Resuming social contact after months of contact restrictions: Social traits moderate associations between changes in social contact and well-being

K äme , Michael D.; Roos, Yannick; Rich e , Da id; W zus, Co nelia
A icle — Accep ed Manusc ip (Pos p in )
Resuming social con ac a e mon hs o con ac
es ic ions: Social ai s mode a e associa ions be ween
changes in social con ac and well-being
Jou nal o Resea ch in Pe sonali y
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Ge man Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch (DIW Be lin)
Sugges ed Ci a ion: K äme , Michael D.; Roos, Yannick; Rich e , Da id; W zus, Co nelia (2022) :
Resuming social con ac a e mon hs o con ac es ic ions: Social ai s mode a e associa ions
be ween changes in social con ac and well-being, Jou nal o Resea ch in Pe sonali y, ISSN
1095-7251, Else ie , Ams e dam, Vol. 98, pp. 1-13,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.j p.2022.104223
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/289416
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 1
Resuming Social Con ac A e Mon hs o Con ac Res ic ions: Social T ai s1
Mode a e Associa ions Be ween Changes in Social Con ac and Well-Being2
Michael D. K äme 1,2,3, Yannick Roos4, Da id Rich e 1,2,3, and Co nelia W zus4
3
1Ge man Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch, Ge many4
2In e na ional Max Planck Resea ch School on he Li e Cou se (LIFE), Max Planck5
Ins i u e o Human De elopmen , Ge many6
3F eie Uni e si ä Be lin, Ge many7
4Uni e si ä Heidelbe g, Ge many8
This is he pos p in o an a icle published in: Jou nal o Resea ch in Pe sonali y 98 (2022),
104223, 13 S.
A ailable online a : h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.j p.2022.104223
© <2022>. This manusc ip e sion is made a ailable unde he
CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license
h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 2
Au ho No e9
10
Michael D. K äme h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0002-9883-5676, Socio-Economic11
Panel (SOEP), Ge man Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch (DIW Be lin); In e na ional Max12
Planck Resea ch School on he Li e Cou se (LIFE), Max Planck Ins i u e o Human13
De elopmen ; Depa men o Educa ion and Psychology, F eie Uni e si ä Be lin.14
Yannick Roos h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0001-7223-8577, Depa men o 15
Psychological Aging Resea ch, Ins i u e o Psychology, Uni e si ä Heidelbe g.16
Da id Rich e h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0003-2811-8652, Socio-Economic Panel17
(SOEP), Ge man Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch (DIW Be lin); Su ey Resea ch18
Di ision, Depa men o Educa ion and Psychology, F eie Uni e si ä Be lin.19
Co nelia W zus h ps://o cid.o g/0000-0002-6290-959X, Depa men o 20
Psychological Aging Resea ch, Ins i u e o Psychology, Uni e si ä Heidelbe g.21
Acknowledgemen s: We hank The esa En inge o aluable eedback.22
The au ho s made he ollowing con ibu ions. Michael D. K äme :23
Concep ualiza ion, Da a Cu a ion, Fo mal Analysis, Me hodology, Visualiza ion, W i ing -24
O iginal D a P epa a ion, W i ing - Re iew & Edi ing; Yannick Roos: Concep ualiza ion,25
Da a Cu a ion, Me hodology, W i ing - Re iew & Edi ing; Da id Rich e :26
Concep ualiza ion, Funding Acquisi ion, Supe ision, W i ing - Re iew & Edi ing; Co nelia27
W zus: Concep ualiza ion, Funding Acquisi ion, Supe ision, Me hodology, W i ing -28
Re iew & Edi ing.29
Co espondence conce ning his a icle should be add essed o Michael D. K äme ,30
Ge man Ins i u e o Economic Resea ch, Moh ens . 58, 10117 Be lin, Ge many. E-mail:31
[email p o ec ed]32
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 3
Abs ac 33
Humans possess a need o social con ac . Sa is ac ion o his need bene i s well-being,34
whe eas dep i a ion is de imen al. Howe e , how much con ac people desi e is no 35
uni e sal, and e idence is mixed on indi idual di e ences in he associa ion be ween36
con ac and well-being. This p e egis e ed longi udinal s udy (N= 190) examined changes37
in social con ac and well-being (li e sa is ac ion, dep essi i y/anxie y) in Ge many du ing38
pe asi e con ac es ic ions, which exceed lab-based social dep i a ion. We analyzed how39
changes in pe sonal and indi ec con ac and well-being du ing he i s COVID-1940
lockdown a ied wi h social ai s (e.g., a ilia ion, ex a e sion). Resul s showed ha 41
a ilia ion mo i e, need o be alone, and social anxie y mode a ed he esump ion o 42
pe sonal con ac unde loosened es ic ions as well as associa ed changes in li e43
sa is ac ion and dep essi i y/anxie y.44
Keywo ds: social con ac , well-being, social ai s, need egula ion, a ilia ion45
mo i e, men al heal h, COVID-1946
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 4
Resuming Social Con ac A e Mon hs o Con ac Res ic ions: Social T ai s47
Mode a e Associa ions Be ween Changes in Social Con ac and Well-Being48
Humans ha e an inna e need o seek social con ac and o m ela ionships49
(Baumeis e & Lea y, 1995; Ho e & Hagemeye , 2018). A he same ime, people di e in50
how hey sa is y his need in daily li e: Some enjoy being a ound o he s a lo and eel51
unwell in ongoing soli ude, whe eas o he s seek less social con ac and a e less a ec ed in52
well-being by li le con ac .53
Ou s udy examines social con ac and well-being as pa o a dynamic need54
egula ion in he con ex o he COVID-19 pandemic, which equi ed a popula ion-wide55
educ ion in pe sonal con ac o cu ail i us ansmission (Flaxman e al., 2020).56
Ha nessing he unique si ua ion o a g adual eboo o social con ac o e h ee mon hs,57
ou s udy p o ides insigh s in o social need egula ion and indi idual di e ences in social58
beha io du ing he pandemic. The con ac es ic ions in oduced o educe he sp ead o 59
COVID-19 p o ide an unp eceden ed oppo uni y o s udy social need egula ion ou side60
he labo a o y. We in es iga e longi udinally (a) how social con ac changes in ela ion o61
social ai s, and (b) how well-being changes wi h inc eased social con ac depending on62
social ai s. Unde a b oad concep ualiza ion o well-being, we examine bo h li e63
sa is ac ion and dep essi i y/anxie y as po en ial ma ke s o social need sa is ac ion.64
Social Need Regula ion65
Social need egula ion is concep ualized as con inuous in e nal compa isons be ween66
a pe son’s ideal le el o social con ac and he le el cu en ly expe ienced (i.e., bo h67
amoun and quali y; Hall & Da is, 2017; Nezlek, 2001; Sheldon, 2011). De ia ions om he68
ideal le el in bo h di ec ions a e heo ized o educe well-being and mo i a e indi iduals o69
align social beha io owa ds need sa is ac ion (Hall & Da is, 2017; Sheldon, 2011). Fo 70
example, expe ience sampling s udies ha e shown ha highe momen a y need mo i a ion71
leads o highe need sa is ac ion h ough need- ele an beha io (Neubaue e al., 2018;72

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 5
Zyga e al., 2018). Social need egula ion he e o e ep esen s a dynamic p ocess in which73
pas social con ac in luences u u e con ac h ough need sa is ac ion o dissa is ac ion74
(Ca e & Scheie , 1998).75
Sa is ying one’s social needs is linked o highe well-being (Demi & Özdemi , 2010;76
J. Sun e al., 2020; Tay & Diene , 2011). Ea ly mo i e heo ies (e.g., McClelland, 1987) and77
ecen empi ical wo k sugges ha , depending on social need s eng h, people’s well-being78
is di e en ly a ec ed by need sa is ac ion (Du ne e al., 2015; Zyga e al., 2018).79
E idence on he ex en o which indi ec con ac (e.g., ex ing, ideocalls) sa is ies80
social needs emains inconclusi e (Kushle e al., 2019; O ben & P zybylski, 2019, 2020).81
Indi ec con ac migh subs i u e pe sonal con ac du ing he pandemic lockdown82
(Gabbiadini e al., 2020). Daily dia y da a indica e, howe e , ha only pe sonal con ac is83
obus ly ela ed o well-being (Lades e al., 2020; R. Sun e al., 2020). In e ms o men al84
heal h, he p e alence o dep ession and anxie y symp oms inc eased du ing he COVID-1985
pandemic (E man e al., 2020; Twenge & Joine , 2020), and he e is associa i e e idence86
ha being alone due o con ac es ic ions— he eby unable o sa is y social87
needs—nega i ely a ec s men al heal h (Benke e al., 2020; F ied e al., 2021).88
Social T ai s89
People di e in he ideal le el o social con ac o which hey compa e hei cu en 90
expe iences (Sheldon, 2011). Thus, he same si ua ion such as being alone o se e al days91
can elici ei he an appe i i e (i.e., enjoying and main aining soli ude) o an a e si e92
esponse (i.e., disliking soli ude and seeking social con ac ; Hagemeye e al., 2013)93
depending on he indi idual’s ideal le el, which is cap u ed in social ai s.94
O he Big Fi e ai s (So o & John, 2017), ex a e sion is closely ela ed o95
in e pe sonal beha io (DeYoung e al., 2013). Ex a e sion p edic s, among o he hings,96
how much someone likes he company o o he s (B eil e al., 2019), and whe he someone97
lea es si ua ions when hey a e alone (W zus e al., 2016).98
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 6
The a ilia ion mo i e desc ibes he need o ini ia e and main ain close ela ionships99
(Ho e & Hagemeye , 2018). Wi h a highe a ilia ion mo i e, people pa ake in mo e social100
in e ac ions such as isi ing iends o phone calls and a e mo e likely o c a e social101
con ac when alone (Hill, 2009).102
Al hough humans ha e social needs, hey also seek soli ude, o example, o pu sue103
a hobby o wind down a e a long day o mee ings (Lay e al., 2019). Indi iduals a y in104
he s eng h o his need o be alone (Coplan e al., 2019; Hagemeye e al., 2013). A105
highe need o be alone educes he likelihood o social con ac (Hall, 2017).106
Ano he eason why people a oid o he s is ha hey expe ience anxie y when107
an icipa ing social con ac . Subclinically low o mode a e anxie y abou social con ac is108
p e alen in he gene al popula ion (Pe e s e al., 2012). Highe social anxie y is associa ed109
wi h smalle social ne wo ks (Van Zalk e al., 2011), being disliked by in e ac ion pa ne s110
mo e equen ly (Tisse a e al., 2020), and lowe momen a y well-being (B own e al.,111
2007).112
Cu en S udy113
In his longi udinal s udy, we assessed social con ac and well-being ou imes o e 114
h ee mon hs—beginning du ing mos igo ous con ac es ic ions and con inuing du ing115
g adual esump ion o social con ac . Go e nmen al es ic ions limi ing pe sonal con ac 116
o se e al weeks in ea ly 2020 cons i u e a s ong si ua ion wi h limi ed oom o exp ess117
social ai s (Coope & Wi hey, 2009). In con as , pe son e ec s o social ai s a e118
p esumably mo e p onounced in weak si ua ions ha do no cons ain social ac i i y and119
allow beha io al exp ession o ai s (Blum e al., 2018; Schmi e al., 2013). Successi ely120
eased es ic ions he e o e ep esen a ansi ion om a s ong si ua ion cu bing he121
pe son-si ua ion in e ac ion in o a mo e no mal in e play o he wo (Schmi e al., 2013).122
Howe e , as Coope and Wi hey (2009) s a e, he “pe sonali y-dampening e ec o s ong123
si ua ions” (p. 62) has no been shown con incingly because uly s ong si ua ions a e124
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 7
di icul o induce in labo a o y se ings o o obse e unde egula si ua ional125
ci cums ances. The i s COVID-19 lockdown, hus, ep esen s a unique oppo uni y o126
s udy social need egula ion because i caused long-las ing and pe asi e es ic ions o 127
social con ac wi h widesp ead dep i a ion o social needs, which conside ably exceed128
labo a o y-based dep i a ion.129
The “lockdown” o manage he COVID-19 pandemic in Ge many in ea ly 2020130
ini ially c ea ed s ong si ua ional cons ain s se e ely es ic ing e e yday mobili y in all131
age g oups and egions (Beche e al., 2021; Bönisch e al., 2020). Compa ed o132
p e-pandemic le els, social con ac equency was es ima ed o ha e dec eased by 61-90%,133
eaching a nadi in Ap il 2020 (Del Fa a e al., 2021; Tomo i e al., 2021). This ime134
pe iod, du ing which ou longi udinal s udy s a ed, also ep esen s he maximum ex en o 135
go e nmen al con ac es ic ions in all Ge man ede al s a es du ing he i s COVID-19136
wa e (A a indakshan e al., 2020). Following ede al dec ees on 6 May 2020137
(Bundes egie ung, 2020), es ic ions we e g adually eased (un il he second wa e o 138
in ec ions in he all o 2020), and people in Ge many esumed social con ac acco dingly,139
al hough no ye o p e-pandemic le els by la e June 2020 (Tomo i e al., 2021). In140
addi ion o hese mean-le el inc eases o social con ac equency, i s a iance had141
subs an ially inc eased o e his pe iod o eased es ic ions (Tomo i e al., 2021). This is142
consis en wi h e idence ha pe sonali y ai s we e associa ed wi h di e ences in143
p ecau iona y beha io and adhe ence o con ac es ic ions (Aschwanden e al., 2021;144
Gö z e al., 2020; Zajenkowski e al., 2020; Ze le e al., 2021).145
Al hough con ac es ic ions undoub edly p esen ed a s ong si ua ion146
unp eceden ed in he second hal o he 20 h cen u y, e idence is ambiguous ega ding147
esiliency and well-being du ing his pe iod (Luche i e al., 2020; Zache & Rudolph,148
2020). Ge man popula ion- ep esen a i e panel da a indica e s abili y in well-being bu an149
inc ease in loneliness du ing con ac es ic ions, which a ec s ex a e ed people mo e150
se e ely (En inge e al., 2020; En inge & Gosling, 2021). In con as , p o iding151
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 8
p elimina y suppo o he s ong si ua ion hypo hesis, he associa ion be ween152
ex a e sion and well-being was lowe du ing lockdown han be o e he pandemic in a153
c oss-sec ional s udy (Anglim & Ho wood, 2021). We go beyond p e ious wo k by154
conside ing mul iple social ai s, dis inguishing pe sonal and indi ec social con ac , and155
making use o he s ong si ua ion o he COVID-19 pandemic.156
Speci ically, we add ess how social ai s in luence wo s eps o social need157
egula ion: Fi s , we in es iga e whe he indi idual di e ences in social ai s we e158
associa ed wi h di e ging ends in pu suing social con ac when es ic ions we e g adually159
being eased. Second, we p obe he well-being consequences o inc eased social con ac and160
di e ences he ein ela ed o social ai s.161
We p e egis e ed he ollowing hypo heses1(h ps://os .io/n8j ):162
•H1a: Social con ac will inc ease o e ime mo e s ongly o people highe in163
ex a e sion and a ilia ion mo i e.164
•H1b: Social con ac will inc ease less o e ime o people highe in he need o be165
alone and social anxie y.166
•H2a: Social con ac and pe sonali y (ex a e sion, a ilia ion mo i e) will mode a e167
e ec s o ime on well-being, ha is, well-being will be lowes o people wi h low168
social con ac and high ex a e sion o a ilia ion mo i e.169
•H2b: Wi h highe need o be alone and social anxie y2, well-being will be less170
s ongly ela ed o social con ac .171
1In he p e egis a ion, H1=H2 and H2=H3.
2We in ended H2a/H2b o mi o H1a/H1b in cons uc s bu o go o include social anxie y in H2b in ou
p e egis a ion. De ia ions om ou p e egis a ion a e lis ed a h ps://os .io/8xubm/.
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 15
e e y day). In e nal consis ency was high, ω=0.81.300
A aw co ela ion plo o he cons uc s analyzed is shown in Figu e S1.301
Analy ical S a egy302
As p e egis e ed, we winso ized ou lie s wi h sco es ou side M±3×SD o he303
espec i e uppe o lowe bound. This p ocedu e was used o ele en obse a ions o 304
dep essi i y/anxie y, eigh obse a ions o social anxie y, wo and i e obse a ions o 305
pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency, espec i ely.306
We employed mul ile el modeling (Ho man, 2015) wi h obse a ions (Le el 1)307
nes ed in pa icipan s (Le el 2). In a-class co ela ions o all ime- a ying a iables along308
wi h means and s anda d de ia ions o e ime can be ound in Table S1. All models we e309
es ima ed using maximum likelihood wi h andom in e cep s. We included andom slopes310
o he Le el-1 p edic o s o in e es in hose ins ances whe e likelihood a io es s indica ed311
ha he addi ion o he andom slope signi ican ly imp o ed model i (Ho man &312
Wal e s, 2022). I his was he case, we epo he esul s o he andom slope model he ein313
and o he ixed slope model in he Supplemen al Ma e ial (Tables S2-S6), and ice e sa.314
As Le el-2 a iables, all social ai s we e g and-mean cen e ed and, hus, ep esen he315
be ween-pe son e ec o de ia ion om he a e age ai le el in he sample. To es ou 316
hypo heses, we es ima ed wo di e en ypes o models. Fi s , o p edic pe sonal and317
indi ec con ac equency (H1a, H1b), we es ima ed models wi h a c oss-le el in e ac ion318
o ime (linea e ec , ze o a he i s wa e) and each ai :319
con ac i =γ00 +γ01 ai i+γ10 ime i +γ11 ime i ai i+υ0i+e i ,(1)
whe e a ime o pe son i e i ∼N(0, σ2
e)and υ0i∼N(0, τ00)( o a ixed slope model).320
We es ima ed sepa a e models o he wo dependen a iables pe sonal and indi ec 321
con ac and each o he ou ai s, ex a e sion, a ilia ion mo i e, need o be alone, and322
social anxie y.323

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 16
Second, we p edic ed a ia ion in well-being o e ime (li e sa is ac ion and324
dep essi i y/anxie y) wi h con ac equency as a ime- a ying p edic o (ei he pe sonal o 325
indi ec con ac ) and each social ai as a Le el-2 p edic o (pe son le el):326
wellbeing i =γ00 +γ01 ai i+γ02con ac BPi+γ03 ai icon ac BPi
+γ10 ime i +γ20con ac WP i +γ21con ac W P i ai i
+υ0i+e i ,
(2)
whe e e i ∼N(0, σ2
e)and υ0i∼N(0, τ00)( o a ixed slope model). We included ime as a327
linea p edic o cen e ed a he i s assessmen wa e o de end he e ec s (Wang &328
Maxwell, 2015). Con ac was cen e ed on he pe son-speci ic baseline (T1) o dis inguish329
be ween-pe son om wi hin-pe son a ia ion in con ac (Ho man, 2015, 2020): Wi h330
baseline-cen e ing, he be ween-pe son componen (con ac BPi) was each pe son’s con ac 331
equency a he i s assessmen , om which he g and mean was sub ac ed. The332
wi hin-pe son componen (con ac W P i) was he baseline-cen e ed con ac equency, ha 333
is, a pe son’s con ac equency a each wa e, om which hei con ac equency a he334
i s wa e was sub ac ed. Thus, con ac W P i ep esen ed he wi hin-pe son e ec o a335
highe con ac equency a ha wa e han a he i s wa e. To es H2a and H2b, we336
es ima ed a c oss-le el in e ac ion be ween con ac equency (pe sonal o indi ec ) and337
each social ai (con ac W P i ai i).338
To p obe signi ican c oss-le el in e ac ions, we u ilized simple-slopes plo s a 339
condi ional alues and egions-o -signi icance plo s ia he Johnson-Neyman echnique340
(McCabe e al., 2018; P eache e al., 2006). To compa e he models’ p edic i e powe , we341
compu ed R2 o he p opo ion o o al a iance explained by he model ixed e ec s342
(Ho man, 2015), which is he squa ed Pea son co ela ion be ween he ac ual ou come and343
he ou come p edic ed by he model ixed e ec s. To gauge how obus he mul ile el344
models we e o iola ed assump ions ega ding mul i a ia e no mali y and con amina ion345
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 17
by ou lie s, we e-es ima ed all models wi h obus linea mixed-e ec s models (see346
Supplemen al Ma e ial and Tables S7 o S11; Kolle , 2016).347
We used R (Ve sion 4.0.4; R Co e Team, 2020) and he R-packages lme4 (Ve sion348
1.1.27.1; Ba es e al., 2015), and lme Tes (Ve sion 3.1.3; Kuzne so a e al., 2017) o 349
mul ile el modeling, as well as idy e se (Wickham, A e ick, B yan, Chang, McGowan,350
F ançois, e al., 2019) o da a w angling, and papaja (Aus & Ba h, 2020) o 351
ep oducible manusc ip p oduc ion. A comple e lis o so wa e we used and ull model352
equa ions a e p o ided in he Supplemen al Ma e ial.353
Resul s354
Social Con ac 355
A he i s assessmen , ha is, when shops, es au an s, and schools we e closed356
and people we e only allowed o mee wi h one o he pe son, pa icipan s epo ed on357
a e age less equen pe sonal con ac , ˆγ00 = 1.82, 95% CI [1.71,1.93], han indi ec 358
con ac , ˆγ00 = 2.30, 95% CI [2.21,2.39]. No ably, social ai s we e no associa ed wi h359
pe sonal con ac du ing he week o he s ic es con ac es ic ions bu p edic ed he le el360
o indi ec con ac a his ime (see Table 1): wi h highe ex a e sion, ˆγ01 = 0.39, 95% CI361
[0.26,0.52], highe a ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 = 0.26, 95% CI [0.17,0.36], o lowe social anxie y,362
ˆγ01 =−0.16, 95% CI [−0.29,−0.04], people epo ed mo e equen indi ec con ac a he363
i s assessmen du ing he s ic es con ac es ic ions.364
As es ic ions we e eased o e ime, pe sonal con ac equency ose, ˆγ10 = 0.14,365
95% CI [0.11,0.18], while indi ec con ac equency dec eased, ˆγ10 =−0.06, 95% CI366
[−0.08,−0.03] (see Table 1). Pa ly suppo ing H1a, social ai s mode a ed changes in367
social con ac o e ime: Wi h highe ex a e sion, dec eases in indi ec con ac equency368
we e mo e p onounced, ˆγ11 =−0.04, 95% CI [−0.07,−0.01] (see Figs. 2a and 2b). The369
egions-o -signi icance analysis e eals ha his in e ac ion was signi ican o alues o 370
ex a e sion abo e 2.33 (i.e., abo e -0.70 o he cen e ed a iable). In addi ion, wi h a371
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 18
Table 1
Fixed E ec s o Social Con ac F equency P edic ed by Time and Social T ai s
Pe sonal con ac Indi ec con ac
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Ex a e sion (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 1.82 [1.71, 1.93] 32.87 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.39] 50.59 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 0.14 [0.11, 0.18] 8.94 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.03] -5.11 < .001
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 0.05 [-0.11, 0.20] 0.59 .557 0.39 [0.26, 0.52] 6.02 < .001
Time * Ex a e sion, ˆγ11 0.01 [-0.03, 0.06] 0.51 .611 -0.04 [-0.07, -0.01] -2.34 .020
A ilia ion mo i e (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.39 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.39] 49.92 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 0.15 [0.11, 0.18] 9.01 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.03] -5.03 < .001
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 0.09 [-0.02, 0.20] 1.63 .105 0.26 [0.17, 0.36] 5.49 < .001
Time * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ11 0.04 [0.00, 0.07] 2.15 .032 -0.01 [-0.03, 0.01] -0.80 .425
Need o be alone (M3a, M3b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T3 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.10 < .001 2.30 [2.20, 2.40] 46.83 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T3 0.15 [0.11, 0.18] 9.02 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.03] -5.03 < .001
Need o be alone, ˆγ01 -0.01 [-0.12, 0.09] -0.25 .799 -0.09 [-0.19, 0.00] -1.86 .064
Time * Need o be alone, ˆγ11 -0.05 [-0.08, -0.01] -2.73 .006 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.39 .695
Social anxie y (M4a, M4b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T4 1.82 [1.71, 1.93] 32.87 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.40] 47.25 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T4 0.14 [0.11, 0.18] 8.94 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.03] -5.08 < .001
Social anxie y, ˆγ01 0.01 [-0.13, 0.15] 0.16 .876 -0.16 [-0.29, -0.04] -2.53 .012
Time * Social anxie y, ˆγ11 -0.04 [-0.08, 0.01] -1.71 .088 0.02 [-0.01, 0.05] 1.09 .277
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each social ai : as p edic o s o pe sonal con ac
equency (models MXa) and o indi ec con ac equency (models MXb). Models MXb ea u e
andom slopes o ime. CI = con idence in e al. R2
M1a=0.04, R2
M1b=0.13, R2
M2a=0.07,
R2
M2b=0.13, R2
M3a=0.05, R2
M3b=0.03, R2
M4a=0.04, R2
M4b=0.04.
372
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 19
2.00
2.25
2.50
0 1 2 3
Time
Indi ec con ac
equency
Ex a e sion
+ 1 SD
Mean
− 1 SD
a
−0.2
−0.1
0.0
0.1
−2 −1 0 1 2
Ex a e sion
Slope o ime
Range o
obse ed
da a
n.s.
p < .05
b
1.8
2.1
2.4
0 1 2 3
Time
Pe sonal con ac
equency
A ilia ion
mo i e
+ 1 SD
Mean
− 1 SD
c
−0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
−2 0 2 4
A ilia ion mo i e
Slope o ime
Range o
obse ed
da a
n.s.
p < .05
d
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
0 1 2 3
Time
Pe sonal con ac
equency
Need o
be alone
+ 1 SD
Mean
− 1 SD
e
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
−2 0 2
Need o be alone
Slope o ime
Range o
obse ed
da a
n.s.
p < .05
Figu e 2
Simple-slopes plo s (a,c,e) and Neyman-Johnson egions-o -signi icance plo s (b,d, )
o signi ican c oss-le el in e ac ion e ec s p edic ing con ac equency. Con idence bands
ep esen 95% con idence in e als. Va iables p esen ed on he X-axis (b,d, ) a e g and-
mean cen e ed; o iginal scale alues can be compu ed by adding he mean o he espec i e
a iable epo ed in Table S1.
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 20
highe a ilia ion mo i e, he inc ease in pe sonal con ac equency was mo e p onounced,373
ˆγ11 = 0.04, 95% CI [0.00,0.07]. This in e ac ion was signi ican o alues o a ilia ion374
mo i e abo e 1.28 (i.e., abo e -1.95 o he cen e ed a iable), nea ly he comple e ange o 375
obse ed alues (see Figs. 2c and 2d). In pa ial suppo o H1b, wi h a highe need o be376
alone, inc eases in pe sonal con ac equency we e less p onounced, ˆγ11 =−0.05, 95% CI377
[−0.08,−0.01] (see Table 1 and Figs. 2e and 2 ). This in e ac ion was signi ican o he378
whole ange o obse ed alues in he need o be alone. We did no obse e social anxie y379
o be ela ed o a es o change in pe sonal o indi ec social con ac .380
The p ac ical signi icance and size o he e ec s can be in e ed om he scaling o 381
pe sonal con ac on he y-axis in Figu e 2. Fo example, in Figu e 2c, pa icipan s low (-1382
SD) and high (+1 SD) in a ilia ion mo i e epo ed oughly he same amoun o pe sonal383
con ac a he i s assessmen , which was a li le less han “once” du ing he las week384
(co esponding o 2 on he 5-poin scale). A he las assessmen , pa icipan s low in385
a ilia ion mo i e epo ed on a e age 0.33 scale poin s mo e pe sonal con ac jus passing386
2 on he 5-poin scale (i.e, “once” du ing he las week). In con as , pa icipan s high in387
a ilia ion mo i e epo ed 0.54 highe pe sonal con ac , which co esponded o 2.44 on he388
5-poin scale (i.e., in be ween “once” and “mul iple days” du ing he las week).389
Well-Being390
O e ime, li e sa is ac ion declined linea ly, ˆγ10 =−0.11, 95% CI [−0.20,−0.03],391
whe eas dep essi i y/anxie y emained s able on a e age (see Tables 2 o 5). Du ing s ic 392
con ac es ic ions a he i s assessmen , li e sa is ac ion was highe wi h highe 393
ex a e sion, ˆγ01 = 1.18, 95% CI [0.76,1.60], highe a ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 = 0.40, 95% CI394
[0.08,0.73], and lowe social anxie y, ˆγ01 =−0.85, 95% CI [−1.22,−0.47]. A he same395
ime, he lowe he pa icipan s’ ex a e sion, ˆγ01 =−0.26, 95% CI [−0.38,−0.15], and he396
highe hei social anxie y, ˆγ01 = 0.38, 95% CI [0.29,0.47], he highe hei 397
dep essi i y/anxie y. Mo e equen ini ial pe sonal and indi ec con ac (i.e.,398

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 21
be ween-pe son di e ences a T1) was associa ed wi h highe li e sa is ac ion, al hough399
hese e ec s we e signi ican in only i e ou o eigh models (see Tables 2 o 5).400
Ha ing mo e indi ec con ac as compa ed o he baseline (i.e., du ing he s ic es 401
con ac es ic ions) was associa ed wi h highe li e sa is ac ion o people wi h a highe 402
a ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ21 = 0.41, 95% CI [0.07,0.74] (see Table 3). As Figu es 3a and 3b show,403
li e sa is ac ion inc eased wi h mo e equen indi ec con ac o hose wi h a highe 404
a ilia ion mo i e, whe eas i dec eased o hose wi h a lowe a ilia ion mo i e. The405
egions-o -signi icance plo shows ha he wi hin-pe son associa ion be ween indi ec 406
con ac and li e sa is ac ion was signi ican o alues o a ilia ion mo i e below 2.26 (i.e.,407
below -0.97 o he cen e ed a iable) and abo e 5.18 (i.e., abo e 1.95 o he cen e ed408
a iable), albei in opposi e di ec ions. Al hough non-signi ican a p= .050, we ound a409
simila pa e n o he c oss-le el in e ac ion o a ilia ion mo i e and mo e equen 410
pe sonal con ac as compa ed o he baseline, which we p esen in Figu e S2 o he sake o 411
comple eness.412
Con e sely, mo e equen pe sonal con ac as compa ed o he i s assessmen was413
associa ed wi h highe li e sa is ac ion o people wi h a lowe need o be alone,414
ˆγ21 =−0.20, 95% CI [−0.39,−0.02] (see Table 4 and Figs. 3c and 3d), he slope being415
signi ican o people sco ing below 5.15 (i.e., below -0.10 o he cen e ed a iable) in he416
need o be alone. Pa icipan s’ dep essi i y/anxie y inc eased wi h mo e equen pe sonal417
o indi ec con ac as compa ed o he baseline among people highe in social anxie y,418
ˆγ21 = 0.08, 95% CI [0.00,0.15],ˆγ21 = 0.14, 95% CI [0.00,0.27] (see Table 5). Figu es 3e o419
3h emphasizes he na u e o hese associa ions ia simple-slopes and egions-o -signi icance420
plo s: Mo e equen social con ac han a he i s wa e was associa ed wi h highe 421
dep essi i y/anxie y among people highe in social anxie y (abo e 3.23 in social anxie y o 422
pe sonal con ac , i.e., abo e 1.47 o he cen e ed a iable; and abo e 3.78 o indi ec 423
con ac , i.e., abo e 2.02 o he cen e ed a iable).424
O e all, we ound pa ial empi ical suppo o H2a and H2b such ha a ilia ion425
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 22
mo i e, need o be alone, and social anxie y mode a ed he e ec s o inc eased social426
con ac on well-being o e he cou se o ou s udy as con ac es ic ions we e being eased.427
Explo a o y Analyses428
Following an anonymous e iewe ’s sugges ion o in es iga e o e lap be ween he429
social ai cons uc s, we speci ied mul ile el s uc u al equa ion models in Mplus430
(Mu hén & Mu hén, 2019, Ve sion 8.4), in which a la en social ai ac o mode a ed he431
e ec s o ime and o social con ac . This la en ac o ep esen ed he sha ed a iance o 432
he ou social ai s. The explo a o y analyses sugges ed signi ican mode a ion o he433
esump ion o pe sonal con ac by he la en social ai ac o (see Table S12). Fo 434
p edic ing well-being changes, we did no ind signi ican mode a ion o he e ec s o 435
inc eased con ac by he la en social ai ac o (see Table S13). This could indica e ha 436
he e ec s o well-being epo ed in he main manusc ip a e speci ic o each social ai .437
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 23
Table 2
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and Ex a e sion
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.72 [6.41, 7.03] 42.72 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 38.07 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.11 [-0.20, -0.03] -2.56 .011 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.36 .717
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.33 [-0.04, 0.70] 1.77 .078 -0.02 [-0.12, 0.09] -0.31 .756
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.19 [-0.02, 0.40] 1.81 .071 0.01 [-0.05, 0.06] 0.24 .810
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 T1 1.18 [0.76, 1.60] 5.56 < .001 -0.26 [-0.38, -0.15] -4.50 < .001
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ03 -0.05 [-0.59, 0.49] -0.19 .847 0.01 [-0.14, 0.16] 0.12 .901
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ21 -0.03 [-0.30, 0.24] -0.21 .830 -0.02 [-0.10, 0.05] -0.63 .530
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.68 [6.36, 7.00] 40.78 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.74] 38.19 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.08 [-0.17, 0.00] -1.99 .047 -0.01 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.55 .583
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.22 [-0.22, 0.67] 0.98 .329 0.13 [0.01, 0.25] 2.12 .035
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.06 [-0.41, 0.29] -0.35 .730 0.03 [-0.09, 0.14] 0.46 .645
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 T2 1.17 [0.73, 1.61] 5.21 < .001 -0.32 [-0.44, -0.20] -5.31 < .001
Indi ec con ac (BP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ03 -0.27 [-0.85, 0.32] -0.90 .368 -0.04 [-0.19, 0.12] -0.49 .628
Indi ec con ac (WP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ21 0.20 [-0.22, 0.63] 0.94 .350 -0.07 [-0.22, 0.08] -0.95 .343
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e
sa is ac ion (models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). Model M2b ea u es a andom slope o
wi hin-pe son con ac . CI = con idence in e al; BP = be ween-pe son e ec ; WP = wi hin-pe son e ec .
R2
M1a=0.14, R2
M1b=0.08, R2
M2a=0.13, R2
M2b=0.10.
438
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 24
Table 3
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and A ilia ion Mo i e
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.71 [6.38, 7.04] 39.95 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 35.89 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.11 [-0.20, -0.03] -2.59 .010 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.33 .744
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.31 [-0.09, 0.71] 1.53 .128 -0.02 [-0.13, 0.09] -0.36 .720
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.15 [-0.06, 0.36] 1.35 .176 0.01 [-0.05, 0.07] 0.38 .707
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 T1 0.40 [0.08, 0.73] 2.43 .016 -0.05 [-0.14, 0.04] -1.08 .280
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ03 0.12 [-0.31, 0.54] 0.53 .596 -0.02 [-0.13, 0.10] -0.29 .774
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ21 0.22 [0.00, 0.43] 1.96 .050 -0.02 [-0.08, 0.04] -0.70 .481
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.68 [6.35, 7.01] 39.85 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 36.42 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.09 [-0.17, -0.01] -2.13 .034 -0.01 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.50 .619
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.48 [0.03, 0.94] 2.08 .039 0.03 [-0.10, 0.15] 0.45 .652
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.14 [-0.49, 0.21] -0.79 .432 0.02 [-0.09, 0.14] 0.39 .700
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 T2 0.41 [0.08, 0.74] 2.46 .015 -0.06 [-0.15, 0.03] -1.34 .183
Indi ec con ac (BP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ03 -0.29 [-0.70, 0.13] -1.36 .175 -0.01 [-0.13, 0.10] -0.21 .830
Indi ec con ac (WP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ21 0.41 [0.07, 0.74] 2.39 .017 -0.04 [-0.16, 0.07] -0.72 .476
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e sa is ac ion
(models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). Model M2b ea u es a andom slope o wi hin-pe son
con ac . CI = con idence in e al; BP = be ween-pe son e ec ; WP = wi hin-pe son e ec . R2
M1a=0.06,
R2
M1b=0.01, R2
M2a=0.08, R2
M2b=0.01.
439
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 31
canno comple ely ule ou non andom a i ion o e ime. A i ion analyses indica e522
di e ences in a ilia ion mo i e and indi ec con ac equency be ween pa icipan s523
comple ing he s udy and hose ini ially indica ing in e es in pa icipa ing in ollow-ups524
bu no aking pa in all wa es. The e a e no meaning ul di e ences i only a i ion in he525
longi udinal analysis sample is conside ed. S ill, a i ion migh ha e led us o526
unde es ima e e ec s in ol ing a ilia ion mo i e and indi ec con ac equency. Finally,527
elying on sel - epo s, ou esul s a e subjec o common me hod bias (Podsako e al.,528
2003). Fu u e s udies could inco po a e expe ience sampling and sma phone sensing da a529
(Ha a i e al., 2019; Zyga e al., 2018), o which we expec simila esul s.530
Conclusions531
Ou s udy demons a es ha social ai s such as a ilia ion mo i e and need o be532
alone play an impo an ole in he egula ion o social con ac . Expe iencing a si ua ion533
ha imposed s ic cons ain s on he exp ession o social ai s, people none heless534
demons a ed ai di e ences in hei le els o indi ec con ac and well-being.535
A e wa ds—as he si ua ion opened up—social ai s mode a ed bo h he esump ion o 536
pe sonal con ac and changes in well-being associa ed wi h mo e equen con ac . This537
illumina es he egula ion o social needs and also p o ides suppo o he heo e ical538
assump ion ha social need sa is ac ion eels di e en depending on someone’s ai s. The539
COVID-19 pandemic has es ic ed many people in hei sa is ac ion o social needs wi h540
li le leeway o e ade. Ou s udy adds u he e idence ha he ways in which people eac 541
o adap o his es ic ed si ua ion di e depending on hei pe sonali y ai s, in his case542
hei a ilia ion mo i e, need o be alone, and social anxie y.543

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 32
Re e ences544
Anglim, J., & Ho wood, S. (2021). E ec o he COVID-19 Pandemic and Big Fi e545
Pe sonali y on Subjec i e and Psychological Well-Being. Social Psychological and546
Pe sonali y Science, Ad ance Online Publica ion.547
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1948550620983047548
Anglim, J., Ho wood, S., Smillie, L. D., Ma e o, R. J., & Wood, J. K. (2020). P edic ing549
psychological and subjec i e well-being om pe sonali y: A me a-analysis.550
Psychological Bulle in,146(4), 279–323. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/bul0000226551
A a indakshan, A., Boehnke, J., Gholami, E., & Nayak, A. (2020). P epa ing o a552
u u e COVID-19 wa e: Insigh s and limi a ions om a da a-d i en e alua ion o 553
non-pha maceu ical in e en ions in Ge many. Scien i ic Repo s,10(1), 20084.554
h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41598-020-76244-6555
Aschwanden, D., S ickhouse , J. E., Seske , A. A., Lee, J. H., Luche i, M., S ephan, Y.,556
Su in, A. R., & Te acciano, A. (2021). Psychological and beha iou al esponses o557
Co ona i us disease 2019: The ole o pe sonali y. Eu opean Jou nal o Pe sonali y,558
35(1), 51–66. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/pe .2281559
Aus , F. (2019). Ci : ’RS udio’ add-in o inse ma kdown ci a ions.560
h ps://gi hub.com/c sh/ci 561
Aus , F., & Ba h, M. (2020). papaja: P epa e ep oducible APA jou nal a icles wi h R562
Ma kdown [R Package Ve sion 0.1.0.9997].563
Ba h, M. (2020). Tinylabels: Ligh weigh a iable labels.564
h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package= inylabels565
Ba es, D., & Maechle , M. (2019). Ma ix: Spa se and dense ma ix classes and me hods.566
h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=Ma ix567
Ba es, D., Mächle , M., Bolke , B., & Walke , S. (2015). Fi ing linea mixed-e ec s568
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 33
models using lme4. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,67(1), 1–48.569
h ps://doi.o g/10.18637/jss. 067.i01570
Baumeis e , R. F., & Lea y, M. R. (1995). The need o belong: Desi e o in e pe sonal571
a achmen s as a undamen al human mo i a ion. Psychological Bulle in,117(3),572
497–529. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497573
Beche , H., Bönisch, S., & Wegscheide , K. (2021). Reduc ion o Mobili y Du ing he574
COVID-19 Pandemic in Ge many Acco ding o Age, Sex, and Fede al S a e.575
Deu sches A z ebla In e na ional,118(31-32), 536–537.576
h ps://doi.o g/10.3238/a z ebl.m2021.0293577
Benke, C., Au en ie h, L. K., Asselmann, E., & Pané-Fa é, C. A. (2020). Lockdown,578
qua an ine measu es, and social dis ancing: Associa ions wi h dep ession, anxie y579
and dis ess a he beginning o he COVID-19 pandemic among adul s om580
Ge many. Psychia y Resea ch,293, 113462.581
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.psych es.2020.113462582
Be naa ds, C. A., & I.Jenn ich, R. (2005). G adien p ojec ion algo i hms and so wa e o 583
a bi a y o a ion c i e ia in ac o analysis. Educa ional and Psychological584
Measu emen ,65, 676–696.585
Blum, G. S., Rau hmann, J. F., Göllne , R., Lische zke, T., & Schmi , M. (2018). The586
Nonlinea In e ac ion o Pe son and Si ua ion (NIPS) Model: Theo y and Empi ical587
E idence. Eu opean Jou nal o Pe sonali y,32(3), 286–305.588
h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/pe .2138589
Bou sie , V., Gioia, F., Muse i, A., & Schimmen i, A. (2020). Facing Loneliness and590
Anxie y Du ing he COVID-19 Isola ion: The Role o Excessi e Social Media Use in591
a Sample o I alian Adul s. F on ie s in Psychia y,11, 586222–586222.592
h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psy .2020.586222593
Bönisch, S., Wegscheide , K., K ause, L., Sehne , S., Wiegel, S., Zap , A., Mose , S., &594
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 34
Beche , H. (2020). E ec s o Co ona i us Disease (COVID-19) Rela ed Con ac 595
Res ic ions in Ge many, Ma ch o May 2020, on he Mobili y and Rela ion o596
In ec ion Pa e ns. F on ie s in Public Heal h,8, 619.597
h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ pubh.2020.568287598
B eil, S. M., Geukes, K., Wilson, R. E., Nes le , S., Vazi e, S., & Back, M. D. (2019).599
Zooming in o Real-Li e Ex a e sion how Pe sonali y and Si ua ion Shape600
Sociabili y in Social In e ac ions. Collab a: Psychology,5(7).601
h ps://doi.o g/10.1525/collab a.170602
B own, L. H., Sil ia, P. J., Myin-Ge meys, I., & Kwapil, T. R. (2007). When he Need o603
Belong Goes W ong: The Exp ession o Social Anhedonia and Social Anxie y in604
Daily Li e. Psychological Science,18(9), 778–782.605
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01978.x606
Bundes egie ung. (2020). P essekon e enz on Bundeskanzle in Me kel, Minis e p äsiden 607
Söde und dem E s en Bü ge meis e Tschen sche im Anschluss an das Gesp äch608
mi den Regie ungsche innen und Regie ungsche s de Lände [P ess con e ence by609
Chancello Me kel, Minis e P esiden Söde and Fi s Mayo Tschen sche 610
ollowing he con e sa ion wi h he heads o he ede al s a es].611
h ps://www.bundes egie ung.de/b eg-612
de/ak uelles/p essekon e enzen/p essekon e enz- on-bundeskanzle in-me kel-613
minis e p aesiden -soede -und-dem-e s en-bue ge meis e - schen sche -im-anschluss-614
an-das-gesp aech-mi -den- egie ungsche innen-und- egie ungsche s-de -laende -615
1751050.616
Ca e , C. S., & Scheie , M. F. (1998). On he sel - egula ion o beha io . Camb idge617
Uni e si y P ess. h ps://doi.o g/10.1017/CBO9781139174794618
Chang, W., Cheng, J., Allai e, J., Xie, Y., & McPhe son, J. (2020). Shiny: Web applica ion619
amewo k o . h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=shiny620
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 35
Chen, B., Vans eenkis e, M., Beye s, W., Boone, L., Deci, E. L., Van de Kaap-Deede , J.,621
Du iez, B., Lens, W., Ma os, L., Mou a idis, A., Ryan, R. M., Sheldon, K. M.,622
Soenens, B., Van Pe egem, S., & Ve s uy , J. (2015). Basic psychological need623
sa is ac ion, need us a ion, and need s eng h ac oss ou cul u es. Mo i a ion624
and Emo ion,39(2), 216–236. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11031-014-9450-1625
Cheung, F., & Lucas, R. (2014). Assessing he alidi y o single-i em li e sa is ac ion626
measu es: Resul s om h ee la ge samples. Quali y o Li e Resea ch,23(10),627
2809–2818. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11136-014-0726-4628
Coope , W. H., & Wi hey, M. J. (2009). The S ong Si ua ion Hypo hesis. Pe sonali y and629
Social Psychology Re iew,13(1), 62–72. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/1088868308329378630
Coplan, R. J., Hipson, W. E., A chbell, K. A., Ooi, L. L., Baldwin, D., & Bowke , J. C.631
(2019). Seeking mo e soli ude: Concep ualiza ion, assessmen , and implica ions o 632
aloneliness. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences,148, 17–26.633
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.paid.2019.05.020634
Danne , D., Ramms ed , B., Bluemke, M., T eibe , L., Be es, S., So o, C., & John, O.635
(2016). Die deu sche Ve sion des Big Fi e In en o y 2 (BFI-2).636
h ps://doi.o g/10.6102/zis247637
Del Fa a, E., Cimen ada, J., Pe o a, D., G ow, A., Rampazzo, F., Gil-Cla el, S., &638
Zagheni, E. (2021). Di e en ial impac o physical dis ancing s a egies on social639
con ac s ele an o he sp ead o SARS-CoV-2: E idence om a c oss-na ional640
online su ey, Ma chAp il 2020. BMJ Open,11(10), e050651.641
h ps://doi.o g/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050651642
Demi , M., & Özdemi , M. (2010). F iendship, Need Sa is ac ion and Happiness. Jou nal643
o Happiness S udies,11(2), 243–259. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10902-009-9138-5644
DeYoung, C. G., Weisbe g, Y., Quil y, L., & Pe e son, J. (2013). Uni ying he Aspec s o 645
he Big Fi e, he In e pe sonal Ci cumplex, and T ai A ilia ion. Jou nal o 646
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 36
Pe sonali y,81, 465–475. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/jopy.12020647
Du ne , M., A slan, R. C., Hagemeye , B., Schönb od , F. D., & Denissen, J. J. A. (2015).648
A ec i e con ingencies in he a ilia i e domain: Physiological assessmen ,649
associa ions wi h he a ilia ion mo i e, and p edic ion o beha io . Jou nal o 650
Pe sonali y and Social Psychology,109(4), 662–676.651
h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/pspp0000025652
En inge , T. M., & Gosling, S. D. (2021). Loneliness Du ing a Na ionwide Lockdown and653
he Mode a ing E ec o Ex o e sion. Social Psychological and Pe sonali y654
Science, 19485506211037871. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/19485506211037871655
En inge , T. M., K öge , H., Schupp, J., Kühne, S., Liebig, S., Goebel, J., G abka, M. M.,656
G aebe , D., K oh, M., Sch öde , C., Seebaue , J., & Zinn, S. (2020). Psychische657
K ise du ch Co id-19? So gen sinken, Einsamkei s eig , Lebenszu iedenhei bleib 658
s abil (SOEPpape s on Mul idisciplina y Panel Da a Resea ch Nos. 1087).659
Deu sches Ins i u ü Wi scha s o schung (DIW).660
h ps://doi.o g/h p://hdl.handle.ne /10419/222647661
E man, C. K., Abdalla, S. M., Cohen, G. H., Sampson, L., Vi ie , P. M., & Galea, S.662
(2020). P e alence o Dep ession Symp oms in US Adul s Be o e and Du ing he663
COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Ne wo k Open,3(9), e2019686–e2019686.664
h ps://doi.o g/10.1001/jamane wo kopen.2020.19686665
Flaxman, S., Mish a, S., Gandy, A., Unwin, H. J. T., Mellan, T. A., Coupland, H.,666
Whi ake , C., Zhu, H., Be ah, T., Ea on, J. W., Monod, M., Pe ez-Guzman, P. N.,667
Schmi , N., Cilloni, L., Ainslie, K. E. C., Baguelin, M., Boonyasi i, A., Boyd, O.,668
Ca a ino, L., . . . Impe ial College COVID-19 Response Team. (2020). Es ima ing669
he e ec s o non-pha maceu ical in e en ions on COVID-19 in Eu ope. Na u e,670
584(7820), 257–261. h ps://doi.o g/10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7671
Fox, J. (2003). E ec displays in R o gene alised linea models. Jou nal o S a is ical672

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 37
So wa e,8(15), 1–27. h ps://www.js a so .o g/a icle/ iew/ 008i15673
Fox, J., & Hong, J. (2009). E ec displays in R o mul inomial and p opo ional-odds674
logi models: Ex ensions o he e ec s package. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,675
32(1), 1–24. h ps://www.js a so .o g/a icle/ iew/ 032i01676
Fox, J., & Weisbe g, S. (2018). Visualizing i and lack o i in complex eg ession models677
wi h p edic o e ec plo s and pa ial esiduals. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,678
87(9), 1–27. h ps://doi.o g/10.18637/jss. 087.i09679
Fox, J., & Weisbe g, S. (2019). An R companion o applied eg ession (Thi d). Sage.680
h ps://socialsciences.mcmas e .ca/j ox/Books/Companion/681
Fox, J., Weisbe g, S., & P ice, B. (2020). Ca Da a: Companion o applied eg ession da a682
se s. h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=ca Da a683
F ied, E. I., Papanikolaou, F., & Epskamp, S. (2021). Men al Heal h and Social Con ac 684
Du ing he COVID-19 Pandemic: An Ecological Momen a y Assessmen S udy.685
Clinical Psychological Science, 21677026211017839.686
h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/21677026211017839687
Gabbiadini, A., Baldissa i, C., Du an e, F., Val o a, R. R., De Rosa, M., & Gallucci, M.688
(2020). Toge he Apa : The Mi iga ing Role o Digi al Communica ion689
Technologies on Nega i e A ec Du ing he COVID-19 Ou b eak in I aly. F on ie s690
in Psychology,11, 2763. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2020.554678691
Genz, A., & B e z, F. (2009). Compu a ion o mul i a ia e no mal and p obabili ies.692
Sp inge -Ve lag.693
Gö z, F. M., G i z, A., Galinsky, A. D., & Jachimowicz, J. M. (2020). How pe sonali y694
and policy p edic pandemic beha io : Unde s anding shel e ing-in-place in 55695
coun ies a he onse o COVID-19. Ame ican Psychologis , No Pagina ion696
Speci ied–No Pagina ion Speci ied. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/amp0000740697
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 38
G een, P., & MacLeod, C. J. (2016). Sim : An package o powe analysis o gene alised698
linea mixed models by simula ion. Me hods in Ecology and E olu ion,7(4),699
493–498. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/2041-210X.12504700
Hagemeye , B., Neye , F. J., Nebe ich, W., & Asendo p , J. B. (2013). The ABC o Social701
Desi es: A ilia ion, Being Alone, and Closeness o Pa ne . Eu opean Jou nal o 702
Pe sonali y,27(5), 442–457. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/pe .1857703
Hall, J. A. (2017). The egula ion o social in e ac ion in e e yday li e: A eplica ion and704
ex ension o O’Conno and Rosenblood (1996). Jou nal o Social and Pe sonal705
Rela ionships,34(5), 699–716. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0265407516654580706
Hall, J. A., & Da is, D. C. (2017). P oposing he Communica e Bond Belong Theo y:707
E olu iona y In e sec ions Wi h Episodic In e pe sonal Communica ion.708
Communica ion Theo y,27(1), 21–47. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/com .12106709
Hallquis , M. N., & Wiley, J. F. (2018). MplusAu oma ion: An R package o acili a ing710
la ge-scale la en a iable analyses in Mplus. S uc u al Equa ion Modeling, 1–18.711
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/10705511.2017.1402334712
Ha a i, G. M., Mülle , S. R., S achl, C., Wang, R., Wang, W., Bühne , M., Ren ow, P. J.,713
Campbell, A. T., & Gosling, S. D. (2019). Sensing sociabili y: Indi idual di e ences714
in young adul s’ con e sa ion, calling, ex ing, and app use beha io s in daily li e.715
Jou nal o Pe sonali y and Social Psychology, Ad ance Online Publica ion.716
h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/pspp0000245717
Ha ell J , F. E. (2021). Hmisc: Ha ell miscellaneous.718
h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=Hmisc719
Hen y, L., & Wickham, H. (2020). Pu : Func ional p og amming ools.720
h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=pu 721
Hill, C. A. (2009). A ilia ion mo i a ion. In M. R. Lea y & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook722
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 39
o indi idual di e ences in social beha io (pp. 410–425). The Guil o d P ess.723
Ho e , J., & Hagemeye , B. (2018). Social Bonding: A ilia ion Mo i a ion and In imacy724
Mo i a ion. In J. Heckhausen & H. Heckhausen (Eds.), Mo i a ion and Ac ion (pp.725
305–334). Sp inge In e na ional Publishing.726
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-3-319-65094-4_7727
Ho man, L. (2015). Longi udinal analysis: Modeling wi hin-pe son luc ua ion and change.728
Rou ledge/Taylo & F ancis G oup.729
Ho man, L. (2020). Disagg ega ing Be ween-Pe son Time Slope E ec s om730
Wi hin-Pe son E ec s. PsyA Xi . h ps://doi.o g/10.31234/os .io/6q2sm731
Ho man, L., & Wal e s, R. W. (2022). Ca ching Up on Mul ile el Modeling. Annual732
Re iew o Psychology,73. h ps://doi.o g/10.31234/os .io/j8x9k733
Ho ho n, T. (2019). TH.da a: TH’s da a a chi e.734
h ps://CRAN.R-p ojec .o g/package=TH.da a735
Ho ho n, T., B e z, F., & Wes all, P. (2008). Simul aneous in e ence in gene al pa ame ic736
models. Biome ical Jou nal,50(3), 346–363.737
Kolle , M. (2016). obus lmm: An R package o obus es ima ion o linea mixed-e ec s738
models. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,75(6), 1–24.739
h ps://doi.o g/10.18637/jss. 075.i06740
Kolle , M. (2019). Robus lmm: Robus linea mixed e ec s models [R Package Ve sion 2.3].741
K oenke, K., Spi ze , R. L., Williams, J. B. W., & Löwe, B. (2009). An Ul a-B ie 742
Sc eening Scale o Anxie y and Dep ession: The PHQ4. Psychosoma ics,50(6),743
613–621. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/S0033-3182(09)70864-3744
Kushle , K., Dwye , R., & Dunn, E. W. (2019). The Social P ice o Cons an Connec i i y:745
Sma phones Impose Sub le Cos s on Well-Being. Cu en Di ec ions in746
Psychological Science,28(4), 347–352. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/0963721419847200747
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 40
Kuzne so a, A., B ockho , P. B., & Ch is ensen, R. H. B. (2017). lme Tes package: Tes s748
in linea mixed e ec s models. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,82(13), 1–26.749
h ps://doi.o g/10.18637/jss. 082.i13750
Lades, L. K., La an, K., Daly, M., & Delaney, L. (2020). Daily emo ional well-being751
du ing he COVID-19 pandemic. B i ish Jou nal o Heal h Psychology,25(4),752
902–911. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/bjhp.12450753
Lay, J. C., Pauly, T., G a , P., Biesanz, J. C., & Hoppmann, C. A. (2019). By mysel and754
liking i ? P edic o s o dis inc ypes o soli ude expe iences in daily li e. Jou nal o 755
Pe sonali y,87(3), 633–647. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/jopy.12421756
Long, J. A. (2019). In e ac ions: Comp ehensi e, use - iendly oolki o p obing757
in e ac ions [R Package Ve sion 1.1.0].758
Long, J. A. (2020). J ools: Analysis and p esen a ion o social scien i ic da a.759
h ps://c an. -p ojec .o g/package=j ools760
Löwe, B., Wahl, I., Rose, M., Spi ze , C., Glaesme , H., Wingen eld, K., Schneide , A., &761
B ähle , E. (2010). A 4-i em measu e o dep ession and anxie y: Valida ion and762
s anda diza ion o he Pa ien Heal h Ques ionnai e-4 (PHQ-4) in he gene al763
popula ion. Jou nal o A ec i e Diso de s,122(1), 86–95.764
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.jad.2009.06.019765
Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2012). Es ima ing he eliabili y o single-i em li e766
sa is ac ion measu es: Resul s om ou na ional panel s udies. Social Indica o s767
Resea ch,105(3), 323–331. h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s11205-011-9783-z768
Lucas, R. E., Le, K., & Dy en o h, P. S. (2008). Explaining he Ex a e sion/Posi i e769
A ec Rela ion: Sociabili y Canno Accoun o Ex a e s’ G ea e Happiness.770
Jou nal o Pe sonali y,76(3), 385–414.771
h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00490.x772
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 47
wellbeing du ing he ea ly s ages o he COVID-19 pandemic. Ame ican923
Psychologis , Ad ance Online Publica ion. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/amp0000702924
Zajenkowski, M., Jonason, P. K., Lenia ska, M., & Kozakiewicz, Z. (2020). Who complies925
wi h he es ic ions o educe he sp ead o COVID-19?: Pe sonali y and926
pe cep ions o he COVID-19 si ua ion. Pe sonali y and Indi idual Di e ences,166,927
110199. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110199928
Zeileis, A., & C oissan , Y. (2010). Ex ended model o mulas in R: Mul iple pa s and929
mul iple esponses. Jou nal o S a is ical So wa e,34(1), 1–13.930
h ps://doi.o g/10.18637/jss. 034.i01931
Ze le , I., Schild, C., Lillehol , L., K oencke, L., U esch, T., Moshagen, M., Böhm, R.,932
Back, M. D., & Geukes, K. (2021). The Role o Pe sonali y in COVID-19-Rela ed933
Pe cep ions, E alua ions, and Beha io s: Findings Ac oss Fi e Samples, Nine934
T ai s, and 17 C i e ia. Social Psychological and Pe sonali y Science,935
19485506211001680. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/19485506211001680936
Zyga , C., Hagemeye , B., Pusch, S., & Schönb od , F. D. (2018). F om Mo i e937
Disposi ions o S a es o Ou comes: An In ensi e Expe ience Sampling S udy on938
Communal Mo i a ional Dynamics in Couples. Eu opean Jou nal o Pe sonali y,939
32(3), 306–324. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/pe .2145940

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 1
Appendix
Supplemen al Ma e ial
Full Equa ions941
Fi s , o p edic pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency (H1a, H1b), we es ima ed942
models wi h a c oss-le el in e ac ion o ime i (linea e ec , ze o a he i s wa e) and each943
ai :944
con ac i =β0i+β1i ime i +e i
β0i=γ00 +γ01 ai i+υ0i
β1i=γ10 +γ11 ai i
(A1)
945
con ac i =γ00 +γ01 ai i+γ10 ime i +γ11 ime i ai i+υ0i+e i ,(Reduced- o m)
whe e a ime o pe son i e i ∼N(0, σ2
e)and υ0i∼N(0, τ00)( o a ixed slope model).946
We es ima ed sepa a e models o he wo dependen a iables, pe sonal and indi ec 947
con ac , and o each o he ou ai s. Second, o p edic well-being, ha is, li e948
sa is ac ion and dep essi i y/anxie y (H2a, H2b), we es ima ed c oss-le el in e ac ions o 949
he wi hin-pe son e ec o highe - han-baseline con ac (ei he pe sonal o indi ec 950
con ac ), con ac WP i, wi h each social ai :951
wellbeing i =β0i+β1i ime i +β2icon ac W P i +e i
β0i=γ00 +γ01 ai i+γ02con ac BPi+γ03 ai icon ac BPi+υ0i
β1i=γ10
β2i=γ20 +γ21 ai i
(A2)
952
wellbeing i =γ00 +γ01 ai i+γ02con ac BPi+γ03 ai icon ac BPi
+γ10 ime i +γ20con ac WP i +γ21con ac W P i ai i
+υ0i+e i ,
(Reduced- o m)
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 2
whe e e i ∼N(0, σ2
e)and υ0i∼N(0, τ00)( o a ixed slope model). Again, we es ima ed953
sepa a e models o he wo dependen a iables li e sa is ac ion and dep essi i y/anxie y,954
o pe sonal and indi ec con ac , and o each social ai .955
Robus ness Check956
In o de o judge how obus he mul ile el models we e o iola ed assump ions957
ega ding mul i a ia e no mali y and con amina ion by ou lie s, we e-es ima ed all models958
p esen ed in he main pa o he a icle wi h obus linea mixed-e ec s models using he959
obus lmm package (Kolle , 2016, 2019). Based on he andom e ec s con amina ion model960
and he cen al con amina ion model, his me hod suppo s hie a chically g ouped da a961
s uc u es such as obse a ions nes ed in pa icipan s. The e is no uni e sally accep ed way962
o ob ain con idence in e als o p- alues based on he me hod implemen ed in he963
obus lmm package (Kolle , 2019) which is why we decided no o epo hese obus 964
models in he main pa o he a icle. Gene ally, he esul s epo ed in he main pa o 965
he a icle we e e y simila o hese obus es ima es (see Tables S7, S8, S9, S10, & S11),966
especially o models ela ed o hypo heses H1a and H1b. Di e ences be ween obus and967
non- obus models we e sligh ly la ge o models es ing hypo heses H2a and H2b, whe e968
ai ∗con ac W P e ec s we e sligh ly educed in magni ude o a ilia ion mo i e and969
social anxie y in he obus models.970
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 3
Supplemen al Tables971
Table S1
Means and S anda d De ia ions o he Included Va iables O e Time and hei ICCs
M1SD1M2SD2M3SD3M4SD4ICC
Pe sonal con ac equency 1.85 0.78 1.9 0.83 2.14 0.78 2.25 0.83 0.62
Indi ec con ac equency 2.30 0.69 2.25 0.72 2.15 0.64 2.13 0.64 0.8
Li e sa is ac ion 6.75 2.36 6.46 2.42 6.44 2.37 6.48 2.32 0.74
Dep essi i y/anxie y 1.67 0.65 1.67 0.62 1.6 0.59 1.65 0.68 0.72
Ex a e sion 3.05 0.70
A ilia ion mo i e 3.25 0.96
Need o be alone 5.23 1.01
Social anxie y 1.76 0.77
No e. P esen ed a e he uncen e ed a iables. Pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency
ha e a ange om 1 o 5 (obse ed anges: 1 – 4.5, 1 – 4.25), li e sa is ac ion om 0 o
10, dep essi i y/anxie y om 1 o 4 (obse ed ange: 1 – 3.6), ex a e sion om 1 o 5
(obse ed ange: 1.25 – 4.75), a ilia ion mo i e om 1 o 6, need o be alone om 1 o 7
(obse ed ange: 2.75 – 7), and social anxie y om 1 o 5 (obse ed ange: 1 – 4.08). M1
= mean a he i s wa e. SD1= s anda d de ia ion a he i s wa e. ICC = in a-class
co ela ion, ha is, p opo ion o a iance ha lies a he be ween-pe son le el.
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 4
Table S2
Fixed E ec s o Social Con ac F equency P edic ed by Time and Social T ai s (Al e na i e
Random Slope Con igu a ion o Table 1)
Pe sonal con ac Indi ec con ac
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Ex a e sion (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.60 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.38] 52.25 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 0.15 [0.11, 0.18] 8.29 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.04] -5.70 < .001
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 0.05 [-0.11, 0.20] 0.60 .552 0.39 [0.27, 0.52] 6.24 < .001
Time * Ex a e sion, ˆγ11 0.01 [-0.04, 0.06] 0.50 .616 -0.04 [-0.07, -0.01] -2.72 .007
A ilia ion mo i e (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.79 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.38] 52.31 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 0.15 [0.11, 0.18] 8.41 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.04] -5.63 < .001
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 0.09 [-0.02, 0.20] 1.65 .100 0.26 [0.17, 0.35] 5.77 < .001
Time * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ11 0.04 [0.00, 0.07] 1.97 .051 -0.01 [-0.03, 0.01] -0.98 .326
Need o be alone (M3a, M3b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T3 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.53 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.39] 49.25 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T3 0.15 [0.11, 0.18] 8.45 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.04] -5.62 < .001
Need o be alone, ˆγ01 -0.01 [-0.12, 0.09] -0.26 .796 -0.09 [-0.18, 0.00] -1.97 .050
Time * Need o be alone, ˆγ11 -0.05 [-0.08, -0.01] -2.53 .012 0.00 [-0.02, 0.02] -0.40 .690
Social anxie y (M4a, M4b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T4 1.82 [1.71, 1.92] 33.58 < .001 2.30 [2.21, 2.39] 49.43 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T4 0.14 [0.11, 0.18] 8.31 < .001 -0.06 [-0.08, -0.04] -5.66 < .001
Social anxie y, ˆγ01 0.01 [-0.13, 0.15] 0.17 .868 -0.16 [-0.28, -0.04] -2.65 .009
Time * Social anxie y, ˆγ11 -0.04 [-0.08, 0.01] -1.63 .106 0.02 [-0.01, 0.04] 1.27 .205
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each social ai : as p edic o s o pe sonal con ac
equency (models MXa) and o indi ec con ac equency (models MXb). CI = con idence
in e al. Models MXa ea u e andom slopes o ime.
972
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 5
Table S3
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and Ex a e sion (Al e na i e Random
Slope Con igu a ion o Table 2)
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.73 [6.42, 7.04] 42.33 < .001 1.66 [1.58, 1.75] 38.24 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.11 [-0.20, -0.03] -2.60 .010 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.28 .782
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.33 [-0.03, 0.70] 1.78 .077 -0.02 [-0.12, 0.09] -0.32 .747
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.22 [0.00, 0.44] 1.96 .052 0.00 [-0.06, 0.06] -0.01 .990
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 T1 1.16 [0.74, 1.58] 5.37 < .001 -0.26 [-0.38, -0.15] -4.51 < .001
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ03 -0.09 [-0.62, 0.44] -0.33 .740 0.01 [-0.14, 0.16] 0.12 .906
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ21 -0.01 [-0.29, 0.27] -0.07 .944 -0.02 [-0.10, 0.06] -0.51 .613
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.68 [6.36, 7.00] 41.16 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 37.10 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.08 [-0.17, 0.00] -1.99 .047 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.39 .696
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.23 [-0.21, 0.68] 1.03 .306 0.13 [0.00, 0.25] 2.03 .044
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.11 [-0.49, 0.27] -0.56 .578 0.01 [-0.09, 0.11] 0.22 .824
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 T2 1.16 [0.72, 1.60] 5.20 < .001 -0.32 [-0.44, -0.20] -5.23 < .001
Indi ec con ac (BP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ03 -0.26 [-0.84, 0.33] -0.86 .391 -0.03 [-0.19, 0.13] -0.37 .709
Indi ec con ac (WP) * Ex a e sion, ˆγ21 0.19 [-0.30, 0.67] 0.76 .451 -0.09 [-0.21, 0.03] -1.49 .137
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e
sa is ac ion (models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). CI = con idence in e al; BP =
be ween-pe son e ec ; WP = wi hin-pe son e ec . Models M1a, M1b, and M2a ea u e andom slopes o
wi hin-pe son con ac .
973

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 6
Table S4
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and A ilia ion Mo i e (Al e na i e
Random Slope Con igu a ion o Table 3)
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.71 [6.38, 7.05] 39.54 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 36.09 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.11 [-0.20, -0.03] -2.61 .009 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.22 .825
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.30 [-0.10, 0.69] 1.45 .149 -0.02 [-0.13, 0.09] -0.38 .703
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.17 [-0.05, 0.39] 1.54 .126 0.00 [-0.06, 0.07] 0.14 .891
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 T1 0.41 [0.08, 0.74] 2.43 .016 -0.05 [-0.14, 0.04] -1.08 .280
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ03 0.12 [-0.30, 0.54] 0.56 .575 -0.02 [-0.13, 0.10] -0.27 .786
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ21 0.21 [-0.02, 0.43] 1.80 .076 -0.03 [-0.09, 0.04] -0.84 .403
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.68 [6.36, 7.01] 40.19 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 35.61 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.09 [-0.17, -0.01] -2.11 .035 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.27 .789
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.49 [0.03, 0.95] 2.10 .037 0.03 [-0.10, 0.15] 0.41 .684
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.17 [-0.55, 0.21] -0.89 .373 0.01 [-0.09, 0.11] 0.20 .840
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 T2 0.41 [0.09, 0.74] 2.49 .014 -0.07 [-0.16, 0.03] -1.41 .161
Indi ec con ac (BP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ03 -0.29 [-0.70, 0.12] -1.40 .164 0.00 [-0.12, 0.11] -0.08 .933
Indi ec con ac (WP) * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ21 0.40 [0.03, 0.77] 2.14 .035 -0.07 [-0.17, 0.02] -1.55 .122
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e sa is ac ion
(models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). CI = con idence in e al; BP = be ween-pe son e ec ;
WP = wi hin-pe son e ec . Models M1a, M1b, and M2a ea u e andom slopes o wi hin-pe son con ac .
974
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 7
Table S5
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and Need o be Alone (Al e na i e
Random Slope Con igu a ion o Table 4)
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.75 [6.42, 7.08] 40.48 < .001 1.65 [1.57, 1.74] 36.81 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.12 [-0.21, -0.04] -2.79 .006 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.10 .917
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.41 [0.03, 0.80] 2.10 .037 -0.04 [-0.14, 0.07] -0.67 .501
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.21 [-0.01, 0.43] 1.87 .064 0.00 [-0.06, 0.06] -0.02 .980
Need o be alone, ˆγ01 T1 0.27 [-0.04, 0.58] 1.69 .093 -0.04 [-0.13, 0.04] -1.04 .300
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * Need o be alone, ˆγ03 -0.27 [-0.71, 0.17] -1.20 .233 0.08 [-0.04, 0.19] 1.25 .214
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * Need o be alone, ˆγ21 -0.19 [-0.39, 0.00] -1.93 .057 0.02 [-0.03, 0.08] 0.87 .385
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.61 [6.30, 6.93] 40.99 < .001 1.66 [1.57, 1.75] 36.96 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.09 [-0.17, 0.00] -2.06 .040 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.32 .748
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.71 [0.27, 1.14] 3.19 .002 -0.01 [-0.13, 0.11] -0.21 .835
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.07 [-0.45, 0.31] -0.35 .724 -0.02 [-0.11, 0.08] -0.35 .727
Need o be alone, ˆγ01 T2 0.28 [-0.03, 0.59] 1.76 .079 -0.05 [-0.14, 0.03] -1.24 .216
Indi ec con ac (BP) * Need o be alone, ˆγ03 0.08 [-0.34, 0.51] 0.37 .711 -0.02 [-0.13, 0.10] -0.28 .782
Indi ec con ac (WP) * Need o be alone, ˆγ21 -0.20 [-0.56, 0.16] -1.10 .274 -0.01 [-0.10, 0.07] -0.31 .753
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e sa is ac ion
(models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). CI = con idence in e al; BP = be ween-pe son e ec ;
WP = wi hin-pe son e ec . Models M1a, M1b, and M2a ea u e andom slopes o wi hin-pe son con ac .
975
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 8
Table S6
Fixed E ec s o Well-Being P edic ed by Time, Con ac F equencies, and Social Anxie y (Al e na i e
Random Slope Con igu a ion o Table 5)
Li e sa is ac ion Dep essi i y/anxie y
Pa ame e ˆγ95% CI p ˆγ95% CI p
Pe sonal con ac equency (M1a, M1b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 6.77 [6.46, 7.08] 42.68 < .001 1.65 [1.57, 1.73] 42.61 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T1 -0.12 [-0.20, -0.03] -2.63 .009 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.22 .823
Pe sonal con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.48 [0.11, 0.85] 2.55 .012 -0.05 [-0.14, 0.04] -1.07 .286
Pe sonal con ac (WP), ˆγ20 0.20 [-0.02, 0.43] 1.79 .076 0.01 [-0.06, 0.07] 0.18 .856
Social anxie y, ˆγ01 T1 -0.84 [-1.22, -0.46] -4.28 < .001 0.39 [0.30, 0.48] 8.27 < .001
Pe sonal con ac (BP) * Social anxie y, ˆγ03 0.64 [0.10, 1.17] 2.32 .021 -0.11 [-0.24, 0.03] -1.58 .115
Pe sonal con ac (WP) * Social anxie y, ˆγ21 0.07 [-0.23, 0.36] 0.43 .670 0.07 [-0.01, 0.15] 1.64 .104
Indi ec con ac equency (M2a, M2b)
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 6.65 [6.34, 6.96] 42.38 < .001 1.66 [1.58, 1.73] 42.43 < .001
Time, ˆγ10 T2 -0.09 [-0.17, 0.00] -2.07 .039 0.00 [-0.03, 0.02] -0.36 .719
Indi ec con ac (BP), ˆγ02 0.50 [0.08, 0.92] 2.33 .021 0.08 [-0.03, 0.18] 1.46 .146
Indi ec con ac (WP), ˆγ20 -0.07 [-0.45, 0.31] -0.37 .713 0.00 [-0.09, 0.09] 0.05 .961
Social anxie y, ˆγ01 T2 -0.86 [-1.23, -0.48] -4.46 < .001 0.43 [0.34, 0.52] 9.24 < .001
Indi ec con ac (BP) * Social anxie y, ˆγ03 0.27 [-0.28, 0.82] 0.95 .341 0.05 [-0.08, 0.18] 0.73 .464
Indi ec con ac (WP) * Social anxie y, ˆγ21 0.14 [-0.31, 0.60] 0.62 .536 0.16 [0.05, 0.27] 2.76 .006
No e. Two models we e compu ed o each pe sonal and indi ec con ac equency: p edic ing li e
sa is ac ion (models MXa) and dep essi i y/anxie y (models MXb). CI = con idence in e al; BP =
be ween-pe son e ec ; WP = wi hin-pe son e ec . Models M1a, M1b, and M2a ea u e andom slopes o
wi hin-pe son con ac .
976
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 9
Table S7
Robus Es ima es: Fixed E ec s o Social Con ac P edic ed by Time and Social T ai s
Pe sonal con ac Indi ec con ac
Pa ame e ˆγ SE ∆ ˆγ SE ∆
Ex a e sion
In e cep , ˆγ00 T1 1.77 0.06 30.36 0.04 2.18 0.05 45.77 0.12
Time, ˆγ10 T1 0.14 0.01 9.64 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -6.26 0.00
Ex a e sion, ˆγ01 0.04 0.08 0.46 0.01 0.39 0.07 5.70 0.00
Time * Ex a e sion, ˆγ11 0.01 0.02 0.62 0.00 -0.04 0.01 -2.94 0.00
A ilia ion mo i e
In e cep , ˆγ00 T2 1.78 0.06 30.70 0.04 2.16 0.05 47.15 0.13
Time, ˆγ10 T2 0.14 0.01 9.78 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -5.98 0.00
A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ01 0.08 0.06 1.33 0.01 0.28 0.05 5.83 -0.02
Time * A ilia ion mo i e, ˆγ11 0.04 0.02 2.62 0.00 -0.01 0.01 -0.72 0.00
Need o be alone
In e cep , ˆγ00 T3 1.77 0.06 30.50 0.04 2.18 0.05 43.92 0.12
Time, ˆγ10 T3 0.14 0.01 9.78 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -5.95 -0.01
Need o be alone, ˆγ01 -0.03 0.06 -0.49 0.01 -0.13 0.05 -2.54 0.03
Time * Need o be alone, ˆγ11 -0.04 0.02 -2.60 -0.01 -0.01 0.01 -0.79 0.00
Social anxie y
In e cep , ˆγ00 T4 1.78 0.06 30.32 0.04 2.19 0.05 42.48 0.11
Time, ˆγ10 T4 0.14 0.01 9.69 0.00 -0.05 0.01 -6.01 0.00
Social anxie y, ˆγ01 0.02 0.08 0.21 0.00 -0.12 0.07 -1.71 -0.05
Time * Social anxie y, ˆγ11 -0.03 0.02 -1.70 0.00 0.01 0.01 1.03 0.00
No e. CI = con idence in e al. SE = s anda d e o . ∆= di e ence be ween non- obus
and obus es ima es.
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 16
Comple e So wa e and Session In o ma ion982
We used R (Ve sion 4.0.4; R Co e Team, 2020) and he R-packages ca (Ve sion983
3.0.12; Fox & Weisbe g, 2019; Fox e al., 2020; Yen es & Wilhelm, 2018), ca Da a (Ve sion984
3.0.4; Fox e al., 2020), ca eless (Ve sion 1.1.3; Yen es & Wilhelm, 2018), ci (Ve sion985
0.3.2; Aus , 2019), co plo 2017 (Wei & Simko, 2017b), cowplo (Ve sion 1.1.1; Wilke,986
2020), dply (Ve sion 1.0.7; Wickham, F ançois, e al., 2020), e ec s (Ve sion 4.2.0; Fox &987
Weisbe g, 2018; Fox, 2003; Fox & Hong, 2009), o ca s (Ve sion 0.5.1; Wickham, 2020a),988
Fo mula (Ve sion 1.2.4; Zeileis & C oissan , 2010), ggplo 2 (Ve sion 3.3.5; Wickham, 2016),989
GPA o a ion (Ve sion 2014.11.1; Be naa ds & I.Jenn ich, 2005), Hmisc (Ve sion 4.6.0;990
Ha ell J , 2021), in e ac ions (Ve sion 1.1.5; Long, 2019), j ools (Ve sion 2.1.4; Long,991
2020), la ice (Ve sion 0.20.41; Sa ka , 2008), lme4 (Ve sion 1.1.27.1; Ba es e al., 2015),992
lme Tes (Ve sion 3.1.3; Kuzne so a e al., 2017), magick (Ve sion 2.7.3; Ooms, 2021),993
MASS (Ve sion 7.3.53; Venables & Ripley, 2002), Ma ix (Ve sion 1.3.2; Ba es & Maechle ,994
2019), MplusAu oma ion (Hallquis & Wiley, 2018), mul comp (Ve sion 1.4.18; Ho ho n e 995
al., 2008), m no m (Ve sion 1.1.1; Genz & B e z, 2009), nlme (Ve sion 3.1.152; Pinhei o e 996
al., 2021), papaja (Ve sion 0.1.0.9997; Aus & Ba h, 2020), pa chwo k (Ve sion 1.1.1;997
Pede sen, 2020), png (Ve sion 0.1.7; U banek, 2013), psych (Ve sion 2.1.9; Re elle, 2020),998
pu (Ve sion 0.3.4; Hen y & Wickham, 2020), ead (Ve sion 2.1.1; Wickham & Hes e ,999
2020), obus lmm (Ve sion 2.5.0; Kolle , 2019), scales (Ve sion 1.1.1; Wickham & Seidel,1000
2020), shiny (Ve sion 1.7.1; Chang e al., 2020), sim (G een & MacLeod, 2016), s ing 1001
(Ve sion 1.4.0; Wickham, 2019), su i al (Ve sion 3.2.7; Te y M. The neau & Pa icia M.1002
G ambsch, 2000), TH.da a (Ve sion 1.0.10; Ho ho n, 2019), ibble (Ve sion 3.1.6; Mülle &1003
Wickham, 2020), idy (Ve sion 1.1.4; Wickham, 2020b), idy e se (Ve sion 1.3.1;1004
Wickham, A e ick, B yan, Chang, McGowan, F ançois, e al., 2019), and inylabels1005
(Ve sion 0.2.2; Ba h, 2020) o da a w angling, analyses, and plo s.1006
The ollowing is he ou pu o R’s sessionIn o() command, which shows in o ma ion1007
o aid analy ic ep oducibili y o he analyses.1008

SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 17
R e sion 4.0.4 (2021-02-15) Pla o m: x86_64-apple-da win17.0 (64-bi ) Running1009
unde : macOS Big Su 10.161010
Ma ix p oduc s: de aul BLAS:1011
/Lib a y/F amewo ks/R. amewo k/Ve sions/4.0/Resou ces/lib/libRblas.dylib LAPACK:1012
/Lib a y/F amewo ks/R. amewo k/Ve sions/4.0/Resou ces/lib/libRlapack.dylib1013
locale: [1]1014
en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-8/C/en_US.UTF-8/en_US.UTF-81015
a ached base packages: [1] g id s a s g aphics g De ices u ils da ase s me hods1016
[8] base1017
o he a ached packages: [1] png_0.1-7 magick_2.7.3 co plo _0.841018
[4] ca eless_1.1.3 ca _3.0-12 scales_1.1.11019
[7] pa chwo k_1.1.1 e ec s_4.2-0 ca Da a_3.0-41020
[10] cowplo _1.1.1 j ools_2.1.4 in e ac ions_1.1.51021
[13] lme Tes _3.1-3 obus lmm_2.5-0 lme4_1.1-27.11022
[16] Ma ix_1.3-2 GPA o a ion_2014.11-1 psych_2.1.91023
[19] o ca s_0.5.1 s ing _1.4.0 dply _1.0.71024
[22] pu _0.3.4 ead _2.1.1 idy _1.1.41025
[25] ibble_3.1.6 ggplo 2_3.3.5 idy e se_1.3.11026
[28] ci _0.3.2 papaja_0.1.0.9997 inylabels_0.2.21027
loaded ia a namespace (and no a ached): [1] TH.da a_1.0-10 minqa_1.2.41028
colo space_2.0-21029
[4] ellipsis_0.3.2 es imabili y_1.3 s_1.5.21030
[7] s udioapi_0.13 a e _2.1.0 ansi_1.0.21031
[10] m no m_1.1-1 lub ida e_1.8.0 xml2_1.3.31032
[13] code ools_0.2-18 splines_4.0.4 mno m _2.0.21033
[16] obus base_0.93-6 kni _1.37 jsonli e_1.7.31034
SOCIAL CONTACT, WELL-BEING, AND SOCIAL TRAITS 18
[19] nlop _1.2.2.2 b oom_0.7.11.9000 dbply _2.1.11035
[22] shiny_1.7.1 compile _4.0.4 h _1.4.21036
[25] emmeans_1.7.1-1 backpo s_1.4.1 asse ha _0.2.11037
[28] as map_1.1.0 su ey_4.0 cli_3.1.11038
[31] la e _1.3.0 h ml ools_0.5.2 ools_4.0.41039
[34] coda_0.19-4 g able_0.3.0 glue_1.6.11040
[37] Rcpp_1.0.7 cell ange _1.1.0 c s_0.3.81041
[40] nlme_3.1-152 insigh _0.14.5 x un_0.291042
[43] es _1.0.2 mime_0.12 miniUI_0.1.1.11043
[46] li ecycle_1.0.1 DEop imR_1.0-8 MASS_7.3-531044
[49] zoo_1.8-8 hms_1.1.1 p omises_1.2.0.11045
[52] pa allel_4.0.4 sandwich_3.0-0 yaml_2.2.21046
[55] pande _0.6.3 as GHQuad_1.0 s ingi_1.7.61047
[58] high _0.9 boo _1.3-26 lang_0.4.121048
[61] pkgcon ig_2.0.3 e alua e_0.14 la ice_0.20-411049
[64] labeling_0.4.2 idyselec _1.1.1 mag i _2.0.21050
[67] bookdown_0.24 R6_2.5.1 gene ics_0.1.11051
[70] mul comp_1.4-18 DBI_1.1.0 pilla _1.6.51052
[73] ha en_2.4.3 wi h _2.4.3 abind_1.4-51053
[76] su i al_3.2-7 nne _7.3-15 model _0.1.81054
[79] c ayon_1.4.2 u 8_1.2.2 m nsim_1.0-21055
[82] zdb_0.2.0 ma kdown_2.11 eadxl_1.3.11056
[85] ep ex_2.0.1 diges _0.6.29 x able_1.8-41057
[88] h pu _1.6.5 numDe i _2016.8-1.1 munsell_0.5.01058
[91] mi ools_2.41059