A new study finds that single adults in both the United States and Japan report lower well-being than their married peers. The research suggests that the influence of family support and strain on this health and satisfaction gap differs significantly between the two cultures. The findings were published in the journal Personal Relationships.

Researchers conducted this study to better understand the experiences of single adults outside of Western contexts. Much of the existing research has focused on places like the United States, where singlehood is becoming more common and accepted. In these individualistic cultures, some studies suggest single people may even have stronger connections with family and friends than married individuals.

However, in many Asian cultures, including Japan, marriage is often seen as a more essential part of life and family. This can create a different set of social pressures for single people. The researchers wanted to investigate whether these cultural differences would alter how family relationships, both positive and negative, are connected to the well-being of single and married people in the U.S. and Japan.

“I’ve always been curious about relationship transitions and singlehood lies in this awkward space where people are unsure if it really counts as an actual ‘relationship stage’ per se,” said study author Lester Sim, an assistant professor of psychology at Singapore Management University.

“Fortunately, the field is starting to recognize singlehood as an important period and it’s becoming more common, yet people still seem to judge singles pretty harshly. I find that kind of funny in a way, because it often reflects how we judge ourselves through others. Coming from an Asian background, I also wondered if these attitudes toward singlehood might play out differently across cultures, especially since family ties are so central in Asian contexts. That curiosity really sparked this project.”

To explore this, the research team analyzed data from two large, nationally representative studies: the Midlife in the U.S. (MIDUS) study and the Midlife in Japan (MIDJA) study. The combined sample included 4,746 participants who were 30 years of age or older. The researchers focused specifically on individuals who identified as either “married” or “never married,” and they took additional steps to exclude participants who were in a cohabiting or romantic relationship despite being unmarried.

Participants in both studies answered questions at two different points in time. The first wave of data included their marital status, their perceptions of family support, and their experiences of family strain. Family support was measured with items asking how much they felt their family cared for them or how much they could open up to family about their worries. Family strain was assessed with questions about how often family members criticized them or let them down.

At the second wave of data collection, participants reported on their well-being. This included rating their overall physical health on a scale from 0 to 10 and their satisfaction with life through a series of six questions about different life domains. The researchers then used a statistical approach to see how marital status at the first time point was related to well-being at the second time point, and whether family support and strain helped explain that relationship.

Across the board, the results showed that single adults in both the United States and Japan reported poorer physical health and lower life satisfaction compared to their married counterparts. This finding aligns with a large body of previous research suggesting that marriage is generally associated with better health outcomes.

When the researchers examined the role of family dynamics, they found distinct patterns in each country. For American participants, being married was associated with receiving more family support and experiencing less family strain. Both of these family factors were, in turn, linked to higher well-being. This suggests that for Americans, the well-being advantage of being married is partially explained by having more supportive and less tense family relationships.

The pattern observed in the Japanese sample was quite different. Single Japanese adults did report experiencing more family strain than married Japanese adults. Yet, this higher level of family strain did not have a significant connection to their physical health or life satisfaction later on.

“Family relationships matter a lot for everyone, whether you’re single or married, but in different ways across cultures,” Sim told PsyPost. “We found that singles in both the US and Japan reported lower well-being, in part because they experienced more family strain and less support (differentially across cultures). So even though singlehood is becoming more common, it still carries social and emotional costs. I think this shows how important it is to build more inclusive environments where singles feel equally supported and valued.”

Another notable finding from the Japanese sample was that there was no significant difference in the amount of family support reported by single and married individuals. While family support did predict higher life satisfaction for Japanese participants, it did not serve as a pathway explaining the well-being gap between single and married people in the way it did for Americans.

“I honestly thought the patterns would differ more across cultures,” Sim said. “I expected singles in Western countries to feel more accepted, and singles in Asia to rely more on family support and report greater strain; but neither of the latter findings turned out to be the case. It seems that, across the board, social norms around marriage still shape how people experience singlehood and well-being.”

The researchers acknowledged some limitations of their work. The definition of “single” was based on available survey questions and could be refined in future studies with more direct inquiries about relationship status.

“We focused only on familial support and strain because family is such a big part of East Asian culture,” Sim noted. “But singlehood is complex: friendships, loneliness, voluntary versus involuntary singlehood, and how satisfied people feel being single all matter too. We didn’t examine these constructs in the current study because there is existing work on this topic, so I wanted to bring more focus onto the family (especially with the cross-cultural focus). Future work should dig into those other layers and examine how they interact to shape the singlehood experience.”

It would also be beneficial to explore these dynamics across different age groups, as the pressures and supports related to marital status may change over a person’s lifespan. Such work would help create a more comprehensive picture of how singlehood is experienced around the world.

“I want to keep exploring how culture shapes the meanings people attach to relationships and singlehood,” Sim explained. “Long term, I hope this work helps shift the narrative away from the idea that marriage is the default route to happiness, and shift toward recognizing that there are many valid ways to live a good life.”

“Being single isn’t a problem to be fixed. It’s a meaningful, often intentional part of many people’s lives. The more we understand that, the closer we get to supporting well-being for everyone, not just those who are married.”

The study, “Cross-Cultural Differences in the Links Between Familial Support and Strain in Married and Single Adults’ Well-Being,” was authored by Lester Sim and Robin Edelstein.

A new study proposes that horror films are appealing because they offer a controlled environment for our brains to practice predicting and managing uncertainty. This process of learning to master fear-inducing situations can be an inherently rewarding experience, according to the paper published in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.

The authors behind the paper, published in 2013, sought to address why people are drawn to entertainment that is designed to be frightening or disgusting. While some studies have shown psychological benefits from engaging with horror, many existing theories about its appeal seem to contradict one another. The authors aimed to provide a single, unifying framework that could explain how intentionally seeking out negative feelings like fear can result in positive psychological outcomes.

To do this, they applied a theory of brain function known as predictive processing. This framework suggests the brain operates as a prediction engine, constantly making forecasts about incoming sensory information from the world. When reality does not match the brain’s prediction, a “prediction error” occurs, which the brain then works to minimize by updating its internal models or by acting on the world to make it more predictable.

This does not mean humans always seek out calm and predictable situations. The theory suggests people are motivated to find optimal opportunities for learning, which often lie at the edge of their understanding. The brain is not just sensitive to the amount of prediction error, but to the rate at which that error is reduced over time. When we reduce uncertainty faster than we expected, it generates a positive feeling.

This search for the ideal rate of error reduction is what drives curiosity and play. We are naturally drawn to a “Goldilocks zone” of manageable uncertainty that is neither too boringly simple nor too chaotically complex. The researchers argue that horror entertainment is specifically engineered to place its audience within this zone.

According to the theory, horror films can be understood as a form of “affective technology,” designed to manipulate our predictive minds. Even though we know the monsters are not real, the brain processes the film as an improbable version of reality from which it can still learn. Many horror monsters tap into deep-seated, evolutionary fears of predators by featuring sharp teeth, claws, and stealthy, ambush-style behaviors.

The narrative structures of horror films are also built to play with our expectations. The slow build-up of suspense creates a state of high anticipation, and a “jump scare” works by suddenly violating our moment-to-moment predictions. The effectiveness of these techniques is heightened because they are not always predictable. Sometimes the suspense builds and nothing happens, which makes the audience’s response system even more alert.

At the same time, horror films often rely on familiar patterns and clichés, such as the “final girl” who survives to confront the villain. This combination of surprising events within a somewhat predictable structure provides the mix of uncertainty and resolvability that the predictive brain finds so engaging.

The authors propose that engaging with this controlled uncertainty has several benefits. One is that horror provides a low-stakes training ground for learning about high-stakes situations. This idea, known as morbid curiosity, suggests that we watch frightening content to gain information that could be useful for recognizing and avoiding real-world dangers. For example, the film Contagion saw a surge in popularity during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, as people sought to understand the potential realities of a global health crisis.

Another benefit is related to emotion regulation. By exposing ourselves to fear in a safe context, we can learn about our own psychological and physiological responses. The experience allows us to observe our own anxiety, increased heart rate, and other reactions as objects of attention, rather than just being swept away by them. This process can grant us a greater sense of awareness and control over our own emotional states, similar to the effects of mindfulness practices.

The theory also offers an explanation for why some people prone to anxiety might be drawn to horror. Anxiety can be associated with a feeling of uncertainty about one’s own internal bodily signals, a state known as noisy interoception. Watching a horror movie provides a clear, external source for feelings of fear and anxiety. For a short time, the rapid heartbeat and sweaty palms have an obvious and controllable cause: the monster on the screen, not some unknown internal turmoil.

The researchers note that this engagement is not always beneficial. For some individuals, particularly those with a history of trauma, horror media may serve to confirm negative beliefs about the world being a dangerous and threatening place. This can create a feedback loop where a person repeatedly seeks out horrifying content, reinforcing a sense of hopelessness or learned helplessness. Future work could examine when the engagement with scary media crosses from a healthy learning experience into a potentially pathological pattern.

The study, “Surfing uncertainty with screams: predictive processing, error dynamics and horror films,” was authored by Mark Miller, Ben White and Coltan Scrivner.

When people feel emotionally close, their bodies may start to act in tandem. A new study published in Biological Psychology offers evidence that this alignment can reach the level of the heart. Researchers found that married couples from lower socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to show synchronized heart rate patterns than couples from higher socioeconomic backgrounds. The findings suggest that social and economic conditions may shape not only how people relate to one another emotionally, but also how their bodies respond during social connection.

Previous research has shown that people from lower-income and lower-education backgrounds tend to emphasize relationships more than their more affluent peers. Studies suggest that individuals from these environments often rely more on their social networks for support, given that they face more external challenges such as financial strain and limited access to resources. This emphasis on social interdependence appears in how people think, feel, and behave. But until now, little was known about whether this tendency might also appear in physical processes, such as heart rate.

“Social connection is essential for human well-being and survival. And how we connect with others is shaped by the resources and opportunities we have. When socioeconomic resources are scarce, social relationships can become a refuge and a resource, taking on a particularly important role in people’s lives,” said Tabea Meier, a postdoctoral scholar affiliated with the University of Zurich, and Claudia Haase, an associate professor at Northwestern University, the corresponding authors of the study.

“Prior research has shown that people from less privileged backgrounds tend to be more interdependent and attuned to others, for example, in experiencing greater empathy and compassion. This stands in contrast to the individualism that tends to dominate more privileged social contexts.”

“However, much less is known about whether this attunement to others goes beyond experiences and behavior—whether it shows up in people’s bodies or physiology. Our study of married couples examined this question by probing how socioeconomic status relates to physiological linkage – the way spouses’ heart rates rise and fall together when they interact. In moments of deep connection, people’s hearts can beat in sync.”

For their study, the researchers recruited 48 married couples living in the Chicago area, resulting in a sample of 96 individuals. The couples varied widely in terms of income and education. Some earned less than $20,000 per year, while others made over $150,000. Their education levels also ranged from less than high school to advanced degrees. The sample included people from several racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Each couple participated in a three-hour lab session. After some initial procedures, they took part in two ten-minute conversations: one focused on a topic of conflict in their relationship, and another centered on a mutually enjoyable subject. During these conversations, the participants wore sensors that tracked their heart activity in real time. The researchers focused on a measure called “interbeat interval,” which is the amount of time between heartbeats. These second-by-second measurements allowed the team to assess how each spouse’s heart rate changed throughout the conversation.

The researchers analyzed how closely the spouses’ heart rate patterns mirrored each other. When both people’s heart rates sped up or slowed down together, this was called “in-phase linkage.” When one person’s heart rate increased while the other’s decreased, that was labeled “anti-phase linkage.” In both cases, stronger linkage meant a tighter correlation between spouses’ heart rate shifts. The team looked at how these two types of linkage were related to the couple’s socioeconomic background.

Across both conflict and pleasant conversations, couples from lower socioeconomic backgrounds showed higher in-phase linkage. In other words, their heart rates were more likely to change in the same direction. At the same time, they showed lower anti-phase linkage, meaning their heart rates were less likely to change in opposite directions.

This pattern suggests that less affluent couples tend to experience a stronger bodily connection during interpersonal interactions. Their heart rhythms moved more in unison, regardless of whether they were arguing or sharing positive memories. The difference was particularly strong for anti-phase linkage, which was much lower in lower-income and lower-education couples compared to their more privileged peers.

“When people connect, it’s not just their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that can align – their bodies can, too,” Meier and Haase told PsyPost. “Our study found that couples’ socioeconomic backgrounds may shape how this connection unfolds at a physiological level. Specifically, the heart rates of spouses from less privileged backgrounds were more likely to change in the same direction (i.e., speeding up or slowing down together) and less likely to change in opposite directions (i.e., one speeding up while the other is slowing down) compared to those from more privileged backgrounds.”

These results held even after the researchers controlled for several other factors, including age and racial background. The effect was also more strongly tied to education than income, although both contributed to the findings.

Importantly, the level of synchrony did not appear to be linked to the emotional tone of the conversation or to how many times the couples used inclusive words like “we.” That suggests that the physiological linkage observed may be operating somewhat independently of what the spouses said or how they rated their emotions.

“These findings build on a long line of research showing that people from less privileged backgrounds tend prioritize relationships and are more attuned to those around them,” the researchers said. “Our study suggests, to our knowledge for the first time, that this connection may not only appear in feelings or behaviors, but also at a physiological level in the form of linked heart rates between spouses. It is a reminder that our social worlds live within us.”

There are a few caveats to consider. The sample size, although consistent with similar lab-based studies, was relatively small. It also focused on heterosexual married couples with children in the United States, which limits how broadly the results can be applied.

The study also did not look at how these heart rate patterns affect the couples over time. It remains unclear whether higher in-phase linkage leads to better relationship satisfaction, improved health, or other benefits. Some previous research suggests that synchrony may be helpful in many cases, but not always. For example, when couples are arguing, syncing up physiologically might sometimes make things worse by escalating conflict. On the other hand, moving in opposite directions might help one partner stay calm while the other is distressed.

“It is important not to oversimplify these results,” Meier and Haase explained. “Linked heart rates do not necessarily mean “better” or healthier relationships. Whether physiological linkage is beneficial or not may really depend on the context in which it occurs, for example, whether spouses are cracking up about an inside joke, are throwing harsh words at each other, or comforting each other in sadness. Future research can explore when and how different heart rate linkage patterns support or harm relationship satisfaction, well-being, and health.”

“Our study is a first step and there are many open questions that we would love the research community to pursue. While we worked hard to recruit a diverse sample of couples from all walks of life from the U.S. Chicagoland area, larger samples will be needed, ideally not just from the US. There are many other open questions. For instance, how does physiological linkage predict how satisfied spouses from less or more privileged backgrounds are with their relationship over time? And what are the consequences for mental and physical health? We look forward to more research in this area that connects the macro and the micro.”

“Socioeconomic status can shape our everyday lives in powerful ways, including how we connect with loved ones,” the researchers added. “Psychological research on couples has traditionally focused mostly on white, middle-class couples. Findings from our study, along with others, highlight the importance of inclusive approaches in the study of social connection. The couples in our study allowed us to gain a deeper understanding of how emotional dynamics and social connection may differ across socioeconomic contexts, and we are grateful that they shared their time and insights with us.”

The study, “Connected at heart? Socioeconomic status and physiological linkage during marital interactions,” was authored by Tabea Meier, Aaron M. Geller, Kuan-Hua Chen, and Claudia M. Haase.