Source: University of Bristol / PLOS

Hugging serves as one of humanity’s most universal nonverbal communication channels. As an essential form of social touch, gentle physical embraces stimulate tactile C-tactile afferent nerve fibers, buffer systemic physiological stress responses, reduce heart rate, and stimulate the release of oxytocin.

Yet despite its recognized benefits for physical and mental well-being, interpersonal touch is experienced heterogeneously: while an embrace offers profound comfort to one person, it can evoke stiffness, awkwardness, or discomfort in another.

Until now, cognitive psychologists and affective neuroscientists have lacked empirical clarity on which psychological dimensions determine whether an embrace leaves an enduring emotional impression.

In a study published October 28, 2026, in the open-access journal PLOS One, a research team led by Anna Lena Dueren at the University of Bristol investigated the individual traits and perceptual factors that shape autobiographical memories of social touch.

Assessing Touch Across 15,000 Individuals

To capture the emotional nuances of physical contact at scale, Dueren and colleagues recruited 15,049 healthy UK adults across public broadcasting networks and nationwide media platforms. Participants completed a comprehensive psychometric assessment mapping their hugging frequencies, somatic body awareness, attachment behaviors, trait empathy, and detailed recollections of past embraces.

The overarching data confirmed the soothing role of interpersonal touch: nearly 70% of respondents reported remembering hugs primarily for their positive emotional impact, particularly feelings of solace, validation, and safety.

However, the authors noted clear divergences based on core psychological phenotypes:

  • Empathy: Participants demonstrating elevated levels of both cognitive empathy (the ability to understand another’s perspective) and affective empathy (the capacity to physically share another’s feelings) were far more likely to retain meaningful memories of hugs.
  • Body Perception: Higher scores on standardized body-perception metrics, which measure how consciously individuals integrate somatic sensations and cutaneous touch into their body schema, were strongly correlated with positive hug memories.
  • Habitual Practice: Everyday social habits played a direct role; individuals who routinely greet friends and relatives with embraces retained more positive touch memories, whereas those who reported uncertainty about hugging mechanics or expressed touch aversion exhibited diminished recall of emotional comfort.

Attachment Styles: Seeking Connection vs. Self-Reliance

The team observed a pronounced relationship between adult attachment orientations and the psychological value attributed to hugs.

Participants exhibiting high relational independence, a hallmark of avoidant attachment styles characterized by emotional self-reliance and interpersonal distancing, were significantly less inclined to remember hugs as emotionally rewarding.

In contrast, individuals scoring higher in separation anxiety, who frequently worry about emotional distance and crave close reassurance, consistently recalled hugs as salient, supportive, and emotionally grounding experiences.

“We hope our findings will help explain why hugs are perceived differently from person to person,” the authors noted. “A next step would be to further investigate how personality, previous experiences, and the context in which a hug occurs shape its perception. Ultimately, this could help us better understand when and for whom hugging provides comfort and social support.”

Methodological Context and the Science of Touch

The authors caution that the findings reflect a sample composed of 75% women in a Western society, where attitudes toward interpersonal distance and tactile boundaries may differ substantially from other cultures.

Furthermore, because the survey utilized a cross-sectional design, it establishes correlations rather than direct causal pathways between underlying personality architecture and the neurological consolidation of touch memories.

Nevertheless, the investigation bridges social psychology and tactile neurobiology, providing an empirical roadmap showing that our memory of a hug is determined not merely by the physical mechanics of the embrace, but by the internal lens of our empathy, attachment style, and bodily self-awareness.

Keywords; social neuroscience, attachment