The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
Based upon more than 3000 hours of videotaped observations at the Gottman Marital Observatory at the University of Washington over a 23 year period, this research yielded some insights as to how couples relate (or don’t relate) to one another. So predictable are the insights that Dr. Gottman can predict pending divorce with 94% accuracy! He named one of the most important and most predictable negative patterns to come from the research the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.” These four “behaviors” derive from a couple’s inability to deal with disagreements, and one "Horseman" leads to another.
· CRITICISM – This can take the form of judgments, discounts, put downs, blaming statements, and “always” and “never” statements. The implication is that there is something wrong with the partner. Criticism is different from a complaint; a complaint is a statement of dissatisfaction with some specific event or circumstance (an action), whereas criticism is a judgment of one’s partner (who they are). This leads to…
· DEFENSIVENESS – This is an attempt to defend oneself from a perceived attack. It takes on an “innocent victim” tone. The person on the defensive often attempts to retaliate. Defensiveness can deflect a discussion of the problem. It denies any responsibility. This leads to…
· CONTEMPT – Any statement that puts one on a higher place than one’s partner. It shows disrespect for them. It is a particularly corrosive form of contempt. Another is sarcasm, often used by educated people. Facial expressions and certain non-verbal behaviors can also show contempt. Contempt shown to a partner is one of the most predictive of divorce. Likewise, there is very little or no contempt in happy marriages. Which leads to…
· STONEWALLING or WITHDRAWAL – Occurs when the listener deliberately withdraws from interactions. It manifests by fewer words being exchanged, looking away, and use of controlled facial expressions. Men tend to stonewall more than women.
Ways to Counteract the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
· CRITICISM à POSITIVE COMPLAINT -- To make a positive complaint, you begin by giving compliments and appreciation. The appreciation needs to be sincere and hopefully “bigger” than the complaint. It helps protect the relationship by reducing the likelihood the partner feels rejected or insulted. Then using “I” statements, you ask for something to change, stating how the change would benefit you. If possible, make it about you.
· DEFENSIVENESS à DON’T DEFEND – Try to admit some role in the partner’s complaint. Respectfully acknowledging your partner’s feelings is useful and lowers defenses.
· CONTEMPT à RESPECT – Always assume good will and competence of your partner. If he/she does not agree with you or does not do what you want, it is not because they are bad or stupid. He/she merely sees it differently, that’s all.
· STONEWALLING or WITHDRAWAL à TIME OUT – As with young children, you take a break and get to an emotional or even a physical place to calm yourself, making sure that your partner knows you will return soon. This reduces feelings of abandonment that simply leaving or not responding can cause.
Other Gottman Research Findings
· Successful couples have a ratio of positive interactions to negative interactions of at least 5 to 1. according the research.
· Research showed that a partner’s emotions will be negative (anger, sadness, bullying, contempt) after the other had been negative. It showed that overgeneralizations in which everything was seen through a negative lens were disastrous to relationships and required attempts to be very specific in what was communicated.
· When disagreements began, successful couples had “soft start ups” as opposed to “harsh start ups.” Research showed that such “soft start ups” were more predictive of longevity of relationships as opposed to “harsh start ups” which were more predictive of divorce.
· Sometimes disagreements flood a relationship. When this occurs, one or both partners may think it best to work out problems alone, often leading parallel lives. This leads to loneliness and the distance and isolation cascade are predictive of divorce. The research showed that even though genders may experience negative emotions during such flooding, men were flooded more quickly and easily and it takes them longer to de-escalate. Partners in successful relationships learned to soothe each other, and even though men must learn to self-soothe in productive ways, their partners can attempt to find ways to soothe them in non-condescending ways.
· Some disagreements are solvable while others are not, research showed. Unsolvable conflicts will never resolve and they do not have to be resolved. Instead of attempting to solve the unsolvable through interminable discussions, partners need to learn to live with the discomfort. Choosing to not live with them will likely produce continued fights and will allow negativity to build up.
· There are times when one partner cannot accept the influence of the other. They cannot share power. They hold fast to their own ideas and actions and purposefully do not allow themselves to agree with their partner. Research showed that men in particular have trouble accepting the influence of women, and Dr. Gottman found that marriages work to the extent that husbands accepted the influence and shared the power with their wives.
· The attempt to heal and injury or stop negativity from a disagreement, such as a positive commentary on a communication, expressing appreciation, supporting or soothing one another, or genuinely asking for forgiveness, are ways to repair. According to the research, when “bids to repair” consistently fail, when there is an absence of “de-escalation” attempts, when there is little positive affect expressed such as humor, interest, or affection, these are predictive of divorce, because there is emotional disengagement.
About Anger & Arguing
Anger is often a secondary emotion; that is, it is a strong emotion that manifests because of some anxiety we feel inside, usually fear, a signal that something is wrong. It can manifest itself quickly and can wreak havoc on relationships. Often, when it comes on quickly, it is a pretty good indication that we have been anxious about something, and we project that anxiety onto those around us, often onto family or our partner, and often with disastrous effect.
When disagreements occur, anger feelings well up inside. If they come on quickly, there is a good likelihood that we have been suppressing our anxiety and not talking about it, and our “fuse” is very short. Feeling overwhelmed by the anxiety, we will say or do things that we often later regret. All respect and good will and rational thought are crushed by the onslaught of our out-of-control feelings of anger. We go into accuse mode. We make our loved one the enemy. We often raise our voices, or worse, become physically violent.
It is natural and normal to feel anger. Some of us were not allowed to feel angry as children. Some of us were taught either consciously or subconsciously that we shouldn’t verbalize our anger but bottle it up inside, either verbally or through the examples of our caregivers. For any number of reasons, some of us never learned the skills of what to do with this intense emotion and we carry this unresolved issue into our adult lives. The feelings of anger often occur as a result of irrational thoughts that we experienced earlier in life. As adults, we may have to catch up and learn strategies as to what to do with our anger and how to express it, especially those of us in marital relationships.
To begin, when there is a disagreement with our partner and anger is involved, we need to acknowledge that we are indeed upset and angry. We need to allow ourselves to feel the emotions, and allow our partners the same. They are manifestations or reflections of our needs and they may be simple or complex. But they are our feelings and we must own them. Nobody can make us feel complex feelings but ourselves. Often, our judgment causes the feelings inside of us. Our spouses cannot cause us to feel anything unless we empower them to do so.
Our natural tendency is to protect ourselves by lashing out at our partner. The anxiety that we experience internally is intense and can seem like a tsunami, completely uncontrollable. The feelings want to manifest themselves in forceful words—usually judgmental, meant-to-hurt, emotionally violent words, words that in another calmer place would never be said.
But if our partners cannot cause us to feel complex feelings, then we truly must take responsibility for the management of our feelings and subsequent behaviors. The most productive way of managing our anxiety and anger in the moment is to follow three steps: STOP à PAUSE à THINK.
When we want to externalize our strong feelings, to lash out at our partner and say harsh words, we have to STOP, if only for a brief moment. It may feel like a flimsy dam with a gigantic wall of water (emotion) ready to burst through it, but STOP we must. The process of stopping can be facilitated by taking a few deep BREATHS which serve to calm us. It might even take the form of saying that we need a minute. This brief interlude will hopefully STOP the surge of emotion long enough to allow us time to THINK. STOPPING and BREATHING or PAUSING will allow us to begin to THINK, to actually identify what is being felt. It will begin the process of allowing us to stop feeling and to start thinking. This necessary process of controlling our emotions allows us to cognitively question what we are feeling and why we are feeling it. It allows us to cognitively address why our partner might have said what he/she said. But cognition won’t happen if we are vomiting our feelings onto our partner. The following is an actual situation that occurred.
Janeen’s mother had recently died. Both Janeen and her husband Tom knew that as a result, Janeen was going to receive an inheritance from the estate. Both of them had discussed the need to contact their financial advisor about resultant tax liabilities. Janeen received information about the inheritance at work from her brother, the executor of the estate. She called Tom at his work and informed him that they needed to further discuss what her brother had told her. When they both arrived home from work that evening, she asked Tom if he would call the financial advisor, never thinking that he would do so before she had a chance to tell him the details of the conversation. But because Tom had not yet been able to make the phone call, he made it right then. As he started to describe the situation to the advisor as he understood it, in Janeen’s presence, he didn’t know all the details she had found out and was relating incorrect information. Janeen asked to have the phone.
Tom felt disrespected and a little angry and left her to speak. A few minutes after she concluded, Janeen went to talk to Tom. He wanted to lash out at her, but he stopped, paused, and thought. He chose to articulate using “I” statements that he had felt disrespected and was hurt. Through much of her life, Janeen had had trouble being accused of being wrong and felt a desire to lash out at Tom. She paused and then thought. That allowed her time to realize that she had not explained to him what she had learned from her brother. She realized through listening respectfully that Tom had thought the she had just “bulldozed” him and he was feeling disrespected and angry. In a calm voice, she explained to her husband that she had wanted him to make the phone call after they had had a chance to discuss the new information. Tom had surprised her by calling so quickly. She knew that he did not have all of the pertinent facts. She was positioned to explain things accurately to the financial advisor and had asked for the phone. Because Tom had not lashed out at Janeen, and she had not lashed out at him, they were able to then calmly discuss the new information without the drama.
In this actual account, both spouses went to a cognitive place away from their emotional places by stopping, pausing, and thinking. They both had empathy towards the other, and had been working on this three step technique. They listened respectfully to one another and had not allowed their feelings to get in the way of effective communication and conflict resolution. They knew that they could only control themselves and not their spouse. They did not try to defend themselves. They knew that wallowing in their angry feelings was counterproductive and that “feelings aren’t facts, they’re feelings.” They did not want to make their spouse the enemy, but rather, they wanted to take care of their relationship rather than winning an argument. They had assumed the best motives of the other.
To review, stopping, pausing, and thinking allow us to:
· Cognitively identify what we are feeling
· Cognitively question what we are feeling—why we are feeling it
· Cognitively question why our spouse may have said what they said
· Take time out from feeling the emotional tsunami
· Develop empathy
· Develop the ability to listen respectfully to our spouse
· Control ourselves, knowing we can’t control our spouse
· Gradually lose the need to defend ourselves
· Develop the understanding that feelings aren’t facts
· Not make our spouse the enemy
· Take care of the relationship rather than win an argument
· Develop the ability to assume best intentions from our spouse
Based upon Non-Violent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg, articles by Kendall Evans called Anger Management Guidelines, Feelings, Safe and Productive Arguments, Guidelines for Positive Relating, and original thought by Robert E. Davis.
No comments:
Post a Comment