John Gottman’s research led him to believe that there are three marriage styles:
He says it is best if both partners have the same marriage style.
Also Gottman found that in happy marriages there is a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions.
Honestly I’d be inclined to throw all that crap out, a marriage works if it works. I know that sounds silly but it is true, you’ll run into couples that defy all the official “rules” of marriage.
Sure there are things that make a relationship more likely to be successful, but they are fool proof by no means.
And quite frankly I would never, ever, ever! PURPOSEFULLY inject negative interactions to align with some goofballs formula.
“People hear Dr. Gottman’s prediction rate (for divorce) is 90 or 85 or 94 percent accurate (depending on the study)”
So he’s still wrong some of the time.
The point I was trying to make was to have a lot of positive interactions. I thought normally couples would have trouble having enough positive interactions to meet the 5:1 ratio.
Gottman’s research is well-regarded. The big take-away: Rolling your eyes generally doesn’t lead to good outcomes.
Gottman, John (2012-04-12). Why Marriages Succeed or Fail (p. 58). Bloomsbury UK. Kindle Edition.
I’m not sure what healthy anger is exactly though.
Anger expressed without criticism, contempt, or defensiveness. A strong expression of negative feeling that doesn’t treat your partner like shit.
Yeah I can see what healthy anger is not… but I’m not sure what it is exactly… I thought to express anger you’ve got to criticize them… even if you’re angry at a thorn that you stepped on.
It’s the difference between “You’re a damn moron and I hope you die!” and “I’m mad because you agreed to pick up the kid but you left her waiting at school!”
That sounds like criticism to me because they’re saying that the other person not keeping their word is a bad thing.
I don’t think stating that one is angry and saying why they’re angry is the same as criticising someone.
“Criticism” in the popular sense as you describe it doesn’t always line up with how a researcher or clinician is using the term–like “depression,” which can mean different things when I say “I’m depressed” vs. receiving a diagnosis or depression. Not criticizing means not calling names, belittling, blaming the other person, etc. It doesn’t mean you can’t talk about the negative effects you experience from the other person’s behavior–“When you do X, I feel Y” or “When you do X, I see these consequences.” This plays out really differently from “You’re a loser and I feel sorry for whoever’s stuck marrying you next!”
Well if you’re saying “well that’s why I’m angry and you don’t have to stop because that’s just my opinion” then I guess so.
susan:
I think your examples are more about “contempt” though.
Well that certainly seems like a mindset that will lead to progress. “No point trying to figure out psychology … people are just different!”
Gottman isn’t imposing “rules,” he’s making generalizations based on observations.
My husband and I are both validators and both can lean towards avoidance if we don’t pay attention (mainly because we dislike conflict). It’s important to us to bring up an issue and explain our thoughts and (if applicable) how we interpreted something, like a statement the other said. It goes back and forth, always listening to the other and not interrupting. It leads us to feel more like WE are a team that is working together to solve a puzzle/problem instead of ME against YOU.
What about passive aggressiveness? I’m assuming it’s not in this specific theory because its focus is on successful relationships and PA is generally just toxic. Theoretically, though, I’d maybe see it as a mix of violent and avoidant (and not in a good way).
There’s criticism and there’s criticism. Criticism of what they did is sometimes warranted. Criticism of what they ARE is not.
Compare “you did a lousy thing” to “you are a lousy person.”
Compare “I’m angry because you left the kid at school” to “you’re irresponsible and a bad parent.”
Even criticizing one aspect of a person’s personality is very different than casting aspersions at their whole character. I’ve seen my best bud and her husband get into fights over her flakiness about certain things. I don’t blame him for being angry. It would drive me nuts too. But their argument focuses on that one problem, and when they’re done with the argument, they move on. In contrast, if it was me who lost my cellphone every 5 minutes, my ex-husband would have used it as yet another example of my many failings as a human being. Her husband is trying to solve the problem, whereas my ex-husband would have been trying to tear me down and build himself up in comparison. She will never stop losing her cellphone, and I expect she and her husband to have periodic arguments over the matter for many years to come. And my ex-husband is an EX-husband.
Do you see what I mean?