Want to keep the happy feelings in your relationship going strong? New research published in Social Psychological and Personality Science suggests that sex can provide a relationship satisfaction boost that lasts much longer than just the act itself. Scientists discovered that the positive “afterglow” of sex can linger for at least 24 hours, and it’s especially powerful when sex is a mutual decision or initiated by one partner, while sexual rejection can unfortunately create a negative ripple effect lasting several days.
Prior studies have shown that sexual satisfaction not only enhances daily contentment within a relationship but also contributes to its health over months and even years. Given the well-documented benefits of satisfying sex, it might seem surprising that most couples in long-term relationships engage in sexual activity relatively infrequently, typically only once or twice a week.
This infrequency raises an intriguing question: how can sex have such a profound and lasting impact on a relationship if it is not a daily occurrence? This observation suggests that individual instances of sexual intimacy might have psychological effects that extend far beyond the immediate moment, significantly influencing overall well-being in the relationship.
To explore this idea, researchers sought to understand more about the phenomenon of “sexual afterglow,” the lingering feeling of sexual satisfaction following sexual activity. Earlier work in this area indicated that sexual satisfaction could remain elevated for up to two days after sex. However, a more recent study suggested that this afterglow might last even longer, potentially up to five days, and that it could be influenced by factors such as who initiated the sexual encounter and whether sexual rejection was involved.
These findings highlighted the complex nature of sexual afterglow and raised important questions about the roles of sexual initiation and rejection. The current research aimed to gain a more comprehensive understanding of sexual afterglow, building upon these previous findings. In addition to examining whether sex was initiated by oneself or a partner, the researchers also considered the impact of sex that was mutually initiated by both partners. They also examined whether individual differences—such as how much importance a person places on sex—altered the strength of this afterglow.
“I am very interested in evolutionary perspectives on our behavior, especially as it relates to our romantic relationships. This phenomenon, sexual afterglow, helps us to understand an important function of sex. In addition to reproduction, sex also helps us to feel bonded with our romantic partners, despite occurring less frequently than other pair-bonding behaviors such as expressing love and affection,” explained study author Olivia Breedin, a doctoral candidate at Florida State University.
“I also believe that it is important to replicate findings in our field, this helps to build trust and confidence in psychological research. Thus, I like that we replicated my advisor, Dr. Andrea Meltzer’s, pioneering finding on sexual afterglow, and included those data as well as our current data and that of another recent replication to conduct integrative data analyses of the sexual afterglow effect.”
The researchers conducted two related studies using a daily diary approach. They recruited a total of 576 individuals through an online platform called Prolific. Participants in the first study were married individuals, while those in the second study were in partnered relationships.
At the beginning of the study, they filled out a baseline survey that collected information about their demographics, their attachment style in relationships (specifically, how anxious and avoidant they were), their level of sexual desire, and how frequently they desired to have sex. Then, every evening for either 12 or 14 days, participants reported whether they had engaged in any form of sex with their partner that day. They also rated their sexual satisfaction and their overall relationship satisfaction for that day.
In addition, on days when sex occurred, participants indicated who initiated the sexual activity on a scale from “100% me” to “100% my partner.” In the first study only, on days when sex did not occur, participants reported who was responsible for the decision not to have sex, using the same scale. This allowed researchers to identify instances of sexual rejection. In addition to these questions, participants rated their satisfaction with their sex life and with their overall relationship each day.
The team then used statistical techniques that took into account the repeated measurements from each participant over the course of the study. They examined how sexual satisfaction on any given day was related to whether sex occurred that day and on previous days. In other words, they looked at the immediate boost in satisfaction when sex took place as well as the lingering “afterglow” that might continue on the following days. The researchers also controlled for other factors that could influence these feelings, such as personality traits, self-esteem, and depressive symptoms, ensuring that the effects they observed were truly linked to the sexual experience itself.
The findings confirmed that sex on a given day was associated with higher sexual satisfaction on that same day. More interestingly, the study revealed that the positive effects of a sexual encounter did not vanish immediately. When the researchers examined data from one day later, they found a measurable increase in sexual satisfaction compared to days when no sex occurred. This one-day afterglow was consistent across the two studies and held true even when taking into account other personal and relationship factors. The researchers extended their analysis to look at associations up to seven days after sex, but the most reliable and robust effect was observed for the day immediately following the sexual encounter.
When sex was initiated by the partner or when both partners mutually decided to have sex, the positive afterglow was generally stronger than when the encounter was initiated solely by the individual reporting. This suggests that when a partner’s interest is clearly communicated, the resulting boost in sexual satisfaction may be more pronounced. On the other hand, self-initiated sex produced a somewhat weaker afterglow, although the difference was modest.
In addition to positive encounters, the researchers also examined the effects of sexual rejection. On days when a participant either rejected their partner’s sexual advance or felt rejected themselves, sexual satisfaction was lower. Not only did these negative experiences impact satisfaction on the day they occurred, but the negative effects could persist for up to three days afterward.
However, when the researchers combined their data with results from earlier studies in a mini-meta-analysis, the overall picture for sexual rejection was less clear-cut. While the new data suggested that rejection can have lingering negative effects, the combined analyses indicated that sexual rejection did not reliably produce lasting aftereffects across all samples. This difference highlights the possibility that the impact of rejection may depend on the context or the specific dynamics of the relationship.
Another important finding was the link between the afterglow of sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction. In both individual analyses and in the combined data from previous studies, a stronger sexual afterglow was associated with higher relationship satisfaction on the following day. This suggests that the boost in positive feelings following sex may spill over into a person’s overall view of their relationship. In other words, when a sexual encounter leaves one feeling good, this positivity can help improve the overall quality of the relationship—even if sex happens relatively infrequently.
“Discrete acts have lasting implications,” Breedin told PsyPost. “Having sex is associated with heightened feelings of satisfaction for at least a day, and maybe even longer for some people. This may be especially true when this sex communicates your partner’s interest, i.e., it is initiated by them or is mutually initiated. On the other hand, being sexually rejected may be associated with decreased feelings of satisfaction for a few days.”
The researchers were also interested in whether the strength of the sexual afterglow depended on how much importance a person places on sex. They looked at factors such as biological sex, attachment anxiety, the intensity of sexual desire, and how often a person would like to have sex. Contrary to what might be expected, the data showed little evidence that these individual differences had a significant influence on the length or strength of the afterglow.
“I was surprised that none of the variables associated with the importance of sex: biological sex (male or female), attachment anxiety, sexual desire, or desired sexual frequency, moderated the sexual afterglow effect,” Breedin said. “People who were higher or lower on these variables, or male, did not have differing strength of sexual afterglow.”
Like all studies, this research comes with some limitations. One limitation is that participants reported on their experiences once per day in the evening. Because of this, the exact time when sex occurred was not pinpointed, leaving some uncertainty about how long after the encounter the afterglow really lasts.
“It would be interesting to get more precise estimates of the length of sexual afterglow in the future, perhaps using a methodology such as ecological momentary assessments,” Breedin said.
Looking ahead, the research team plans to explore the lingering effects of other types of relationship behaviors. The idea is to examine whether other meaningful interactions between partners—such as sharing affectionate moments, engaging in supportive conversations, or even enjoying a shared meal—might also produce lasting benefits that spill over into overall relationship satisfaction.
“I like the idea of examining different types of ‘afterglow’ or examining the lasting effects of other relationship behaviors,” Breedin said. “I also think it would be interesting to continue to explore the universality of afterglow, to find out if there are other individual differences that influence the strength of sexual afterglow.”
The study, “Sexual Afterglow: How Long Does It Last and Does It Vary by the Relative Importance of Sex, Who Initiates It, or Who Rejects It?“, was authored by Olivia W. Breedin, Andrea L. Meltzer, Jordan A. Turner, Lindsey L. Hicks, Juliana E. French, Emma E. Altgelt, and James K. McNulty.
