Emily Perron

February 6, 2016

COM 380

Brief Reading 1

Public Touch Behavior in Romantic Relationships Between Men and Women is an

intriguing study on gender differences and dating practices. The article particularly compared

haptic behavior of men and women during different stages of behavior. The study focused on

public touch during different stages of a relationship and compared men and womens behaviors

throughout these stages. The study was interesting and thought-provoking, in both the methods

of data collection and reported findings.

The study describes interpersonal touch as influential in relationship quality and the

balance of intimacy. Through the study, three ideas are tested: whether public touch depends on

the stage of the relationship, whether partners adopt the similar tactile behavior, and whether men

or women initiate touch more. Ultimately the findings showed that serious daters touched twice

as much as casual daters and married couples, and spouses showed the least public affection.

Findings also showed that men and women showed similar amounts of touch across all stages,

but married couples were more in synced with each other. This research begins to explore the

complex study of haptics and especially Henslins category of love and intimacy.Both the reason

behind this study and the methods of the study seem simple; this study is to examine touch in

romantic relationships by observing behavior through naturalistic observation. However,

communication is more complex and group relationships are difficult to observe in a limited

setting. It is questionable how much information can be gathered in two minutes while standing
in line. It is also unusual to conduct a natural observation and then question unsuspecting

participants.

There are also many assumptions and biases in the article that would affect the study.

First, there is no indication that shows the amount of time the couple has been together and how

that affected the indicated stage in the relationship. From the questionnaire, researchers make

assumptions based on what stage each person identified with. Second, as mentioned, there are

limitations based on the fact that this study is strictly on a two-minute public observation and

self-disclosure. As pointed out in the article, there are also limitations based on the subject pool

strictly being heterosexual couples.

The study, while fascinating had me question initially the ethics of the method. Though I

could see how the findings contribute to research, especially explaining Henslins descriptions of

both friendship/warmth and love/ intimacy, I can imagine it being startling if I was out on a date

and approached about my relationship. While that is the setting of a naturalistic observation the

study seems invasive. However, studying relationships is valuable in the process of

understanding and improving interpersonal communication. To further study touch behavior in

romantic relationships, it would be interesting to study haptics among different relational

partners and among partners of different age groups.

Studying gender and public affection is an interesting topic throughout all stages of a

relationship. The article, Public Touch Behavior in Romantic Relationships Between Men and

Women introduces a study comparing three stages of a relationship and the practices of touch.

The findings of the study were understandable but the methods were questionable. Regardless,

the study is groundwork to further uncovering meaning behind the practice of tactile

communication.