Marriage

Learning Outcomes

1. Consider some misconceptions about marriage
2. Better understand what not to do during marital conflicts (according to Gottman)
3. Better understand what makes marriages work (according to Gottman)
4. Apply #2 and #3 to YOUR OWN life, not your partner. Be aware of your own negativity bias, the fundamental attribution error- actor-observer bias, your partner’s receptivity, and lead by example.

Mythsconceptions about marriage

Do opposites attract?¹

“Today, we turn to one person to provide what an entire village once did: a sense of grounding, meaning, and continuity. Is it any wonder that so many relationships crumble under the weight of it all?”

– Esther Perel

Does marital satisfaction increase throughout life?²

Is social exchange theory the best way to think about marriage? This theory posits that satisfying marriages results when both partners perceive there is a fair exchange, or equity, in all the dimensions of the relationship… competing demands of work and family, etc.

Marriage can offer remarkable benefits against stress, illness, and other problems, especially in old age.

John Gottman’s Research on Marriage

"The masters" - stay together v. "The disasters" - break up

Conflict is normal! Healthy and happy relationships can have conflict. Conflict and difficulties provide an opportunity for growth. Relationship “masters” have about 5 or more positive interactions for every 1 negative interaction. Relationship “disasters” have about 1 to 1.

Soft starts when there are conflicts. This may just be me honey but… (often own their own perspective as a perspective)

At first, Gottman thought that the nature of the reparation after a conflict was key.  For example, if one apologizes with flowers in hand then that would predict marital satisfaction, but the key was whether the reparation was received.  It was forgiveness as a willingness to let go and move on after conflict that was key.

John Gottman’s Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (Divorce) also know as The Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution

Criticism, Defensiveness, Contempt, Stonewalling

1. Criticism:

The disasters say in an argument that the partner's personality is bad and they make what happened a symptom of the partner's personality. Here trying to avoid the I-it way of being is helpful as well as having a growth mindset about others instead of a fixed mindset. People are more of whatever label you give them and people can grow. How you think of others is something that is within your control and it matters substantially in terms of how you feel about them.

The masters, on the other hand, talk about and even complain about what is bothering them but they try to take responsibility for their perspective and own how they are feeling (in ways that involve self-authoring). The focus tends to be on their thinking and resultant feeling (not feeling first, as thinking is an avenue for improving feelings).

2. Defensiveness:

The disasters often met a complaint with another complaint. They deflected responsibility and focused on the other.

The masters accepted responsibility, even for small things. ("Good point." "You are right, I actually was stressed out. I am sorry.")

3. Contempt: (Key predictor of divorce)

The disasters tended to look down on their partners and feel better in some way... one way of doing that is calling each other names. ("You are a jerk! you only talk about yourself! " )

The masters respected and were proud of the people they love, creating a culture of appreciation. They often say thank you for the very small things their partners are doing ("Thanks for making the food"; "I enjoyed our conversation"; "I watched you playing with the baby last night and it was beautiful"). Instead of scanning the area for things to criticize, scan the area for things to praise and appreciate. Note: This is important in child-parent relationships. Punishment only stops behavior and does a poor job of creating the kinds of behaviors that you desire. Reinforcement is key to eliciting the kinds of behaviors that you want.

4. Stonewalling

Stonewalling is a kind of emotional avoidance. Usually when talking to someone you give signs of active listening like facial expressions and open body posture etc. Stonewalling describes physical and emotional distancing, the opposite of active listening or intentional efforts to work through a conflict. Relationship disasters sometimes engage in stonewalling to try and remain calm and avoid overreacting, but this can create additional distance and problems.

Exceptions to the Four Horsemen?

The priority given to couples' communication as the source of marital satisfaction is not always apparent (Lavner, Karney, & Bradbury), as it may not be as predictive of divorce for low-income high-risk couples (Kim, Capaldo, & Crosby, 2007). For older couples, the perception of spouse’s support is the most important predictor of remaining married (Landis et al., 2013)

Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work

1. Enhancing love maps
2. Nurturing fondness and admiration
3. Turning toward each other
4. Accepting influence
5. Solving solvable problems
6. Overcoming gridlock
7. Creating shared meaning

1. Enhancing love maps:

How well do you really know your partner? Do you really know what interests them, what they like, their values, and the other people in their life. Consider asking more open-ended questions ("How are you feeling about being a mother right now", "How do you like this house? Wanna change it? " ). To improve a relationship try changing some statements for questions.

2. Nurturing fondness and admiration:

Fondness and admiration are fragile, but if you can remind yourself of your spouse’s positive qualities even when your thoughts spiral to negativity and contempt, then you can keep your marriage above water. Simply assess your relationship by determining what you think of your spouse while they are away, do you think of him or her positively? Next, list three positive characteristics that describe your spouse. For each one, recall an incident that shows that characteristic in action. You can share this list with your spouse and communicate why you value those traits. You can do this as often as you like and choose different characteristics each time.

• Spend 20-30 minutes talking
• Take turns throughout the conversation
• Avoid advising unless asked
• Be genuinely interested
• Show that you understand
• Take their side at all times
• Express a united front attitude. In other words, “we’re in this together.”
• Show affection
• Validate how they feel

“Human nature dictates that it is virtually impossible to accept advice from someone unless you feel that the person understands you.” -John Gottman

3. Turning towards each other:

We tend to think of romance in terms of grand gestures, surprise trips, extravagant dates, but it is the small moments that keep romance and passion alive. We often make “bids” for our partner's attention, support, humor, and affection. The partner has the opportunity to respond by either turning towards or turning away from their spouse.

4. Accepting influence

Accepting influence involves saying: "Good point"; "You are right”; “Let me consider that"; "Tell me more about your opinion here" etc. This is especially needed for men, as men tend to be more defensive.

5. Solving Solvable Problems

Only 31% of conflicts get solved. 69% of conflicts in marriage do not get solved, you just talk about them and learn to live with them and talk about them some more.

Common on-going conflicts relate to differences as far as one partner thinking differently than the other about

• Having a child
• Sex/physical intimacy
• Chores and household responsibilities
• Alcohol and drug use
• Extended family (in-laws)
• Religious faith
• How to correct and discipline children

For the 31% of problems that are solvable, the masters "soften the startup", they gently and with respect and appreciation talked about the problem (talking about themselves and what they need). They made and received repair attempts, soothed themselves, compromised, and were more tolerant of their partner’s imperfections.

After conflicts, try to repair the relationship according to your partner’s needs. When a conflict ends up bad and unsolved, take a break and come back to it later when calm and renegotiate the conflict.

6. Overcoming gridlock

Try to find what’s hidden underneath the surface, it usually comes from a personal belief in things and values, which are very essential to them and to their sense of self and cannot be compromised. It might infuse to the level of personality, often as a central assumption. When you find the dream that is hidden, then honor each other's dreams.

7. Creating shared meaning

Culture is the magic of a family. Feel like you are building something. Create shared striving and purpose. What do we learn about our DDOs about creating a culture of development and growth?

Symbols, goals, rituals, roles?

Other Notes on Gottman

• Successful marriages have 20 positive interactions for every 1 negative interaction.
• Studies have shown that dual-career couples with young children spend only 10% of their evenings together, with most of that time spent discussing errands. (In other words, they have to work extra hard to keep that romantic spark alive…)
• Arguments about the unpaid work in a relationship (chores and childcare) cause significant conflict.
• Stay at home parents do about $90,000 worth of work per year.
• An early indicator of the future success of a marriage happens during pregnancy and the birth of a child. If a husband (the study only involved heterosexual couples) is involved during pregnancy and birth, the marriage will be happier later on. A father tends to stay involved with the children through the years if his marriage has low conflict and there is continued sex.
• Play is a vital component of a relationship. This includes experiencing laughter, excitement, anxiety, and curiosity, both separately and together.
• Conflict is how our relationships grow.
• It’s important for couples to share their dreams with each other. Keeping your dreams from your partner leads to bitterness, resentment, loss of passion and desire, and distance.
• Every person has a dream or life purpose, and it should never be sacrificed for the relationship. It’s possible for both people to achieve their dreams, just typically not at the same time.

Existential Themes

1. Freedom- We have the freedom to choose, we have a response-ability (the ability to respond differently)
2. Meaning- We are more free than we realize… to self-author, to shape our lives, etc.) We create and shape meaning.
3. Loneliness- We alone shape the meaning of our lives. Our freedom to create meaning resides in us alone. We alone choose what to make of this moment. Irvin Yallom (YEAR) explains that “to the extent that one is responsible for one's life, one is alone. Responsibility implies authorship.” and there, “Deep loneliness is inherent in the act of self-creation.” We were born alone and we will die alone.
4. Death- This moment matters and is meaningful because it is unique, has an end, and will not continue forever. We are the only species that is aware of our pending death and the finality of mortal life. As such we aspire to transcend death by emphasizing how our choices are meaningful and can improve suffering.
5. Suffering- Given death and mortality, our lives involve inherent suffering with the capacity to alleviate that suffering
6. Anxiety- Our freedom, to create meaning, alone, amid the finality and suffering involves anxiety and existential angst which is often hidden.

Self-deception

Intellectual Precedents

Terry Warner is a philosopher from BYU that founded the Arbinger Institute. Warner draws from existential themes that are relevant to adult development. Warner’s work draws mostly from the assumption that we are more free than we realize and that such freedom creates anxiety; we have difficulty acknowledging the extent to which we are free to shape how we think about others and ourselves. Specifically, he draws from Martin Buber who describes two ways of being in the world, Immanuel Levinas who describes an ethical call from the other, and Soren Keirkagard and Jean-Paul Sartre who describe self-deception. Warner has integrated and developed the possibility of self-deception as it relates to psychology and adult development.

Now, the Arbinger Institute promotes the development of adults who are embedded in the interpersonal world (i.e., the socialized mind) to become more self-authoring. The Arbinger institute also invites individuals who are self-authoring to become more self-transforming.

Summary

There are two ways of being in the world. One involves genuinely perceiving others. The other involves objectifying misperceptions of others in which their desires and needs are less important than your own. These ways of being are deeper than behavior. That is, any behavior can emerge from either way of being. Perhaps, some problems reoccur because we are engaging in the proper behavior but our way of being, our core/heart, is inward and closed.

Self-deception emerges from an act of self-betrayal in which one fails to honor their moral senses. One’s moral senses (i.e., what is right and wrong) is their deepest sense of self, and not living authenticity in these essential ways creates distorted perceptions of self and others. Self-betrayal creates a state of self-deception in which one’s sense of self and other becomes skewed. Their way of being becomes inward and closed. In order to self-justify (i.e., to make something straight that is not straight), they might fall into an I-it way of being so that their perceptions of others involve labels and objectifications. It is far easier to be angry at someone when they are a jerk! In such an experience, one’s sense of self is also skewed and they present a distorted sense of self, a self-image (i.e., for Buber the it is connected to the I); “I was not doing anything wrong here!”. This counterfeit sense of self and other is imperceptible to us as we experience it; we are genuinely deceived. We experience our emotions and reactions as caused by the other person. To insinuate to the self-deceived person that they are choosing to experience such emotions like anger and frustration feels ridiculous and insulting to them (e.g., “You think I want to feel this way!”). They are deceived to the existential reality that they are a self-authoring individual, capable of thinking and acting in ways that affect their emotional experience of the other. In general, the idea that we alone are response-able, capable of creating and authoring our experience is overwhelming and creates anxiety. We tend to deny our freedom to shape our lives and self-author. Instead, we often make claims like, “This guy drives me crazy!” Such deceptions have a gravity towards collusion, a vicious circle in which deception of others invites deception from others. Arbinger suggests three primary forms of self-deceptions in which others are vehicles for using, obstacles for blaming, and irrelevancies for ignoring.

Arbinger Institute’s ideas are empowering about the nature of our perceptions of others. They encourage others to consider how they are in control of their perceptions of others more than they realize. They also implicitly encourage individuals to consider the limitation of their prior institutional frameworks. That is, the possibility of self-deception also encourages one to examine the limitations of any self-authoring identity or ideology in ways that move towards being more self-transforming (e.g., Have I been self-deceived in thinking of myself this way?).

Can you relate to the experience of self-deception? Consider moments in which you have been using, blaming, or ignoring others. In these moments, consider your experience of the other; did you perceive this person as a vehicle, obstacle, or irrelevancy respectively? What kinds of labels or ideas did you have of the other?

Footnotes

1. Marriages do better when age, values, goals, attitudes (especially about children) socioeconomic status, behaviors (like drinking alcohol), and ethnic background align. We are more likely to be attracted to people with similar personalities.
2. Research shows for most couples, overall marital satisfaction is highest at the beginning of the marriage, falls until the children begin leaving home, and stabilizes or continues to decline in later life; this pattern holds for both married and never-married cohabiting couples with children (Kulik, 2016). However, there is considerable variability across couples. For some couples, satisfaction declines only slightly, while for others it rebounds in late life, while for still others it declines more precipitously and the couple becomes, in essence, emotionally divorced (Proulx, 2016).