Table 1.
Descriptive statistics for combined pittsburgh mind body center and pittsburgh cold study 3 samples (N = 404).
Table 2.
Contingency table of the number of person-days on which hugs and conflicts occurred.
Fig 1.
Interaction between hug receipt and conflict in predicting same day negative affect.
There was a significant interaction between experiencing conflict and receiving a hug in predicting same day negative affect. When individuals reported conflict without a hug they had higher concurrent negative affect than when they had also received a hug. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals for the mean predicted same day negative affect values.
Fig 2.
Interaction between hug receipt and conflict in predicting same day positive affect.
There was a significant interaction between experiencing conflict and receiving a hug in predicting same day positive affect. When individuals reported conflict without a hug they had lower concurrent positive affect than when they had also received a hug. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals for the mean predicted same day positive affect values.
Fig 3.
Interaction between hug receipt and conflict in predicting next day negative affect.
There was a significant interaction between experiencing conflict and receiving a hug in predicting next day negative affect. When individuals reported conflict without a hug they had higher negative affect on the next day than when they had also received a hug on the previous day. Error bars represent 95% confidence intervals for the mean predicted next day negative affect values.