Cited by 88Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlAttachment and Relationship DynamicsStress Responses and Cortisol

When couples’ hearts beat together: Synchrony in heart rate variability during conflict predicts heightened inflammation throughout the day

Open access
Wilson, Stephanie J., Bailey, Brittney E., Jaremka, Lisa M., Fagundes, Christopher P., Andridge, Rebecca, Malarkey, William B., Gates, Kathleen M., Kiecolt-Glaser, Janice K.·2018·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

Hostile conflict in marriage can increase risks for disease and mortality. Physiological synchrony between partners-e.g., the linkage between their autonomic fluctuations-appears to capture engagement, or an inability to disengage from an exchange, and thus may amplify the health risks of noxious interactions such as marital conflict. Prior work has not examined the unique health correlates of this physiological signature. To test associations between couples' heart rate variability (HRV) synchrony during conflict and inflammation, 43 married couples engaged in a marital problem discussion while wearing heart monitors and provided four blood samples; they repeated this protocol at a second visit. When couples' moment-to-moment HRV changes tracked more closely together during conflict, they had higher levels of three inflammatory markers (i.e., IL-6, stimulated TNF-α, and sVCAM-1) across the day. Stronger HRV synchrony during conflict also predicted greater negative affect reactivity. Synchrony varied within couples, and was related to situational factors rather than global relationship traits. These data highlight partners' HRV linkage during conflict as a novel social-biological pathway to inflammation-related disease.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2018.04.017

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In contexts marked by conflict, unresolved trauma, or insecure attachment, synchrony could reflect co-dysregulation and shared distress, which may compromise wellbeing over time.

    “Conversely, in contexts marked by conflict, unresolved trauma, or insecure attachment, synchrony could reflect co-dysregulation and shared distress (37, 67), which may compromise wellbeing over time.”

    From Physiological attunement and flourishing: understanding the influence of relationships on health (2025) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Results (§3.5.2) link stronger synchrony during marital conflict to greater negative-affect reactivity, and §3.4 links it to higher inflammatory markers during the study day. These findings support the possibility that synchrony during conflict reflects shared distress and poses a health risk. The paper does not examine unresolved trauma or insecure attachment, or establish compromised wellbeing over time; the Discussion (§4) says long-term risk would require further assessment. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • During conflict interactions, high autonomic synchrony sometimes predicted emotional strain and hostile affect.

    “Conversely, during conflict interactions, high autonomic synchrony sometimes predicted emotional strain and hostile affect (30, 37).”

    From Physiological attunement and flourishing: understanding the influence of relationships on health (2025) · cites this paper as [37]

    The Results (§3.5.2; page unavailable) report that greater HRV synchrony during conflict predicted greater negative-affect reactivity, supporting the emotional-strain portion. The Results (§3.3; page unavailable) do not establish a link with hostile affect and report that synchrony did not track hostile behavior during the disagreement. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Physiological synchrony does not necessarily reflect a positive evaluation of the interaction.

    “While in some studies physiological synchrony was found to be related to positive affect (Chanel et al. 2012; Danyluck and Page‐Gould 2018), empathy (Chatel‐Goldman et al. 2014), and group cohesion (Gordon et al. 2020), others observed a positive relationship between physiological synchrony and negative affect (Wilson et al. 2018) or distress in couples (Levenson and Gottman 1983), suggesting that”
  • Some studies identified potential physiological costs, such as elevated inflammatory markers following high HRV synchrony during conflict.

    “Several studies linked higher attunement to emotional or relational outcomes, including increased marital satisfaction (41), while others identified potential physiological costs, such as elevated inflammatory markers following high HRV synchrony during conflict (37).”
  • During marital conflicts, couples showed higher HRV attunement, and this was associated with elevated inflammatory markers and negative affect, suggesting a stress-reactive form of attunement.

    “For example, during marital conflicts, couples showed higher HRV attunement, and this was associated with elevated inflammatory markers and negative affect, suggesting a stress-reactive form of attunement (30, 37).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilson, S. J., Bailey, B. E., Jaremka, L. M., Fagundes, C. P., Andridge, R., Malarkey, W. B., Gates, K. M., & Kiecolt-Glaser, J. K.
Affiliations
  • The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • University of Delaware (US)
  • Rice University (US)
  • Oklahoma State University Medical Center (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Wilson, Stephanie J.
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-07
Volume
93
Pages
107-116
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2803005465
Cited by
88
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Rice Research Repository (Rice University) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001070)
  • National Institute on Aging (R00AG056667, K99AG056667, L30 AG060525)
  • National Cancer Institute (K05CA172296, R21CA158868)
  • National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (T32DE014320)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
marital conflict, heart rate variability, physiological synchrony, couples, inflammation, interleukin-6, TNF-α, sVCAM-1, autonomic nervous system
MeSH terms
Adult, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Heart Rate, Hostility, Humans, Inflammation, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Marriage, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, Interleukin-6, Spouses, Vascular Cell Adhesion Molecule-1, Family Conflict

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review