quality, and whether perceived partner responsiveness—the extent to which people believe their partner understands, validates, and cares for them—buffers these effects. When people in relationships reported more COVID-related stressors they reported poorer relationship quality at the onset of the pandemic ( N = 3,593 from 57 countries) and over the subsequent 3 months ( N = 1,125). At the onset of the pandemic, most associations were buffered by perceived partner responsiveness, such that people who perceived their partners to be low in responsiveness reported poorer relationship quality when they experienced COVID-related stressors, but these associations were reduced among people who perceived their partners to be highly responsive. In some cases, these associations were buffered over the ensuing weeks of the pandemic.

The aim of this study was to investigate daily positive humor in couples as an interpersonal emotion regulation strategy. Associated changes in psychological intimacy were tested as a possible socio-affective pathway of emotion regulation that mediates the effects of couple humor on changes in individual momentary affect. Within a dyadic ambulatory assessment framework, 102 couples reported on their production of positive humor as an attempt to regulate their partner’s mood, psychological intimacy, and momentary affect four times a day for 1 week. An actor–partner interdependence mediation model revealed actor and partner effects of humor on changes in daily affect. Furthermore, the indirect effect of own humor via changes in the partner’s feelings of psychological intimacy (socio-affective pathway) on the partner’s affect was significant. Results support the assumption that daily positive humor experienced with one’s romantic partner serves as an interpersonal emotion regulation strategy in daily life as reflected in direct effects on one’s own and one’s partner’s momentary affect. The partner’s changes in affect were partially mediated by changes in their feelings of psychological intimacy. This speaks in favor of an indirect socio-affective mechanism of interpersonal emotion regulation associated with positive humor expressed toward the partner.

Affectionate touch is crucial for well-being. However, attachment avoidance is associated with negative attitudes toward touch. We tested two preregistered hypotheses about how attachment avoidance influences the association between touch in romantic couples and psychological well-being. We examined whether greater attachment avoidance is associated with a reduced link between touch and well-being, and/or whether reduced touch mediates the relationship between attachment avoidance and lower well-being. Across three studies, including two dyadic ones, we measured retrospective self-reports (Studies 1 and 2), laboratory observations (Study 2), and daily experiences (Study 3) of touch. Touch and well-being were positively associated, and attachment avoidance was associated with lower well-being and less frequent touch. Touch was associated with greater well-being regardless of level of attachment avoidance, and less frequent touch mediated the negative association between attachment avoidance and well-being in most analyses. This underscores the importance of touch, even for those valuing distance and autonomy.

Emotion regulation is important for daily well-being and health. Emotions are regulated through intrapersonal (i.e., regulating one's own emotions) and interpersonal (i.e., regulating emotions in interaction with others) processes. The current study examines the interplay of an unfavorable intrapersonal emotion regulation strategy "thought suppression" with a favorable interpersonal emotion regulation strategy "responsive touch," in daily life. Both partners of 102 dating heterosexual couples simultaneously completed an electronic diary assessing their mood and how they dealt with their own and their partner's emotions four times a day during one week. Multilevel analysis revealed that thought suppression was associated with more negative mood not only in the suppressor but also in the romantic