Humans are social animals whose well-being is shaped by the ability to attract and connect with one another, often through brief interactions. In addition to physical features, a choreography of movements, physical reactions and subtle expressions may help promote attraction. Here, we measured the physiological dynamics between pairs of participants during real-life dating interactions outside the laboratory. Participants wore eye-tracking glasses with embedded cameras and devices to measure physiological signals including heart rate and skin conductance. We found that overt signals such as smiles, laughter, eye gaze or the mimicry of those signals were not significantly associated with attraction. Instead, attraction was predicted by synchrony in heart rate and skin conductance between partners, which are covert, unconscious and difficult to regulate. Our findings suggest that interacting partners’ attraction increases and decreases as their subconscious arousal levels rise and fall in synchrony.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
Scientific Reports Open Access 07 February 2023
Journal of Eating Disorders Open Access 15 July 2022
Current Psychology Open Access 08 April 2022
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available at DataverseNL: https://dataverse.nl/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34894/RFUGGD.
The codes generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available at DataverseNL: https://dataverse.nl/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.34894/RFUGGD.
Walster, E., Aronson, V., Abrahams, D. & Rottman, L. Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 4, 508–516 (1966).
Eastwick, P. W. & Finkel, E. J. Sex differences in mate preferences revisited: do people know what they initially desire in a romantic partner? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 94, 245–264 (2008).
Tahhan, D. A. Touching at depth: the potential of feeling and connection. Emot. Sp. Soc. 7, 45–53 (2013).
Wheatley, T., Kang, O., Parkinson, C. & Looser, C. E. From mind perception to mental connection: synchrony as a mechanism for social understanding. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 6, 589–606 (2012).
Berscheid, E. & Wastler, E. in Foundations of Interpersonal Attraction (ed. Huston T.L.) 356–381 (Academic, 1974).
Finkel, E. J., Eastwick, P. W. & Matthews, J. Speed-dating as an invaluable tool for studying romantic attraction: a methodological primer. Pers. Relatsh. 14, 149–166 (2007).
Damasio, A. R. The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 351, 1413–1420 (1996).
Palumbo, R. V. et al. Interpersonal autonomic physiology: a systematic review of the literature. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 21, 99–141 (2017).
Reed, R. G., Randall, A. K., Post, J. H. & Butler, E. A. Partner influence and in-phase versus anti-phase physiological linkage in romantic couples. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 88, 309–316 (2013).
Papp, L. M., Pendry, P., Simon, C. D. & Adam, E. K. Spouses’ cortisol associations and moderators: testing physiological synchrony and connectedness in everyday life. Fam. Process 52, 284–298 (2013).
Levenson, R. W. & Ruef, A. M. Empathy: a physiological substrate. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 63, 234–246 (1992).
Helm, J. L., Sbarra, D. A. & Ferrer, E. Coregulation of respiratory sinus arrhythmia in adult romantic partners. Emotion 14, 522–531 (2014).
Levenson, R. W. & Gottman, J. M. Marital interaction: physiological linkage and affective exchange. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 45, 587–597 (1983).
Helm, J., Sbarra, D. & Ferrer, E. Assessing cross-partner associations in physiological responses via coupled oscillator models. Emotion 12, 748 (2012).
de Waal, F. B. M. & Preston, S. D. Mammalian empathy: behavioural manifestations and neural basis. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 18, 498–509 (2017).
Prochazkova, E. & Kret, M. E. Connecting minds and sharing emotions through mimicry: a neurocognitive model of emotional contagion. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 80, 99–114 (2017).
Hasson, U., Ghazanfar, A. A., Galantucci, B., Garrod, S. & Keysers, C. Brain-to-brain coupling: a mechanism for creating and sharing a social world. Trends Cogn. Sci. 16, 1–8 (2012).
Behrens, F. et al. Physiological synchrony is associated with cooperative success in real-life interactions. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–9 (2020).
Prochazkova, E. et al. Pupil mimicry promotes trust through the theory-of-mind network. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 115, E7265–E7274 (2018).
Singh, R. et al. On the importance of trust in interpersonal attraction from attitude similarity. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 32, 829–850 (2015).
McAssey, M. P., Helm, J., Hsieh, F., Sbarra, D. A. & Ferrer, E. Methodological advances for detecting physiological synchrony during dyadic interactions. Methodology 9, 41–53 (2013).
Chatel-Goldman, J., Congedo, M., Jutten, C. & Schwartz, J.-L. Touch increases autonomic coupling between romantic partners. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 8, 95 (2014).
Chartrand, T. L. & Lakin, J. L. The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64, 285–308 (2013).
Boker, S. M., Xu, M., Rotondo, J. L. & King, K. Windowed cross-correlation and peak picking for the analysis of variability in the association between behavioral time series. Psychol. Methods 7, 338–355 (2002).
Gould, R. A Modern Approach to Regression with R. J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1–3 (2010).
Mogan, R., Fischer, R. & Bulbulia, J. A. To be in synchrony or not? A meta-analysis of synchrony’s effects on behavior, perception, cognition and affect. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 72, 13–20 (2017).
Chartrand, T. L. & van Baaren, R. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology vol. 41 (ed. Zanna M.) 219–274 (Academic Press, 2009).
Chartrand, T. L. & Bargh, J. A. The chameleon effect: the perception–behavior link and social interaction. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 76, 893–910 (1999).
Goffman, E. The arrangement between the sexes. Theory Soc. 4, 301–331 (1977).
Grammer, K. Strangers meet: laughter and nonverbal signs of interest in opposite-sex encounters. J. Nonverbal Behav. 14, 209–236 (1990).
Givens, D. B. The nonverbal basis of attraction: flirtation, courtship, and seduction. Psychiatry 41, 346–359 (1978).
Hall, J. A. & Xing, C. The verbal and nonverbal correlates of the five flirting styles. J. Nonverbal Behav. 39, 41–68 (2015).
Montoya, R. M., Kershaw, C. & Prosser, J. L. A meta-analytic investigation of the relation between interpersonal attraction and enacted behavior. Psychol. Bull. 144, 673–709 (2018).
Bryant, J. & Miron, D. in Communication and Emotion: Essays in Honor of Dolf Zillmann (eds Bryant J., Roskov-Ewoldsen D. R. & Cantor J.) 31–59 (Routledge, 2003).
Cohen, B., Waugh, G. & Place, K. At the movies: an unobtrusive study of arousal-attraction. J. Soc. Psychol. 129, 691–693 (1989).
Meston, C. M. & Frohlich, P. F. Love at first fright: partner salience moderates roller-coaster-induced excitation transfer. Arch. Sex. Behav. 32, 537–544 (2003).
Zillmann, D. Excitation transfer in communication-mediated aggressive behavior. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 7, 419–434 (1971).
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. T. & Rapson, R. L. Emotional contagion. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2, 240 (1993).
Levenson, R. W. & Gottman, J. M. Physiological and affective predictors of change in relationship satisfaction. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 49, 85–94 (1985).
Quadt, L., D.Critchley, H. & Garfinkel, S. N. in The Interoceptive Mind: From Homeostasis to Awareness (eds Tsakiris, M. & De Preester, H.) 123–143 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2018).
Hasson, U., Nir, Y., Levy, I., Fuhrmann, G. & Malach, R. Intersubject synchronization of cortical activity during natural vision. Science (80-.). (2004).
Kret, M. E., Fischer, A. H. & De Dreu, C. K. W. Pupil mimicry correlates with trust in in-group partners with dilating pupils. Psychol. Sci. 26, 1401–1410 (2015).
Galvez-Pol, A., Antoine, S., Li, C. & Kilner, J. M. Direct perception of other people’s heart rate. https://psyarxiv.com/7f9pq/ (2020).
Changizi, M. A., Zhang, Q. & Shimojo, S. Bare skin, blood and the evolution of primate colour vision. Biol. Lett. 2, 217–221 (2006).
Hasson, U., Nir, Y., Levy, I., Fuhrmann, G. & Malach, R. Intersubject synchronization of cortical activity during natural vision. Science 303, 1634–1640 (2004).
Thomsen, D. G. & Gilbert, D. G. Factors characterizing marital conflict states and traits: physiological, affective, behavioral and neurotic variable contributions to marital conflict and satisfaction. Pers. Individ. Dif. 25, 833–855 (1998).
Liebowitz, M. R. Social phobia. Mod. Probl. Pharmacopsychiatry 3, 141–173 (1987).
Watson, D., Clark, L. A. & Tellegen, A. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 1063–1070 (1988).
Spector, I. P., Carey, M. P. & Steinberg, L. The sexual desire inventory: development, factor structure, and evidence of reliability. J. Sex. Marital Ther. 22, 175–190 (1996).
Kret, M. E. & De Dreu, C. K. W. Pupil-mimicry conditions trust in partners: moderation by oxytocin and group membership. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 284, 1–10 (2017).
Diedenhofen, B. & Musch, J. Cocor: a comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correlations. PLoS ONE 10, e0121945 (2015).
Fujiwara, K. & Daibo, I. Evaluating interpersonal synchrony: wavelet transform toward an unstructured conversation. Front. Psychol. 7, 516 (2016).
Tschacher, W., Rees, G. M. & Ramseyer, F. Nonverbal synchrony and affect in dyadic interactions. Front. Psychol. 5, 1323 (2014).
Behrens, F., Moulder, R. G., Boker, S. M., & Kret, M. E.. Quantifying physiological synchrony through windowed cross-correlation analysis: statistical and theoretical considerations. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.27.269746v1 (2020).
Kohavi, R. A study of cross-validation and bootstrap for accuracy estimation and model selection. IJCAI 14, 1137–1145 (1995).
Sjak-Shie, E. PhysioData Toolbox (version 0.4) computer software (2018).
The authors thank M. Rojek-Giffin for helpful feedback and W. Boekel for proof-reading the scripts and helping with the control analysis scripts, as well as T. Wilderjans and J. Folz for statistical advice. Research was supported by the Netherlands Science Foundation (016.VIDI.185.036) to M.E.K., Talent Grant (no. 406-15-026) from Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) to M.E.K. and E.P. and the European Research Council (ERC) (Starting Grant #802979) to M.E.K.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Human Behaviour thanks Eli Finkel, Sebastian Wallot and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Figs. S1–S3, Tables S1–S20 and quantification of synchrony.
Video 1. An example of measures. The video shows a non-verbal interaction where participants were instructed not to talk (825–945 s). The female’s and male’s Z-scored SC and HR are shown in the top two rows. In four rows below, selection of measured expressions is depicted (touch face, head shake, smile and laugh). In addition, gaze fixations were collected (not depicted). Notice the contagious spread of emotional information; at 886 s, the female smiles and the male partner reciprocates with a smile back. During this moment, we observe an increase in the female’s and male’s SC and HR. Again, at 903 s, the female laughs; in response, the male smiles, and we again observe synchrony in HR and SC (highlighted by orange cursor). Although non-verbal, during this 2 min interaction, the couple’s physiological synchrony and attraction increased.
About this article
Cite this article
Prochazkova, E., Sjak-Shie, E., Behrens, F. et al. Physiological synchrony is associated with attraction in a blind date setting. Nat Hum Behav 6, 269–278 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01197-3
This article is cited by
Scientific Reports (2023)
Current Psychology (2023)
Journal of Eating Disorders (2022)
Reading Your Emotions in My Physiology? Reliable Emotion Interpretations in Absence of a Robust Physiological Resonance
Affective Science (2022)