Today's lecture was all about love relationships, what makes them successful and what are the predictors for divorce/breaking up. Since so many threads are often answered with the suggestion to communicate, I figured I would share them here.
What John Gottman coined the four horseman of the apocalypse (something like that) in relationships are predictors that have allowed him to predict which couples are headed towards divorce, by studying them in these four areas, with a 90% success rate. This is one of the highest, conclusive numbers in psychology to date, so I'll start with the four.
1. Criticism - Criticisms are things such as "you're constantly leaving your laundry on the floor" or "you never clean the dishes right. There's always food on them!" Now, Gottman does not advocate that these things should not be said, but rather, it's the way of framing them that can become a problem.
2. Hostility, contempt - This involves insults, name calling, commands, sarcasm, etc.
3. Defensiveness - This involves making excuses, such as saying you're too tired to do the dishes after a long day at work and that's why you don't clean them properly, or counter-complaining, responding with a complaint about the partner; the complaint might be valid, but it's strategically placed to deflect the blame.
4. Withdrawing - This includes being non-responsive, disengaged, walking away (different to the "I love you, but I feel like we need some space right now to calm down," which is actually quite healthy) and it also includes what one student in my class referred to as "stonewalling," i.e. letting the other partner vent and expend their anger before responding.
Now, I want to point out that everyone occasionally loses their cool and succumbs to these things. Where they really start to strain a relationship is when they're used frequently and consistently. I should also note that the want to change can also counter the influence that these things might have on a relationship, as in that case, the partner is actively working towards a healthier method of communication.
The other thing that was pointed out was that disagreements are too often seen as unhealthy. Putting the focus on not arguing, never disagreeing, etc. is avoiding conflict, which is not an unhealthy thing to have in relationships. It's the way that those arguments and disagreements are handled. An example of a very passionate couple was given to illustrate that even those who fight/disagree frequently can be happy and satisfied in their marriages; it was pointed out that they worked on their communication styles so that they were able to recognise when things were getting heated and take a moment to calm down before rationally dealing with the situation. So again, it's less about how many arguments that are had and more about how they're handled.
There are also consistent predictors (as in, they're agreed upon across studies) for what will make a successful/happy relationship, and they are as follows:
1. Similarity in interests/values. He brought up the saying that "opposites attract" and yet studies have found that couples who are similar, as opposed to opposites, are more likely to stay together, happily, in the long run. If anyone's a Jung fan, this also ties into Jung's philosophy that compensating by finding what we're weak on in a partner can ultimately lead to tension and unhappiness further on down the line.
2. Trust.
3. Role sharing. Studies have found that in relationships where men, say, help with the laundry and other household chores, the women are often happier for it, thus leading to the men in the relationship being happier.
4. Affection.
5. Good communication.
So what makes good communication? There are two subgroups that help determine this:
a) Mutual self-disclosure and listener support
and
b) Handling disagreement and conflict
a) Self-disclosure (being vulnerable/talking about one's emotions) is about faciliating shared understanding and allowing for shared support. One study - albeit this study was done on friendship intimacy as opposed to romantic intimacy - found that, among a sample of college students, both men and women tended to experience emotional closeness through talking and sharing their emotions, but men were more likely, on average, to experience emotional closeness through shared activities. Although the effect sizes were small - an effect size determines the overlap if you were to plot the differences on a graph, and many times, average gender differences are cancelled out by their overlap, because so many men and women share the characteristics on the same scale - it's still something to think about when trying to find ways to connect with your partner. There's also the fact that engaging in activities - even for LDR couples, there are plenty of activities to partake in - can lead to self-disclosure.
The other thing to practice is both more passive listening and active listening. It's important to acknowledge what your partner is saying, and not interrupt, but it's also important to take advantage of pauses and thought points to try and actively understand the problem. Ask questions, sympathise/empathise, be a part of the conversation and talk it out in attempt to nudge them towards better understanding (or your understanding, if it's a disagreement). As might be obvious, don't make negative statements, such as telling someone they "should have tried harder" or they "should have stood up for themselves" and don't be completely non-responsive.
It has been found that providing emotional support through these two methods leads to higher levels of satisfaction for couples, and for married and cohabitating couples. Instrumental support, which is where the role sharing mentioned earlier comes in, has been found to lead to higher levels of satisfaction in couples where both partners are more egalitarian than traditional; for traditional couples, role sharing has actually been found to lead to feelings of unhappiness.
b) Beyond the basics of communication that we learn from reading around, such as using "I" statements, there are two other keys to handling conflict in such a way that's healthy for a lasting relationship (three if you count the four "what not to do"s from earlier).
1. Listen. All too often we get caught up in wanting to talk, in wanting to convey our point, in wanting to interrupt and clarify if our partner perceives something we say as something it's not, or wasn't intended to be. A part of being a supportive and active listener means listening to gain an understanding of where the partner is coming from. There's nothing wrong with being honest and saying you don't understand so could they try explaining it one more time, because you want to understand, or simply asking them what's been up before jumping to the conclusion that anything needs to be talked out.
2. Demonstrate active understanding. It's important to let the other know that you heard what they're upset about. You don't have to agree with it, but it's important to still hear it and understand it for what it is. Saying "I understand that you're angry with me because...[reason they're upset here]" will get you further than criticising them for being upset in the first place. It's acknowledging what they're feeling, accepting it as valid because they're feeling it, and then moving on from it to explain your position and hopefully come to calmer, more rational conclusions.
Of course there are always exceptions, but these are some of what's been found in both past and present psychological research, and so I figured I would share.
What John Gottman coined the four horseman of the apocalypse (something like that) in relationships are predictors that have allowed him to predict which couples are headed towards divorce, by studying them in these four areas, with a 90% success rate. This is one of the highest, conclusive numbers in psychology to date, so I'll start with the four.
1. Criticism - Criticisms are things such as "you're constantly leaving your laundry on the floor" or "you never clean the dishes right. There's always food on them!" Now, Gottman does not advocate that these things should not be said, but rather, it's the way of framing them that can become a problem.
2. Hostility, contempt - This involves insults, name calling, commands, sarcasm, etc.
3. Defensiveness - This involves making excuses, such as saying you're too tired to do the dishes after a long day at work and that's why you don't clean them properly, or counter-complaining, responding with a complaint about the partner; the complaint might be valid, but it's strategically placed to deflect the blame.
4. Withdrawing - This includes being non-responsive, disengaged, walking away (different to the "I love you, but I feel like we need some space right now to calm down," which is actually quite healthy) and it also includes what one student in my class referred to as "stonewalling," i.e. letting the other partner vent and expend their anger before responding.
Now, I want to point out that everyone occasionally loses their cool and succumbs to these things. Where they really start to strain a relationship is when they're used frequently and consistently. I should also note that the want to change can also counter the influence that these things might have on a relationship, as in that case, the partner is actively working towards a healthier method of communication.
The other thing that was pointed out was that disagreements are too often seen as unhealthy. Putting the focus on not arguing, never disagreeing, etc. is avoiding conflict, which is not an unhealthy thing to have in relationships. It's the way that those arguments and disagreements are handled. An example of a very passionate couple was given to illustrate that even those who fight/disagree frequently can be happy and satisfied in their marriages; it was pointed out that they worked on their communication styles so that they were able to recognise when things were getting heated and take a moment to calm down before rationally dealing with the situation. So again, it's less about how many arguments that are had and more about how they're handled.
There are also consistent predictors (as in, they're agreed upon across studies) for what will make a successful/happy relationship, and they are as follows:
1. Similarity in interests/values. He brought up the saying that "opposites attract" and yet studies have found that couples who are similar, as opposed to opposites, are more likely to stay together, happily, in the long run. If anyone's a Jung fan, this also ties into Jung's philosophy that compensating by finding what we're weak on in a partner can ultimately lead to tension and unhappiness further on down the line.
2. Trust.
3. Role sharing. Studies have found that in relationships where men, say, help with the laundry and other household chores, the women are often happier for it, thus leading to the men in the relationship being happier.
4. Affection.
5. Good communication.
So what makes good communication? There are two subgroups that help determine this:
a) Mutual self-disclosure and listener support
and
b) Handling disagreement and conflict
a) Self-disclosure (being vulnerable/talking about one's emotions) is about faciliating shared understanding and allowing for shared support. One study - albeit this study was done on friendship intimacy as opposed to romantic intimacy - found that, among a sample of college students, both men and women tended to experience emotional closeness through talking and sharing their emotions, but men were more likely, on average, to experience emotional closeness through shared activities. Although the effect sizes were small - an effect size determines the overlap if you were to plot the differences on a graph, and many times, average gender differences are cancelled out by their overlap, because so many men and women share the characteristics on the same scale - it's still something to think about when trying to find ways to connect with your partner. There's also the fact that engaging in activities - even for LDR couples, there are plenty of activities to partake in - can lead to self-disclosure.
The other thing to practice is both more passive listening and active listening. It's important to acknowledge what your partner is saying, and not interrupt, but it's also important to take advantage of pauses and thought points to try and actively understand the problem. Ask questions, sympathise/empathise, be a part of the conversation and talk it out in attempt to nudge them towards better understanding (or your understanding, if it's a disagreement). As might be obvious, don't make negative statements, such as telling someone they "should have tried harder" or they "should have stood up for themselves" and don't be completely non-responsive.
It has been found that providing emotional support through these two methods leads to higher levels of satisfaction for couples, and for married and cohabitating couples. Instrumental support, which is where the role sharing mentioned earlier comes in, has been found to lead to higher levels of satisfaction in couples where both partners are more egalitarian than traditional; for traditional couples, role sharing has actually been found to lead to feelings of unhappiness.
b) Beyond the basics of communication that we learn from reading around, such as using "I" statements, there are two other keys to handling conflict in such a way that's healthy for a lasting relationship (three if you count the four "what not to do"s from earlier).
1. Listen. All too often we get caught up in wanting to talk, in wanting to convey our point, in wanting to interrupt and clarify if our partner perceives something we say as something it's not, or wasn't intended to be. A part of being a supportive and active listener means listening to gain an understanding of where the partner is coming from. There's nothing wrong with being honest and saying you don't understand so could they try explaining it one more time, because you want to understand, or simply asking them what's been up before jumping to the conclusion that anything needs to be talked out.
2. Demonstrate active understanding. It's important to let the other know that you heard what they're upset about. You don't have to agree with it, but it's important to still hear it and understand it for what it is. Saying "I understand that you're angry with me because...[reason they're upset here]" will get you further than criticising them for being upset in the first place. It's acknowledging what they're feeling, accepting it as valid because they're feeling it, and then moving on from it to explain your position and hopefully come to calmer, more rational conclusions.
Of course there are always exceptions, but these are some of what's been found in both past and present psychological research, and so I figured I would share.
Comment