Post Sex Affectionate Exchanges Promote Sexual and Relationship Satisfaction
- 1.9k Downloads
The current research examined the role of post sex affection in promoting sexual and relationship satisfaction in ongoing romantic partnerships. Since romantic partners view the period after engaging in sex as an important time for bonding and intimacy, we sought to determine if and how the duration and quality of post sex affection might promote satisfaction in romantic relationships. In two studies, we tested the link between post sex affectionate behavior (e.g., cuddling, caressing, shared intimacy) and sexual and relationship satisfaction. In Study 1, a cross-sectional survey of individuals in romantic relationships (N = 335), duration of post sex affection was associated with higher sexual satisfaction and, in turn, higher relationship satisfaction. In Study 2, a daily experience study of 101 established couples (N = 202) with a 3-month follow-up, day-to-day changes in post sex affection duration and quality were associated with both partners’ sexual and relationship satisfaction, and engaging in longer and more satisfying post sex affection over the course of the study was associated with higher relationship and sexual satisfaction 3 months later. In general, the pattern of results was consistent for men and women, but the association between the duration of post sex affection and relationship satisfaction was stronger for women than for men (Study 1) and women, but not men, felt more sexually satisfied when their partner reported higher quality post sex affection (Study 2). The findings suggest that the period after sex is a critical time for promoting satisfaction in intimate bonds.
KeywordsPost sex affection Sexual satisfaction Relationship satisfaction Cuddling Couples
This work has been supported by a Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) postdoctoral fellowship and a University of Guelph-Humber Research Grant awarded to Amy Muise and a SSHRC grant awarded to Emily A. Impett.
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Byers, E. S., & Wang, A. (2004). Understanding sexuality in close relationships from the social exchange perspective. In J. H. Harvey, A. Wenzel, & S. Sprecher (Eds.), The handbook of sexuality in close relationships (pp. 203–234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Carpenter, L. M., Nathanson, C. A., & Kim, Y. J. (2009). Physical women, emotional men: Gender and sexual satisfaction in midlife. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 38, 87–107. doi: 10.1007/s10508-007-9215-y.
- Floyd, K., Boren, J. P., Hannawa, A. F., Hesse, C., McEwan, B., & Veksler, A. E. (2009). Kissing in marital and cohabiting relationships: Effects on blood lipids, stress, and relationship satisfaction. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 113–133. doi: 10.1080/10570310902856071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Halpern, J., & Sherman, S. (1979). Afterplay: A key to intimacy. New York: Stein & Day Publishers.Google Scholar
- Impett, E. A., Muise, A., & Peragine, D. (2014). Sexuality in the context of relationships. In D. L. Tolman & L. M. Diamond (Eds.), APA handbook of sexuality and psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 269–315)., Person-based approaches Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
- Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Preacher, K. J., & Selig, J. P. (2010). Monte Carlo method for assessing multilevel mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects in 1-1-1 multilevel models [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org/.
- Rahmani, A., Khoei, E. M., & Gholi, L. A. (2009). Sexual satisfaction and its relation to marital happiness in Iranians. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 38, 77–82.Google Scholar
- Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., Cheong, Y. F., & Congdon, R. T. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Google Scholar
- Selig, J. P., & Preacher, K. J. (2008). Monte Carlo method for assessing mediation: An interactive tool for creating confidence intervals for indirect effects [Computer software]. Available from http://quantpsy.org/.
- Smith, A., Lyons, A., Ferris, J., Richters, J., Pitts, M., Shelley, J., & Simpson, J. M. (2011). Sexual and relationship satisfaction among heterosexual men and women: The importance of desired frequency of sex. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 37, 104–115. doi: 10.1080/0092623X.2011.560531.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Trivers, R. L. (1985). Social evolution. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar