CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
Attachment Informed Relationship Education: An Integrated Approach to Relationship
Education
A graduate project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
For the degree of Master of Science in Counseling,
Marriage and Family Therapy
By
Jessica A. Perez
December 2014
Copyright by Jessica A. Perez 2014
ii The graduate project of Jessica A. Perez is approved:
______Stan Charnofsky, Ed.D. Date
______Bruce C. Burnam, Ph.D. Date
______Pete G. Goldschmidt, Ph.D., Chair Date
California State University, Northridge
iii Dedication
I would like to dedicate this project to all of the people who have helped make it a possibility.
Thank you to my advisor and chair Pete Goldschmidt as well as my readers Stan Charnofsky and
Bruce Burnam. A special thanks also to Dana Stone who took time out of her busy schedule to
provide guidance. I would also like to thank my colleagues who have been such an inspiration
and driving force throughout this entire process: Andrea Larco, Denise Torres, Jacqueline
Kademian, Adrian Rodriguez, Karla Barba, Juan Mendoza, Amanda Berkowitz, Solange Pollack,
and Elizabeth Kekahuna. Finally, I would especially like to thank my husband, Victor Hugo
Perez, who has supported me in so many ways during the development of this project and who
provided inspiration for its creation.
iv Table of Contents
COPYWRIGHT……………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii SIGNATURE PAGE………………………………………………………………………………………………….iii DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………………………………………...iv ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...….v
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ...... 1
CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ...... 4 FACTORS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO RELATIONSHIP DISSATISFACTION AND DISSOLUTION ...... 4 OVERVIEW AND EFFICACY OF EXTANT RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION ...... 8 ADULT ATTACHMENT AND ITS EFFECTS ON MARITAL SATISFACTION ...... 14 EMOTIONALLY FOCUSED THERAPY: OVERVIEW AND EFFICACY ...... 18 OVERVIEW OF GOTTMAN’S THEORY AS A RELATIONSHIP INTERVENTION ...... 22 GROUP THERAPY: BENEFITS AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES ...... 24 INTEGRATION INTO THE CURRENT PROJECT ...... 29
CHAPTER III: PROJECT AUDIENCE AND IMPLEMETATION FACTORS ...... 36 DEVELOPMENT OF PROJECT ...... 36 INTENDED AUDIENCE ...... 37 PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS ...... 38 ENVIRONMENT AND EQUIPMENT ...... 39 PROJECT OUTLINE ...... 40
CHAPTER IV: CONCLUSION ...... 43 SUMMARY ...... 43 DISCUSSION ...... 44 FUTURE WORK/RESEARCH ...... 45
REFERENCES ...... 47
APPENDIX-PRODUCT ...... 53
ABSTRACT
ATTACHMENT INFORMED RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION: AN INTEGRATED
APPROACH TO RELATIONSHIP EDUCATION
By
Jessica A. Perez
Master of Science in Counseling, Marriage and Family Therapy
This project aims to create an integrated approach to relationship education by designing a group curriculum that draws upon existing relationship interventions and integrates them with attunement towards partner’s needs, awareness of attachment issues via Emotionally Focused
Therapy, and John Gottman’s Sound Relationship House/divorce indicators. The existing literature surrounding marital satisfaction and the factors that lead to marital dissolution and divorce are examined. Also reviewed is the efficacy of existing relationship education programs, the potential impact of attachment upon marital satisfaction, and key ideas from John Gottman’s marital research.
Keywords: relationship education, Sound Relationship House, Gottman, adult attachment,
marital satisfaction, group therapy
v Chapter I
Introduction
In 2011,The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP, 2011) reported that there were 2,118,000 marriages in the United States, the marriage rate was 6.8 per
1000 total population and the divorce rate was 3.6 per 1000. Additionally, “divorce begets divorce” as evidenced by Copen, Daniels, Vespa, and Mosher (2012), as women with previously married first husbands had 38% probability of their marriage lasting 20 years compared to 54% probability for women whose first husband had not been married previously; for men the probability of first marriage lasting 15 years was 64% if their first wife had never been married before and 50% if she had. With the divorce rate a little over half the marriage rate, and the fact that having one divorce decreases the odds of subsequent successful marriages, the importance of understanding the factors that contribute to successful marriages is crucial. It is imperative that this information not only be used to fuel additional research, but also that it reach couples in the early stages of marriage. Many couples tend to undertake marital therapy only as a last resort, at which point might be too late, as it would be impossible to undo years of criticism, contempt, abuse or other irreparable damage. The best approach to combat marital dissolution would be prevention. A relationship educational curriculum, designed for newlywed couples and based on an integration of relationship research, would help disseminate the crucial knowledge regarding relationship functioning before it is too late.
Statement of Purpose
The purpose of this project is to develop a relationship education group curriculum that would provide newlywed couples with an opportunity not only to learn
1 and practice essential communication skills, but also to learn about the issues that most often affect marriages, the factors that could contribute to the dissolution of a marriage, and what distinguishes a successful and lasting marriage from those that end in divorce.
Statement of Significance
This curriculum educates couples regarding some of the most pertinent relationship literature. They also become aware of some practices and actions that have been proved through research to improve relationship satisfaction and enhance the foundation and strength of the marriage. The curriculum would be adaptable and available to be used by other counselors or programs to help couples prepare for a lasting marriage. In contrast to extant relationship education programs/curriculums, this project does not focus solely on communication skills, but rather incorporates knowledge from various theories such as: attachment theory, Emotionally Focused Therapy, and
Gottman’s relationship theory/divorce indicators, as well as foster more positive communication styles.
Definition of Terms
Emotionally Focused Therapy: Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) focuses on underlying meaning of partner’s present emotional experiences (Johnson & Greenberg,
1985). Each partner’s inner experiences are explored as well as the meanings attributed to them. By clarifying needs and modifying perception of self and partner, couples are able to interact in new ways that satisfy newly uncovered emotional needs (1985)
Intimacy: Soltani, Molazadehb, Mahmoodic, and Hosseini (2013) describe intimacy as a feeling of closeness and support within couple relationships; it is characteristic of successful and happy couples. Conflict and decreases in intimacy may occur when the
2 partners have different expectations of autonomy and collaboration, having differing levels of independence and solidarity (2013).
Group Therapy: Therapy with 3 or more members receiving therapy simultaneously.
Group therapy has been seen to be as effective as individual therapy and it can be seen as consisting of emotional experience and reflection of that experience (Yalom, 2005).
Psychoeducation: Formal instruction provided by a therapist or other professional regarding mental health, mental illness or other psychological functioning and processes
(Yalom, 2005).
Relationship Education: Curriculum or material designed to offer couples specialized information and/or skills relevant to marriage with the intention of strengthening and preventing dissolution of relationships. It may be presented in various formats including group, conjoint and self-study.
In order to best prepare a new curriculum which integrates positive communication as well as relationship theory, it is necessary to review some previous studies and research regarding attachment, Gottman’s relationship theory, as well as existing relationship education curricula, which will be covered in the following chapter.
Subsequently, the implementation of the above mentioned theories into an Attachment
Informed Relationship Education curriculum will be discussed and the actual curriculum will be presented in the appendix.
3 Chapter II
Review of the Literature
This chapter begins with an introduction to factors that are associated with decreased relationship satisfaction and marital dissolution. Following this is a discussion of the highly utilized relationship education intervention: Prevention and Relationship
Enhancement Program (PREP); the efficacy of PREP and similar skills-based interventions will be discussed as well as the implications of these findings for developing new interventions. Next, attachment in romantic relationships is discussed; beginning with an overview of adult attachment, following with the role attachment plays in marital satisfaction and concluding with possible contributions to the development of a group curriculum from Emotionally Focused Therapy. Subsequently, there is an overview of John Gottman’s research into functional/dysfunctional marriages and how it may be applied in the context of the group curriculum. Finally, the chapter concludes with a summary of group therapy and the benefits in using this approach in the current project.
Factors that Contribute to Relationship Dissatisfaction and Dissolution
Marital satisfaction as defined by Garrett (2009), is “a measure of married partners’ feelings of fulfillment from their relationship, their enjoyment of being a couple, and their continued commitment to one another” (p. 383). Using this definition, marital satisfaction is used to denote the positive feelings and fulfillment present in a marriage, while marital dissatisfaction constitutes the negative feelings and the sense of disconnect between spouses (2009).
4 Luo and Snider (2009), surveyed 228 newlywed couples across several domains including marital satisfaction, accuracy, similarity bias, and positivity bias and identified accuracy and similarity bias as important mediators of spousal satisfaction. Accuracy in evaluating partner needs and anticipated responses may help increase marital satisfaction by helping partners coordinate and manage conflicts more effectively and gain support of the spouse, while similarity bias may foster a sense of affinity and convey to partners that they are understood. Thus, if partners are unable to accurately anticipate partner needs/responses, they are unlikely to be able to provide them with support, and if partners are unable to feel connected to each other, they may experience a sense of dissatisfaction with the relationship. Lavner and Bradbury (2012) surveyed 136 couples that reported consistently high levels of relationship satisfaction in the first 4 years of marriage. At the
10-year follow-up couples who divorced and those who stayed together were compared on the initial measures of commitment, observed communication, stress, and personality.
The researchers asserted that even couples that reported being highly satisfied in the early years of marriage went on to divorce 10 years later. Demographic characteristics of initially highly satisfied couples who went on to divorce included: younger age at marriage, lower husband income, and higher rates of parental divorce on the husband’s side. Additionally, increased occurrences of negative interactions and support (including more anger and contempt), husband verbal aggression, and wives with more negative personalities, all differentiated between couples who went on to divorce from those who did not. While the researchers’ results did not detract from interventions that targeted improvement of negative communication, the deleterious effects caused by the negative communication were observed to emerge gradually or were even masked by other
5 personality factors and/or the lack of stressful life events. This suggests that for low- distressed couples successful relationship intervention would need to focus not only on communication skills but also on how/when unaddressed negative communication skills might adversely affect the relationship. These researchers further reported that among couples that went on to divorce, neuroticism, low self-esteem, anger, chronic stress, and verbal and physical aggression were observed. Also, while husbands reported greater martial dissatisfaction, it was wives who were slightly more likely to seek divorce when dissatisfied in marriage (2012). Similarly, in a study of 251 newlywed couples who were surveyed regarding their beliefs about the stability of their marriage over the course of the next 4 years, almost all couples predicted their marriage would remain stable or improve; yet overall levels of marital satisfaction declined in the sample (Lavner, Karney,
& Bradbury, 2013).
According to Lavner, Karney, and Bradbury (2013), wives who were the most optimistic at the time of first survey showed the largest declines in marital satisfaction, and additionally demonstrated lower self esteem, higher levels of stress, and higher levels of physical aggression toward their partners. The researchers suggested that these overly optimistic forecasts for marriage, might be allowing some women to overlook certain characteristics of the relationship such as lowered self-esteem, higher stress levels, and higher propensity toward violence; this could be masking high-risk relationships among women, as well as contributing to the lack of premarital counseling attendance among couples in general (2013). Sullivan, Pasch, Johnson, and Bradbury (2010) observed 172 newlywed couples (selected via marriage license searches) in 2 problem solving and 2 personal support interactions, and then re-observed them in the same tasks one year later.
6 The results of the study indicated that more negative behaviors during the support tasks predicted increases in negative emotion during the problem solving tasks one year later.
The study showed that while initial problem-solving behaviors predicted levels of marital satisfaction, it was unrelated to changes in social support behavior; only social support is predictive of long-term marital satisfaction and divorce by influencing the problem- solving domain within a marriage (2010). This means that problem-solving behaviors may lead to some initial increases in marital satisfaction, however long-term marital satisfaction is attributed to pro-social support behavior, as the effects of social support in a relationship spill over into the problem-solving domain. It is apparent that spousal connection and support is more predictive of marital stability than is a couple’s positive communication or problem-solving abilities. Similarly, Rehman et al. (2011) studied 15 newlywed couples engaged in conflict discussions of both sexual and non-sexual issues and found negative communication behaviors when discussing the sexual conflict were more predictive of marital dissatisfaction. This association was stronger for wives, with more negative behavior during the sexual issue discussion associated with lower marital satisfaction for the wife (2011). These results tentatively lend credence to the idea that the communication process in marital discussions is not necessarily the most important factor; rather, certain content may be important in and of itself.
These findings stress the importance of being aware of and working on one’s own unresolved issues that are brought into the marriage. These findings also indicate possible directions for relationship interventions, such as, deemphasizing the focus on teaching couples communication skills and instead focusing on relationship maintenance and enrichment.
7 Overview and Efficacy of Extant Relationship Education
According to Markman, Renick, Floyd, Stanley and Clemens (1993), the
Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program (PREP) is a 5-session program that aims to teach couples positive communication skills and conflict resolution. Couples are taught specific skill sets in hopes that this will help them better manage the relational difficulties that inevitably arise throughout the course of marriage (1993).
Owens, Rhoades, Stanley and Markman (2011) contend that PREP has shown small to moderate effects for improving relationship quality and communication skills. Ideally, these skills would be practiced and thus become less scripted and more natural over time, as they became second nature. However, according to Markman et al. (1993), the relationship gains attributable to premarital education programs are time limited, as indicated in 5-year follow up study of couples that attended such programs. In this study,
114 couples preparing for a first marriage were selected from a larger sample participating in a study of relationship development; couples that declined participation were used as a second control group. At the 5-year follow-up, the relationship satisfaction and communication styles experienced by the couples who participated in relationship education were the same as those couples in the control groups who never did, in spite of initial gains reported in relationship satisfaction, increased positive communication, and decreased negative communication by the participating couples. A possible explanation for the atrophy might be that by the 5-year follow-up the participating couples had ceased practicing the skills previously learned (1993).
Interestingly, structured communication interventions, often a hallmark of prevention programs, were found to correlate with an increase in positive communication
8 (validation), but no difference was found in decreased negative communication between couples who experienced structured interventions and those that did not (Owens,
Manthos & Quirck, 2013). This indicates that an emphasis on communication skills and techniques does not necessarily translate to long-term use of the skills or long-term duration of benefits.
Rogge, Cobb, Lawrence, Johnson, and Bradbury (2013) found that wives participating in PREP showed slower declines in hostile conflict than wives in another relationship education program, Compassionate and Accepting Relationships Through
Empathy (CARE), which highlighted interpersonal skills beyond conflict management.
Nonetheless, CARE couples had faster declines in positive behaviors than couples in
PREP. Both these programs are skills-based, and it is posited that these negative outcomes may be attributable to unconsciously sensitizing couples to deficits in their relational skills (2013). A German study with 77 couples receiving EPL (a German form of PREP) conducted by Baucom, Hahlweg, Atkins, Engl, and Thurmaier (2006) replicated the results of a prior American study where women who had extreme changes in their communication strategies following intervention, went on to experience significant couple distress over the course of 5 years. The implications from this study indicate that relationship education programs may have inadvertently sensitized certain couples and caused drastic changes with extreme increases in positive communication and extreme decreases in negative communication that were unsustainable in the long run
(2006). Here again, the importance of not overemphasizing the significance of communication skills becomes apparent; instead the focus should be to expand understanding of couple dynamics and issues by participants.
9 In contrast, interventions that promote greater relationship awareness may also prompt routine monitoring of the relationship and foster greater affiliation and responsibility for it (Rogge et al., 2013). This suggests, that a focus on building positive communication skills is not as important a buffer for marriage dissolution as commonly believed; rather a greater focus on the relationship itself and a strengthening of it might be more beneficial. For instance, according to Durana (1997), the Practical Application of Intimate Relationship Skills program (PAIRS), is an integrated psychoeducation program designed to prevent marital problems form emerging. It is an intensive 120-hr. group program that teaches problem solving and communication skills as well as incorporating cognitive, behavior and experiential theories designed to help the participants gain deeper understanding of the self and emotional experiences. It also helps participants restructure negative attitudes about relationships. In a study by
Durana, 137 participants in a PAIRS program were surveyed before and 4-6 months after completion of treatment; the study supported the idea that intimacy can be enhanced through social skills training, bonding and working on the self. Sharing of emotional feeling and closeness were found to be a large part of intimacy; sharing of feelings (both negative and positive) is one of the most important factors that influence intimacy and marital satisfaction (1997). Halford, Lizzio, Wilson, and Occhipinti (2007), discuss the importance of relationship self-regulation on marital satisfaction, and assert that there is very little evidence that communication improves relationship satisfaction. Instead it is more important to help partners attune to how they select and change behaviors, so they may be relationship enhancing, rather than focus on instilling a set of specific behaviors that may not be the best fit for all couples (2007).
10 In a review of skills-based couples relationship education (CRE) programs,
Halford, Markman and Stanley (2008) found that research indicated the potential strengthening of programs by tailoring content to specific couples. For instance, by educating at-risk couples about the impact of substance abuse and the relationship on each other, or providing couples about to have their first child information regarding parenthood and the changes found to affect relationships (2008). Scott, Rhoades,
Stanley, Allen, and Markman (2013) found that among 52 divorced couples that had received PREP prior to marriage, the most common reasons for divorce were: infidelity, domestic violence, and substance abuse. Among the possible ways to improve relationship education programs, participants identified having more support for implementation of skills outside of the program and providing more information about the typical stages likely to occur in marriage (Scott et al., 2013). This provides further evidence of the insufficiency of skills-based marital education programs that only focus on improving communication, and provides significant information for developing comprehensive and integrative relationship education that uses communication elements shown to be effective, while incorporating other aspects shown to contribute to intimacy and martial satisfaction. It is noteworthy that PAIRS is a 4-5 month long program and not all couples are willing or able to commit to such long programs, and it would be beneficial to take into consideration the unique needs and abilities of the most at-risk couples when developing a relational psychoeducation curriculum.
High risk couples vs. low risk couples. It is important to make a distinction between high-risk and low-risk couples, as research suggests that the two groups may benefit from different approaches. Couples determined to be high-risk included women
11 whose parents were divorced and/or men whose parents had a history of physical violence, while low-risk couples were those that did not have these premarital risk factors. Several studies comment on the limited benefits of communication-based interventions for certain couples. When compared to naturally occurring forms of premarital relationship education in religious intuitions, Markman et al. (1993), found that PREP was actually less effective for high-risk, distressed couples than for those couples who had lower levels of negative communication prior to treatment. It may be possible that the messages received by more distressed couples in the naturally occurring relationship education groups were stronger and more fervently stressed the importance and sanctity of marriage, as opposed to focusing on skills based intervention (1993).
Subsequently, Markman, Rhoades, Stanley, and Peterson (2010) conducted a study that followed 110 couples that received either PREP or their religious organizations naturally occurring (NO) premarital education services (without communication skills training) in order to gauge the impact of such interventions on divorce during the first 8 years of marriage. High risk couples (those characterized by high levels of negative couple interactions) were found to have better outcomes when receiving naturally occurring services, while lower-risk couples were found to do better at follow-up if they had received PREP. It may be that high-risk couples received messages about the permanence of marriage and more tailored interventions in NO services, which may be more helpful to highly distressed couples than focusing on communication skills (2013).
In contrast, Halford, Sanders, and Behrens (2001) examined effects of PREP versus a control condition over four years. PREP had the most benefits for high-risk couples, as defined by negative family of origin experiences, parental divorce, and inter-
12 parental aggression. Low risk couples did not differ significantly between the PREP condition and a control condition. These results suggest that high-risk couples may benefit most from structured skills based education in order to offset learned negative interaction patterns. The efficacy of premarital education on high risk and low risk couples presents mixed findings thus they must be taken with caution until more studies are able to provide conclusive implications (2001).
Cohabitating couples. Special attention must be given to the concept of cohabitating couples, or in other words, couples who have been living together prior to marriage. Kline et al. (2004) collected data from 136 cohabiting couples before marriage and 10 months into marriage. Couples cohabiting before engagement or marriage were shown to have more negative interactions, lower relationship commitment, relationship quality, and relationship confidence. A possible explanation of these results is that couples cohabiting before marriage were less committed to the relationship and wished to
“test” it by living together before committing further. Couples who only cohabited after marriage had a small advantage over those that cohabited after engagement. The results indicate that cohabiting couples may need extra help in addressing weak points in the relationship as well as motivations for marriage (2004). Parallel to this, an analysis by
Copen et al. (2012) of data from 2006-2010 on marriage and divorce statistics that showed an increase in cohabitation from 3% in 1982 to 11% in 2006-2010. Similarly a decrease in the number of women in first marriages was seen, 44% in 1982 to 36% in
2006-2010. The probability of first marriage lasting at least 20 years for women who had never cohabited prior to the marriage was 57%; for those who did cohabitate the probability was 45-46%. Though the differences for men were far less notable, men who
13 did not cohabitate had a higher probability of marriage lasting at least 20 years: 60% for non-cohabiting, 57% for cohabiting and engaged and 49% for cohabiting and not engaged (2012).
Auspiciously, Williamson, Trail, Bradbury and Karney (2014) conducted a survey of 2,126 couples, finding evidence that participation in premarital education correlated with an increased likelihood of seeking couples counseling in the future. Interestingly, this association was stronger for African-Americans, those with low-income, and the less formally educated; populations oft-considered “at-risk”. These effects may be partially explained via an exposure to services most would not often be aware of, and to make these couples more comfortable seeking help for relationship issues in the future (2014).
All of this indicates that focus on structured interventions and teaching specific skill sets might not be sufficient for solidifying and maintaining lasting long-term gains in couple interactions. Other variables, such as attending to relationship maintenance, helping couples attain their own goals, and increasing partner social support, might help improve upon the group experience and help to consolidate gains.
Adult Attachment and its Effects on Marital Satisfaction
The way in which relationship partners relate to each other is mediated by attachment style. Attachment as a moderately stable framework for relationships formed in childhood that persists into adulthood, though it may be consistently monitored and updated according to subsequent relationships and experiences (Seedall & Wampler,
2013). Following up on the theories of Bowlby on infants’ attachment to caregivers,
Hazan and Shaver (1987) expanded the views on attachment style to adults and their behaviors in romantic relationships. These researchers identified anxiety and avoidance
14 as two dimensions upon which insecurity in romantic relationships could rest and thus divided individuals into those with secure, avoidant, and anxious attachment styles
(1987). Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) further advanced attachment theory by introducing four distinct categories of attachment with their own unique features: secure, preoccupied, dismissive, and fearful. Anxiety and avoidance still figured into these categories, but the two dimensions focused on by the authors were the views on the self and of others. The views of the self and of others depended on the lovability and worthiness of each. Secure individuals have positive views of the worthiness and lovability of both the self and others, while dismissive individuals have positive views of the self but negative views of others. Thus, while secure people may function more or less normally in relationships, dismissive (formerly avoidant) people may be wary of getting close to others because of the mistrust they have of them (1991).
Attachment can also be conceptualized as a couple-level process. According to
Cobb, Davila, & Bradbury (2001), a couple’s perception of individual spousal security attachment can influence not only marital satisfaction but instances of supportive behavior as well. When spouses positively perceived their partners as secure (regardless of their actual attachment style) they reported increased satisfaction with the relationship and were more willing to offer and receive positive forms of social support (2001).
Similarly, buffering, or the ability of security in one partner to lead to greater security in the other, has presented with mixed findings, though it is suggested that security in one partner may protect the relationship from instability by providing more positive interactions (Seedall & Wampler, 2013).
15 Cobb et al. (2001) contend that the importance of understanding how attachment works on the individual level as well as the couple level may be useful to help couples gain insight to the mechanism behind their feelings, thoughts and behaviors, thus raising the couples’ overall awareness’ of all that actually goes into the relationship. In addition,
Jarnecke and South (2013) assert that intergenerational patterns of attachment may have an effect on a couple’s current marital functioning. These researchers found that couples’ reports of parental marital satisfaction positively correlated to greater marital satisfaction for husbands. Parental marital satisfaction also predicted parent-child attachment orientations such that low marital satisfaction in parents correlated with insecure attachment in their children. Additionally parent-child anxious attachment correlated with anxious attachment to romantic partners later in life; for wives, anxious attachment in childhood actually correlated with avoidant attachment with romantic partners. The observed effects spoke to the importance of raising awareness of attachment patterns, as they not only affect spousal interactions and marital satisfaction, but can have generational effects upon children as well (2013).
Changing attachment. In a longitudinal investigation where children were tracked from birth to age 15, various correlates of attachment style were examined including environmental and gene factors (Fraley, Roisman, Booth-LaForce, Owen, &
Holland, 2013). The results revealed that variation in adult attachment style could be largely traced to the subject’s caregiving environment, emerging social competence, and quality of best friendships. Adult attachment style was found to be largely uncorrelated with genetic components of temperament or specific polymorphisms with the exception of the serotonin receptor gene HTR2A rs6313; this gene was associated with increased
16 attachment anxiety as well as a gene x environment interaction where maternal sensitivity was negatively related to attachment avoidance. Thus, adult attachment is largely influenced by the social environment and early experiences with very little genetic influence. However, this is not to say that temperament and other genetic correlates currently unidentified might not be associated with attachment. The results support the importance of social experiences in shaping attachment style and further point to possibilities of influencing attachment outside of the parent-caregiver bond (2013).
Seedall and Wampler (2013) indicate that attachment may shift from secure towards insecure during times of high stress or trauma occurring before adulthood.
Scharfe and Cole (2006) surveyed 109 undergraduate seniors in order to assess the stability and propensity for attachment change during a life transition. Attachment was found to be moderately stable however it also did appear to be moderated by level of distress; students who reported more distress during a life transition also were less likely to report changes in attachment at follow-up. It may be that higher levels of distress cause some students to react in such a way as to inhibit change in attachment, in contrast to students reporting lower levels of distress whose attachment was more likely to change
(2006). According to Seedall and Wampler (2013), research on therapy and attachment change have been inconclusive, but it is possible that rather than completely changing attachment style, therapy may influence attachment interactions among partners with the end result being more secure behaviors in the relationship.
Duquette (2010) postulates that change in attachment during therapy may be achieved through genuineness of the therapeutic relationship, with the therapist helping the client learn new ways of interacting and self-regulating. Clients must learn to identify
17 faulty patterns within their internal working models and begin to explore and re- experience difficult emotions with the therapist helping to regulate emotions (2010). It is considered the task of the therapist to provide a secure and safe environment for the couple to explore and develop a secure base within the relationship (Seedall & Wampler,
2013). When clients are able to engage in emotionally charged situations within a safe environment and such experiences do not end in the typical way they have become accustomed to, clients may begin to engage in these behaviors outside of therapy
(Duquette, 2010). Such experiences can effect psychoneurobiological change in clients and thus elicit changes in character (2010). Marmarosh and Tasca (2013) found that successful change in attachment was evident within a clinical sample of high attachment anxiety women with Binge Eating Disorder (BED); attachment informed group therapy
(GPIP), was associated with improved outcomes in binge eating, depression, and attachment avoidance and anxiety.
It is important to consider the effect clients’ attachment style has on the therapeutic process, such as when deciding upon the timing and presentation of interventions. According to Seedall and Wampler (2013) a secure person, currently in a distressed relationship, has more past positive experience on which to drawn upon, thus making it easier for them to engage in the interventions that require them to appropriately express their needs or respond to their partners needs. The same may not be true of a person without prior consistent/secure experiences and who thus might be more insecurely attached. More time and effort should be spent helping this partner attune to their own needs and emotions as well as helping them attune to their partner (2013).
Emotionally Focused Therapy: Overview and Efficacy
18 EFT overview. Johnson and Greenberg (1985) note that Emotionally Focused
Therapy (EFT) focuses on the underlying meaning of a partner’s present emotional state.
Each partner’s inner experiences are explored as well as the meanings attributed to them.
By clarifying needs and modifying perception of self and partner, couples are able to interact in new ways that satisfy newly uncovered emotional needs (1985). EFT subscribes to the view of affect as a construction formed from a synthesis of complex network structures involving facial motor responses, schemas/emotional memory, and concepts about emotional experiences (Greenberg & Johnson 1986). Thus, a stimuli acting on any part of this network will set off reactions in the rest, leading to an affective experience. EFT also adheres to the inherent importance of affect, unlike other therapies that attempt to bypass emotion or influence it through behavior or cognition modification.
Interventions are aimed at evoking an affective experience in session in order to help the client understand the affective state as well as to create new meanings that will translate to changes in maladaptive emotional experiences and new ways of being with a partner.
EFT targets primary emotions, which unlike secondary or instrumental emotions are largely unconscious processes that must be accessed in the active emotional state. By focusing on the primary emotions, a spouse’s perception of their partner may undergo reorganization as they discover underlying vulnerabilities and respond to them in new and more adaptive ways (1986). According to Johnson and Wittenborn (2012), twelve to thirteen sessions were typically offered in early studies of EFT efficacy, but changes often take longer to occur.
EFT efficacy. In a review of 7 studies of EFT treatment, Byrne, Carr and Clark
(2004) found that EFT treated couples’ outcomes were superior to 89% of untreated
19 couples. Additionally, in one study, the efficacy of EFT was found to have increased over time from 15% at post treatment to 46% at a 2-year follow-up, which indicates that
EFT effects may strengthen over time rather than deteriorate (2004). Soltani,
Molazadehb, Mahmoodic, and Hosseini (2013) conducted a study of 14 couples receiving either EFT treatment or a control condition, in which the EFT group showed greater increases in intimacy across various domains such as psychological, physical, emotional, temporal, relational, intellectual and sexual. In a study of 14 couples who underwent
EFT, Johnson and Greenberg (1985) discovered significant changes in measures of target complaint reduction and goal attainment occurring directly after an 8-week treatment, and at a follow-up 8 weeks later; as compared to the control condition (a waiting period of 8 weeks) in which there was no change from the intake levels. Notably, the study included novice therapists conducting treatment in order to account for variability of therapist skill when conducting EFT. These results are important in that they show the robust efficacy of EFT even when conducted by novice therapists, and demonstrate the lasting effects of therapy that did not deteriorate 8 weeks later (1985). In a comparison study of EFT,
Integrated Systemic Therapy (IST), and a 10-week waiting list control condition,
Goldman and Greenberg (1992) found that both EFT and IST were equally effective in alleviating marital distress, facilitating conflict resolution and goal attainment, and reducing target complaints at termination. IST showed greater maintenance of gains on marital satisfaction and goal attainment at a 4-month follow-up. However. An important change factor in the IST therapy was the team of therapists that weighed in and discussed the couple’s interactional patterns and behaviors (1992). In James’ study (1991), 12 EFT sessions were compared to 8 EFT sessions with a 4-session communication component
20 added and no significant differences in outcomes were noted. However, the couples that received EFT with communication reported enjoying the combination of treatment more so than either EFT or communication training alone (1991).
EFT and attachment. According to Makinen and Johnson (2006), attachment injuries (such as those resulting from emotional unavailability, abandonment, or betrayal in an attachment relationship) are unique from other types of couple distress because they are not easily forgotten and define the security of the relationship. The Attachment
Injury Resolution Model outlines the step necessary to resolve attachment injuries. This model posits that deeper levels of understanding are necessary for change; the hurt partner must learn to express the deeper levels of the injury, those that affect the attachment relationship, and the other partner must take responsibility, and express understanding and remorse, this will allow the couple to restore the trust in the relationship and engage in more affiliative behavior. In a study with couples undergoing
EFT treatment with the attachment injury model, these researchers indicated that 63% of participants resolved the injury as evidenced by clinically significant improvements in relationship distress and forgiveness. They suggested that those couples with compound injuries, that have been hurt more than once by a partner, or where partners hurt each other at two different points in time, may have trust irreparably shattered, making the resolution process even more difficult (2006). In a review of studies in which a variety of clients underwent EFT, Johnson and Wittenborn (2012) found that couples with more successful outcomes are able to tune into their own needs and fears, convey those needs to their partner, and respond appropriately to their partners needs. Couples who fared worse had multiple injuries, lower levels of initial trust, and reported the therapy was too
21 brief (2012). This demonstrates just how theories with an emphasis on attachment and attunement can be combined with skills-based communication interventions, as it is still necessary to convey that information to partners in an effective manner.
Overview of Gottman’s Theory as a Relationship Intervention
John Gottman has conducted research on marital satisfaction and divorce indicators for over 35 years. Gottman and Krokoff (1989) determined that anger is not necessarily a damaging emotion within the context of a relationship. Although expressions of anger led to more immediate distress in a couple relationships, long-term martial satisfaction increased. Thus, the researchers asserted that it was not expressing anger that tended to be more damaging to a relationship. Holding onto anger and contempt without expressing it, while helping to keep the peace and decrease martial distress in the short-term, led to longitudinal martial dissatisfaction. These findings were particularly salient for women, as they took a more active role in conflict management and reported increased marital distress when unable to express conflict and negative affect openly (1989). In another study, Gottman and Levenson (1992) asserted that it was the presence of increased positive compared to negative affect in couple interactions that predicted marital dissolution in a ratio of 5:1, that is in stable and happy marriages there were more positive interactions than negative interactions at a rate of five positive interactions for every negative. This indicates that fostering and nurturing couples’ expression of positive affect, even in the face of conflict, might be most beneficial in maintaining longitudinal marital satisfaction as this behavior was salient in successful marriages (1992).
As far as marital dissolution and divorce, Gottman and Levenson (1992)
22 described a cascade effect whereby couples are unhappy and dissatisfied in their relationship for quite some time, whereupon they go on to seriously consider separation/divorce, followed by actual separation, and eventually divorce. Couples with less positive interactions and more negative interactions were more likely to have partners engaging in stubbornness, withdrawal from interaction, and defensiveness; these couples were also at an increased risk for marital dissolution and going on to divorce
(1992).
The Gottman Institute offers the “Art and Science of Love Workshop,” a 2-day group psychoeducation workshop that focuses on friendship building and conflict management in couples. Friendship and intimacy building included: acquiring knowledge of a partner’s inner world (building a love map), expressing affection and respect, and turning toward a partner’s bids for emotional connection (Babcock, Gottman,
Ryan, & Gottman, 2013). In order to address conflict management, couples are taught to differentiate between two types of issues: solvable and unsolvable or “gridlocked.” For solvable issues couples are taught behavioral modification and skills training such as softened startup, accepting influence, and effective repair and compromise. While for gridlocked issues, a reconceptualization is often called for, and couples are taught to look for the meaning behind the issues in order to determine how to best move forward while still honoring each partner’s position (2013). A combination of friendship enhancement and conflict management training helped decrease the dissatisfaction of even severely distressed couples (Gottman, 1999). Friendship enhancement involves establishing a strong marital connection by learning more about a partner’s intimate world and conflict management training involves helping couples change their negative perceptions about a
23 partner and de-escalating conflict situations (Gottman, 1999). Women, who generally take the lead in discussing conflict issues in the relationship, especially showed more improvement when receiving both, compared to just one or the other. These findings support the idea that including psychoeducation components in relationship education programs may help consolidate gains as couples gain insight into their functioning not only at the individual level but also at the couple level (2013).
The Gottman Institute states that one of the core tenants of Gottman Couples therapy is the Sound Relationship House. The Sound Relationship House is based on the premise of building up a relationship (as one builds a house) from one level to the next.
It includes: creating shared meaning, making life dreams come true, managing conflict, the positive perspective, turning towards instead of away, sharing fondness and admiration, and building love maps. Hicks, McWey, Benson, and West (2004) found that couples readily identified aspects of the Sound Relationship House as the best things they contributed to the marriage. This knowledge may be applied by helping couples maintain areas of strength and identify and combat areas that may hinder the relationship. This can help inform psychoeducational group curricula as a way of validating and enhancing a couple’s self-perceived strengths. By using a couples’ strengths as a starting point for further elaboration of the principles of the Sound Relationship House, additional areas of strength and weakness can be addressed; beginning with psychoeducation to ground couples in the research and reasoning behind the concepts and interventions, and continuing with opportunities to discuss and practice important topics and relational skills in order to solidify gains (2004).
Group Therapy: Benefits and Implementation Strategies
24 According to Yalom (2005), group therapeutic factors that lead to change include: instillation of hope, universality, imparting information, altruism, the correction emotional experience, socializing techniques, imitative behavior, interpersonal learning, group cohesiveness, catharsis, and existential factors. Indeed Marmarosh and Tasca
(2013) included group therapeutic factors such as cohesion, interpersonal learning, corrective emotional experiences, social microcosm, reflective functioning and regulation of affect in their successful treatment of women with Binge Eating Disorder (BED). The early stages of group focused on creating group cohesion and safety, while the secondary stage focused on developing new and more adaptive functioning through interpersonal learning, reflective functioning and regulation of affect (2013). In a study by Lawson,
Barnes, Madkins, and Francios-Lamonte (2006), thirty-three men on probation for partner violence attended 17 weeks of integrated CBT/psychodynamic group treatment.
Upon completion of treatment 13 men had changed from insecure to secure attachment (a change rate of 39.4%); providing some evidence for the efficacy of group treatment in influencing attachment. These men reported an increased comfort with closeness and less anxiety and depression (2006). To test the assertion that attachment to groups is analogous to attachment to individuals, Keating et al. (2014) conducted a study in which
87 women with Binge Eating Disorder (BED) participated in Group Psychodynamic
Interpersonal Psychotherapy (GPIP) in either a low or high individual attachment anxiety group. Results indicated that group attachment insecurity decreased during treatment and group attachment avoidance translated to decreases in individual attachment insecurity at the 1-year follow-up. These results suggest that the women who received treatment in group were able to generalize the attachment security developed in group to their outside
25 dyadic relationships (2014).
In a study by Solomon, Dralne, Mannion, and Meisel (1996), 183 relatives of people with a severe mental illness were assigned to a psychoeducational group, individualized consultation, or a wait-list control condition. Both treatment conditions found that participants’ reports of self-efficacy in caring for the ill family member increased; though the individualized consultation appeared to provide more immediate benefits due to the personalized nature of the information/goals, the group was more beneficial for those participants who had never been part of a support group. The researchers suggested that structuring a psychoeducation group that allows for an individualized focus might be able to tap into the benefits of both conditions (1996). In a meta-analysis of three studies comparing the efficacy of group counseling vs. individual counseling when used within the same study, McRoberts, Burlingame and Hoag (1998) found that the two formats seem to be equivalent in producing participant benefits.
Group therapy appears to be a cost effective treatment that is at least as effective a form of therapy as individual counseling. Group counseling was found to have superior benefits for circumscribed problems such as: chemical dependency, obesity, life transitions, etc. (1998).
Multi-couple groups. In a follow up study of group vs. individual counseling of
179 couples where one of the partners was a problem drinker, Burton and Kaplan (1968) found that the couples that participated in group counseling, were more successful upon follow-up. Participants in the group counseling reported that the group counseling had helped improve communication, develop insight to their problems by hearing others talk about the same problems, and gain an understanding about the drinking problem.
26 Additionally, half of the couples that later divorced reported that group counseling had helped them face the realities of their relationship and decide to end it. Thus, it appears that group counseling can facilitate new understanding and interactions in participants, by highlighting functional and dysfunctional thoughts and behaviors (1968). In a study by
Anderson et al. (2013), 107 air force couple participants participated in either a 12-hour self-directed PREP program or a 6-week multi-couple group based PREP program.
After six weeks, greater relationship satisfaction, anger management skills and greater program satisfaction were reported in the group program while only anger management skills improved in the self-directed group (2013). In a study by Stith, Rosen, McCollum, and Thomsen (2004), 42 couples in which mild-moderate violence had occurred were assigned to either multi-couple group therapy for batterers or individual therapy, while nine couples were used as a control condition; at a 6-month follow-up, recidivism for male violence was lowest among those in the group therapy condition (25%). Marital satisfaction increased and acceptance of wife battering and marital aggression decreased in the group condition but not the others (2004). Here again the benefits of group therapy for changing problematic behaviors and thinking patterns are observed. In a study by
McGeorge and Carlson (2006), twenty-nine couples entering their first marriage received premarital education in either a group setting or as an individual couple (conjoint) or were part of a control condition receiving no treatment. The group condition included group discussion, mini-lectures, skills training, and dyadic experiential activities.
Couples were surveyed pre and post treatment on four PREP subscales: unity in values, personal, partner, and couple readiness for marriage. Post-treatment, both treatment conditions proved to be effective in enhancing preparation for marriage by improving
27 knowledge of the marital relationship and teaching health patterns of interacting (2006).
Michaels (2006) discussed a multi-couple group intervention aimed at helping blended families adapt to the new life changes unique to them; the group focused on specific issues related to parent-child relationships as well as spousal relationship. The program incorporated didactic presentations, group discussions and experiential exercises and a booster session was offered two moths after completion of treatment. Preliminary feedback from group members indicated that they were able to adapt to new family formation more quickly due to the structure and content of the group (2006).
Group qualities. The therapeutic relationship was also found to be important for client outcomes similar to individual counseling. Having one or more individualized meetings with a couple prior to the beginning of group therapy enhances the therapeutic relationship (Burton & Kaplan, 1968). Group therapy was also found to be most effective when conducted in 10 or fewer sessions (McRoberts, Burlingame & Hoag,
1998). According to Michaels (2006), a 2-hour or 2.5 hour session is considered most effective, as it allows maximal time for group learning and discussion yet not so much time that members lose interest or become tired. The optimal size of group is 4-6 couples as smaller groups would not allow for rich discussion and larger groups would be too difficult to engage as effectively (2006).
Group leader qualities. Group leader qualities also play an important role in couples’ relationship outcomes. As reported by Owen et al. (2011), in situations where both clergy/lay leaders and university-trained leaders administered PREP, the outcomes for couple functioning were found to be equal. This suggested that standardized training in programs like PREP help increase leader effectiveness and contribute to the overall
28 positive and effective outcome for couples. However, similar to the therapeutic relationship and the working alliance existing between therapist and client in individual therapy; there is some variability in treatment outcome for couples, attributable to the working alliance with the group leader. The quality of the working alliance correlated with greater relationship satisfaction and confidence, as well as changes in positive and negative communication for couples (2011). To assess the relationship between number of group leaders, number of group members, group satisfaction and climate, 32 individual and co-led groups ranging in size from 3-12 members were studied; results indicated that larger group size was related to increased conflict and decreased engagement in the group
(Kivlighan, London, & Miles, 2012). In individually led groups, larger group size was also related with increased avoidance in group and more negative group relationships; while in co-led groups, group size was related to decreased avoidance and more positive relationships among group members. Participants also reported more benefit from treatment in co-led groups (2012).
Integration into the Current Project
In integrating attachment theory, Emotionally Focused Therapy, and Gottman’s research on what characterizes successful marriages (as well as unsuccessful marriages), it is important to consider the areas of overlap as well as the areas unique to each, in order to present them in such a way that they support and complement each other. It is important to fostering a basic understanding of attachment within the proposed group curriculum in order to provide a stronger base for EFT interventions as different attachment styles may have different unmet needs that need to be understood in context.
Additionally, Gottman’s research is in line with Greenberg, and Johnson (1986), which
29 reports that people learn and retain information in the emotional state in which it occurred, thus to revise this information most effectively, the original emotional state must be accessed. Accordingly, teaching couples EFT techniques in-group in order to help create new meanings and implement new interactions is an aim of this curriculum.
Knowledge and use of Gottman’s divorce indicators, and well as the indicators of a successful marriage may serve as relevant, research informed communication modules that go beyond simply using I-statements, cognitive restructuring, or behavior modification. Understanding the rationale behind behaviors and their impact on the marriage can be taught through Gottman’s research and EFT techniques, and can help solidify the importance to put them in practice beyond the length of the program.
The decision to provide premarital relationship education in a group format has support in the research as a cost effective form of therapy that is at least as effective (if not more so) as individual/conjoint therapy. In addition, group therapy offers its own unique benefits as a social microcosm and possibilities for corrective emotional experiences as group members learn from group feedback. Furthermore, the implementation of attachment and EFT concepts and interventions in a group setting may confer similar benefits as the professional team present in IST (Goldman & Greenberg,
1992), since the group and therapists can serve to point out and challenge maladaptive thought processes and interactions. According to Kivlighan et al. (2012), group size effects may be seen because with two group leaders there is greater chance that at least one of them will tune into and acknowledge members’ needs and McGeorge and Carlson
(2006) note that there are some studies suggesting that conjoint education is the preferred method for couples, though it may be that preferred program structure does not translate
30 to more efficacious treatment.
Booster sessions after the end of the program may help to retain the gains made in the group. According to Neff and Brody (2011), the concept of stress inoculation, or the idea that early exposure to moderate stress in a couple’s relationship may help them navigate future stressors more adeptly than those couples who do not have such exposure.
Evidence for this was found in two separate studies. In the first, 61 newlywed couples were surveyed and assessed multiple times over 2.5 years. Overall, couples with effective problem-solving skills and exposure to moderate stress early on in their marriage were found to adapt to later stress better than couples with effective problem- solving skills and no stress exposure early in marriage. Similarly, the second study followed 50 newlywed couples into parenthood and found that those couples with prior exposure to moderate stress and good relationship resources/support adjusted better to parenthood than those with just good relationship resources (2011). It appears that moderately stressful events allow a couple to practice their problem-solving skills prior to later more severe stress events and that having good problem solving skills alone is not as effective an asset as commonly believed. In this sense it may be helpful to have support, such as booster sessions in order to strengthen the skills previously learned and help the couple navigate through some of the early struggles in marriage.
Special issues. In a study following couples married less than 5 years who had completed FOCCUS (Facilitating Open Couple Communication) Risch, Riley and Lawler
(2003) indicated that the top three problematic issues affecting them throughout their marriage were: balancing time and the relationship, frequency of sex, and financial.
Thus, special issues including domestic violence, financial issues, and general issues
31 commonly seen during the early years of marriage should also be addressed within this curriculum. The authors suggested that these issues be directly addressed in premarital education with the goal of informing couples about the issues as well as helping to moderate potentially unrealistic expectations surrounding these issues and marriage in general (2003). It should be noted that while many of theses issues will be touched upon throughout the course of the group, as part of general marital issues, specialized time and attention should be allocated to specific issues with the goal of properly informing couples about these issues and allowing a forum for discussion. Kaukinen (2004) indicated that nearly 8% of women in relationships had experienced emotional abuse as evidenced by their male partner’s control behaviors such as social isolation, financial control, or put downs. The researcher found that status incompatibility, such as women having higher education levels and contributing more economically than their partners, though not associated with higher risk for physical violence, was a risk factor for emotional abuse. While having higher education is generally a protective factor for women against emotional abuse, the effect is negated if her partner’s education level does not match up. The risks for physical violence were higher among minority women, disabled women, wives of problem drinkers, and women at the beginning of a new relationship (2004). Thus, while changing gender roles provide hope that such effects might be mitigated in subsequent generations it is still important to discuss the warning signs of abuse in relationships in order to help prevent further abuse.
A survey of 414 ethnically diverse, low-income, newlywed couples conducted by
Williamson et al. (2013) revealed that positivity in a couple’s communication was strongly correlated to relationship satisfaction while financial and life stressors were
32 correlated with increased negativity in communication. Effective communication, such as listening well, offering solutions, communicating clearly, and asking for clarifications was not significantly related to marital satisfaction (2013). This suggests that for some couples the context in which they live (financial and life stressors) may be a strong contributor to marital satisfaction and subsequent behaviors that can impact that satisfaction. Similarly in an analysis of data regarding types of disagreements in couples and their contributions to divorce, Dew, Brit and Huston (2012) found that financial disagreements predicted divorce more so than any other type of disagreement; financial disagreements were found to play a role in couple relationships at all socioeconomic levels. However, this effect was mediated by communication, marital satisfaction, and financial equality, such that effective communication, marital satisfaction, and the perception of money being managed fairly in the relationship, all independently mediated the correlation with divorce (2012). The relationship between these factors is complex as financial stressors both impact and are impacted by marital satisfaction. This indicates that in addition to other interventions designed to increase marital satisfaction it may be beneficial for couples to receive education and support with regards to financial planning, in order to more effectively bolster the relationship against financial stressors that might strain marital satisfaction.
According to Durana (1997), PAIRS in an example of a psychoeducation and experiential group format that aims to foster greater understanding in couples and decreases gender differences characteristic of more distressed marriages. However, its extensive length may be unfeasible for many couples and thus a shorter time commitment may be more beneficial (1997). Thus, the current project incorporates psychoeducational
33 and experiential aspects into a program within a reduced time frame of 6 sessions of 2 hours each. The psychoeducation will include attachment issues and EFT, Gottman’s research to inform cognitive and communication skills, as well as attention to special issues that have been found to be most problematic to marriage; while the experiential aspect will include time to discuss the concepts in group and as a couple. Burton and
Kaplan (1968) found that group counseling refusal rate upon follow up was lower than for the individual counseling; this gives hope that after group has terminated couples will be more willing to return for booster sessions. James (1991) points to the usefulness of designing a psychoeducation group that incorporates aspects of both affective and communication components in helping to recruit and retain couples.
34 Theory of Action for Attachment Informed Relationship Education
Input Output Outcome
Attachment Style Attachment
Attachment Functioning Increase in Marital Intimacy and Greater Understanding of Relationship Demon Dialogues
Emotionally Focused Raw Spots Therapy
Revisiting Rocky Moment
Increased Probability of Divorce Marital Satisfaction and Indicators Decreased Probability of Gottman Divorce Research Sound Relationship House
Domestic Special Violence Topics
Finances
35 Chapter III
Project Audience and Implementation Factors
This project presents a proposed group curriculum that according to the research referenced above is needed. In this chapter the logistics and potential ways of implementing the project will be discussed. First, the developmental process of the project will be discussed, followed by a discussion of the intended audience and target population. Next the personal qualifications of the group leaders will be addressed, as well as any special environmental considerations or equipment needed to successfully implement the group. Finally, the chapter will conclude with a brief outline of the proposed group sessions including sample content, activities and procedures.
Development of Project
This project was developed with the hope of helping to increase relationship satisfaction between engaged/newlywed couples as well as help mitigate common future relationship stressors before they occur. At the present time, relationship group curriculums do exist, but they are usually overwhelmingly focused on communication strategies while ignoring some very important relationship topics and content that should be discussed. In addition, some relationship group curriculums require specialized training in order to run and thus can be very expensive and inaccessible to those couples who most need them. Furthermore, many relationship groups, like traditional marriage counseling, target couples whose relationship is already in distress. This group was conceptualized to help prevent engaged/newlywed couples from falling into common relationship traps. Currently, it is religious institutions that encourage or require engaged couples to attend pre-marital screenings and workshops. This group would take a
36 nondenominational/non-religious approach, in order to expand the pre-marital counseling beyond its conceptualization as a religious requirement to a useful tool for the population at large. It is for these reasons that this group curriculum was formulated; in order to impart the knowledge and relational benefits currently only available to a small segment of the population, this curriculum integrates the most effective and important aspects of extant relationship education and literature.
Intended Audience
The target population for this group would be engaged couples and newlywed couples within their first year of marriage. Participants would develop skills useful in preventing or deescalating future problems before they start. An important aspect of the group, and ideal for engaged couples, would be the ability to focus on the dyadic relationship and determine if the couple is truly ready to commit to marriage, with the option of delaying or deciding against marriage if they find significant incompatibilities/issues during the course of the group. It would also be important to stress the importance of marriage, and that dissolution of the marriage might have many different ramifications depending on what stage in their marriage they divorce or separate.
It is important to note exclusions and those couples who would not be good candidates for this group. The probability of a women’s first marriage lasting 20 years if her first husband had children from previous relationships when they married was only
37% compared to 54% if he did not (Copen et al., 2012). Similarly, the probability of a man’s first marriage lasting 15 years was 67% if his first wife did not have children from a previous relationship but only 39% if she did (2012). Thus, this group would not be
37 recommended for couples that already have children, as this would add too much complexity and might divert the couple’s focus on the dyadic relationship to that of familial functioning. Also, couples already married for a long time and/or in significant distress would not be good candidates for this group as their issues might be beyond the scope of the curriculum. Additionally, this curriculum may be implemented with same- sex couples, though it may be helpful to create a separate group and add additional sections of relevant content. However, it is important to note that the basic components of the curriculum may be modified or utilized in such a way as to be beneficial for relationship/marriage counseling in a more traditional setting.
In order to help build up participation, it may be possible to work in conjunction with religious organizations in order to enhance the programs for engaged couples they already have in-place, and as a general way to promote premarital education. It would be important to make a distinction between the religious organizations existing programs and this group curriculum; as a comparison group, this curriculum could be administered in addition to the organization’s program. Increasing the visibility of such programs might also help in the recruitment of more high-risk couples (Sullivan & Bradbury,
1997).
Personal Qualifications
Qualifications for professionals who will run the group should include: a license in Marriage in Family Therapy (or MFT intern/trainee under supervision by LMFT), or a
Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, and general experience working with couples and groups.
No additional special training would be required, as long as the counselor took the time to familiarize himself/herself with the curriculum. The group leader(s) should be fluent in
38 whatever language they are conducting the group. While the curriculum was developed in English, any competent and fluent person also familiar with the psychological concepts contained therein may translate it into another language.
Environment and Equipment
This group and its associated intake session may be conducted in any standard room also used for general counseling insofar as it is quiet, private, and allows for a safe and contemplative atmosphere. As part of the intake and screening process to select group members, various assessments and tests could be used.
The Marital Adjustment Test (Lock & Wallace, 1959) could be used to measure relationship adjustment, by measuring: general happiness, thoughts of leaving relationship, desire to spend time together, etc. The Conflict Tactics Scales (Straus,
Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996) could be used to measure the propensity for a couple to resort to aggression in order to resolve a conflict. The Confidence Scale
(Stanley, Hoyer, & Trathen, 1994) could be used to measure a couple’s confidence that they can effectively manage conflicts and stay together. Additionally, the Experiences in
Close Relationships (ECR) scale could be used in order to assess attachment style. No other special environment or equipment is necessary for either the group sessions or the intake sessions. If used, the MAT, CTS, and the Confidence Scale could be used to measure participant progress pre and post group. The ECR could also be used to chart whether clients’ attachment were influenced by the group, but it may also be used directly in the second group session in order to help participants learn more about their own attachment as indicated by their scores.
The MAT is a public domain marital satisfaction measure and may be found at:
39 http://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Self_Measures_for_M arital_Satisfaction_MARITAL_ADJUSTMENT_TEST.pdf . The ECR is free to use for research purposes, however it may not be used without permission for commercial purposes and may be found here: http://internal.psychology.illinois.edu/~rcfraley/measures/ecrritems.htm. If using the scales, participants should be advised that it is for informational/educational purposes only and are not diagnostic. The CTS requires permission before using, permission may be obtained at: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/WPS%20PERMISSION%202.pdf.
Project Outline
Intake and assessment session. During the intake sessions, each member of a couple would be screened separately in a 2-hour long interview each. The intake would include relevant relational history and current concerns/expectations for group. During screening, it would be important to make sure that no participant had any severe emotional or mental health problems that would be beyond the scope of the group, and/or that would hinder the group’s progress. The above-mentioned tests: MAT, CTS and the
Confidence Scale would be administered and scored prior to admittance to the group.
Group sessions. The group curriculum would be implemented over the course of
6 sessions, 2 hours each, with 3-5 couples per group and two leaders. The group would be a closed group, in order to help foster group cohesiveness. As established in Sullivan
& Anderson (2002), couples indicated a strong interest in the educational content of premarital consoling groups, a focus on personal couple goals, and less focus on structured interactions. Thus the curriculum would include some information/exercises on adult attachment styles, Gottman’s relationship variables, effective communication skills,
40 discussion of core values, and conflict resolution. Separate conjoint counseling sessions would be available for couples that became significantly distressed or requested additional help.
The first session should be used to establish group norms of attendance and safety/confidentiality, which would be reinforced throughout all subsequent sessions.
Members should not miss more than one session, and any missed session must be made up prior to the next group meeting. Due to the intimate nature of content discussed, as well as the importance of the skills presented in each meeting, attendance is extremely important both to impart knowledge and teach essential skills, as well as to maintain group cohesiveness.
The second session focuses on attachment. Participants learn about attachment in general, how it is formed in childhood and how it persists into adulthood, as well as how it continues to shape interpersonal relationships. If the ECR was administered, participants may be informed of their scores in order to discuss what the scores indicate.
A discussion on changing/influencing attachment will also be included.
The third session is an overview of EFT. Group members learn about demon dialogues, raw spots, and revisiting a rocky moment in order to facilitate couple learning and insight into the relationship.
The fourth session is an overview of Gottman’s divorce indicators and characteristics of a successful marriage. The session includes examples of each and invites couples to take a look at their own relationship and determine which characteristics are most salient. It is an introduction to communication strategies and enhancing the marital friendship.
41 The fifth session is an overview of Gottman’s Sound Relationship House and couples partake in a variety of exercises adapted from Gottman (1999), designed to facilitate communication and enhance the relationship.
Finally, the sixth session includes a brief overview of domestic violence and financial planning with the goal of inviting discussion of these important issues by the participants. Here group leaders may add any additional material/topics that group members would like to cover in more detail. Any questionnaires administered at intake should be repeated here.
All sessions should include discussion time both as a couple and as a group in order to help process the information covered and to help illustrate the concept of universality. Additionally, booster sessions to reinforce learned skills and concepts might be arranged so that group members can reconvene to practice skills and refresh content; these booster sessions would be open to all past group members.
42 Chapter IV
Conclusion
Summary
This project aims to create an integrated approach to relationship education by designing a group curriculum that draws upon extant premarital group counseling curriculums and relationship interventions, and integrates them with awareness of attachment issues, Emotionally Focused Therapy and John Gottman’s Sound
Relationship House/divorce indicators. The existing literature surrounding marital satisfaction and the factors that lead to marital dissolution and divorce are examined.
Also reviewed is the efficacy of existing relationship education programs, the potential impact of attachment upon marital satisfaction, and key ideas from John Gottman’s marital research. The existing relationship education curriculums focus in large part on communication. The importance of communication is not to be undermined; especially considering research that suggests that an over-focus on communication may have detrimental effects for certain couples. However, in this project the plan is to design a curriculum which incorporates not only the basics of positive communication, but also a review of important relational concepts to help couples be better informed and more well rounded in the areas known to affect marital outcomes.
The curriculum ideally targets engaged or newlywed couples in their first year of marriage. It would include psychoeducation on the interplay of attachment styles and the importance of partner attunement, integrated communication modules based on
Gottman’s Sound Relationship House and divorce indicators as well as EFT, as well as special modules that reflect important content areas relevant to newlywed couples. The
43 group curriculum would be adaptable to diverse situations and institutions. It might be covered in 6 two-hour sessions or broken up into shorter-length sessions stretching out over a longer course. In recruiting couples it might be implemented with institutions that already require such classes, such as churches, as part of the requirements to marry. It might even be useful with certain adaptations to couples that have already been married some time. It is hoped, that as word spreads of the usefulness of such programs, more couples would actively seek them out of their own accord.
Discussion
The proposed group curriculum would help couples prepared for what some of the most common stumbling blocks of marriage as informed by current research. While there are quite a few relationship education programs already in existence, there appears to be an over focus on communication/skills training, which has no real support in research as providing what is most needed in relationships or conferring long-term benefits. Additionally, this project focuses on the importance attachment plays throughout the lifespan and acts a frame of reference for some of the most intractable of relational problems, thus enabling the possibility for new understanding and meaning in conjunction with marital research. It also stipulates the amount of participants that should be present in each group in order to allow for maximum benefit of group. In too large of a class it is too easy for individuals to get lost, thus this would be another advantage the current project consisting of a smaller group run by two leaders. This project is also not specifically designed with a religious aspect in mind, and thus it may be more accessible to various types of couples, unlike some of the relationship education programs that are often offered through religious institutions.
44 Recruitment of couples for relationship education can be particularly tricky.
Results indicated that while several factors appeared to be motivators for couples intentions to seek premarital counseling, the strongest factors to predict actual participation were perceived barriers to counseling and the recommendation of a trusted other person (Sullivan, Pasch, Cornelius, Cirigliano, 2004). Thus, it is suggested that in order to more effectively recruit couples, premarital counseling programs should work to reduce the barriers keeping couples from participating, such as reducing costs associated with attending as well as making the process as convenient as possible. It may also be helpful to harness the influence of those respected community members already in contact with many engaged couples such as clergy, therapists, and community leaders, in order to spread awareness of the utility and efficacy of premarital counseling (Sullivan et al., 2004). On another note, several states have implemented financial incentives by way of reducing the costs associated with marriage and/or premarital education in order to promote relationship education and entice couples to participate. It may be worthwhile to consider lobbying at the state level for similar incentives in California, as a way to foster healthier and more stable marriages and families.
Future Work/Research
Research on the efficacy of EFT therapy on non-distressed or mildly distressed couples could be further studied. The use of EFT to prevent future marital problems within the context of a relationship education group, as proposed in this project, should also be studied in order evaluate the usefulness of such a group and decimate the curriculum. Furthermore, the recruitment of couples for premarital education programs is a crucial aspect of all programs, as the population that usually attends does not
45 necessarily lend itself to unbiased and representative samples for study. It would then be important to consider new recruitment strategies and evaluate the efficacy of premarital education programs on a more diverse and representative study of the population. In this way, it would be possible to better identify which programs/aspects of relationship education yield the most long-term benefits and promote those in order to address the rising concerns over marital dissolution.
46 References
Anderson, J.R., Stith, S.M., Johnson, M.D., Strachman-Miller, M.M., Amanor-Boadu, Y., & Linkh, D.J. (2013). Multi-couple group and self-directed PREP formats enhance relationship satisfaction and improve anger management skills in air force couples. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 41, 121-133.
Babcock, J. C., Gottman, J. M., Ryan, K. D., & Gottman, J. S. (2013). A component analysis of a brief psycho-educational couples’ workshop: one-year follow-up results. Journal of Family Therapy, 35, 252-280.
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226-244.
Baucom, D.H., Hahlweg, K., Atkins, D.C., Engl, J., & Thurmaier, F. (2006). Long-term prediction of marital quality following a relationship education program: Being positive in a constructive way. Journal of Family Psychology, 20(3), 448-455.
Burton, G., & Kaplan, H.M. (1968). Group counseling in conflicted marriages where alcoholism is present: Clients’ evaluation of effectiveness. Journal of Marriage and Family, 30(1), 74-79.
Byrne, M., Carr, A., & Clarke, M. (2004). The efficacy of behavioural couples therapy and emotionally focused therapy for couple distress. Contemporary Family Therapy, 26 (4), 361-387.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2011). Marriage and divorce. Retrieved December 22, 2013, from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm
Cobb, R. J., Davila, J., & Bradbury, T. N. (2001). Attachment security and marital satisfaction: The role of positive perceptions and social support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(9), 1131-1143.
Copen, C.E., Daniels, K., Vespa, J., & Mosher, W.D. (2012). First marriage in the United States: Data from the 2006-2010 national survey of family growth. National Health Statistics Reports, 49, 1-22. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics.
Dew, J., Britt, S., Huston, S. (2012). Examining the relationship between financial issues and divorce. Family Relations 61, 615-621 Duquette, P. (2010). Reality matters: Attachment, the real relationship, and change in psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 64(2), 127-151.
47 Durana, C. (1997). Enhancing marital intimacy through psychoeducation: The PAIRS program. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 5(3), 204-215.
Fraley, R.C., Roisman, G.L., Booth-LaForce, C., Owen, M.T., & Holland A.S. (2013). Interpersonal and genetic origins of adult attachment styles: A longitudinal study from infancy to early adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(5), 817-838.
Garrett, N. D. (2009). Marital Satisfaction . In K. P. Brackett (Ed.), Battleground: The family, (pp. 383-394).
Goldman, A., & Greenberg, L. (1992). Comparison of integrated systemic and emotionally focused approaches to couples therapy. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 962-969.
Gottman, J. M., & Krokoff, L. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57(1), 47-52.
Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 221-233.
Gottman, J. M. (1999). The marriage clinic: A scientifically-based marital therapy. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
Greenberg, L.S., & Johnson, S.M. (1986). Affect in marital therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 12(1), 1-10.
Halford, W.K., Sanders, M.R., Behrens, B.C. (2001). Can skills training prevent relationship problems in at-risk couples? Four-year effects of a behavioral relationship education program. Journal of Family Psychology, 15(4), 750-768.
Halford, W. K., Lizzio, A., Wilson, K. L., & Occhipinti, S. (2007). Does working at your marriage help? Couple relationship self-regulation and satisfaction in the first 4 years of marriage. Journal of Family Psychology, 21(2), 185-194.
Halford, W.K., Markman, H.J., Stanley, S. (2008). Strengthening couples’ relationships with education: Social policy and public health perspectives. Journal of Family Psychology, 22(3), 497-505.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524.
48 Hicks, M. W., McWey, L. M., Benson, K. E., & West, S. H. (2004). Using what premarital couples already know to inform marriage education: Integration of a Gottman model perspective. Contemporary Family Therapy, 26(1), 97-113.
James, P.S. (1991). Effects of a communication training component added to an emotionally focused couples therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 17(3), 263-275.
Jarnecke, A. M., & South, S. C. (2013). Attachment orientations as mediators in the intergenerational transmission of marital satisfaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(4), 550-559.
Johnson, S.M., & Greenberg, L.S. (1985). Emotionally focused couples therapy: An outcome study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11(3), 313-317.
Johnson, S.M., & Wittenborn, A.K. (2012). New research finding on emotionally focused therapy: Introduction to special section. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 38(1), 18-22.
Kaukinen, C. (2004). Status compatibility, physical violence, and emotional abuse in intimate relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 452-471.
Keating, L., Tasca, G.A., Gick, M., Richie, K., Balfour, L., & Bissada, H. (2014). Change in attachment to the therapy group generalizes to change in individual attachment among women with binge eating disorder. Psychotherapy, 51(1), 78- 87.
Kivlighan, D.M., London, K., & Miles, J.R. (2012). Are two heads better than one? The relationship between number of group leaders and group members, and group climate and group member benefit from therapy. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 16(1), 1-13.
Kline, G.H., Stanley, S.M., Markman, H.J., Olmos-Gallo, P.A., St. Peters, M.,Whitton, S.W., & Prado, L.M. (2004). Timing is everything: Pre-engagement cohabitation and increased risk for poor marital outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 18(2). 311-318.
Lawson, D.M., Barnes, A.D., Madkins, J.P., & Francios-Lamonte, B.M. (2006). Changes in male partner abuser attachment styles in group treatment. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 43(2), 232-237.
Lavner, J. A., & Bradbury, T. N. (2010). Patterns of change in marital satisfaction over the newlywed years. Journal of Marriage and Family, 75(5), 1171-1187.
Lavner, J. A., & Bradbury, T. N. (2011). Why do even satisfied newlyweds eventually go on to divorce? Journal of Family Psychology, 26(1), 1-10.
49
Lavner, J.A., Karney, B.R., and Bradbury, T.N. (2013). Newlyweds’ optimistic forecasts of their marriage: For better or worse? Journal of Family Psychology 27(4), 531- 540.
Locke, H., & Wallace, K. (1959). Short marital-adjustment and prediction tests: Their reliability and validity. Marriage and Family Living, 21, 251-255.
Luo, S., & Snider, A. G. (2009). Accuracy and biases in newlyweds’ perceptions of each other: Not mutually exclusive but mutually beneficial. Psychological Science, 20(11), 1332-1339.
Makinen, J.A., & Johnson, S.M. (2006). Resolving attachment injuries in couples using emotionally focused therapy: Steps toward forgiveness and reconciliation. Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, 74(6), 1055-1064.
Markman, H. J., Renick, M. J., Floyd, F. J., Stanley, S. M., & Clements, M. (1993). Preventing marital distress through communication and conflict management training: A 4- and 5-year follow-up. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61(1), 70-77.
Markman, H.J., Rhoades, G,K., Stanley, S.M., & Peterson, K.M. (2013). A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of premarital intervention: Moderators of divorce outcomes. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(1), 165-172.
Marmarosh C.L., & Tasca G.A., (2013). Adult attachment anxiety: Using group therapy to promote change. Journal of Clinical Psychology: In Session, 69(11), 1172- 1182.
McGeorge, C.R., Carlson, T.S. (2006). Premarital education: An assessment of program efficacy. Contemporary Family Therapy 28(1), 165-190.
McRoberts, C., Burlingame, G.M, Hoag, M.J. (1998). Comparative efficacy of individual and group psychotherapy: A meta-analytic perspective. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2(2), 101-117.
Michaels, M.L. (2006). Stepfamily enrichment program: A preventative intervention for remarried couples. The Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 31(2), 135-152.
Neff, L.A., & Broady, E.F. (2011). Stress resilience in early marriage: Can practice make perfect? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 1050-1067.
Owen, J. J., Rhoades, G. K., Stanley, S. M., & Markman, H. J. (2011). The role of leaders’ working alliance in premarital education. Journal of Family Psychology, 25(1), 49-57.
50 Owen, J., Manthos, M., & Quirk, K. (2013). Dismantling study of Prevention and Relationship Education Program: The effects of a structured communication intervention. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(2), 336-341.
Rehman, U.S., Janssen, E., Newhouse, S., Heiman, J., Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Fallis, E., & Rafaeli, E. (2011). Martial satisfaction and communication behaviors during sexual and nonsexual conflict discussions in newlywed couples: A pilot study. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 37, 94-103.
Risch, G.S., Riley, L.A., & Lawler, M.G. (2003). Problematic issues in the early years of marriage: Content for premarital education. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 31(3), 253-269.
Rogge, R. D., Cobb, R. J., Lawrence, E., Johnson, M. D., & Bradbury, T. N. (2013). Is skills training necessary for the primary prevention of marital distress and dissolution? A 3-year experimental study of three interventions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1-13.
Scharfe, E., & Cole, V. (2006). Stability and change of attachment representations during emerging adulthood: An examination of mediators and moderators of change. Personal Relationships, 13, 363-374.
Scott, S.B., Rhoades, G.K., Stanley, S.M., Allen, E.S., & Markman, H.J. (2013). Reasons for divorce and recollections of premarital intervention: Implications for improving relationship education. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2(2), 131-145.
Seedall, R.B., & Wampler, K.S., (2013). An attachment primer for couple therapists: Research and clinical implications. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 39(4), 427-440.
Solomon, P., Draine, J., Mannion, E., & Meisel, M. (1996). Impact of brief family psychoeducation on self-efficacy. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 22(1), 41-50.
Soltani, A., Molazadeh, J., Mahmoodi, M., & Hosseini, S. (2013). A study on the effectiveness of emotional focused couple therapy on intimacy of couples. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 82, 461-465.
Stanley, S. M. Hoyer, L. Trathen, D. W. (1994). The confidence scale. Unpublished manuscript, University of Denver
Stith, S.M, Rosen, K.H., McCollum, E.E., & Thomsen, C.J. (2004). Treating intimate partner violence within intact couple relationships: Outcomes of multi-couple versus individual couple therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 30(3), 305-318.
51 Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2) Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283-316.
Sullivan, K. T., & Anderson, C. (2002). Recruitment of engaged couples for premarital counseling: An empirical examination of the importance of program characteristics and topics to potential participants. The Family Journal, 10(4), 388-397.
Sullivan, K.T., Pasch, L.A., Cornelius, T., & Cirigliano, E. (2004). Predicting participation in premarital prevention programs: The health belief model and social norms. Family Process, 43(2), 175-193.
Sullivan, K.T., Pasch, L.A., Johnson, M.D., & Bradbury, T.N. (2010). Social support, problem solving, and the longitudinal course of newlywed marriage. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(4), 631-644.
The Gottman Institute (2013). Relationship help: The fastest way to better relationships. Retrieved from http://www.gottman.com/marriage-couples/
Williamson, H.C., Karney, B.R., & Bradbury, T.N. (2013). Financial strain and stressful events predict newlyweds’ negative communication independent of relationship status. Journal of Family Psychology, 27(1), 65-75.
Williamson, H.C., Trail, T.E., Bradbury, T.N., & Karney, B.R. (2014). Does premarital education decrease or increase couples’ later help-seeking? Journal of Family Psychology, 28(1), 112-117.
52 Appendix-Product
Session One Objective: Participants will gain an understanding of coupling life cycle stage along with some of its most typical challenges. Participants will also be able to identify at least three myths about marriage.
Introductions and Establishment of Rules No judgment, all questions welcomed, it is an interactive group feel free to speak up, no one is forced to share, anything said in group is confidential, There will be discussion in pairs and in group while it is helpful to share in group it is not required. Only one absence will be allowed and must be made up at a later time to be arranged.
Outline of Sessions: Session 1: Introduction Session 2: Attachment Session 3: Emotionally Focused Therapy Session 4: Characteristics of Successful Marriage and Divorce Indicators Session 5: Building and Maintaining a Strong Marital Relationship Session 6: Special Topics: Domestic Violence, Finances
Possible Icebreakers String Game Start with a big roll of yarn or string. Cut the string into various different lengths. Bunch all the pieces up into one big ball of string. Ask the first player to choose any piece of string and pull on it to separate it from the ball. The player then introduces himself or herself as they slowly wind the piece of string around their index finger. The idea of this game is that some of the strings are very long, so sometimes a person must keep talking for a very long time!
Fabulous Flags Give each couple a sheet of paper, pens, and colored pencils, crayons, and/or markers. Have each pair draw flags that represent or symbolize them. Include some symbols or objects that symbolize who you are as a couple, what you find enjoyable, how you met, etc. Some examples of symbols: • A piano (representing your enjoyment of music or ability to play) • Various sports balls (enjoyment sports) • A foreign country (representing affiliation with a specific country) • A cross, ohm, star of David, etc. (representing religion) Give couples about 10 minutes to draw and then reconvene as a group. Ask each couple to share their flag and explain the meaning of the symbols.
Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o Discuss with you partner which aspects of this phase seem the most challenging? Which seem least challenging? Why?
53
• Group: o What do you think about this? o Does anyone have any personal experience to share? o Do you agree or disagree with the challenges identified
Myths and Facts Marriage and Divorce Indicators 1. Having one divorce does not increase changes of another divorce. False (Divorce begets divorce: ~50% of 1st marriages end in divorce, ~60% of marriages end in divorce and ~70% of marriages end in divorce. ) 2. Negative emotions play a positive role in relationships. True 3. The best marriages are those in which partners have strong complementary roles; where one partner is very feminine and the other very masculine. False 4. Anger and criticism are destructive to a marriage. False 5. Understanding a partner’s needs, both verbal and nonverbal, as well as the ability to meet those needs is crucial to relationships. True 6. Living together before marriage does not increase risk for later divorce. True
Suggested Group Process Questions • Were you surprised by any of the answers? • Which answer was most surprising and why? • What does this say about marriage?
Gottman Conflict Resolution Styles1 • Validating: Validators attempt to influence each other most in the middle of an argument. Influence attempts are lower in the beginning and the end when they are negotiating. They believe in emotional expressiveness but in moderation, at certain times, and only about important issues. • Volatile: Volatiles attempt to influence each other early and constantly throughout the argument, they are very emotionally expressive; positive and negative emotions are expressed freely. They believe in being open and expressive with each other. These are strong passionate individuals with high levels of both disagreement and affection. • Avoidant: Avoiders agree to disagree and minimize the importance of problems. They highlight their shared beliefs, establish their commitment to the relationship, and end on a positive note. Their goal is acceptance of the other not compromise, persuasion, or problem solving. If they are emotionally expressive it is usually softened.
*No one style is better than the other; they all have their strong and weak points. The important point is that a couple agrees on the style that works for them. Volatile couples happen to be the ones that stay romantic the longest, partly due to the need to court one another after disagreements. However, when there is a mismatch-partners are not of the same conflict resolution style, it may be harder, thought not impossible, to resolve
1 (Gottman, 1999, p. 88-89)
54 conflict. Remind couples that the descriptions of the styles and the associated questions are not for diagnostic purposes, but rather, educational in nature. The sample questions are taken from Gottman’s questionnaire and are there to help participants quickly classify themselves in order to help them get a better sense of how the styles function and gain insight into their own functioning. • Mismatches: 2 o Validator with Volatile: Validator may begin to feel ignored, overwhelmed and hyper-vigilant. The volatile partner may feel their partner is too cold and distant and that the marriage lacks passion. o Validator with Avoider: The validator may constantly be pursuing the avoider and feel disconnected from their avoidant partner. The avoidant partner may start to feel overwhelmed. o Volatile with Avoider: The volatile person may begin to think that their partner is devoid of emotion and feel unloved or rejected. The avoider may feel that their volatile partner is too extreme and lacking self-control. • In order to have a successful marriage couples should aim for:3 o Overall feeling of positivity towards a partner and the relationship o An ability to decrease negativity during times of conflict
Suggested Process Questions • Conjoint: o Discuss what couple type you are, are you a mix? o Is this relevant to your relationship? How do you see this being problematic or beneficial to you? • Group: o What do you think about these distinct couple styles? Do they apply to you? o Does anyone want to discuss his or her own relationship paradigm?
Wrap-up How was this first session? Was it what you expected? What would you like to see covered in future sessions? Would you like more group time or more individual time?
2 (Gottman, 1999, p.96) 3 (Gottman, 1999, p.105)
55 Session Two: Attachment
Objective: Participants will be able to define attachment and describe how attunement shapes attachment security not only in childhood but when relating in a couple relationship.
Check-in: Any thoughts or questions about the last session?
Overview of Attachment • Attachment as a moderately stable framework for relationships formed in childhood that persists into adulthood, though it may be consistently monitored and updated according to subsequent relationships and experiences (Seedall & Wampler, 2013). • There are four distinct categories of attachment with their own unique features: secure, preoccupied, dismissive, and fearful (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). *Use an analogy of mother-child in order to illustrate how attachment is initially formed through attunement (accurate understanding of a child or partner’s needs), and how it can persist in adulthood. Attachment can be affected moderately by a child or caregiver’s temperament, but it is largely learned through behavioral interactions. (Ex: mothers of fussy infants can be taught to be more sensitive and responsive in order to help the child develop secure attachment). Attachment is the secure base from which people learn rules for relating to others. In order to illustrate attachment use another example of a mother understanding why her child cries vs. one who responds to all cries with feeding attempts.
Attachment Styles *If attachment questionnaire was administered prior to session, participants may be given their attachment style to compare to the descriptions. If not, participants may use the descriptions to determine which style best describes them. Remind participants that these categories are not for diagnostic purposes, but rather are to be used for educational purposes to further self-understanding and promote insight.
• Attachment styles reflect two dimensions: avoidance of intimacy and anxiety about abandonment.4 o Secure: “It is easy for me to become emotionally attached to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don’t worry about being alone or having others not accept me.” Secure people tend to be comfortable with intimacy and are optimistic and sociable. o Preoccupied: “I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don’t value me as much as I value them. “ Preoccupied people are vigilant of threats toward their relationships and can be needy and jealous.
4 Miller, R.S., & Perlman, D. (2009). Intimate relationships (5th ed.) (pp.16-17). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
56 o Fearful: “I am uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others. Fearful people are afraid of rejection and can be suspicious and shy. o Dismissing: “I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient and I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me. “ Dismissing people are independent and not interested in intimacy. They can be indifferent and independent. • Importance of Attachment Patterns: It is important to be aware of attachment patterns because they may be passed down through generations and have an effect on a couple’s current marital functioning. Parental marital satisfaction predicted parent- child attachment orientations such that low marital satisfaction in parents correlated with insecure attachment in their children (Jarnecke & South, 2013). Buffering, or the ability of security in one partner to lead to greater security in the other, suggested that security in one partner might protect the relationship from instability by providing more positive interactions (Seedall & Wampler, 2013).
Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o Which is your individual attachment style? o Can you see evidence of your attachment style playing out in everyday interactions? o How does your partner’s attachment style positively or negatively affect you? o Are you satisfied with your current attachment style? Why or why not? • Group: o Do you agree with the information presented on attachment styles? Why or why not. o Have you seen evidence of attachment at work in your personal lives? Are there any examples you would care to share? o Do you believe attachment can be changed or modified? If so how?
Changing Attachment Styles • Adult attachment is largely influenced by social environment and early experiences with very little genetic influence. However, this is not to say that temperament and other genetic correlates currently unidentified might not be associated with attachment (Fraley et al., 2013). • Social experiences are important in shaping attachment style and further point to possibilities of influencing attachment outside of the parent-caregiver bond. o Attachment can be shaped by friendships and relationships that disprove prior learned relationship rules/experiences (Miller & Perlman, 2009). • However, once established attachment styles can be difficult to change since people may seek relationships that confirm their prior experiences instead of presenting new
57 experiences that would positively inform and update attachment styles (Miller & Perlman, 2009). • Research has shown that attachment may shift from secure towards insecure during times of high stress or trauma occurring before adulthood (Seedall & Wampler, 2013). o Luckily, insecure styles are more likely to change than secure ones. • Rather than completely changing attachment style, positive attachment interactions among partners may result in more secure behaviors in the relationship (Seedall & Wampler, 2013).
Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o Do you think your attachment is different with different people/relationships? o Has your attachment ever changed? • Group: o Do you think attachment changes within different relationships? o Is it possible to change attachment styles?
Wrap-up: • Any final thoughts or questions? • Relaxation or grounding exercise as desired or needed. (Deep breathing will be very useful for later sessions and should begin to be practiced as soon as possible). • Needs Exercise: Everyone in the group goes around and names a need either physical or emotional that they will meet over the next week.
58 Session 3: Emotionally Focused Therapy
Check-in: Any thoughts or questions about the last session?
Objective: Participants will demonstrate understanding of basic EFT principles by identifying at least two examples of demon dialogues and raw spots, as well as revisit a rocky moment.
EFT Overview5 Attachment needs are at the root of many marital conflicts and it is these unmet needs that lead to a gradual disconnect and distancing of partners in a relationship. When marital conflict arises and attachment needs are not met, the behavior exhibited is a cry for help; a protest at the potential loss of the relationship. Secondary emotions, such as anger, are used to hide more vulnerable primary emotions such as sadness and hurt. Martial conflict highlights the underlying fear of losing the relationship. Remind participants that the following are only adaptations and highlights of Emotionally- Focused Therapy designed by Susan Johnson. A.R.E. • Emotional responsiveness is the key to creating and maintaining strong marital bonds. It is characterized by accessibility, responsiveness and engagement (A.R.E). o Accessibility means staying open towards your partner even in the face of conflict in order to attend to the attachment message they are giving. § Examples of Accessibility6 • “I can get my partner’s attention easily.” • “My partner is easy to connect with emotionally.” • “I am not feeling lonely or shut out in this relationship.” o Responsiveness involves being attuned to your partner and demonstrating that their attachment needs have been received and that they matter to you. § Examples of Responsiveness • “My partner responds to signals that I need him/her to come close.” • “Even when we fight or disagree, I know that I am important to my partner and we will find a way to come together.” • “If I need reassurance about how important I am to my partner, I can get it.” o Emotional engagement means being present with your partner and giving them the attention and affection they need. § Examples of Engagement • “I can confide in my partner about almost anything.”
5 Johnson, S. (2008). Hold me tight: Seven conversations for a lifetime of love. New York, NY: Little, Brown.
6 (Johnson, 2008, p. 57)
59 • “I feel confident even when we are apart, that we are connected to each other.” • “I feel very comfortable being close to, trusting my partner.” • The overall message is “ Are you there, are you with me?”7 Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o How do you feel about the areas of A.R.E. in your current relationship? o How do you deal with any of these areas in which you find your relationship lacking? o Did you ever experience any or all of these in other relationships (with parents or friends for example)? How did this shape your view of relationships? • Group: o Does the idea of attachment loss underlying marital conflict make sense to you? Do you agree or disagree? Why? o How might A.R.E. help with attunement?
Demon Dialogues8 Destructive patterns that couples engage in when faced with relationship conflict. Couples should be on the lookout for these patterns and stop them when they do arise. • The Blame Game: Arguing back and forth trying to establish who is to blame. When a partner is hurt, self-protection is evoked and they will try to deflect their partner’s attack by attacking them back. • Demand-Withdraw: One partner pursues the other and tries to engage him/her in order to try and resolve a conflict or establish connection (demand); the pursued partner simultaneously tries to distance himself/herself from the pursuing partner (withdraw). A vicious cycle develops where the more one partner pursues the more the other withdraws, which makes the pursuer pursue all the more, etc. o Pursuer May Feel: § Shut out § Lonely § Ignored § Unimportant § Angry § They have to push to keep the relationship alive § Any response is better than none o Distancer May Feel: § Inadequate § Frozen § It’s better to shut down and not cause more problems § Empty § They are more independent
7 (Johnson, 2008, p. 50) 8 (Johnson, 2008, p. 65-97)
60 § They are more rational • The Deep Freeze: Emotional disengagement of partners. The pursuing partner has given up trying to connect, and the distancing partner is stuck in their withdrawn stance. This may result from prolonged experiences with the other two demon dialogues. There is tension, hopelessness and denial in the relationship. If left unrepaired for too long, it can destroy the relationship. Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o Do you ever engage in any of the demon dialogues? If so when, how often, and how do you feel afterwards? o When your attachment needs are not met, how do you typically respond? Are you a pursuer or distancer or a little of both? o How did you react to feelings of disconnection/unmet needs in prior relationships? • Group: • How are these dialogues destructive to marriage? • Do you agree that they are all destructive? • How would you suggest breaking these patterns?
Raw Spots9 • Raw spots are hypersensitive areas in a person’s life that are formed by repeated neglect or dismissal of attachment needs in prior relationships; they leave one feeling emotionally deprived and deserted. • Examples: o Nancy is very hurt when her husband does not compliment her. Her unmet attachment need goes back to her mother who would never praise or compliment her because she did not want Nancy to become complacent. o Rick becomes angry when his wife disagrees with his ideas and instead suggests something else. He remembers his childhood where his parents never listened to any of his ideas and constantly made him feel dumb. o People can have multiple raw spots and sometimes one raw spot is pervasive through many areas of life. o John is embarrassed and anxious when his wife mentions that she would like to have sex more often. His sensitivity goes back to a prior relationship where he felt he was never good enough at anything, as well as to his childhood, when he was the smallest boy in his classes and when his father would call him a girl in front of his brothers. • Sometimes, it is difficult to discover raw spots, especially in the heat of conflict because the softer emotions of hurt, fear, and sadness are masked by an initial reaction of frustration, anger, or irritation in an attempt at self-protection. This defensiveness leads to partners engaging in the demon dialogues. • Recognizing a Raw Spot o There is a change in the emotional tone of the interaction o The offended partner’s response to the perceived insult is very extreme
9 (Johnson, 2008, p. 98-120)
61 • Raw Spot in Action o There is a perceived insult/hurt and an attachment trigger is set off which signals that something bad is happening. o There is a change in the body: churning stomach, cold clammy hands, profuse sweating, face gets hot. This is the physical manifestation of the emotion evoked by the insult. o A message is formed. Prior to this, the amygdala and the limbic system (the emotional brain) were on autopilot, taking in the trigger and transmitting the emotion. At this point, the prefrontal cortex, associated with reasoning and planning, catches up and is able to evaluate the trigger and emotion in order to form a message about what this means for the relationship. o Reaction. You move toward, or away from your partner depending on the nature of the message. • Raw Spot Exercise:10 Have each partner in a couple identify a raw spot by focusing on a time in which he/she noticed a sudden shift in emotional tone and an extreme response. Have each answer the following questions and then share with their partner. Remind partners to be supportive, nonjudgmental listeners as the only way to develop emotional safety and trust in a relationship is by allowing each other space to express themselves. Remind partners that the purpose of this exercise is not to establish blame or provoke conflict, but rather to engage in closer self-examination and open up to their partner. o What was the trigger that set you off? o What did you notice happening in your body? o What emotion did you show? o What did you feel deep down? o What was the message you got from the interaction? o What did you do? o Where do you think this sensitivity came from? Are there any similar incidents in your past?
Suggested Group Process Questions • Do you believe that identifying and understanding raw spots is important? Why or why not? • Is it helpful to pinpoint where raw spots come from? Discuss • Would anyone like to share their experience discussing their raw spots with their partner?
Revisiting a Rocky Moment11 It is important for couples to be able to stop the demon dialogues and be attuned to their partner so they know when they are rubbing a raw spot. When they are able to do this, they can then pause the conflict in order to take it in a different direction; one that leaves partners feeling safe and emotionally connected.
10 (Johnson, 2008, p. 107-109) 11 (Johnson, 2008, p. 121-140)
62 • Couples will separate into their pairs and choose a moment in which they did not get along to revisit. It should not be a very painful event, but rather a lesser argument they might have had, in order to avoid distressing couples too much while they practice these skills. Have couples do the following: o Identify a moment in which you and your partner had difficulty seeing eye to eye and getting along. Briefly describe what happened with each of you identifying your own actions. (Give a brief play-by-play). Did your own moves incite your partner’s next move? Did something they did make you react in a certain way? o Talk about the feelings each of you had during this incident. Ask your partner about any deeper and softer feelings they might have had during this time in a calm, nonjudgmental, and genuinely curious way. If your partner cannot identify any, take a few guesses at what deeper emotions they might have been feeling. See if your partner agrees or if he/she felt something different. o Together with your partner, discuss how you might have said/done things differently based on any new information you may have just discovered. § How could you have communicated your thoughts/feelings while still allowing space and security for your partner’s thoughts/feelings? § If you had been able to have this conversation instead of the original how would you have felt towards each other or the relationship?
Suggested Group Process Questions: • If you could identify these negative patterns as they were happening would it be helpful to stop and try to manage the conflict in the way we just practiced? Why or why not? • How can asking about a partner’s softer emotions help de-escalate a conflict? Would you feel comfortable doing this? Why or why not? • Do you find that most conflicts have an attachment insecurity/fear of losing a relationship at their root?
Wrap-up: • Any final thoughts or questions? • Relaxation or grounding exercise as desired or needed. (Deep breathing will be very useful for later sessions and should begin to be practiced as soon as possible).
63 Session 4: Characteristics of Successful Marriages and Divorce Indicators
Check-in: Any thoughts or questions from last week’s session?
Objective: Participants will be able to identify at least 2 divorce indicators and 2 components of a successful marriage.
Divorce Indicators • Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:12 The most toxic elements to a relationship. *After each of the four horsemen, allow time for couples to discuss with their partner examples in their own relationship of each. o Criticism: A statement that implies globally wrong with a partner and is a lasting part of his/her personality. This is different from a specific complaint. *Cannot store up lists of specific complaints they should be discussed as they arise in order to avoid resentment. If they build up and are listed, it will seem as a rejection of a partner’s personality. I- statements can help avoid this, but are no guarantee. Always, never, etc. should be avoided as these are more global statements but I-statements and more specific statements can also be criticism. Some “why” questions are not questions at all but insults. § Examples: § Complaint: It worries me to have guns in the house. § Criticism: It bothers me to have guns in the house; you have a really violent temper. § Complaint: I’m upset that you didn’t ask me anything about my day at dinner. § Criticism: You always monopolize the conversation. How can you be so insensitive? § Criticism: Why are you so selfish? Why are you so lazy? Why are you so inconsiderate? o Defensiveness: Defending oneself from a perceived attack. It helps deny responsibility and fuels conflict. Counter-complaining/counterattacking is a form of defensiveness. § Examples: § Complaint: It scares me when you drink so much and become aggressive. § Counterattack: Well what about when you spend all that money on shoes? o Contempt: A statement or nonverbal behavior that elevates one partner higher than the other by putting the other down. It can involve a lightly mocking tone of voice, calling them childish, crazy, etc. and using words like explode, tantrum, or mockery. Mockery is not humor because only one person is laughing and at the expense of the other. Also may involve
12 Gottman, J. M. (1999). The marriage clinic: A scientifically-based marital therapy. New York, NY: W.W. Norton. p. 41-47.
64 correcting grammar or other mistakes when angry. Nonverbal behavior may include eye rolling and glancing upwards in an exasperated sigh. This is the MOST toxic of the four horsemen. Happy and stable marriages may have some instances of the other four horsemen but they usually have NO contempt. o Stonewalling: One partner withdraws from interactions and may even walk out. This person is nor really listening to the conversation anymore, but rather waiting for it to end. Men are more likely to stonewall than women. Stonewalling bothers women greatly though it may actually be a form of self-soothing for men. Men may withdraw after physiological arousal (conflict) in order to calm down, but women become aroused after men withdraw. (May start a vicious cycle; demand-withdraw pattern).
Suggested Group Process Questions: • Discuss if and how they have seen these processes play out in relationships. • Discuss which were the most destructive and why.
Divorce Indicators (Cont.) • Negative Affect Reciprocity:13 Responding to negative emotions or statements with another negative emotion or statement. It is not problematic when met kind for instance: anger is met with with anger (low intensity conflict), or criticism met with criticism (higher intensity conflict), but rather when it escalates from low to high intensity such as anger to contempt. Positive affect such as, humor, affection, interest, and engaged listening, can be used to decrease escalation of conflict. • Harsh Startup:14 Addressing a problem by going from a neutral stance to a negative one. This can be accomplished by beginning a discussion with a criticism instead of a complaint. Harsh startup by the wife is especially predictive of later unhappy marriages. • Emotional Disengagement:15 Partners may have become completely disengaged and emotionally distant, and thus there may not be much negative affect but the most striking feature is the lack of positive affect. Absence of affect: no joy or happiness and also very rarely anger or conflict. There may be underlying sadness or tension that partners seem reluctant to acknowledge, they may be determined to adapt to such circumstances. There are little or no attempts to soothe each other.
Suggested Group Process: • Discuss these concepts and have participants come up with examples from their own relationships or that of others. • Role-play examples of each concept as a group to demonstrate an understanding of each and how it leaves the couple feeling.
13 (Gottman, 1999, p. 51-52) 14 (Gottman, 1999, p. 41) 15 (Gottman, 1999, p. 47-48)
65
Successful Marriage Characteristics • What is a Happy and Stable Marriage? The definition is different for every couple but generally speaking partners are gentle and kind to each other with softened startup, and acceptance of influence from each other. All marriages have criticism, defensiveness, and stonewalling at some point, but they occur less often and effectively managed when they do occur. • 5:1 Ratio:16 More positive interactions in a relationship than negative ones. Gottman’s research has found that happy stable couples overall engage in 5 positive interactions for every negative one, while distressed couples have closer to a 1:1 ratio. • Repair attempts:17 Attempts to restore the relationship by commenting on the communication itself, supporting and soothing one another, or expressing appreciation to soften complaints. Success of repair attempts depends on how soon after the negative interaction starts that they are employed, as well as how effective the repair is once it is made. Sometimes a seemingly effective repair attempt is not successful because the other partner rejects it. This may be partly due to negative attributions. Successful Repair attempts are crucial as this is what distinguishes stable happy marriages from distressed ones that go on to divorce; they allow for the successful repair of the relationship after the 3 horsemen, or other negative interactions. o Perception of Affect:18 § In happy and stable marriages, negative behavior is seen as situational and passing. • Ex: “He had a bad day, She has not had enough sleep, he is hungry, etc.” § In distressed marriages the same negative behavior is seen as a permanent and internal part of the partner. § Similarly, in happy marriages, positive behavior is seen as permanent and characteristic of a partner. § In troubled marriages the same positive behavior seems transitory and situational, and not likely to happen again. o Attributions:19 Over time, many of these interactions cause either relationship-enhancing or distress-maintaining attributions to develop. § Relationship enhancing attributions maximize the impact of a partner’s positive behavior and minimize the impact of negative behavior. § Distress maintaining attributions maximize the impact of a partner’s negative behavior and minimize the impact of the positive ones. § Once these attributions are established they can be difficult to change as the behaviors that disconfirm these beliefs are ignored and only confirming behaviors are paid attention to.
16 (Gottman, 1999, p. 38-40) 17 (Gottman, 1999, p. 48-49) 18 (Gottman, 1999, p. 71-72) 19 (Gottman, 1999, p. 71-72)
66
o Suggested Process Questions: § Conjoint: Can you identify both successful and unsuccessful repair attempts in your relationship? What made them successful or unsuccessful? § Group: Do you agree that repair attempts are important? Why or why not? Do you believe perception plays a role in the success of repair attempts?
Successful Marriage Characteristics (Cont.) • Negativity Detector:20 In happy marriages wives notice lower levels of negative behavior and don’t adapt to negativity; instead they bring up the issues fairly quickly (within days). It is not good to sweep things under the rug. Distressed marriages have wives who ignored lower levels of negativity; only responding once things have gotten much worse. This is partly why people delay getting help for so long. Don’t let the sun set on your wrath, kiss and makeup, don’t go to bed angry. • Accepting Influence:21 Being agreeable and actively looking for areas to compromise/where they agree. It is not simply giving in or avoiding conflict but truly looking for compromise (finding common ground or noting areas of disagreement to address later). Marriages headed for divorce are characterized by a lack of accepting influence on the part of the husband. It is important for men to accept influence from and share power with women. In troubled marriages husbands have difficulty accepting influence from their wives even with the most reasonable of requests. • Self and other soothing:22 Marital conflict can stimulate production of stress hormones, and an activation of many physiological systems, which may result in a fight-or-flight response. It is difficult to pay attention to what a partner is saying and higher level cognitive processing is decreased which makes problem solving more challenging. It is not the expression of one strong emotion that causes this reaction, but rather a combination of strong emotions that activate various physiological processes. For example, strong expressions of anger will only activate one body system (the sympathetic nervous system), but if the anger is accompanied by fear/helplessness then multiple systems are activated (the sympathetic and cortical). This type of combined activation of physiological processes are present during martial conflict, as the conflict leaves a person angry, but also feeling helpless and in fear of losing the relationship. This is similar to the fundamental fears of attachment loss. o Helping to Soothe:23 § Take a break for at least 20 minutes to give the body a chance to calm down. § Rehearsing of negative/victimizing thoughts should be avoided. These statements do not allow for a return to calm.
20 (Gottman, 1999, p. 73-74) 21 (Gottman, 1999, p. 51-52) 22 (Gottman, 1999, p. 74-79) 23 (Gottman, 1999, p. 82)
67 • Ex: “I don’t have to take this.” “I shouldn’t have to put up with this.” § Have a specific time to come together again. Use positive affect to self-soothe, and to help soothe your partner. § This may help prevent stonewalling, which is very distressful to women, while allowing the husband to have time to deescalate.
Suggested Process Questions: • Conjoint: o In which areas do you consider your relationship to be strong and which need more work? o Are you able to self-soothe effectively? o Are you able to help soothe your partner? Why or why not? • Group: o How important do you consider the marital success indicators? o Have you seen them play a role in your/other’s marriage? How so?
Wrap-up: • Any final thoughts or questions? • Relaxation or grounding exercise as needed (practice of deep breathing during discussion of self-soothing or as part of wrap-up recommended). • Challenge participants to be aware of their own behavior over the course of the week and see if they fall into any of the categories discussed today. Discuss briefly at the beginning of next session.
68
Session 5: Building and Maintaining a Strong Marital Relationship
Check-in: Any thoughts or questions from last week? Did anyone notice himself or herself engaging in any of the behaviors from last week?
Objective: Participants will be able to provide one example from their relationship for each level of the Sound Relationship House as well as describe how to achieve positive sentiment override.
Sound Relationship House (SRH)24 A way to help create and maintain a strong marital friendship that guards against developing negative attributions and helps promote positive relational interaction. The lower levels help couples become and stay connected while the higher levels help deal with problem solving and interactions, as well as creating shared meaning. • Cognitive Room25 o Love Maps: Knowledge about ones partner. It may include likes and dislikes, important people, events or things in a partners life, or any other information that helps to know a partner better, and enriches the relationship. This along with the following two levels form the foundation of a strong marital friendship. o Love Map Exercise:26 Write the following questions out on 2x5 cards and give one set to each couple. Then have the couples take turns answering in pairs. The partner may correct any wrong answers but gently, so as to avoid conflict. § Love Map Cards: • What is your partner’s favorite food? • What is your partner’s favorite type of music • What is one of your partner’s most memorable childhood experiences? • What is your partner’s favorite book or movie? • Who are your partner’s closest friends? • Who are the adversaries in your partner’s life? • What is currently stressing out your partner the most? • What important event(s) is your partner looking forward to? • What are two of your partner’s hopes and dreams? • What is worrying your partner most right now? o *The goal is to help partners learn more about each other. Remind couples that this exercise is adapted from Gottman’s love map card game to illustrate how to build a marital friendship by knowing as much as possible about your partner, as well as constantly updating this knowledge by keeping in touch, in order to have an accurate “map” of your partner.
24 (Gottman, 1999, p. 87-110) 25 (Gottman, 1999, p. 202) 26 (Gottman, 1999, p. 203-205)
69 • Fondness and Admiration System27 o Acknowledging and expressing appreciation for a partner’s positive qualities. o Fondness and Admiration Exercise:28 § Have each couple come up with seven things they most appreciate/like about their partner. Then have them share their lists with their partner and give a brief example that illustrates why they chose each. During the coming week challenge couples to select one trait each day and mentally rehearse it throughout the day. Ask them to try to find an opportunity to express their appreciation for that trait at some point throughout the day. • Examples: o The way he styles his hair o How affectionate he can be o How thoughtful she is o How well she sings o How safe you feel with him, etc. • Turning Toward Versus Turning Away: The Emotional Bank Account29 o “Turning toward” is making the marriage a secure base in the face of adversity or conflict. Instead of looking for consolation outside of the relationship, partners turn to each other in times of distress, thereby strengthening the marriage. Develops emotional connection vs. distancing in a relationship. o Turning Toward Exercise: Everyday Activities:30 § Have couples list 5 everyday activities/areas in which they would like more partner participation. Having your partner take part in these tasks helps to foster a martial friendship by having them turn more toward you. Have partners share their lists and why it would be meaningful to have their partner participate more. • Examples: o Meal preparation o Morning/bedtime rituals o Date nights o Chores o Grocery shopping/other shopping o Movie nights o Visiting family, etc. § This is should not lead to an argument, but rather the focus is on certain everyday situations of which your partner could take advantage, in order to spend more quality time together/strengthen your marital friendship. o Turning Towards: Facilitating Discussions:31
27 (Gottman, 1999, p. 206) 28 (Gottman, 1999, p. 208-209) 29 (Gottman, 1999, p. 163-164) 30 (Gottman, 1999, p. 214)
70 § Have couples discuss one source of non-marital stress (ex: job stress, party they must attend, morning commute, etc.) for 10 minutes. Each partner has 5 minutes to talk while the other partner actively listens (see conversation guide). Then the partners switch roles. Afterwards have them discuss how this type of conversation made them feel. The goal is not to try to solve the problem/stressor, but to actively listen and empathize with the partner. § Conversation Guide for Active Listening:32 • Show interest: “Tell me more,” ask questions that clarify details. • Show you understand: empathize and mirror emotions, “I can understand why you feel that way”, “I would feel sad too”, “that is worrisome”, “wow that is exciting!” • Show support: “That was definitely not fair”, “we will figure things out together”, etc. • Share a similar experience: “I know what you mean something similar happened to me….” • Show affection: Hug or hold your partner, show them you are rooting for them. • Be patient and listen: A solution does not have to be found right away
§ Suggested Conjoint Process Questions: • Was it better, worse or the same as their regular form of discussion? • Is this something they would like to routinely implement at home?
Suggested Group Process Questions: • Did you find these interventions useful? Why or why not? • Which intervention did you find most interesting/useful/surprising/difficult? Why? • Would it be useful to try and incorporate these interventions in your daily life? • Sound Relationship House (Cont.) • Positive Sentiment Override:33 o Having an overall positive perception of the relationship; this is enabled by having a strong relational foundation/marital friendship (previous 3 levels). Positive sentiment override increases the probability for success of repair attempts.
31 (Gottman, 1999, p. 213-214) 32 (Gottman, 1999, p. 215) 33 (Gottman, 1999, p. 107,110)
71 o **This level of the SRH cannot be practiced, as can the other interventions, rather it arises out of the success of prior relational experiences; it also facilitates the following problem solving interventions. • Problem Solving: Dialogue with Perpetual Problems, Effective Problem-Solving of Solvable Problems, and Physiological Soothing34 o Solvable Problems: § Problems or conflicts that can be solved with some compromise. These problems are not as serious or intrinsic to the self as perpetual problems; they are generally more specific and related to certain situations or circumstances. § *Some problems that may seem solvable or even trivial to one couple may be perpetual problems for another. Each couple must decide on the nature of a given problem; there is no one definition for either solvable or unsolvable problems that will fit all couples. • General Examples: o “I would like my partner to do the laundry more often.” o “I would like my partner to help me with the cooking.” o “I would like my partner to help me more with the holiday shopping.” o “I would like my partner to spend less money on home decorations. “ o “I would like for my partner to listen to music with me.” o “I would like my partner to visit the in-laws with me more.” o “I would like my partner to not bring work home so much” § Working with Solvable Problems • Softened Start-up:35 *Briefly review softened startup if necessary and expand upon prior knowledge by offering the following examples that further illustrate softened startup. o Complain don’t blame: Talk about how you feel and what you see as the problem, but don’t present your complaint/perceptions as total fact. o Be brief: Don’t go on and on about a complaint as this makes it harder to take in without getting defensive o Start with a positive: Spin the complaint into a positive request. “I really liked how clean the dishes were the last time you did them. I wish you would do them more often.” o Express appreciation: If in the past your partner has been different in this respect, say how much you appreciated that and how you would like it now.
34 (Gottman, 1999, p. 218) 35 (Gottman, 1999, p. 226-227)
72 o Don’t store up complaints: do not wait too long to talk about grievances all the while making a laundry list of complaints to use later. o Use vulnerable emotions: Express your underlying softer feelings such as sadness, fear, or loneliness. • Repair and De-escalation of Conflict36 o Have couples pick a solvable problem to briefly discuss. Give couples 10 minutes to discuss the issue while using the abridged Gottman Repair Checklist. o Abridged Gottman Repair Checklist37 § I Feel • “I don’t feel like you understand me right now.” • “I feel criticized. Can you rephrase that?” • “Please don’t lecture me.” • “That felt like an insult.” § Sorry • “My reactions were too extreme. Sorry.” • “Let me try again.” • “I want to be gentler toward you right now but I don’t know how.” • “I’m sorry. Please forgive me.” § Get to Yes • “I agree with part of what you’re saying.” • “Let’s compromise here.” • “I never thought of things that way.” • “I think your point of view makes sense.” § I Need to Calm Down • “I need your support right now.” • “Please be gentler with me.” • “Please help me calm down.” • “This is important to me. Please listen.” • “Can I have a hug?” § Stop Action! • “Lets take a break.” • “Give me a moment I’ll be back.” • “Lets agree to disagree here.” • “Hang in there don’t withdraw.” § I appreciate:
36 (Gottman, 1999, p. 225-227) 37 (Gottman, 1999, p. 230)
73 • “I know this isn’t your fault.” • “Thank you for….” • “My part of this problem is…” • “That’s a good point.”
• Accepting Influence and Compromise38 o Have couples pick another solvable problem and give them 10 minutes to attempt to compromise by accepting influence. Couples may use the following questions: § What does this issue mean to us? Can we come to a compromise? § What feelings are most salient? Do we have any feelings in common? § What goals do we share regarding this issue? § What can we agree to do in order to accomplish these goals? o Perpetual Problems:39 § Less than 1/3 of problems have real solutions. Perpetual problems, or those that with a personal need central to the self, cannot be solved but must be discussed in a dialogue. A dialogue is an adaptation, to living with an unsolvable problem (similar to living and adapting to a physical illness). § The goal is not to resolve the conflict but rather to regulate the emotions, and behaviors, associated with discussing and adapting to it. § If a perpetual problem is not dialogued, then people become gridlocked. • A gridlock involves entrenched positions where people refuse to accept influence from another (no give-and-take), there are hurt feelings and participants are vilified. § Making Dreams and Aspirations Come True: Avoiding Marital Gridlock • Understanding Another’s Dreams:40 Have couples choose a perpetual problem to discuss for 10 minutes. Each partner takes 5 minutes talk about the meaning the issue has for him or her, while the other partner actively listens without attempting to solve the problem. Listen as a friend who is truly interested in hearing the story not passing judgment or solving it. Have the partner whose turn it is to speak answer the following questions: o What is your position on this issue? o What do you feel regarding this issue?
38 (Gottman, 1999, p. 233) 39 (Gottman, 1999, p. 56-58) 40 (Gottman, 1999, p. 247-249)
74 o How do you think we should resolve this issue? o What deeper meaning does this issue hold for you? o What dream or aspiration do you feel you would be giving up if you gave in on this issue? • It is important to know the meaning behind your entrenched positions. Many times, these central conflicts hold an underlying life goal or meaning, that may go back to childhood/earlier life issues, or that hold a special meaning that defines us. This is why it is so hard to compromise on these issues. It is helpful for partners to know what these underlying issues are in order to gain a better understanding of their partner’s inner world and be more understanding and willing to help make both partners’ dreams a reality. • Respecting Another’s Dreams:41 o Have couples return to the prior gridlocked issue. Give them 10 minutes to discuss the following: § What is the absolute minimum that each of you require in this situation? § In what areas would each of you be able to be more flexible? § Taking the above answers into consideration come up with a tentative compromise and plan for implementing it. o Physiological Soothing:42 § How to calm yourself down when feeling overwhelmed or how to help your partner calm down when you notice they seem overwhelmed. § Deep Breathing Exercise: Have partners practice coaching each other in deep breathing for at least 2 minutes each (include guided imagery if useful/possible). § Other Forms of Soothing: Have couples come up with at least one other idea of how their partner could help soothe them in the midst of conflict or afterwards. Each partner should have one alternative suggestion to the deep breathing that their partner could help soothe them with. • Examples: strong hug, massage, playing a favorite cd, kiss on the forehead, etc. Suggested Group Process Questions: • Is it useful/accurate to separate problems into solvable and unsolvable? • Were these interventions helpful in talking about these problems? Why or why not? • Do you think the work on the lower levels of the SRH make it easier to problem- solve?
Sound Relationship House (Conclusion)
41 (Gottman, 1999, p. 250-251) 42 (Gottman, 1999, p. 215)
75 • Creating Shared Meaning: Rituals of Connection, Roles, Goals, and Symbols43 o Creating Meaning involves creating a family culture that supports both partners’ hopes and dreams and develops its own symbols, meanings, and stories. o Creating Meaning Exercise:44 § Have each partner in a couple answers one of the following questions and then discuss their answers noting areas of agreement as well as areas of disagreement. How can both partner’s positions/views be honored? • What do weekend mean to us? What were they like growing up and what do we want them to mean now? • How do you feel about playing the role of parent? How did your own parent view/perform this role? How would you like to be similar or different? • What goals do you have for next 5-10 years? Who is included in these goals and what parts do they play? • What does “home” mean to you? What qualities does your home need to have? Is this the same or different from your family home growing up? § Making shared meaning is at the top of the SRH because only after couples have created a strong marital friendship as a foundation, successfully problem-solved and regulated conflict, can they begin to work toward helping each other realize their dreams for family rituals, goals, and symbols. This in turn further strengthens the marriage by making it more cohesive.
Wrap-up: • Any final thoughts or questions? • Remind couples of final meeting, which will cover special topics. Ask if there is anything they want to make sure to cover by next week. Try to incorporate suggestions into last session.
43 (Gottman, 1999, p. 260) 44 (Gottman, 1999, p. 261-264)
76 Session 6: Special Topics Check-in: Any thoughts or questions from last week?
Objective: Participants will be able to define domestic violence and at least 3 red flags that would suggest domestic violence.
Domestic Violence: • Domestic violence, also known as, intimate partner violence, includes physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse.45 o Physical Violence: intentional use of physical force with potential for causing death, disability, injury, or harm. § Examples include: § Scratching § Pushing § Shoving § Biting § Choking § Slapping § Punching § Burning § Use of a weapon and/or restraints o Sexual Violence § Physically forcing someone to engage in a sexual act against his or her will, § Engaging or attempting to engage in a sexual act with someone unable to understand or consent to the act. • Some reasons for lack of understanding/consent: o Illness o Disability o Being under the influence of alcohol or other drugs o Intimidation or pressure § Abusive sexual contact • Spousal rape • Forcing/pressuring someone to engage in deeming or humiliating sex acts • Forcing/Pressuring someone to have sex with others • Threats of Physical or Sexual Violence o Using words, gestures, or weapons to communicate an intent to cause death, disability, injury, or physical harm. • Psychological/Emotional Violence o Psychological or emotional harm caused by acts, threats, or intimidating
45 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Intimate partner violence: Definitions. Retrieved November 18, 2014, from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/definitions.html
77 tactics. § Some Examples include: • Humiliation • Controlling behaviors • Put-downs • Isolation from friends and family • Restricting access to money or other resources • Some Risk Factors for Domestic Violence46 o Low self-esteem o Low income o Low academic achievement o Young age o Aggressive or delinquent behavior as a youth o Heavy alcohol and drug use o Anger and hostility o Prior history of being physically abusive o Having few friends and being isolated from other people o Belief in strict gender roles (e.g., male dominance and aggression in relationships) o Desire for power and control in relationships o Being a victim of physical or psychological abuse (consistently one of the strongest predictors of perpetration) • Red Flags: The Warning Signs of an Abusive Relationship47 o Moving too quickly into the relationship o Violating your boundaries. o Excessive jealously o Keeping Tabs § You have to report your location constantly and receive many calls, emails and texts throughout the day. o Put downs § "You are crazy," "You are stupid" "You are fat," “no one else would ever want or love you.” o Actions do not match the words o Blaming of others while taking no personal responsibility o History of abuse/violence o Blames prior failed relationships completely on the ex-partner
46 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Intimate partner violence: Risk and protective factors. Retrieved November 18, 2014, from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/riskprotectivefact ors.html
47 National Network to End Domestic Violence. (2014). Red flags of abuse. Retrieved November 18, 2014, from http://nnedv.org/resources/stats/gethelp/redflagsofabuse.html
78 o Isolates you from friends or family. o Controls what activities you can and cannot participate in. o Impulsive behavior and out-of-control rage. o Initially seems like the perfect partner/relationship • Child abuse and Domestic Violence o If a child witnesses domestic violence it can be reported as child abuse. Children (even babies) are affected by domestic violence though adults often believe they are too young to remember or understand. Children’s emotional and behavioral functioning may be affected by domestic violence. Finances • Suggested Financial Conversations:48 *Using previously learned problem-solving and dialoguing skills have couples discuss the following: o Talking about Money: § What are your goals, dreams, and visions for the future? § What kinds of conversations did you have in your youth about money? § How did your parents manage money? § How do you manage money? Do you like to save? Do you ever overspend? o Taking Stock: § Sum up your assets (savings, checking, retirement accounts, real estate, collectibles etc.) as well as your debts (school loans, credit card debt, mortgages, etc.) Determine your net worth by subtracting your debts from your assets. § Know your credit scores and income. o Setting Financial Goals: § What types of financial goals do you want to set? § How will you accomplish them? § Example of 3 Types of Goals: • Emergency money (three to six months of essential bills) • 1-5 year goals (down payment or investment) • Long-term goals (Higher education, retirement, etc.) o Spending Money: § Do you need/want a threshold amount under which it is fine to spend? Example: Anything over $50 necessitates a discussion before purchase. o Lending Money: § Will you lend money to family and friends? § How will you decide whether or not to do so? § Does it depend on who is asking to borrow and with what frequency? § Does it depend on how much money you currently have? o Beneficiaries:
48 Shin, L. (2013). Newlyweds, here’s how to manage your finances. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/pictures/fjfi45jgg/13-financial-tips-for-newlyweds/
79 § Who will receive the benefits of your will, life insurance policy, 401(k), etc.? § Will you update these to name your spouse as a beneficiary? § Are you both in agreement? o Creating a Budget: § How much will you put away each month? § How will you keep track of spending? § Do you agree on what constitutes essentials and non-essentials? § According to Forbes(2014) couples should generally save 20% of net earnings (putting 10% toward emergencies and 10% toward retirement). However to reduce debt, couples should try to save 30% of the net earnings o Managing money: § Who will pay the bills? § If one person is responsible for bill-pay, how will the other stay aware of what is happening financially? § Will you have weekly, biweekly, or monthly money meetings? o Bank Accounts: § Will you joint accounts, a combination of joint and separate accounts, or will you keep all accounts separate?
Any Other Special Topics of Interest to the Group
Wrap-up: Any final thoughts or questions? Have couples retake the attachment and Locke-Wallace questionnaires to see if any changes have occurred. Discuss setting up booster sessions in the future, available to participants who would like a “refresher session”.
80