Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of nonverbal intimacy on arousal and behavioral adjustment

  • Published:
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The effects of two intimacy manipulations, 80% eye contact (EC) and combined lean, touch, 50% eye contact (LT), were examined in a bogus waiting period involving a male confederate-male subject pairing. Hypothesized arousal increase was found only for the LT manipulation when it occurred later, rather than earlier, in the waiting period. Associated with that increased arousal were weak tendencies for increased eye contact and talking. These results offered limited support for the arousal model of interpersonal intimacy (Patterson, 1976). However, it also appeared that the directing effect of the specific social context qualified the impact and meaning of the confederate's high intimacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyle, M., & Dean, J. Eye-contact, distance, and affiliation.Sociometry, 1965,28, 289–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohlin, G. Delayed habituation of the electrodermal orienting response as a function of increased level of arousal.Psychophysiology, 1976,13, 345–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breed, G. The effect of intimacy: Reciprocity or retreat?British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 1972,11, 135–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, A. J. Eye contact, physical proximity and laughter: A re-examination of the equilibrium model of social intimacy.Social Behavior and Personality, 1975,3, 143–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellsworth, P. C., & Ludwig, L. M. Visual behavior in social interaction.Journal of Communication, 1972,4, 375–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foot, H. C., Chapman, A. J., & Smith, J. R. Friendship and social responsiveness in boys and girls.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977,35, 401–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foot, H. C., Smith, J. R., & Chapman, A. J. Individual differences in children's social responsiveness in humour situations. In A. J. Chapman & H. C. Foot (Eds.)It's a funny thing, humour. London: Pergamon, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jourard, S. M., & Friedman, R. Experimenter-subject “distance” and self-disclosure.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1970,15, 278–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katkin, E. S. Relationship between manifest anxiety and two indices of autonomic response to stress.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1965,2, 324–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, D. G. Differential responsiveness of two electrodermal indices to psychological stress and performance of a complex cognitive task.Psychophysiology, 1972,9, 218–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montagu, J. D., & Coles, E. M. Mechanism and measurement of the galvanic skin response.Psychological Bulletin, 1966,65, 261–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. Compensation in nonverbal immediacy behaviors: A review.Sociometry, 1973,36, 237–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. An arousal model of interpersonal intimacy.Psychological Review, 1976,83, 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. Tape recorded cuing for time sampled observations of nonverbal behavior,Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 1977,2, 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. The role of space in social interaction. In A. Siegman & S. Feldstein (Eds.).Nonverbal behavior and communication. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978. (a)

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. Arousal change and cognitive labeling: Pursuing the mediators of intimacy exchange.Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 1978,3, 17–22. (b)

    Google Scholar 

  • Schachter, S., & Singer, J. E. Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional state.Psychological Review, 1962,69, 379–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storms, M. D., & Thomas, G. C. Reactions to physical closeness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1977,35, 412–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitcher, S. J., & Fisher, J. D. Multi-dimensional reaction to therapeutic touch in a hospital setting.Journal of Personality and Social Personality, 1979,37, 87–96.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Michael B. Hogan (undergraduate degree)

    Present address: the University of Houston, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Missouri-St. Louis, 63121, St. Louis, Missouri, USA

    Miles L. Patterson (Professor of Psychology), Andrew Jordan (undergraduate degree), Michael B. Hogan (undergraduate degree) & Daved Frerker (undergraduate degree)

Authors
  1. Miles L. Patterson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew Jordan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael B. Hogan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daved Frerker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The authors thank Larry Halligan and Joan Naylor for their assistance in conducting this experiment and also Bill Ickes for his constructive comments.

This project was completed under National Institute of Health grant, USPH RO1 MH 32386 01 awarded to the first author.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Patterson, M.L., Jordan, A., Hogan, M.B. et al. Effects of nonverbal intimacy on arousal and behavioral adjustment. J Nonverbal Behav 5, 184–198 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986135

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986135

Keywords

Search

Navigation