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