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 suggests that higher levels of psychopathic traits are associated with lower relationship satisfaction in romantic couples. The research indicates that a person’s perception of their partner’s traits is a particularly strong predictor of their own discontent within the relationship. The findings were published in the Journal of Couple & Relationship Therapy.

The research team was motivated by the established connection between personality and the quality of romantic relationships. While traits like agreeableness and conscientiousness are known to support relationship satisfaction, maladaptive traits, such as those associated with psychopathy, are understood to be detrimental. Psychopathy is not a single trait but a combination of characteristics, including interpersonal manipulation, a callous lack of empathy, an erratic lifestyle, and antisocial tendencies.

Previous studies have shown that individuals with more pronounced psychopathic traits tend to prefer short-term relationships, are more likely to be unfaithful, and may engage in controlling or destructive behaviors. Yet, much of this research did not simultaneously account for the perspectives of both partners in a relationship. The researchers aimed to provide a more nuanced understanding by examining how both a person’s own traits and their partner’s traits, as viewed by themselves and by their partner, collectively influence relationship satisfaction.

To investigate these dynamics, the researchers recruited a sample of 85 heterosexual couples from the Netherlands. The participants were predominantly young adults, many of whom were students. Each member of the couple independently completed a series of online questionnaires. The surveys were designed to measure their own psychopathic traits, their perception of their partner’s psychopathic traits, and their overall satisfaction with their relationship.

For measuring psychopathic traits, the study used a well-established questionnaire that assesses three primary facets: Interpersonal Manipulation (e.g., being charming but deceptive), Callous Affect (e.g., lacking guilt or empathy), and Erratic Lifestyle (e.g., impulsivity and irresponsibility). A fourth facet, Antisocial Tendencies, was excluded from the final analysis due to statistical unreliability within this specific sample. Participants completed one version of this questionnaire about themselves and a modified version about their romantic partner.

The researchers used a specialized statistical technique called the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model to analyze the data. This method is uniquely suited for studying couples because it can distinguish between two different kinds of influence. “Actor effects” refer to the association between an individual’s own characteristics and their own outcomes. For example, it can measure how your self-rated manipulativeness relates to your own relationship satisfaction. “Partner effects” describe the association between an individual’s characteristics and their partner’s outcomes, such as how your self-rated manipulativeness relates to your partner’s satisfaction.

Before conducting the main analysis, the researchers examined how partners’ ratings related to one another. They found very little “actual similarity,” meaning that a man’s level of psychopathic traits was not significantly related to his female partner’s level. However, they did find moderate “perceptual accuracy,” which means that how a person rated their partner was generally in line with how that partner rated themselves. There was also strong “perceptual similarity,” indicating that people tended to rate their partners in a way that was similar to how they rated themselves.

One notable preliminary finding was that both men and women tended to rate their partners as having lower levels of psychopathic traits than their partners reported for themselves. This could suggest a positive bias, where individuals maintain a more charitable view of their partner, or it may indicate that certain maladaptive traits are not easily observable to others in a relationship.

The central findings of the study emerged from the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model. The most consistent result was a negative actor effect related to partner perception. When an individual rated their partner higher on psychopathic traits, that same individual reported lower satisfaction with the relationship. This connection was present for both men and women and held true across the total psychopathy score and its specific facets.

The study also identified other significant associations. For both men and women, rating oneself higher on Interpersonal Manipulation was linked to lower satisfaction in one’s own relationship. This suggests that a manipulative style may be unfulfilling even for the person exhibiting it.

A partner effect was observed for the trait of Callous Affect. When a person was perceived by their partner as being more callous, unemotional, and lacking in empathy, that partner reported lower relationship satisfaction. This highlights the direct interpersonal damage that a lack of emotional connection can inflict on a relationship.

In an unexpected turn, the analysis revealed one positive association. When women rated themselves as higher in Callous Affect, their male partners reported slightly higher levels of relationship satisfaction. The researchers propose that this could be related to gender stereotypes, where traits that might be labeled as callous in a clinical sense could be interpreted differently, perhaps as toughness or independence, in women by their male partners.

The study has some limitations that the authors acknowledge. The sample consisted of young, primarily student-based, heterosexual couples in relatively short-term relationships, which may not represent the dynamics in older, married, or more diverse couples. Because the study captured data at a single point in time, it cannot establish causality; it shows an association, not that psychopathic traits cause dissatisfaction. The sample size also meant the study was better equipped to detect medium-to-large effects, and smaller but still meaningful associations might have been missed.

Future research could build on these findings by studying larger and more diverse populations over a longer period. Following couples over time would help clarify how these personality dynamics affect relationship quality and stability as the relationship matures. A longitudinal approach could also determine if these traits predict relationship dissolution.

The study, “Psychopathic Traits and Relationship Satisfaction in Intimate Partners: A Dyadic Approach,” was authored by Frederica M. Martijn, Liam Cahill, Mieke Decuyper, and Katarzyna (Kasia) Uzieblo.

A new longitudinal study suggests that intimate partners mutually influence each other’s support for political parties over time. The research found that a shift in one person’s support for a party was predictive of a similar shift in their partner’s support the following year, a process that may contribute to political alignment within couples and broader societal polarization. The findings were published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin/em>.

Political preferences are often similar within families, particularly between parents and children. However, less is known about how political views might be shaped during adulthood, especially within the context of a long-term romantic relationship. Prior studies have shown that partners often hold similar political beliefs, but it has been difficult to determine if this is because people choose partners who already agree with them or if they gradually influence each other over the years.

The authors of the new study sought to examine if this similarity is a result of ongoing influence. They wanted to test whether a change in one partner’s political stance could predict a future change in the other’s. To do this, they used a large dataset from New Zealand, a country with a multi-party system. This setting allowed them to see if any influence was specific to one or two major parties or if it occurred across a wider ideological spectrum, including smaller parties focused on issues like environmentalism, indigenous rights, and libertarianism.

To conduct their investigation, the researchers analyzed data from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study, a large-scale project that has tracked thousands of individuals over many years. Their analysis focused on 1,613 woman-man couples who participated in the study for up to 10 consecutive years. Participants annually rated their level of support for six different political parties on a scale from one (strongly oppose) to seven (strongly support).

The study employed a sophisticated statistical model designed for longitudinal data from couples. This technique allowed the researchers to separate two different aspects of a person’s political support. First, it identified each individual’s stable, long-term average level of support for a given party. Second, it isolated the small, year-to-year fluctuations or deviations from that personal average. This separation is important because it allows for a more precise test of influence over time.

The analysis then examined whether a fluctuation in one partner’s party support in a given year could predict a similar fluctuation in the other partner’s support in the subsequent year. This was done while accounting for the fact that couples already tend to have similar average levels of support.

The results showed a consistent pattern of mutual influence. For all six political parties examined, a temporary increase in one partner’s support for that party was associated with a subsequent increase in the other partner’s support one year later. This finding suggests that partners are not just politically similar from the start of their relationship but continue to shape one another’s specific party preferences over time.

This influence also appeared to be a two-way street. The researchers tested whether men had a stronger effect on women’s views or if the reverse was true. They found that the strength of influence was generally equal between partners. With only one exception, the effect of men on women’s party support was just as strong as the effect of women on men’s support.

The single exception involved the libertarian Association of Consumers and Taxpayers Party, where men’s changing support had a slightly stronger influence on women’s subsequent support than the other way around. For the other five parties, including the two largest and three other smaller parties, the influence was symmetrical. This challenges the idea that one partner, typically the man, is the primary driver of a couple’s political identity.

An additional analysis explored whether this dynamic of influence applied to a person’s general political orientation, which was measured on a scale from extremely liberal to extremely conservative. In this case, the pattern was different. While partners tended to be similar in their overall political orientation, changes in one partner’s self-rated orientation did not predict changes in the other’s over time. This suggests that the influence partners have on each other may be more about support for specific parties and their platforms than about shifting a person’s fundamental ideological identity.

The researchers acknowledge some limitations of their work. The study focused on established, long-term, cohabiting couples in New Zealand, so the findings may not apply to all types of relationships or to couples in other countries with different political systems. Because the couples were already in established relationships, the study also cannot entirely separate the effects of ongoing influence from the possibility that people initially select partners who are politically similar to them.

Future research could explore these dynamics in newer relationships to better understand the interplay between partner selection and later influence. Additional studies could also investigate the specific mechanisms of this influence, such as how political discussions, media consumption, or conflict avoidance might play a role in this process. Examining whether these shifts in expressed support translate to actual behaviors like voting is another important avenue for exploration.

The study, “The Interpersonal Transmission of Political Party Support in Intimate Relationships,” was authored by Sam Fluit, Nickola C. Overall, Danny Osborne, Matthew D. Hammond, and Chris G. Sibley.

A study of men seeking help for delayed or premature ejaculation in Italy found that those suffering from delayed ejaculation tended to have more severe depressive and anxiety symptoms, and lower sexual desire than men suffering from premature ejaculation. They also tended to be older. The paper was published in IJIR: Your Sexual Medicine Journal.

Premature ejaculation is a sexual condition in which a man reaches orgasm and ejaculates sooner than desired, often within a minute of penetration or with minimal stimulation. It can lead to frustration, anxiety, and reduced sexual satisfaction for both partners. The causes may include psychological factors such as stress, depression, or relationship problems, as well as biological ones like hormonal imbalances or nerve sensitivity.

In contrast, delayed ejaculation is the persistent difficulty or inability to reach orgasm and ejaculate despite adequate sexual stimulation. This condition can also cause emotional distress, relationship strain, and decreased confidence. Delayed ejaculation may result from psychological issues, nerve damage, certain medications, or chronic health conditions such as diabetes. Both conditions are forms of ejaculatory disorders and sexual dysfunction. They can occur occasionally or become chronic depending on underlying causes.

Study author Fausto Negri and his colleagues note that many men experiencing ejaculatory disorders have difficulty expressing their negative feelings and that sexuality and emotional expression are closely connected. With this in mind, they conducted a study aiming to define specific clinical and psychological profiles of individuals suffering from premature and delayed ejaculation and to investigate the association between delayed ejaculation and other domains of sexual functioning.

Study participants were 555 men who were seeking medical help for ejaculation disorders. 76 of them reported for delayed ejaculation, while the rest of them sought help for premature ejaculation. Participants’ average age was approximately 45 years. 53% of participants with delayed ejaculation reported having a stable partner, and this was the case with 64% of participants with premature ejaculation.

Participants completed assessments of erectile function (the International Index of Erectile Function) and depression (the Beck Depression Inventory). Researchers also measured levels of various hormones and collected other medical and demographic information about the participants.

Results showed that participants suffering from delayed ejaculation were older than participants suffering from premature ejaculation (average age of 47 years vs 44 years). They also more often suffered from other disorders. Participants with delayed ejaculation also tended to have more severe symptoms of depression and anxiety. Their sexual desire tended to be lower, as were their orgasmic function scores, compared to participants with premature ejaculation. The two groups did not differ in relationship status, waist circumference, body mass index, or levels of examined hormones.

“Roughly one of ten men presenting for self-reported ejaculatory dysfunction as their main complaint in the real-life setting suffers from DE [delayed ejaculation]. Usually, they are older than men with primary PE [premature ejaculation] and overall less healthy. Likewise, they depict an overall poorer quality of sexual life, with lower SD [sexual desire] and OF [orgasmic function]. Moreover, men with DE have higher chances to report clinically significant depression and anxiety, which significantly impact their overall sexual satisfaction,” the study authors concluded.

The study sheds light on the differences in psychological characteristics between people with different forms of ejaculation disorders. However, it should be noted that the design of the study does not allow any causal inferences to be derived from the results. Additionally, all participants came from the same clinical center. Results on men from other geographical areas might differ.

The paper, “Men with delayed ejaculation report lower sexual satisfaction and more depressive symptoms than those with premature ejaculation: findings from a cross-sectional study,” was authored by Fausto Negri, Christian Corsini, Edoardo Pozzi, Massimiliano Raffo, Alessandro Bertini, Gabriele Birolini, Alessia d’Arma, Luca Boeri, Francesco Montorsi, Michael L. Eisenberg, and Andrea Salonia.

A new study finds that being present and non-judgmental during sex is associated with greater sexual well-being, not only for oneself but for one’s partner as well. The research, which tracked couples over 35 days, suggests that the benefits of sexual mindfulness can be observed on a daily basis within a relationship. The findings were published in the scientific journal Mindfulness.

Many individuals in established relationships report problems with their sexual health, such as low desire or dissatisfaction. Previous research has suggested that mindfulness, a state of present-moment awareness without judgment, could help address these issues. Researchers believe that cognitive distractions during sex, like concerns about performance or body image, can interfere with sexual well-being. Mindfulness may act as an antidote to these distractions by helping individuals redirect their attention to the physical sensations and emotional connection of the moment.

Led by Simone Y. Goldberg of the University of British Columbia, a team of researchers noted that most prior studies had significant limitations. Much of the research focused on general mindfulness as a personality trait rather than the specific state of being mindful during a sexual encounter. Additionally, studies often sampled individuals instead of couples, missing the interpersonal dynamics of sex. Finally, no research had used a daily diary design, which is needed to capture the natural fluctuations in a person’s ability to be mindful across different sexual experiences. Goldberg and her colleagues designed their study to address these gaps.

To conduct their research, the scientists recruited 297 couples who were living together. For 35 consecutive days, each partner independently completed a brief online survey every evening before going to sleep. This daily diary method allowed the researchers to gather information about the couples’ experiences in near real-time, reducing reliance on long-term memory which can be unreliable. The daily survey asked about each person’s level of sexual desire and any sexually related distress they felt that day.

On the days that participants reported having sex with their partner, they were asked additional questions. They completed a 5-item questionnaire to measure their level of sexual mindfulness during that specific encounter. This included rating their agreement with statements about their ability to stay in the present moment, notice physical sensations, and not judge their thoughts or feelings. They also answered questions to assess their level of sexual satisfaction with that day’s experience. This design allowed the researchers to analyze how a person’s mindfulness during sex on a given day related to their own and their partner’s sexual well-being on that same day.

The results showed a clear link between daily sexual mindfulness and sexual well-being for both partners. On days when individuals reported being more sexually mindful than their own personal average, they also reported higher levels of sexual satisfaction and sexual desire. At the same time, they reported lower levels of sexual distress. This demonstrates that fluctuations in a person’s ability to be mindful during sex are connected to their own sexual experience from one day to the next.

The study also revealed significant interpersonal benefits. On the days when one person was more sexually mindful, their partner also reported better outcomes. The partner experienced higher sexual satisfaction, increased sexual desire, and less sexual distress. This suggests that one person’s mental state during a sexual encounter has a direct and immediate association with their partner’s experience. The researchers propose that a mindful partner may be more attentive and responsive, which in turn enhances the other person’s enjoyment and sense of connection.

When the researchers analyzed the overall averages across the 35-day period, they found a slightly different pattern. Individuals who were, on average, more sexually mindful throughout the study reported greater sexual well-being for themselves. However, a person’s average level of sexual mindfulness was not linked to their partner’s average sexual well-being. This suggests that the benefit to a partner may be more of an in-the-moment phenomenon tied to specific sexual encounters, rather than a general effect of being with a typically mindful person.

The study also explored the role of gender in these associations. The connection between a person’s own daily sexual mindfulness and their own sexual well-being was stronger for women than for men. The researchers speculate that since women sometimes report higher levels of cognitive distraction during sex, the practice of mindfulness might offer a particularly powerful benefit for them. In contrast, the association between one person’s mindfulness and their partner’s sexual satisfaction was stronger when the mindful partner was a man.

These findings contribute to a growing body of evidence supporting the idea that being present and aware during sex is beneficial for couples. The study highlights that these benefits are not just personal but are shared within the relationship. By focusing on physical sensations and letting go of distracting or self-critical thoughts, individuals may not only improve their own sexual satisfaction but also contribute positively to their partner’s experience. This points to the potential of clinical interventions that teach mindfulness skills specifically within a sexual context.

The researchers acknowledged some limitations of their work. The participant sample was predominantly White and heterosexual, which means the results may not be generalizable to couples from other ethnic backgrounds or to same-sex couples. Future research could explore these dynamics in more diverse populations to see if the same patterns hold.

Another important point is that the study’s design is correlational, meaning it identifies a relationship between variables but cannot prove causation. It is not possible to say for certain that being more mindful causes better sexual well-being. The relationship could potentially work in the other direction, where a more positive sexual experience allows a person to be more mindful. Future studies using experimental methods, where mindfulness is actively manipulated, could help clarify the direction of this effect. Despite these limitations, the study provides a detailed picture of the day-to-day connections between mindfulness and sexual health in romantic partners.

The study, “Daily Sexual Mindfulness is Linked with Greater Sexual Well‑Being in Couples,” was authored by Simone Y. Goldberg, Marie‑Pier Vaillancourt‑Morel, Marta Kolbuszewska, Sophie Bergeron, and Samantha J. Dawson.

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.

A new study explores how sexual preferences for dominance and submission relate to an individual’s general position in society and their behavior toward others outside of intimate activity. The research found that a person’s tendency toward submission in everyday life is strongly connected to experiencing subordination within their partner relationship, as well as holding a lower social status and less education. These findings offer insight into the vulnerability of some practitioners of bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, sadism and masochism (BDSM), suggesting that interpersonal power dynamics are often consistent across life domains. The research was published in Deviant Behavior.

Researchers, led by Eva Jozifkova of Jan Evangelista Purkyně University, aimed to clarify the complex relationship between sexual arousal by power dynamics and a person’s hierarchical behavior in daily life. Previous academic work had established that a person’s dominant or submissive personality often aligns with their sexual preferences. However, it remained uncertain whether the hierarchical roles people enjoy in sex translated directly into their conduct with their long-term partner outside of the bedroom, or how they behaved generally toward people in their community.

Many people who practice BDSM, often distinguish between the roles they adopt during sex and their roles in a long-term relationship. Some maintain a slight hierarchical difference in their relationships around the clock, while others strictly limit the power dynamic to sexual play. Given the variety of patterns, the researchers wanted to test several ideas about this alignment, ranging from the view that sexual hierarchy is merely playful and unrelated to daily life, to the perspective that sexual roles reflect a person’s consistent social rank.

The study sought to test whether an individual’s tendency to dominate or submit to others reflected their sexual preferences and their hierarchical arrangement with their partner. The concept being explored was whether a person’s position in the social world “coheres” with their position in intimate relationships and sexual behavior.

The researchers collected data using an online questionnaire distributed primarily through websites and social media forums geared toward practitioners of BDSM in the Czech Republic. The final analysis included data from 421 heterosexual and bisexual men and women who actively engaged in these practices with a partner.

Participants completed detailed questions about their socioeconomic status, education, age, and, importantly, their feelings of hierarchy during sexual encounters and in their ongoing partner relationships outside of sexual activity. To measure their general tendency toward submissiveness or dominance in daily life toward others, the researchers used a modified instrument called the Life Scale.

The Life Scale assessed an individual’s perceived hierarchical standing, based on how often they experienced feelings of subordination or felt their opinions were disregarded by others. The higher the score on this scale, the more submissive the person reported being in their interactions with people generally.

The researchers separated participants into groups based on their sexual arousal preference for dominance (Dominant), submissiveness (Submissive), both (called Switch), or neither (called Without). To analyze how these various factors affected the Life Scale score, a statistical method known as univariate analysis of variance models was employed. This method allowed the researchers to examine the influence of multiple variables simultaneously on the reported level of submissiveness in everyday life.

Analyzing the self-reported experiences of the participants, the study found a noticeable alignment between preferred sexual role and general relationship dynamics for many individuals. Among those who were sexually aroused by being dominant, 55 percent reported experiencing a feeling of superiority over their partner outside of sexual activity as well. Similarly, 46 percent of individuals sexually aroused by being submissive also experienced subordination in their relationship outside of sex. This shows that for nearly half of the sample, the preferred sexual role did extend partially into the non-sexual relationship.

For the group who reported being aroused by both dominance and submissiveness, the Switches, the pattern was different. A significant majority, 75 percent, reported experiencing both polarities during sexual activity. However, outside of sex, only 13 percent of Switches reported feeling both dominance and submissiveness in their relationship, while half of this group reported experiencing neither hierarchical feeling in the relationship. This suggests that the Switch group is less likely to carry hierarchical dynamics into their non-sexual partnership.

Experience of dominance and submission in sex was reported even by people who were not primarily aroused by hierarchy. More than half of those in the Without group, 60 percent, experienced such feelings during sex. Significantly, 75 percent of this group did not report feeling hierarchy in their relationship outside of sex.

In general, individuals who were aroused by only dominance or only submissiveness experienced the respective polarity they preferred more often in sex than in their relationships. The experience of the non-preferred, or opposite, polarity during sex and in relationships was infrequent for the Dominant and Submissive groups.

The main statistical findings emerged from the analysis linking these experiences to the Life Scale score, which measured submissiveness in interaction with all people, not just a partner. The final model revealed that several factors combined to predict higher levels of submissiveness in daily life.

Respondents who felt more submissive toward others were consistently those who reported experiencing subordination in their non-sexual relationship with their partner. This higher level of submissiveness was also observed in individuals who did not report feelings of superiority over their partner, either during sex or in the relationship generally.

Beyond partner dynamics, a person’s general social standing played a powerful role. Individuals who reported higher submissiveness toward others had lower socioeconomic status, lower education levels, and were younger than 55 years of age.

The effect of experiencing submissiveness in the partner relationship was particularly potent, increasing the measure of submissiveness toward other people by two and a half units on the Life Scale. Conversely, experiencing feelings of dominance in the relationship or during sex decreased the Life Scale score by about 1.4 to 1.5 units, indicating less submissiveness in daily life.

The researchers found that gender was not a decisive factor in predicting submissiveness in this model, suggesting that the underlying hierarchical patterns observed apply across both men and women in the sample. The findings overall supported the idea that a person’s hierarchical position in their intimate relationship is related to their hierarchical position in society, aligning with the “Social Rank Hypothesis” and the “Coherence Hypothesis” proposed by the authors. This means that, contrary to some popular notions, sex and relationship hierarchy do not typically function as a “compensation” for an individual’s status in the outside world.

The research points to the existence of a consistent behavioral pattern linked to tendencies toward dominance or submissiveness in interpersonal relationships that seems to be natural for some people. The researchers suggest that because power polarization in relationships and sex can be eroticizing, it should be practiced with consideration, especially given the observed link between submissiveness in relationships and lower social status in general. They stress the importance of moderation and maintaining a return to a non-polarized state, often referred to as aftercare, following intense sexual interactions.

The researchers acknowledged several limitations inherent in the study design. Since the data were collected solely through online platforms popular within the BDSM community, the sample may not fully represent all practitioners. People with limited internet access or older individuals may have been underrepresented. The Life Scale instrument, while simple and effective for an online survey, provides a basic assessment of hierarchical status, and future research could employ more extensive psychological measures.

Because the study focused exclusively on practitioners of BDSM, the researchers were unable to compare their level of general life submissiveness with individuals in the broader population who do not practice these sexual behaviors. Future studies should aim to include comparison groups from the general population to solidify the understanding of these personality patterns.

Despite these constraints, the results provide practical implications. The researchers suggest that simple questions about hierarchical feelings in sex and relationships can be useful in therapeutic settings to understand a client’s orientation and potentially predict their vulnerability to external pressures or relationship risk. The clear relationship observed between the Life Scale and social status highlights that submissive individuals may already face a great deal of pressure from society, pointing to the need for social support.

The study, “The Link Between Sexual Dominance Preference and Social Behavior in BDSM Sex Practitioners,” was authored by Eva Jozifkova, Marek Broul, Ivana Lovetinska, Jan Neugebauer, and Ivana Stolova.