Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mutual Grooming in Human Dyadic Relationships: An Ethological Perspective

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite its widespread practice among primates writ large, social scientists have given mutual grooming among humans little attention. This research provides an important first step in describing mutual grooming among humans. A scale was developed to measure self-reported giving and receiving of grooming. In Study 1, 184 female and 94 male participants first indicated their closest emotional relationship (for example, romantic partner, best friend, etcetera). They then completed the grooming measure pertaining to that emotionally close target person. Finally, they completed indices of relationship trust, relationship satisfaction, and parental/familial affection. Individuals who focused on their romantic partners (N = 134) reported more mutual grooming than individuals who focused on other types of relationships. Relationship satisfaction, previous experience of familial affection, and trust were positively correlated with mutual grooming for romantically involved individuals. Study 2 (N = 71 heterosexual couples) explored psychological correlates of mutual grooming within romantic dyads. Individuals with more promiscuous attitudes and those who scored high on the anxiety subscale of an adult attachment style measure reported grooming their partners most frequently. Findings were consistent with several proposed functions of grooming: (a) potential parental-investment indicator, (b) developing trust, and (c) courtship/flirtation—all of which play roles in pair-bonding. At first glance, humans may not appear to groom each other with the same fervor as other primates. However, we posit that humans are, in actuality, groomers par excellence.

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

  • Aureli, F., van Schaik, C., & van Hooff, J. (1989). Functional aspects of reconciliation among captive long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). American Journal of Primatology, 19, 39–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: vol. 3. Loss: Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, K., Clark, C., & Shaver, P. (1998). Self-report measures of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bshary, R., & Schaeffer, D. (2002). Choosy reef fish select cleaner fish that provide high-quality service. Animal Behaviour, 63(3), 557–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D., & Greiling, H. (1999). Adaptive individual differences. Journal of Personality, 67(2), 209–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, V., & Biran, A. (2001). Dirt, disgust, and disease: Is hygiene in our genes? Perspectives in biology and medicine, 44(1), 17–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, F. (1989). Peacemaking among primates. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, F. (1997). The chimpanzee’s service economy: Food for grooming. Evolution & Human Behavior, 18, 375–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, R. (1996). Grooming, gossip and the evolution of language. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1975). Ethology: The biology of behavior. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1989). Human ethology: The biology of human behavior. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Enhuber, C. (1989). Soziale Hautpflege beim Menschen. Eine Fallstudie in einer modernen Industriegesellschaft (Social grooming in humans. A case study in a modern industrialized society). Diploma, Technical University, Munich.

  • Gangestad, S. W., & Simpson, J. A. (2000). The evolution of human mating: Trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 573–644.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J., & Vrba, E. (1982) Exaptation, a missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology, 8(1), 4–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harlow, H. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 673–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hendricks, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 50, 93–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, D. A. (1987). Social relationships between adult male and female rhesus macaques: I. Sexual consortships. Primates, 28(4), 439–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimura, R. (1998). Mutual grooming and preferred associate relationships in a band of free-ranging horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 59(4), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinzey, W., & Wright, P. (1982). Grooming behavior in the titi monkey, Callicebus torquatos. American Journal of Primatology, 3, 267–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Lawick-Goodall, J. (1968). The behavior of free living chimpanzees in the Gombe Stream Reserve. Animal Behavior Monographs, 1, 161–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski, B. (1929). The sexual life of savages in north-western Melanesia. New York: Liveright.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, W. A. (1974). Comparative studies of social behavior in Callicebus and Saimiri: Behavior of male–female pairs. Folio Primatologica, 22, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual choice shaped the evolution of human nature. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D., Angel, J. E., Cheeseman, I. M., & Robinson, G. E. (1995). A highly specialized social grooming honey bee. Journal of Insect Behavior, 8(6), 855–861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooring, M. S., & Hart, B. L. (1997). Reciprocal allogrooming in wild impala lambs. Ethology, 103(8), 665–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mooring, M. S., & Samuel, W. M. (1998). The biological basis of grooming in moose: Programmed versus stimulus-driven grooming. Animal Behaviour, 56(6), 1561–1570.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Muroyama, Y. (1994). Exchange of grooming for allomothering in female patas monkeys. Behavior, 128, 103–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, M., McGrew, W., Marchant, L., & Nishida, T. (2000). Social scratch: Another custom in wild chimpanzees? Primates, 41(3), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poulin, R., Bansemer, C., & Grutter, A. S. (2002). Geographic variation in the behaviour of the cleaner fish Labroides dimidiatus (Labridae). Ethology, 108(4), 353–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rempel, J., Holmes, J., & Zanna, M. (1985). Trust in close relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., & Fallon, A. (1987). A perspective on disgust. Psychological Review, 94, 23–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheflen, A. (1972). Body language and the social order: Communication as behavioral control. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheflen, A. (1974). How behavior means. Garden City: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiefenhövel, W. (1997). Universals in interpersonal interactions. In U. Segerstrale & P. Molnar (Eds.), Nonverbal communication: Where nature meets culture (pp. 71–74). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schino, G., Scucchi, S., Maestripieri, D., & Turillazzi, P. G. (1988). Allogrooming as a tension-reduction mechanism: A behavioral approach. American Journal of Primatology, 16, 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seyfarth, R. M., Palombit, R. A., & Cheney, D. L. (2001). Female–female competition for male ‘friends’ in wild chacma baboons (Papio cynocephalus ursinus). Animal Behaviour, 61(6), 1159–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaver, P., Hazan, C., & Bradshaw, D. (1988). Love as attachment: The integration of three behavioral systems. In R. Sternberg & M. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 68–99). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, M. J. A. (1991). On declaring commitment to a partner. In P. Bateson (Ed.), Development and integration of behavior: Essays in honor of Robert Hinde (pp. 271–293). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J., & Gangestad, S. (1991). Individual differences in sociosexuality: Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 870–883.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J., Gangestad, S., & Biek, M. (1993). Personality and nonverbal social behavior: An ethological perspective on relationship initiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 434–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, J., Rholes, W., & Nelligan, J. (1992). Support seeking and support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(3), 434–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. (1991). Female choices: Sexual behavior of female primates. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smuts, B., Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., Wrangham, R., & Struhsaker, T. (1987). Primate societies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachtmeister, C. (2001). Display in monogamous pairs: A review of empirical data and evolutionary explanations. Animal Behaviour, 61(5), 861–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, G. S. (1986). Social grooming in the common vampire bat, Desmodus rotundus. Animal Behaviour, 34(6), 1880–1889.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA

    Holly Nelson

  2. State University of New York at New Paltz, New Paltz, NY, USA

    Glenn Geher

Authors
  1. Holly Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Glenn Geher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Holly Nelson.

Appendix

Appendix

The following statements refer to a variety of “grooming” touches. For each one, please indicate how often (in the last 12 months) you have touched the person you have chosen (your “significant other”) in the way described. This should be the same person you have previously told us about.

1 = Never

2 = 1 to 6 times/year

3 = 7 to 12 times/year

4 = 1 to 3 times/month

5 = 1 to 3 times/week

6 = 4–7 times/week

7 = 1 or more times/day

  1. 1.

    I run my fingers through my significant other’s hair.

  2. 2.

    I remove dry or flaking skin from my significant other’s body.

  3. 3.

    I wash (shampoo) my significant other’s hair/body while showering/bathing together.

  4. 4.

    I shave my significant other’s legs/face.

  5. 5.

    I squeeze/pop my significant other’s pimples, blisters, or other bumps (zits).

  6. 6.

    I wipe away my significant other’s tears when he or she cries.

  7. 7.

    I brush or play with my significant other’s hair.

  8. 8.

    I massage my significant other (non-sexually).

  9. 9.

    I wipe away or dry liquid spills off my significant other.

  10. 10.

    I clean/trim my significant other’s nails/toenails.

  11. 11.

    I brush dirt, leaves, lint, bugs, etc. off of my significant other.

  12. 12.

    I scratch my significant other’s back or other body parts.

  13. 13.

    I wipe food/crumbs off my significant other’s face/body.

  14. 14.

    I tweeze/remove eyebrow hairs or other body hair from my significant other.

Italicized words represent changes from the first to second version of this measure. The following item appeared in version one only: “I put lotion, oil, and sunscreen on my significant other.” The scale to measure received grooming was reworded so that items took the following form: “My significant other runs his/her fingers through my hair.”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nelson, H., Geher, G. Mutual Grooming in Human Dyadic Relationships: An Ethological Perspective. Curr Psychol 26, 121–140 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-007-9009-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-007-9009-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation