Andrew Huberman· PhD
Now we also know from an extensive literature that the quality and perceived depth of a social bond correlates very strongly with how much physiological synchronization there is between individuals.
Loading…
The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
Now we also know from an extensive literature that the quality and perceived depth of a social bond correlates very strongly with how much physiological synchronization there is between individuals.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
there's a long standing literature showing that our physiology, things like our heart rate, our breathing, our skin conductance, meaning the amount of sweating, can be synchronized between individuals, and that synchronization can occur according to a variety of different things.
There've been studies that have people look at one another and they look and actually see that their pupil size of their eyes starts to synchronize. People's breathing can synchronize, people's body temperatures can even start to synchronize, or at least shifts in body temperature can synchronize.
In other words, when your bodies feel the same, you tend to feel more bonded to somebody else. And so this whole thing is a rather circular argument, when you feel closer to somebody else, your physiology synchronize, and the reverse is true as well, when your physiologies are synchronized, you feel closer to other people.