Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 553–560 | Cite as

Descriptive Experiences and Sexual vs. Nurturant Aspects of Cuddling between Adult Romantic Partners

  • Sari M. van Anders
  • Robin S. Edelstein
  • Ryan M. Wade
  • Chelsea R. Samples-Steele
Original Paper

Abstract

Touch is a critical factor in intimate bonds between romantic partners. Although cuddling is a key expression of intimacy, it has received little empirical attention. Past research suggests that cuddling has some sexual aspects (e.g., it increases testosterone [T]), but there are theoretical reasons to expect cuddling to also involve nurturant intimacy (which should decrease T). In this article, we examined the phenomenon of partner cuddling to: (1) provide a descriptive examination; (2) determine if cuddling involved only nurturant intimacy or also sexual intimacy; and (3) test whether cuddling was perceived as nurturant but experienced as sexual. Via an online questionnaire, 514 participants (338 women) responded to quantitative and qualitative questions about cuddling with their romantic partners. Results suggested that cuddling occurred frequently and for relatively long durations, and was viewed very positively. Findings also showed that cuddling was perceived as nurturant and non-sexual but was experienced as at least somewhat sexual, which may explain why past research had found that cuddling increased T. Correlational analyses linked cuddling frequency and enjoyment positively with partnered sexual activities, but negatively with solitary sexuality. Results were discussed relative to evolutionary theories of distinct but overlapping neurobiological systems underlying pair bonding that involve sexual and nurturant intimacy.

Keywords

Cuddling Pair bond Romantic relationship Sex Gender Kissing 

References

  1. Bell, R. A., Daly, J. A., & Gonzalez, M. C. (1987). Affinity-maintenance in marriage and its relationship to women’s marital satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 49, 445–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bos, P. A., Panksepp, J., Bluth, R., & van Honk, J. (2012). Acute effects of steroid hormones and neuropeptides on human social-emotional behavior: A review of single administration studies. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 33, 17–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol II. Separation, anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Brennan, K. A., Wu, S., & Loev, J. (1998). Adult romantic attachment and individual differences in attitudes toward physical contact in the context of adult romantic relationships. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 394–428). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carter, C. S. (1998). Neuroendocrine perspectives on social attachment and love. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23, 779–818.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coan, J. A., Schaefer, H. S., & Davidson, R. J. (2006). Lending a hand: Social regulation of the neural response to threat. Psychological Science, 17, 1032–1039.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamond, L. M. (2003). What does sexual orientation orient? A biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual desire. Psychological Review, 110, 173–192.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fernandez-Duque, E., Valeggia, C. R., & Mendoza, S. P. (2009). The biology of paternal care in human and nonhuman primates. Annual Review of Anthropology, 38, 115–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Field, T. M. (2001). Touch. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fisher, H. E. (1992). Anatomy of love: The natural history of monogamy, adultery, and divorce. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  11. Fraley, R. C., Brumbaugh, C. C., & Marks, M. J. (2005). The evolution and function of adult attachment: A comparative and phylogenetic analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 731–746.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gallace, A., & Spence, C. (2010). The science of interpersonal touch: An overview. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 246–259.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gulledge, A., Gulledge, M., & Stahmannn, R. (2003). Romantic physical affection types and relationship satisfaction. American Journal of Family Therapy, 31, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heiman, J. R., Long, J. S., Smith, S. N., Fisher, W. A., Sand, M. S., & Rosen, R. C. (2011). Sexual satisfaction and relationship happiness in midlife and older couples in five countries. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 741–753.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hertenstein, M., Verkamp, J., Kerestes, A., & Holmes, R. (2006). The communicative functions of touch in humans, nonhuman primates, and rats: A review and synthesis of the empirical research. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132, 5–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hirschenhauser, K., & Oliveira, R. (2006). Social modulation of androgens in male vertebrates: Meta-analyses of the challenge hypothesis. Animal Behaviour, 71, 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holt-Lunstad, J., Birmingham, W. A., & Light, K. 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, 976–985.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ketterson, E. D., Nolan, V., & Sandell, M. (2005). Testosterone in females: Mediator of adaptive traits, constraint on sexual dimorphism, or both? American Naturalist, 166, 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Light, K., Grewen, K., & Amico, J. (2005). More frequent partner hugs and higher oxytocin levels are linked to lower blood pressure and heart rate in premenopausal women. Biological Psychology, 69, 5–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mackey, R. A., Diemer, M. A., & O’Brien, B. A. (2000). Psychological intimacy in the lasting relationships of heterosexual and same-gender couples. Sex Roles, 43, 201–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Myslivecek, J. (1991). Developmental physiology and pathophysiology of behaviour and nervous functions. Physiological Research, 40, 169–181.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Snowdon, C. T. (2001). Sexe, attachment, et monogamie chez les primates. Primatologie, 3, 387–420.Google Scholar
  23. Thayer, S. (1986). History and strategies of research on social touch. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 10, 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. van Anders, S. M., & Dunn, E. J. (2009). Are gonadal steroids linked with orgasm perceptions and sexual assertiveness in women and men? Hormones and Behavior, 56, 206–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. van Anders, S. M., Goldey, K. L., & Kuo, P. X. (2011). The steroid/peptide theory of social bonds: Integrating testosterone and peptide responses for classifying social behavioral contexts. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 36, 1265–1275.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. van Anders, S. M., Hamilton, L. D., Schmidt, N., & Watson, N. V. (2007). Associations between testosterone secretion and sexual activity in women. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 477–482.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. van Anders, S. M., & Watson, N. V. (2006). Social neuroendocrinology: Effects of social contexts and behaviors on sex steroids in humans. Human Nature, 17, 212–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wingfield, J. C., Hegner, R. E., Dufty, A. M., & Ball, G. F. (1990). The “challenge hypothesis”: Theoretical implications for patterns of testosterone secretion, mating systems, and breeding strategies. American Naturalist, 136, 829–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wood, R. I. (2004). Reinforcing aspects of androgens. Physiology & Behavior, 83, 279–289.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sari M. van Anders
    • 1
  • Robin S. Edelstein
    • 2
  • Ryan M. Wade
    • 2
  • Chelsea R. Samples-Steele
    • 2
  1. 1.Departments of Psychology & Women’s Studies, Programs in Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences, and Science, Technology, and SocietyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations