CAREANDSELFLOVE

I keep returning to a peculiar image: two people know what the other fears, which ordinary ritual helps them through a bad day, and what sentence from childhood still follows them around—yet neither person knows what the other sounds like when interrupted.

They may know one another’s private stories before they know one another’s ordinary behavior.

They may wait twelve days for a reply and still feel more carefully heard than they do in conversations that happen every morning.

That is the strange timing of a pen-pal friendship. It can be emotionally fast, behaviorally slow and almost impossible to measure using the rules we apply to texting, local friendships or everyday social contact.

When I first consider the question of how having a pen pal changes the speed of a friendship, I do not imagine a friendship simply becoming slower. I imagine one friendship being divided into several clocks. The messages slow down. Reflection speeds up. Personal disclosure may deepen surprisingly early. Trust, however, continues to move at the stubborn pace of evidence.

That distinction matters.

A pen pal can know the story of your divorce without knowing whether you return borrowed things. They can understand your fear of disappointing people without seeing what you do when someone disappoints you. They can write with extraordinary tenderness while remaining largely untested by shared inconvenience, disagreement or change.

So my direct answer is this:

Having a pen pal slows the frequency of communication but may accelerate reflection, narrative intimacy and the feeling of being known. It cannot fast-forward reliability, conflict repair or knowledge of how someone behaves across real situations.

The relationship becomes slower in contact but potentially faster in meaning.

I do not want to romanticize this. Paper is not automatically more sincere than a screen. A handwritten letter can be performative. A text message can save a friendship. An envelope can contain manipulation, while a three-line email can contain exactly the care someone needs.

What fascinates me is not the stationery. It is the altered rhythm.

A pen-pal friendship asks two people to leave a conversation unfinished, continue living, and trust that the connection may return.

Friendship does not have only one speed

We often talk about a relationship “moving fast” as though every part of it travels together. In practice, different parts of a friendship develop at different rates.

You can exchange personal information quickly without building trust. You can trust someone’s practical reliability while knowing little about their internal world. You can feel intensely connected but remain unable to resolve a small misunderstanding.

When I use the phrase friendship speed, I am referring to at least four different processes:

• how often two people communicate,
• how quickly they disclose meaningful information,
• how rapidly they gather evidence of reliability,
• and how effectively the relationship learns to survive discomfort.

Research on friendship formation confirms that accumulated time matters. Communication researcher Jeffrey Hall found that spending more time together was associated with closer friendship, especially when that time involved chosen leisure rather than only unavoidable contact. His findings are often reduced online to tidy numerical rules, but I think the more valuable insight is that friendship depends on both the quantity and the quality of shared time.

A pen pal complicates that equation.

You may spend forty minutes writing a letter, then hear nothing for two weeks. The total contact time is limited, but one letter may contain more memory, personality and interpretation than dozens of routine messages.

The friendship can therefore be slow in frequency and fast in narrative depth.

The four clocks of a pen-pal friendship

I find this four-clock model useful because it prevents two opposite mistakes.

The first is assuming that a slow response proves a weak connection.

The second is assuming that a beautiful, vulnerable letter proves a strong one.

Neither conclusion is reliable on its own.

A person may respond slowly because slow correspondence is the agreed form of the relationship. Another person may disclose quickly because writing feels safe, because they are lonely, because they have weak boundaries or because they genuinely feel understood. Several explanations can be true at the same time.

I call the closeness that develops across these delayed exchanges asynchronous intimacy: intimacy created by people who are emotionally responding to one another without occupying the same moment.

A pen pal turns friendship into a series of returns

Most messaging platforms make conversation feel permanently open.

Even when no one is speaking, the thread remains available. You may see a profile picture, activity status, typing bubble, read receipt or notification. A response feels technically possible at almost any time.

This creates what I think of as a continuous relationship channel. The person is not exactly present, but they are never completely absent either. That ambiguity invites constant interpretation.

Why did they view the message without responding?

Why were they active elsewhere?

Why did they react to a post but not answer the question?

A letter closes the channel.

You write. You send it. The friendship moves beyond your control for a while.

Then, perhaps days or weeks later, it returns.

I think that return changes the emotional architecture of the relationship. Correspondence becomes episodic rather than continuous. Each letter has a beginning, middle and end. It becomes a distinct encounter rather than another fragment added to an endless stream.

You enter the other person’s world for several pages. You leave it. You carry pieces of it into your week.

The next letter does not simply continue the conversation. It demonstrates that the other person remembered there was a conversation worth continuing.

In qualitative research based on more than 600 pages exchanged during a year-long pen-pal project, Frank and colleagues traced developing connection through reciprocity, vulnerability, understanding, validation and care. Some pairs remained relatively superficial, while others developed deeper exchanges and mutual support.

I appreciate the limitation inside that finding. It does not claim that putting words inside an envelope automatically produces intimacy. Instead, it shows how connection becomes visible when writers begin responding not only to one another’s topics but also to their emotional meanings.

The important transition is not:

“You told me something, so I will now tell you something.”

It is:

“You told me something. I understood why it mattered. I carried it with me. Now I am returning it with care.”

The return is part of the friendship.

The silence between letters is not empty

I used to think of waiting as the space between two meaningful events. In a pen-pal friendship, waiting is one of the events.

A letter has been sent, but its effect is not finished. The writer may wonder how a particular paragraph will be received. The recipient may reread a sentence days later. A question may remain quietly active while ordinary life continues around it.

This differs from the silence of instant messaging because the delay belongs to the format.

In live conversation, rapid turn-taking can signal that two people are mentally aligned. Research examining conversations found that faster response times—measured in fractions of a second—were associated with a stronger subjective feeling of social connection.

On messaging platforms, delays also communicate because users develop expectations about how quickly a person normally responds. Research on technology-mediated conflict describes some delays as chronemic expectancy violations: disruptions in the timing a person expected. During a sensitive interaction, a delayed response may be interpreted as rejection, distance or unwillingness to engage.

That study concerned romantic conflict rather than pen pals, so I would not treat it as direct evidence about correspondence. What I take from it is a broader lesson: timing becomes painful when it contradicts the relationship’s established meaning.

Pen pals establish a slower meaning from the beginning.

If two people expect to write every two or three weeks, twelve quiet days do not necessarily communicate withdrawal. The absence has a container. It is less likely to become a minute-by-minute referendum on whether the friendship still exists.

This may be one of the calmest lessons correspondence offers:

Someone can care about you without being continuously available to you.

That sounds obvious. Emotionally, it is not always easy to believe.

Digital culture repeatedly collapses affection into access. Fast replies become proof of interest. Availability becomes evidence of care. Silence begins to look like rejection before we know what it means.

A pen-pal friendship can loosen that association. It teaches us that relational presence and digital presence are not identical.

Still, I would not suggest pretending timing has no meaning. Agreed slowness is different from unexplained disappearance. A month-long gap may feel natural in a monthly exchange and alarming in a weekly one.

Calm does not come from denying the meaning of time. It comes from making that meaning less ambiguous.

Writing creates a room between feeling and disclosure

Spoken conversation often requires us to discover what we think while another person is already listening.

We start a sentence before we fully understand where it is going. We monitor the other person’s expression. We adjust to silence, discomfort or surprise. Sometimes that immediacy creates honesty. At other times, it produces defensiveness, performance or confusion.

A letter provides a small room between feeling something and giving that feeling to another person.

I consider that room one of the most psychologically important features of correspondence.

You can begin by describing what happened and realize that the real subject is how it changed you. You can notice that a paragraph is trying to impress rather than communicate. You can remove something that belongs in a private journal instead of another person’s hands.

You can also decide that your original sentence was more honest than the polished one.

Editing does not automatically make emotion fake. Sometimes the first version is simply unclear. Deliberate writing can help a person offer an experience in a form that another person can receive without being forced to decode it in real time.

Experimental research on emotional self-disclosure has connected the act of putting personal experiences into words with emotional, relational and psychological outcomes. In one 2018 experiment, emotional disclosure produced benefits even when participants thought their conversational partner was a chatbot rather than a human. This suggests that part of the benefit can come from organizing and expressing the experience itself, not only from the listener’s identity.

A pen-pal friendship adds something that a solitary disclosure exercise cannot provide: another person may remember, respond and reveal something in return.

That combination can be powerful. Private processing meets social reception.

But I also see a risk here. Time can improve honesty, and it can improve performance. A person can use several days to sound more reflective, compassionate or emotionally stable than they usually behave.

A beautifully composed self may be sincere and still highly selected.

For that reason, I would never treat eloquence as evidence of safety. The quality of someone’s prose cannot replace the slower evidence of how they respond to boundaries, misunderstanding, difference and disappointment.

Pen-pal intimacy has high narrative density

Imagine two new friends exchanging twenty messages:

“How was your day?”

“Busy.”

“Same.”

“Did you see that video?”

Now imagine a pen pal answering one question:

“What has been taking up more emotional space than you expected lately?”

The second interaction is slower but denser. It contains circumstances, interpretation and self-knowledge.

I use the term narrative density to describe the amount of meaningful personal context held inside one interaction.

A pen pal often learns more than what happened to you. They learn how you organize what happened.

Do you make meaning through humor?

Do you notice injustice, atmosphere, texture or other people’s moods?

Which detail do you repeat?

Which part of the story do you protect?

Do you write around anger before naming it?

Do you minimize your accomplishments but describe your failures in perfect detail?

Over time, letters reveal patterns of attention. A person begins to know not only your biography but the shape of your mind moving through that biography.

This may explain why a pen-pal friendship can feel emotionally advanced after relatively few exchanges. Each interaction contains a large sample of the person’s inner world.

It can also create the powerful experience of feeling known.

Across several studies involving friends, romantic partners, family members and acquaintances, feeling known predicted relationship satisfaction more strongly than believing that one knew the other person. The main exception appeared in parents’ relationships with their children.

A responsive letter can communicate “I know you” in unusually concrete ways.

It remembers the interview you were afraid of.

It asks whether the noisy neighbor finally moved.

It connects today’s decision with a hope you described three months earlier.

It notices that you always describe being exhausted before admitting that you are hurt.

What I find important is that the person is not simply retrieving information. They are showing that your experience continued to exist in their mind after the letter ended.

The friendship can therefore feel fast because recognition is concentrated.

You may not be receiving more attention in total. You may be receiving attention with a longer memory.

Why pen-pal friendship feels different from constant texting

I do not divide communication into “real life” and “online life” as though only one contains genuine human experience. A relationship can be deeply meaningful through email. It can also be emotionally empty in the same physical room.

The useful distinction is between different communication conditions.

Email, gaming chat, video calls, group messages, handwritten letters and voice notes provide different cues. They change how quickly people respond, how much they can edit and what kind of attention an exchange invites.

Even within one medium, intention matters. A thoughtful text may be more nourishing than a weekly letter written from obligation.

A qualitative study involving 687 Australian young adults found that participants perceived differences between online and offline interactions with close friends in areas such as control, accessibility, nonverbal information, depth, intimacy and value. Some participants appreciated having more time to consider online responses, while many still experienced face-to-face interaction as richer or more meaningful.

The research examined existing friendships and online interaction broadly rather than new pen-pal relationships. Still, I think it helps explain the central trade-off of written correspondence: it increases control while removing immediate social information.

What changes when the medium changes?

I do not see this table as a competition.

Every medium gives something and removes something.

Letters remove tone of voice, facial expression and instant clarification. In exchange, they provide time, structure and a clearer boundary around attention.

Texting offers continuity and practical closeness. It also creates more opportunities to monitor response speed and confuse availability with affection.

Neither medium guarantees care. It shapes the conditions under which care must be expressed.

Waiting can become a form of positive anticipation

Waiting is often treated as the price people pay for having a pen pal.

Sometimes it is exactly that.

Waiting after a vulnerable letter can feel exposing. A misunderstanding can remain alive for too long. A repeated imbalance may become obvious when one person writes thoughtfully and the other sends rushed replies without engaging with anything that was shared.

But waiting can also produce anticipation.

Daily-diary research conducted during the early COVID-19 pandemic found that thinking about future positive experiences was associated with more positive emotion in the same episode and, in some analyses, into the following one. The researchers were careful about the study’s context and causal limitations, and I want to be equally careful: anticipating a letter is not a mental-health treatment, and the study was not about pen pals. It does, however, support the plausible idea that looking forward to something can become a small positive experience before the event happens.

A future letter gives an ordinary week a modest horizon.

Not a rescue.

Not a dramatic transformation.

Simply the possibility that something personal may arrive.

I find this especially relevant to the idea of a calm space. Much of modern attention is organized around demand. We receive notifications to clear, content to consume, tasks to complete and messages that seem to require immediate management.

A pen-pal reply is different. It cannot be summoned on command. Its arrival is partly outside your control.

There can be pleasure in becoming receptive rather than remaining constantly responsive.

The healthiest anticipation, however, remains light. You can look forward to a letter without making it responsible for regulating your entire mood. If the wait turns into compulsive inbox checking, panic or a test of personal worth, the friendship may need clearer expectations—and you may need more than one source of emotional connection.

Reciprocity becomes slower but more visible

Good correspondence is not an exchange of mathematically equal word counts.

One person may write four pages during a quiet month and half a page during a crisis. Another may prefer shorter, more frequent letters. Healthy reciprocity does not require identical performance.

It requires evidence that both lives fit inside the relationship.

Both people initiate over time.

Both show curiosity.

Both respond to what appears meaningful.

Both are allowed to have difficult periods without permanently becoming the caretaker or the main character.

Research on everyday reciprocity suggests that close relationships do not function like rigid marketplaces. In research examining helping among friends, gratitude and indebtedness related to closeness in different ways. This supports a more flexible understanding of reciprocity than immediate, equal repayment.

A pen-pal friendship makes relational turns easier to observe.

Did the person answer your question?

Did they acknowledge the experience you trusted them with?

Did your vulnerability invite care, or did it merely become an opening for their next story?

Do they ask thoughtful questions but avoid revealing anything about themselves?

Do you repeatedly edit your needs out of letters because you are afraid of becoming difficult?

The Stepping Stones pen-pal research found that vulnerability was often followed by kindness, encouragement or related disclosure. Reciprocity became part of the transition toward deeper connection.

For me, this identifies the mechanism more clearly than the romantic idea that letters are naturally intimate.

A friendship does not deepen because a letter is long.

It deepens because one letter changes the next.

A pen pal may become familiar before becoming fully real

Here is the tension I find most fascinating: a pen pal may become emotionally familiar before becoming behaviorally familiar.

You may know how they understand grief without knowing how they treat a tired server.

You may know their childhood dream without knowing whether they keep small promises.

You may know the carefully reconstructed version of a conflict but not how they behave during the first unedited minute of frustration.

You may know their values as sentences before you know their values as actions.

This does not make the relationship false. Every new friendship begins with incomplete information.

The distinctive risk of correspondence is that narrative intimacy can move much faster than situational knowledge. Empty spaces invite imagination, and imagination is very good at turning partial evidence into a coherent person.

I call this the beautiful draft problem.

Each pen pal may be relating partly to the real writer and partly to a carefully assembled draft of that writer. The draft can be completely sincere. It is still incomplete.

You choose the stories.

You revise the wording.

You decide what emotional context to include.

You send the photograph in which you recognize yourself.

The other person does the same.

I do not think the solution is cynicism. Suspicion can destroy a promising friendship as effectively as naivety can make one unsafe.

The better response is to let the person become three-dimensional gradually.

Notice how they respond when you disagree.

Notice whether a boundary makes them curious, respectful, cold or punitive.

Notice whether they can admit misunderstanding without transforming themselves into the injured party.

If the friendship eventually includes calls or an in-person meeting, allow the new information to revise your picture. Do not force the living person to match the version created through letters.

Emotional depth is not the same as trust

One of the most common mistakes in new relationships is using the depth of disclosure as a measure of the depth of trust.

I understand why this happens. If someone shares a painful or private story, the moment feels significant. It may be significant. But disclosure reveals that a person was willing to tell you something. It does not automatically prove that the relationship can hold it safely.

Trust requires more than access to secrets.

It involves consistency, respect, honesty, accountability and the ability to tolerate separateness.

A person may disclose intensely because they feel close to you. They may also disclose because they are isolated, impulsive, dysregulated, testing your availability or accustomed to relationships that become emotionally consuming very quickly.

I would not respond to early vulnerability with coldness. I would respond with warmth that does not accelerate beyond the available evidence.

You can say:

“Thank you for trusting me with that. You do not have to share anything more than feels comfortable.”

That response communicates care without rewarding the idea that closeness must be continually proven through deeper disclosure.

A healthy pen-pal friendship allows intimacy to expand and contract. It does not require each letter to expose a more painful layer than the one before it.

Can having a pen pal reduce loneliness?

A pen pal may create meaningful connection. I would still avoid promising that correspondence will cure loneliness.

Direct research is encouraging but limited.

A 2023 qualitative study examining letter writing as a response to loneliness described connections created between social-work students and adults in rural communities.

Another intergenerational program connected 69 healthcare-professional students with 180 older adults through letters, email and phone calls over three months. Students reported improved wellness and showed increased comfort communicating with older adults. However, the primary measured outcomes focused heavily on students and professional education, so the study does not establish a universal anti-loneliness effect for every participant.

I think these studies support a hopeful but modest conclusion: structured correspondence can facilitate contact, empathy and human connection.

They do not show that one pen pal can meet every social need.

Loneliness is not simply a shortage of messages.

A person may miss touch, shared activity, practical help, spontaneous company, group belonging or the safety of being known in daily life. A distant correspondent may meet some of these needs beautifully and be unable to meet others.

I prefer to think of a pen pal as one bridge rather than the entire landscape.

The friendship can matter greatly without being required to become everything.

Signs a pen-pal friendship is moving at a healthy speed

Because narrative intimacy can arrive early, I believe it is useful to evaluate the friendship through behavior rather than emotional intensity alone.

A connection does not become healthy because it feels powerful. It becomes healthier when both people can remain curious, separate, imperfect and safe.

A pen-pal friendship speed check

For me, the healthiest pace feels interesting without feeling coercive.

The friendship adds emotional space to your life rather than occupying all of it.

How to start a pen-pal friendship without forcing intimacy

The goal is not to manufacture a profound connection. It is to create conditions in which connection can emerge safely.

1. Agree on a broad rhythm

You do not need a formal contract. One sentence can prevent weeks of uncertainty:

“I usually write every two or three weeks, and I never expect an immediate reply.”

This transforms delay from a possible verdict into an understood feature of the relationship.

2. Begin with texture rather than a résumé

Age, work, hobbies and favorite media provide useful facts. They do not necessarily create presence.

I would include a small scene instead:

• what your street sounds like early in the morning,
• the meal you make when you are too tired to decide,
• the object that has followed you through several homes,
• or the part of your daily routine that feels strangely private.

Texture allows a pen pal to encounter your attention before receiving your autobiography.

3. Use a “one layer deeper” rule

Respond at approximately the level of vulnerability the friendship has earned. If it feels safe, move one layer deeper rather than ten.

If your pen pal mentions changing jobs, you might ask what they hope will feel different in the next one. You do not need to request their deepest workplace wound.

Gradual disclosure protects both people from confusing emotional acceleration with established trust.

4. Respond to the person, not only the subject

A thoughtful reply contains evidence of reception.

Mention something specific. Reflect its emotional meaning without diagnosing it. Ask a question that invites expansion rather than interrogation.

For example:

“You wrote that the move was exciting but unexpectedly quiet. Which part of your old routine do you miss more than you thought you would?”

That question shows that you read both the event and the feeling around it.

5. Leave ordinary life inside the friendship

Depth is not created only through pain.

Recipes, neighborhood observations, failed baking experiments, strange dreams, changing seasons and minor achievements prevent the friendship from turning into mutual therapy.

I value ordinary details because they give intimacy somewhere to rest.

A relationship that knows only your wounds does not yet know your whole life.

6. Let the letters be uneven

If every response must be thoughtful, long and profound, correspondence becomes another performance task.

A postcard can preserve continuity during a demanding month.

A short message can say:

“I received your letter and want to answer properly when I have more energy.”

Consistency does not require identical output.

7. Protect privacy gradually

Use a dedicated email address or a post-office box when writing to someone you met online. Avoid sharing your home address, workplace schedule, financial details, identification documents or intimate images early in the relationship.

Verify identity before moving to more personal communication channels.

Never send money because a new correspondent creates urgency, guilt or secrecy.

If either participant is a minor, correspondence should occur only through a reputable, supervised program with clear safeguarding procedures.

8. Allow the medium to evolve—or remain the same

Some pen-pal friendships remain entirely written. Others eventually include voice notes, calls or meetings.

I do not think one path is more authentic.

If you meet, choose a public place, arrange your own transportation, tell someone where you are and keep the first meeting easy to leave.

The live conversation may initially feel awkward. Both people have lost their editing time. Awkwardness does not invalidate the written friendship. It reveals another dimension of it.

Seven letter prompts that invite connection without feeling like an interview

I prefer prompts that open a small door rather than demand a confession.

1. What small part of your week would have been invisible to everyone else?
2. Which place has shaped your personality more than people would guess?
3. What have you recently changed your mind about?
4. What ordinary ritual makes a difficult day feel more manageable?
5. Which compliment have you remembered for years, and why that one?
6. What are you learning to do less urgently?
7. What question do you wish friends asked you more often?

You do not need to answer every question.

One honest answer usually creates more connection than seven polished ones.

What a pen pal teaches Us about calm connection

The lesson of a pen pal is not that phones are bad, handwriting is morally superior or people were better at friendship in the past.

The more interesting lesson is that intimacy does not always grow at the same speed as access.

We can have immediate access to someone and remain unknown.

We can wait two weeks for a letter and feel carefully held in another person’s mind.

We can disclose a great deal without having tested trust.

We can communicate rarely while building a reliable pattern of return.

When I think about calm connection, I keep coming back to this distinction. Calm is not permanent availability. It is not the certainty that another person will answer immediately. It is the growing confidence that the relationship can survive ordinary distance without turning every silence into danger.

A friendship is not only the time two people spend in direct contact.

It is also what their contact allows them to notice, remember and carry forward.

That is how having a pen pal changes the speed of a friendship. The interval between interactions becomes longer. The unit of attention becomes larger. Narrative intimacy may accelerate, while behavioral knowledge remains slow.

Slowness does not guarantee depth.

It gives depth a different place to grow.

A slow friendship can still move You quickly

A pen-pal friendship contains a beautiful contradiction.

It may take several weeks to complete one conversational turn, yet only a few letters to reach subjects that ordinary conversation avoids for months.

The friendship can feel old before it has been widely tested.

It can feel intimate before it becomes practical.

It can feel present while the other person remains unreachable.

I think the wisest response is to enjoy that contradiction without surrendering judgment to it.

Let writing create reflection.

Let anticipation add brightness to an ordinary week.

Let remembered details produce the rare relief of feeling known.

But let trust move at the speed of evidence.

Notice whether care is reciprocal. Notice whether boundaries are respected. Notice whether misunderstandings can be repaired. Notice whether the friendship gives both people more room to become themselves rather than asking either of them to become permanently available.

You do not need to rush a pen-pal friendship into becoming “real.”

The letters are already real.

They are simply one form of reality: deliberate, partial and still unfolding.

Perhaps that is the calmest thing correspondence can teach us. A relationship can remain alive without remaining constantly open. Someone can leave a conversation and still intend to return.

A pause can be a pause.

Not abandonment.

Not failure.

Not proof that you mattered less than you hoped.

Then one day, something arrives.

You recognize the handwriting, the address or the subject line.

The friendship begins again exactly where attention left a place for it.

Related posts You’ll love

• Rebuild trust in sisterhood without losing Yourself: 9 healing exercises for safer female friendships, FREE PDF
• Friendship breakups hurt differently — why they’re so confusing and how to stop self-blaming with healing mantras
• The friendship audit: When Your circle is built on stress, not support (a research informed reset that feels like relief)
• Female friendship hierarchies: The subtle social rules no one admits (and how to stay true to Yourself inside the circle)
• How to build real connection when You’re tired of surface-level friendships
• Friendship minimalism: Fewer friends, deeper roots — The mindful way to a steadier life, with FREE PDF!

Editorial note: This article is educational and does not replace individualized mental-health advice. Direct research on adult pen-pal friendship remains limited. Conclusions therefore distinguish findings from pen-pal studies from careful inferences based on broader research into friendship, self-disclosure, response timing, reciprocity and social connection.

FAQ

Sources and inspirations

• Adams, M. M., & Miller, J. G. (2022). The flexible nature of everyday reciprocity: Reciprocity, helping, and relationship closeness. Motivation and Emotion.
• Frank, J. M., Granruth, L. B., Preibisch, R., Watson, D., Leffler, B., & Glazier, M. (2023). “Please, Mr. Postman:” Exploring the use of letter writing to address loneliness. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work.
• Frank, J. M., Preibisch, R., Watson, D. M., Brierton Granruth, L., Glazier, M., & Leffler, B. (2024). Stepping Stones: Using letter writing to build human connection. Relational Social Work.
• Hall, J. A. (2019). How many hours does it take to make a friend? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
• Ho, A., Hancock, J., & Miner, A. S. (2018). Psychological, relational, and emotional effects of self-disclosure after conversations with a chatbot. Journal of Communication.
• Huang, Q., & Yao, S. (2024). No response? Chronemic expectancy violation and relational turbulence in technologically-mediated romantic relational conflict. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.
• Leslie-Miller, C. J., Waugh, C. E., & Cole, V. T. (2021). Coping with COVID-19: The benefits of anticipating future positive events and maintaining optimism. Frontiers in Psychology.
• Miller, A. J., Jezewski, E. E., Harlow, E. N., & Potter, J. F. (2022). A pen pal program during COVID-19 pandemic increases student interest for careers in geriatrics. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education.
• Schroeder, J., & Fishbach, A. (2024). Feeling known predicts relationship satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
• Scott, R. A., Stuart, J., & Barber, B. L. (2022). Connecting with close friends online: A qualitative analysis of young adults’ perceptions of online and offline social interactions with friends. Computers in Human Behavior Reports.
• Templeton, E. M., Chang, L. J., Reynolds, E. A., Cone LeBeaumont, M. D., & Wheatley, T. (2022). Fast response times signal social connection in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.