DOCSLIB.ORG

Physiological and Affective Predictors of Change in Relationship Satisfaction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Physiological and Affective Predictors of Change in Relationship Satisfaction J oumal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 1985 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 1985. Vol. 49. No. 1.85-94 0022-3514/85/$00.75 Physiological and Affective Predictors of Change in Relationship Satisfaction Robert W. Levenson John M. Gottman Indiana University University of Illinois In 1980, 30 married couples had engaged in a low-conflict and a high-conflict conversational interaction while continuous physiological data were obtained. In a separate session each spouse had provided a continuous self-report of affect while viewing the videotape of the interaction. In 1983, 19 of these couples were re-Iocated to determine the change in relationship satisfaction that had occurred over the preceding 3 years. A broadly based pattern of physiological arousal (across spouses, interaction segments, and physiological measures) in 1980 was found to predict decline in marital satisfaction; the more aroused the couple was during the 1980 interactions, the more their marital satisfaction declined over the ensuing 3 years. Several affective variables also predicted decline in marital satisfaction, including a pronounced sex difference in negative affect reciprocity: Marital satisfaction declined most when husbands did not reciprocate their wives' negative affect, and when wives did reciprocate their husbands' negative affect. In an earlier article (Levenson & Gottman, sions, each spouse viewed the videotape of 1983), we used physiological and affective the conversation and provided a continuous data obtained during conversational interac­ rating of his or her affective state during the tions to predict current levels of marital interaction. Both physiological and affective satisfaction in a sample of 30 married couples. measures were found to be highly predictive As we noted there, measures of marital sat­ of the couple's current level of marital satis­ isfaction, which have been developed in the faction. The relation between physiology and sociological literature over the past 40 to 50 marital satisfaction was particularly powerful. years, have reasonable levels of psychometric For example, our measure of physiological reliability, discriminant validity, and predic­ linkage by itself accounted for over 60% of tive validity. Thus, it makes good scientific the variance in marital satisfaction. The sense to attempt to account for variation in strength of these findings, compared with marital satisfaction on some independent ba­ previous work using questionnaires (see Bur­ sis. To accomplish this, while couples engaged gess, Locke, & Thomes, 1971, for a review) in these conversational interactions, we ob­ and behavioral observation (e.g., Gottman, tained continuous measures of the physiolog­ 1979), led us to an unexpected conclusion. ical state of each spouse and derived a mea­ Prediction of how satisfied a couple was with sure of the physiological interrelatedness or their marriage was more accurate if based on "linkage" between spouses. In separate ses- their physiological responses during an inter­ action than if based on a careful observation of the interaction. The authors would like to thank Oliver Oyama and Being able to predict current levels of Cathy Oyama for their dedicated detective work. This marital satisfaction on some independent basis research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant MH39895 to the first author and Grant is undoubtedly useful, but being able to pre­ MH29910 and NIMH Research Scientist Development dict future levels of marital satisfaction may Award K2-00257 to the second author. be even more important. Marital dissatisfac­ Requests for reprints should be sent to Robert W. tion has been shown to be predictive of Levenson, Department of Psychology, Indiana University, & Bloomington, Indiana 47405, or to John M. Gottman, marital instability (Terman Wallin, 1949) Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Cham­ and of stress in families, which has deleterious paign, Illinois 61820. effects on the physical and _psychological 85 86 ROBERT LEVENSON AND JOHN GOTTMAN health of the spouses (Bloom, Asher, & White, Method 1978) and on the psychological health and Subjects adjustment of children (Emery, 1982). A technique that enables prediction of which The only information we had on the 30 couples from marriages will become more satisfied and Bloomington, Indiana, who had participated in the original study were their 1980 addreSses and places of employment. which will become less satisfied would have Fortunately, the population of southern Indiana is quite great importance both for understanding the stable; a number of the couples still lived in Bloomington nature of relationship satisfaction over time or in the surrounding areas. Others who had moved were and for identifying marriages that are at high tracked down by using such resources as employer records risk for future instability and stress. These and records kept by educational institutions and by contacting people with the same last name in search of marriages would be prime candidates for relatives. In all, 21 couples were located and asked to therapeutic intervention. participate in the follow-up study. One couple declined, Research on marital satisfaction has been and one couple had divorced, with only the wife agreeing overwhelmingly cross sectional. Among the to participate. Thus, we ended up with 19 intact couples for the follow-up (63%). This percentage compares favor­ few longitudinal studies, Terman and Wallin ably with other recent longitudinal studies, such as Bentler J (1949) found that their inventory of marital and Newcomb's (1978) 4-year follow-up (48%) and Mark­ happiness was moderately successful (r = .47) man's (1979) 2lh-year follow-up (54%). Couples electing in predicting marital stability. Bentler and to participate were mailed a package of questionnaires ( to complete in return for a $15 payment. Newcomb (1978) found that a number of demographic and personality variables (e.g., Procedure: 1980 Study older wives, less extraverted husbands) mea­ sured at the time of marriage were predictive The methodological details of the original study were I of marital stability 4 years later, but the presented in Levenson and Gottman (1983) and thus will be reviewed only briefly here. correlations were low (rs = .23 to .33). Mark­ Married couples were recruited by newspaper adver­ man (1979, 1981), in the only longitudinal tisement and were scheduled for three laboratory sessions. study that attempted to predict future marital The first session was scheduled for a time when the satisfaction on the basis of affective self­ couple would not have spoken to each other for at least 8 hours. This session consisted of two IS-min conversa­ report during premarital interactions, found tions, each preceded by as-min preinteractional baseline that the positivity of ratings of the impact of during which they sat in silence. In the first conversation, statements made during these laboratory in­ the couple was asked to discuss the "events of the day" teractions was predictive of marital satisfac­ as if they were home alone at the day's end. In the second 1 conversation, they discussed a conflictive problem area tion in nine couples followed up 2 h (r = .67) in their marriage. In the second and third sessions, each and 51h (r = .59) years later. Skolnick (1981), spouse returned separately to view the videotape of the using longitudinal data from the Berkeley first session's interaction. A continuous rating of affect Growth Study, the Berkeley Guidance Study, was obtained by having the spouse manipulate a rating dial that traversed a 9-point scale (anchored by very and the Oakland Growth Study, found that negative and very positive on the extremes and by neutral coders' ratings of the quality of adolescent at the center). Spouses were instructed to adjust the dial relationships were moderately predictive of as often as necessary so that it always reflected the way subjects' marital satisfaction in midlife. they felt during the interaction. A laboratory computer monitored the position of the dial continuously and Given the paucity of longitudinal research calculated an average every lOs. in this area and our previous finding that Four physiological measures were obtained from each physiological and affective measures were ex­ spouse during the first session's baselines and interactions: cellent predictors of current levels of marital (a) heart rate, measured by the interbeat interval (lBI); (b) pulse transmission time (PTT) to the finger, that is, satisfaction (Levenson & Gottman, 1983), we the time interval between the R-wave on the electrocar­ decided to undertake a follow-up study to diogram and the arrival of the pulse pressure wave at the determine how well the measures we obtained finger tip; (c) skin conductance level (SCL); and (d) general somatic activity (ACT), a global measure of in that study, which was conducted during bodily movement. The laboratory computer monitored the summer of 1980, would do in predicting these physiological variables continuously, averaging them changes in marital satisfaction 3 years later. every !O s. Thus, in summer 1983, we began the process Both affective and physiological variables were enlisted to attempt to predict couples' changing levels of marital of trying to re-Iocate the 30 couples who had satisfaction. The computations used to derive these pre­ participated in the original study. dictor variables can be found in our earlier report PHYSIOLOGICAL AND AFFECTIVE PREDICTORS
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Preprocessing and Descriptor Features for Facial Micro-Expression Recognition
    Preprocessing and Descriptor Features for Facial Micro-Expression Recognition Chris House and Rachel Meyer Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University {chouse12, r3m3y3r}@stanford.edu June 5, 2015 Abstract sions that reveal true feelings even when someone is attempting to conceal their emotions. These expres- Facial micro-expressions contain signicant informa- sions are extremely dicult to detect due to their tion about how people feel, even when they are at- short time scales and subtlety. Micro-expressions tempting to conceal their emotions. Previously, very were rst reported in psychological literature in the little research has been done to detect and recognize 1960's and have been studied since then[1, 2]. Re- micro-expressions using computer vision methods. cently, a few research groups have attempted micro- In this paper, detection and classication of micro- expression detection and recognition using computer expressions from the Spontaneous Micro-Expression vision techniques. Trained humans can recognize database were implemented, following preprocessing micro-expressions accurately about 47% of the time and cropping of raw images using Haar features, us- [3], but perhaps computer vision methods can achieve ing local binary patterns on three orthogonal planes higher accuracy. The applications of technology (LBP-TOP) and local gray code patterns on three that can successfully detect and recognize micro- orthogonal planes (LGCP-TOP) as descriptors and expressions are varied. It would be valuable in law support vector machines (SVMs) as detection and enforcement interrogations to detect deceit, in mar- recognition algorithms. Results show accuracy com- keting to detect how humans respond to advertising, parable to other work. and in general psychology and articial intelligence research to study human emotion.
    [Show full text]
  • Magic 6 Hours (Gottman)
    'Magic 6 hours' could dramatically improve your relationship In six hours a week, you can dramatically improve your relationship, says expert John Gottman in his newly revised, "The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work." (Stephen Morris/iStockphoto, Getty Images) With 6 extra hours per week (and a few awkward questions), you could dramatically improve your marriage When John Gottman talks, I listen. Actually I've never heard him talk, but when he writes, I read. So when a newly revised edition of his best-selling "The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work" (Harmony Books) hit my desk this week, I cracked it open immediately. Gottman is a psychology professor at the University of Washington and the founder/director of The Gottman Institute, a marital research and counseling center in Seattle. Maybe you've read about his theory on "master couples" versus "disaster couples.” Co-authored with Nan Silver, "Seven Principles," which has sold a million- plus copies, was first released in 1999 — before Tinder, before Facebook — heck, before some of us even had cellphones. The updated version (out next week) offers tips for dealing with digital distractions, including Gottman's suggestion to agree on rules of tech etiquette: How much are you comfortable with your partner sharing on social media? When is texting/posting off-limits (mealtimes, date nights)? Do you create cyber-free zones in your home? Most compelling of all, though, is Gottman's "magic six hours" theory, based on interviews with couples who attended marital workshops at The Gottman Institute. "We wondered what would distinguish those couples whose marriages continued to improve from those whose marriages did not," Gottman writes.
    [Show full text]
  • Facial Expressions During Marital Conflict
    THE JOURNAL OF FAMlL Y COMMUNICATION, 1(1), 37-57 Copyright C 200 I, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Facial Expressions During Marital Conflict Jo1m Gottman L>eparnnentofPsychology University of Washington Robert Levenson L>eparnnent ofPsychology University ofCalifornia at Berkeley Erica Woodin L>eparnnent ofPsychology SUNY, Stony Brook A sample of 79 married couples were studied in 1983 in our laboratOlY engaging in a marital conflict discu&sion. Their facial expressions were coded from video tape using the Ekman and Friesen (1978) Emotion Facial Affect Coding System. This article do­ scribes the validity of this coding in several measurement domains: (a) the couple's perception of the relationship; (b) the prediction of the number of months of marital separation within the next 4 years; (c) the couple's physical health within the next 4 years; (d) the couple's cardiac physiological responses during the conflict interaction (interbeat interval and pulse transit time); (e) the number of floor switches or interacts in the conflict conversation; and (t) coding of the couple's Oral History Interview, which assesses dimensions ofthe couple's relationship history and philosophy. Facial expressions were consistently related to most domains of measurement. The idea that facial expressions of emotion would be interesting to study during marital interaction is quite new. This might be surprising, except for two additional facts. First, faces have primarily been studied in individuals in response to specific Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John Gottman, Box 351525. Psychol­ ogy Department, 201F Johnson Annex, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. E-mail: [email protected] 38 GOTTMAN, LEVENSON, WOODIN MARITAL FACES 39 eliciting stimuli, not during unrestrained social interaction (for a review see cal families (initially defined by one member having a psychiatric classification), Gottman, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • CURRICULUM VITAE April 18, 2010
    CURRICULUM VITAE April 18, 2010 DR. PEPPER SCHWARTZ, PhD Department of Sociology University of Washington Seattle, Washington 98195 (206) 543-4036 – Office (206) 543-5882 – Sociology Dept. http://faculty.washington.edu/couples/ EDUCATION 1 B.A. Washington University, 1967, Sociology M.A. Washington University, 1968, Sociology M.Phil. Yale University, 1970, Sociology Ph.D. Yale University, 1974, Sociology POSITIONS HELD 1969–70 Teaching Assistant, Yale University 1972–79 Assistant Professor of Sociology, University of Washington 1979–present Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Washington 1979–present Adjunct Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science 1979–present Adjunct Professor of Women's Studies 1990–92 Special Assistant to the Provost, University of Washington 1993 Associate Chair, Sociology, University of Washington 1988–present Professor of Sociology, University of Washington 2005 Distinguished Visiting Professorship, University of Denver, Spring quarter 2007–2010 Schrag Fellow, Professor of Sociology, University of Washington FIELDS OF PROFESSIONAL INTEREST Intimate Relationships Marriage and the Family Human Sexuality Gender Qualitative Methodologies 2 NATIONAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICE National Consultant, Centers For Disease Control, Sexual Health Consultation, “Promoting Public Health Approach to Sexual Health in the United States,” Atlanta, GA, April 28-29, 2010. Board Member, Contemporary Council on the Family, 2008-2010. Chairperson, National Sexuality Resource Center, National Sexuality Centers, San Francisco State University, 2007-2010. Board Member, 2010-2012. Member, American Sociological Association (ASA), Committee on Excellence in Reporting of Social Issues Award Selection, 2006–2008. Member, Advisory Council of the National Sexuality Research Center (NSRC), 2004– 2006. Chairperson, Campaign for Sexual Literacy, 2007-present. Member, American Sociological Association (ASA), Committee on the Status of Women in Sociology, 2005–2008.
    [Show full text]
  • Facial Expressions During Marital Conflict
    THE JOURNAL OF FAMILY COMMUNICATION, 1(1), 37–57 Copyright © 2001, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Facial Expressions During Marital Conflict John Gottman Department of Psychology University of Washington Robert Levenson Department of Psychology University of California at Berkeley Erica Woodin Department of Psychology SUNY, Stony Brook A sample of 79 married couples were studied in 1983 in our laboratory engaging in a marital conflict discussion. Their facial expressions were coded from video tape using the Ekman and Friesen (1978) Emotion Facial Affect Coding System. This article de- scribes the validity of this coding in several measurement domains: (a) the couple’s perception of the relationship; (b) the prediction of the number of months of marital separation within the next 4 years; (c) the couple’s physical health within the next 4 years; (d) the couple’s cardiac physiological responses during the conflict interaction (interbeat interval and pulse transit time); (e) the number of floor switches or interacts in the conflict conversation; and (f) coding of the couple’s Oral History Interview, which assesses dimensions of the couple’s relationship history and philosophy. Facial expressions were consistently related to most domains of measurement. The idea that facial expressions of emotion would be interesting to study during marital interaction is quite new. This might be surprising, except for two additional facts. First, faces have primarily been studied in individuals in response to specific Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to John Gottman, Box 351525, Psychol- ogy Department, 201F Johnson Annex, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195. E-mail: [email protected] 38 GOTTMAN, LEVENSON, WOODIN eliciting stimuli, not during unrestrained social interaction (for a review see Gottman, 1993).
    [Show full text]
  • Danger Signs in Romantic Relationships
    Clinical Science Insights Randy L. and Melvin R. Berlin Grand Rounds Danger Signs in Romantic Relationships By Kelley Quirk, PhD Danger signs can also be observed in the way partners Madigan Family Postdoctoral Clinical Research Fellow treat each other. Couples often engage in behaviors that are designed to sustain the good in a relationship Problems in intimate relationships are associated with and promote commitment and dedication; these types a host of negative psychological and physical health of behaviors are called positive relational maintenance consequences, such as depression, anxiety, and heart behaviors. For example, partners often discuss future disease (Hawkins & Booth, 2005; Fincham & Beach, plans and goals together, or ask for reassurance from 2010; Whisman, 2007). Researchers have identified each other. However, maintenance behaviors can also be several types of interpersonal behaviors among couples negative. While negative relational behaviors are often that predict relationship distress or break-up/divorce; motivated by the desire to keep the relationship moving these are referred to as danger signs. Danger signs can forward, they are also considered danger signs. Examples take many forms, from aggressive behavior expressed on of negative relational maintenance behaviors include a first date to a long-term pattern of repeated escalation jealousy induction (e.g., publicly flirting with someone or withdrawal during discussions and arguments. other than your partner to remind them that you are Early and accurate awareness of danger signs may help desirable or could find someone else), or spying on your individuals make healthy decisions about how to proceed partner to verify fidelity (Dainton and Gross, 2008). within a new or long-term relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • For This Month's Interview, Jeff Zeig Arranged for John Gottman To
    For this month’s Interview, Jeff Zeig arranged for John Gottman to interview Paul Ekman at the end of the Couple’s Conference in April. Present in the room were Jeff Zeig, Lillian Borges Zeig and Helen Fisher. Here’s a short bio on our special interview subject: Paul Ekman, Ph.D., is a pioneering psychologist known for his study of emotions and their relationship to facial expression and body movement. For the past 30 years, he also has studied deceit and greatly contributed to the study of the social aspects of lying. The television series “Lie to Me” was based on his real-life scientific discoveries. In 2000, he was named by the American Psychological Association, one of the most influential psychologists of the 20th Century and named one of TIME magazine’s Top 100 most influential people of 2009. He is the author of more than 100 articles, as well as co-author of Emotion in the Human Face, Unmasking the Face, Facial Action Coding System, editor of Darwin and Facial Expression, co-editor of Handbook of Methods in Nonverbal Behavior Research, Approaches to Emotion, The Nature of Emotion, What the Face Reveals, and author of Face of Man, Telling Lies, Why Kids Lie, Emotions Revealed, Telling Lies, Dalai Lama-Emotional Awareness. He is also the editor of the third edition (1998) and the fourth edition (2009) of Charles Darwin’s, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1998). Paul Ekman’s work has shown that, contrary to the belief of some anthropologists (including Margaret Mead), facial expressions of emotion are not culturally determined, but are universal across human cultures and thus biological in origin.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Support for the Evaluation of Facial Expressions in Photographs
    Computational Support for the Evaluation of Facial Expressions in Photographs by Rachel Klingberg Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s degree in Computer Science at The Seidenberg School of Computer Science and Information Systems Pace University May 2013 Abstract Computational Support for the Evaluation of Facial Expressions in Photographs by Rachel Klingberg Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master’s degree in Computer Science May 2013 Charles Darwin first proposed that certain facial expressions of spontaneous emotion are genetically determined and culturally universal in his 1872 monograph The Expression of Emotion in Man and Animals. His theory of evolution applied not only to physical qualities, but also to emotional expression, or behavioral attributes. The latter idea was not widely accepted until the 1960s, when Paul Ekman’s research in neuroscience, psychology, and anthropology validated Darwin’s theory of evolutionary behavior. Drawing on Ekman’s pioneering research and his comprehensive taxonomy of muscular actions of the face, this thesis describes research into the development of computer software aiding the evaluation of facial expressions in photographs. The software program described here reports the presence and intensity of seven universal emotions: anger, contempt, fear, happiness, sadness, and surprise. A Web form prompts the user to match the photo’s appearance with a simple visual lexicon of the various muscular actions of the brow, eyes, nose and mouth. This input is compared to a relational data set of all possible actions of the facial muscles for all seven universal emotions. Using a weighted system of scoring, output reveals the presence and intensity of each of the emotions expressed by the photographic subject.
    [Show full text]
  • Results of Gottman Method Couples Therapy with Gay and Lesbian Couples
    Journal of Marital and Family Therapy doi: 10.1111/jmft.12276 © 2017 American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy RESULTS OF GOTTMAN METHOD COUPLES THERAPY WITH GAY AND LESBIAN COUPLES Salvatore Garanzini University of San Francisco Gay Couples Institute Alapaki Yee Gay Couples Institute John Gottman, Julie Gottman, Carrie Cole and Marisa Preciado The Gottman Institute Carolyn Jasculca Gay Couples Institute The results of an uncontrolled study of Gottman Method Couples Therapy in changing rela- tionship satisfaction with 106 gay and lesbian couples is reported in this paper. Measurement of relationship satisfaction was conducted at five separate time points. The data show signifi- cant improvements in relationship satisfaction following eleven sessions of therapy for both gay male and lesbian couples. Effect sizes suggest that this therapy was highly effective, com- pared to the usual 0.5 standard deviation effect size in couples therapy. Initial co-morbidities did not affect the size of the changes; in fact, some changes were significantly larger for three initial co-morbidities. Over the past decade there has been a major cultural shift in the way same-sex couples’ rela- tionships are viewed in the United States of America, culminating in the historic 2015 Supreme Court decision legalizing marriage for gay and lesbian couples. As Filmore, Baretto, and Ysasi (2016) noted, as this shift has taken place, professionals within the clinical community are facing a major challenge to have the tools be able to meet the growing needs of same-sex couples for counsel- ing, guidance, and therapy. Many other papers have been written calling for new methods to meet the particular needs of these couples and the problems that may arise from homophobia (for exam- ple, Addison & Coolhart, 2015; Belous, 2015; Brown, 2015; Green, Mitchell, Alan, Lebow, & Sny- der, 2015; Thomas, Marini, & Stebnicki, 2016).
    [Show full text]
  • Study Guide Key Concepts and Glossary Terms Marital and Family Therapy
    Study Guide Key Concepts and Glossary Terms Marital and Family Therapy William F. Doverspike, Ph.D. Updated September 1, 2021 Tests and exams may include, but are not limited to, these terms and concepts. This list is not exhaustive and there may be other terms and concepts on the tests and exams. The key concepts and glossary terms are contained in various chapters and in the glossary section of the course textbooks. Affective Presence: In contrast to the well- Complaint: In some ways, a complaint might known phenomena of emotional contagion, be considered as an indirect or passive form of which refers to how one person’s mood (e.g., a request, spoken in a non-assertive manner. anger) can “infect” another person’s mood, trait For example, an assertive statement is directive affective presence refers to the tendency of a and positive (e.g., “Please text me when you are person to elicit the same emotions in others— running late”), whereas a complaint is more regardless of that person’s mood (Eisenkraft & non-directive and negative (e.g., “You didn’t Elfenbein, 2010). “Our own way of being has text me when you were running late”). A an emotional signature,” says Hillary Anger complaint focuses on a specific behavior, Elfenbein, Ph.D., Professor of Organizational whereas criticism attacks a person’s very Behavior at Washington University in St. character. The antidote for criticism is to Louis. Affective presence can differ on two complain without blame by using a soft or dimensions, one of which is a “Gentle Startup.” Otherwise, the result may be positivity/negativity factor and the other of a criticism, which is one of the four deadly which as a passivity/activity factor, resulting in horsemen of the apocalypse toward divorce four types of affective presence: (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
    [Show full text]
  • The Art and Science of Gottman Method Couples Therapy
    The Art and Science of Gottman Method Couples Therapy by Trish Stanley, PsyD, MFT Certified Gottman Couples’ Therapist I’d been counseling with couples for twenty years before I took John Gottman’s training in San Francisco in 1996. It had been the bread and butter in a multidisciplinary practice with a strong sub-specialty in eating disorders. In recent years, having trained many younger therapists in this work, I found myself passing the torch to a new generation of therapists. I turned my focus to the parents’ relationship, marriages in which one party had an eating disorder, and more and more into the labyrinthine world of couples’ therapy. The couples’ therapy had been fascinating and gratifying when it was going well; challenging and sometimes agonizing when it was seemingly going nowhere or backwards. The level of complexity in the couples’ sessions could seem like three dimensional tic tac toe on steroids. I was ready to deepen and broaden my competencies and decided to commit to an approach to couples’ work that would inform the next phase of my professional life. When I decided to launch into the Gottman Method Certification Process, around 2004, I looked for an approach I could weave into my evolving way of working and my therapeutic roots. From my early professional years of delicious Wednesday afternoon conversations, called “staff meetings” at Carl Rogers’ Center for Studies of the Person, with drop in guests from all over the world, I carried an ethos about the primacy of the person, and the centrality of the moment of engagement.
    [Show full text]
  • Strengthening the Family BUTTING HEADS BETWEEN HUSBAND and WIFE Reprinted from April 1999 Newsletter
    ASIAN AMERICAN CHRISTIAN COUNSELING SERVICE, INC. 2550 W. Main St., Suite 202. Alhambra, CA 91801. 626.457.2900 FAX 626.457.2904 Satellite offices in Newport Beach, Torrance, and West Los Angeles Strengthening the Family BUTTING HEADS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE Reprinted from April 1999 Newsletter With high rates of divorce among first time marriages, and even higher rates of divorce among second marriages, you may wonder what makes marriages succeed or fail especially as you witness divorce occurring within the church family. More importantly, you may wonder what will make your marriage endure and thrive? One of the common misconceptions is that couples who are successfully married “never” fight. Dr. John Gottman, Professor of Psychology at the University of Washington writes in his book Why Marriages Succeed or Fail* that “a lasting marriage results from a couple’s ability to resolve the conflicts that are inevitable [emphasis added] in any relationship.” It is difficult to offer a universal prescription for how to resolve conflict because different couples fight differently and “resolve” conflict differently. Gottman identifies three styles of problem solving that healthy marriages tend to fall within. These are: the validating marriage where compromise is often and calmly worked out and mutual satisfaction is achieved as problems arise; the conflict-avoiding marriage, where differences are rarely discussed openly or directly and couples agree to disagree; and the volatile marriage where conflict is frequent and may result in heated disputes. All three of these styles can be stable as long as you and your spouse are able to achieve the right balance of positive and negative interactions.
    [Show full text]