March 28, 2017

Kathy and Paul were talking one night after dinner about plans for a summer vacation, and soon found themselves disagreeing with each other’s suggestions. At one point, Kathy raised the idea of a trip to a national park area. Paul had a sudden flashback: A similar trip some years ago, which ended in disaster. Bad lodging, terrible weather, and bickering about why they had done that trip to begin with. Paul recalled that Kathy had been more interested in it than he was, but that he had gone along with it to please her.

Suddenly, Paul made a negative comment about a recent furniture purchase. He told her he thought it was too expensive — and ugly to boot, but had gone along with it because she liked it. “Why are you bringing that up now?” Kathy asked, angrily. “That’s got nothing to do with planning our trip!” Their conversation deteriorated from there, and they didn’t speak to each other for the rest of the evening.

So what happened? Some new research from the University of Waterloo sheds light on how and why. But relationships are complicated: Some other studies find that attempts to heal disagreements may have an opposite effect, depending on the situation and the needs or vulnerabilities of each partner.

First, the Waterloo research, published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin: It found that when one partner recalls a negative experience from the past — triggered by something in the present that has no real connection to it – that partner is likely to bring up most any annoyance or irritation from the present. The researchers called that “kitchen thinking,” because partners throw everything but the kitchen sink into the argument.

The study’s co-author Kassandra Cortes said, “When memories feel closer to the present, those memories are construed as more relevant to the present and more representative of the relationship. If one bad memory feels recent, a person will also be more likely to remember other past slights, and attach more importance to them.”

That is, that if a partner’s past transgression or slight feels like it happened yesterday — even if it didn’t — he or she is more likely to remember it during new, unrelated arguments. So, even if neither partner mentions an old transgression during the current argument or disagreement, just thinking about it could erupt in ways that hurt the relationship in the present.

And then, the other partner is likely to feel befuddled; even angry, unable to understand why their partner has become so upset over something so seemingly minor. Moreover, that can have lasting effects: The researchers found that partners who tend to recall previous slights or wounds during new conflict tended to react more destructively, with more conflicts and more negative feelings about their relationships, in general.

Other studies, though, present somewhat contradictory findings about what helps couples deal with conflicts or emotionally distressing experiences. For example, research from SUNY at Binghamton found that being supportive and positive towards your partner in an effort resolve a conflict can backfire, and actually raise the partner’s stress level. And, in other situations, behaving in ways that appear unsupportive can have a paradoxical, positive impact.

On the other hand, another study, from the University of Alberta and published in Developmental Psychology, found that conveying empathy and showing direct emotional support to an unhappy or troubled partner enhances the partner’s mental health and helps the overall relationship. 

Psychologically, I think these seemingly mixed findings illustrate that people who experience underlying anxiety and insecurity in their relationships and who often fear abandonment – whether consciously or unconsciously — will tend to experience past slights as being closer in time to the present, and react to them in the present, compared to those who feel more secure. Moreover, their degree of security in relationships can lead to outwardly contradictory responses to either empathic or non-empathic communications from their partners.

Overall, I think that even couples who experience secure attachment personally and with each other would benefit from practicing what I’ve described here as “radical transparency”  — mutual disclosure and openness — especially when a situation generates conflict or differences. That is, become transparent right then, when the issue arises. Ignoring what you experience or thinking you can dismiss it is likely to render it semi-underground, where it brews…awaiting for an opportunity to infect a new situation.

Credit: Flickr/Sage Therapy

A version of this article also appeared in Psychology Today.

August 25, 2015

Some new data about divorce and non-marital breakups contains an unexpected finding, and I think it underscores an ongoing evolution in what people want and seek in their romantic relationships. The study, based on a survey of over 2000 heterosexual couples, found that women initiated nearly 70% of all divorces. Yet there was no significant difference between the percentage of breakups initiated by women and men in non-marriage relationships.

How to explain? I find that this data is consistent with what I and others have seen clinically. When men and women seek couples therapy and then subsequently divorce; or, when either partner seeks individual therapy about a marriage conflict that ends in divorce, it’s often the woman who expresses more overt conflict and dissatisfaction about the state of the marriage. On the other hand, the man is more likely to report feeling troubled by his wife’s dissatisfaction, but “OK” with the way things are; content to lope along as time passes.

In contrast, I find that younger couples – who are more likely to form non-marital but committed relationships — experience more egalitarian partnerships to begin with. When the relationship crumbles beyond repair, both experience that disintegration. Both are equally likely to address it – and part, if it can’t be healed.

These clinical observations are consistent with what the study’s lead author, Michael Rosenfeld, suggests — that women may be more likely to initiate divorces because the married women reported lower levels of relationship quality than married men. In contrast, women and men in non-marital relationships reported equal levels of relationship quality. Rosenfeld said his results support the feminist assertion that some women experience heterosexual marriage as oppressive or uncomfortable.

He adds, “I think that marriage as an institution has been a little bit slow to catch up with expectations for gender equality. Wives still take their husbands’ surnames, and are sometimes pressured to do so. Husbands still expect their wives to do the bulk of the housework and the bulk of the childcare. On the other hand, I think that non-marital relationships lack the historical baggage and expectations of marriage, which makes the non-marital relationships more flexible and therefore more adaptable to modern expectations, including women’s expectations for more gender equality.”

Credit: Moms Magazine

May 5, 2015

I’ve often worked with individuals and couples who experience a diminished sense of their self-worth; low self-esteem. And when they find that their relationships have entered the dead zone, they are often stuck within them, unable to push for revitalizing them, if possible; or leaving. Even as they uncover the roots of their low self-worth, they often remain frozen in a bad, even destructive relationship.

Some recent research provides some empirical confirmation of what we know, clinically. It found that the partner with diminished self-esteem tends to avoid confronting problems or conflicts. That avoidance often reflects feelings of insecurity about the partner’s feelings for them, and leads to hunkering down and withdrawing from conflict that might be resolved through more open, transparent communication.

The research, conducted by the University of Waterloo, confirmed in essence that partners with low self-esteem tend not to voice relationship complaints with their partner because they fear rejection. “There is a perception that people with low self-esteem tend to be more negative and complain a lot more,” says Megan McCarthy, the study’s lead author. “While that may be the case in some social situations, our study suggests that in romantic relationships, the partner with low self-esteem resists addressing problems.”

And, “If your significant other is not engaging in open and honest conversation about the relationship,” says McCarthy, “it may not be that they don’t care, but rather that they feel insecure and are afraid of being hurt. We’ve found that people with a more negative self-concept often have doubts and anxieties about the extent to which other people care about them,” she says. “This can drive low self-esteem people toward defensive, self-protective behavior, such as avoiding confrontation.”

A summary of the research points out that people with low self-esteem’s resistance to address concerns may stem from a fear of negative outcomes. Sufferers may believe that they cannot speak up without risking rejection from their partner and damage to their relationship, resulting in greater overall dissatisfaction in the relationship.

“We may think that staying quiet, in a ‘forgive and forget’ kind of way, is constructive, and certainly it can be when we feel minor annoyances,” says McCarthy. “But when we have a serious issue in a relationship, failing to address those issues directly can actually be destructive.”

Credit: imgkid.com