CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 156Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPersonality Traits and PsychologySocial Power and Status Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 41 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Human Affection Exchange: VIII. Further Evidence of the Benefits of Expressed Affection

Floyd, Kory, Hess, Jon A., Miczo, Lisa A., Halone, Kelby K., Mikkelson, Alan C., Tusing, Kyle James·2005·Communication Quarterly
DOI 10.1080/01463370500101071
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Affection exchange theory speaks to the benefits that affectionate communication elicits, not only when it is received but also when it is communicated to others. Previous research has provided evidence for the individual and relational benefits of having a high trait affection level, yet these benefits may partially be accounted for by the affectionate behavior one elicits from others by being affectionate in the first place. We addressed the validity of this alternative hypothesis in this project, first by re-analyzing data in which we compared correlations between trait affection level and various benefits with the same correlations after controlling for received affection. Next, in three studies involving a total sample of 1,144 people, we further investigated the benefits of expressed affection, both on its own and when received affection is covaried out. Results indicated that affection expressed to others is associated with numerous individual and relational benefits, including increased happiness and self esteem, decreased fear of intimacy and susceptibility to depression, and higher relationship satisfaction. Many of these effects are attenuated—and some are intensified—when affection received from others is held constant.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01463370500101071

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 41 references

1 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Floyd K, 2004, Human affection exchange: IX. Neurological hemispheric dominance and reactions to shifts in affectionate behavior
  2. Floyd K, 2002, “At the mention of your name”: Affect shifts induced by relationship-specific cognitions
  3. Oliver JM, 1993, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 8, 405
  4. Rotter JB, 1972, Applications of a social learning theory of personality

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–156 of 156

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Floyd, K., Hess, J. A., Miczo, L. A., Halone, K. K., Mikkelson, A. C., & Tusing, K. J.
Affiliations
Arizona State University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Communication Quarterly
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2005-08
Volume
53
Issue
3
Pages
285-303
ISSN
  • 0040-8573 (ISSN-L)
  • 0146-3373
  • 1746-4102
DOI
10.1080/01463370500101071
OpenAlex
W2065360617
Cited by
156
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Communication Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Power and Status Dynamics
Keywords
affection exchange theory, happiness, self-esteem, fear of intimacy, depression vulnerability, relationship satisfaction, interpersonal communication, romantic relationships

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