Category: Relationships

The way of thinking about relationship sacrifices that is linked to satisfaction.

People who make sacrifices in their relationship because they want to are more satisfied, research finds.

Those who make sacrifices because they feel pressured into it are less satisfied.

The difference could help to explain why some relationships work, and others don’t.

Sometimes couples appear to be working well together, but underneath the story is different.

Dr Heather Patrick, the study’s first author, said:

“It’s important to understand what makes positive relationships positive and what might undermine positive experiences.”

The conclusions come from a study in which 266 men and women documented their own and their partner’s pro-relationship behaviours for two weeks.

Pro-relationship behaviours are any sacrifices made out of consideration for the other person.

Partners who carried out more of these selfless behaviours because they wanted to felt closer to their mate and were more committed and more satisfied.

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Patrick et al., 2007).

The pattern is linked to anger, sadness, fear and even threats and aggression.

The silent treatment is part of the most common toxic pattern in a relationship, psychologists have found.

It is when one partner stops communicating in response to demands for change from the other.

The pattern is most often triggered by marital topics, such as habits, personality, communication and intimacy — not so much children, work or outside relationships.

Psychologists call it the ‘demand-withdraw’ pattern, as one partner is demanding an issue is resolved, while the other wants to avoid it, so shuts down communication on the topic.

Both behaviours damage the relationship: demanding change causes friction, as does failing to communicate.

That is why the tactic is linked to low marital satisfaction, more negative emotions and an inability to resolve marital conflicts, research finds.

When one or both partners are also depressed, the pattern becomes even more toxic as couples are more likely to fall into the pattern.

The conclusions come from a study in which 116 couples kept diaries of their marital conflicts and were asked about any depression symptoms.

The results showed that the demand-withdraw pattern was linked to anger, sadness, fear and even threats and aggression, the authors write:

“Demand-withdraw patterns were consistently related to greater likelihood of negative tactics (i.e., threat, physical distress, verbal hostility, aggression) and higher levels of negative emotions (i.e., anger, sadness, fear), and to lower likelihood of constructive tactics (i.e., affection, support, problem solving, compromise) and lower levels of positivity.”

Husbands and wives were equally likely to be the one making the demands, the authors write:

“…both husband demand-wife withdraw and wife demand-husband withdraw patterns were displayed at nearly equal frequencies, a finding that counters others’ demonstrations that wife demand-husband withdraw is more commonly expressed.”

Demand-withdraw patterns are not related to personality.

In other words, couples are not stuck with them — they can change.

The study was published in the journal Personal Relationships (Papp et al., 2015).

Only one partner in a couple needs to have this quality.

Couples who do not recover quickly from arguments are unlikely to stay together, research finds.

In contrast, those who do recover quickly are more likely to stay together.

And being able to recover quickly from an argument goes back to childhood.

People who were more ‘securely attached’ to their parents as children are better at regulating their emotions in adulthood, the study found.

Children who are securely attached to their parents or caregiver feel protected and trust them.

The same is true in adult relationships: people who feel protected and trust each other can better regulate their emotions at trying times, like when arguing.

Dr Jessica E. Salvatore, the study’s first author, said:

“We found that people who were insecurely attached as infants but whose adult romantic partners recover well from conflict are likely to stay together.

If one person can lead this process of recovering from conflict, it may buffer the other person and the relationship.”

The results come from a study of 73 people who were tracked from birth.

Each person was induced to have a heated discussion with their partner and then they were given a cool-down period.

Dr Salvatore explained:

“As part of another project where we looked at how couples fight, I would often catch a few minutes of this cool-down period.”

Dr Salvatore noticed that some couples were able to move from a heated discussion right back to pleasant chatting without too much effort.

Other couples, though, got stuck on their conflict and couldn’t cool down.

When they looked back at people’s childhood assessments, they spotted that securely attached people were better at regulating their emotions in their relationship as well.

The researchers also discovered that only one person in the couple needs to be a calming influence.

Dr Salvatore said:

“That, to us, was the most exciting finding.

There’s something about the important people later in our lives that changes the consequences of what happened earlier.”

The study was published in the journal Psychological Science (Salvatore et al., 2010).

Men and women differ, but have certain minimum standards.

Men choose a woman who is at least moderately physically attractive, research finds.

Women, however, prioritise choosing a man of at least moderate social status when considering a long-term relationship.

The speed dating study found that men of low social status and unattractive women tended to lose out.

The partners that people chose were in line with their predictions beforehand.

In other words, men prioritised appearance and women prioritised social status.

Men and women were the same, though, when thinking about a short-term relationship — then both sexes were focused on physical appearance.

The study used both speed dating and online dating formats to test people’s partner preferences.

Before chatting with members of the opposite sex, participants were asked about their preferences.

Dr Norman Li, who led the study, explained the results:

“[people] prioritize different qualities when screening each other in online chats and speed-dates – women want men who are at least average in social status while men want women who are at least moderately physically attractive.

We also are the first to demonstrate that what individuals say they value in potential mates is indeed reflected in how they actually choose them in initial mating situations.”

In other words, people do know what they want in a partner, although men and women differ.

Dr Oliver Sng, study co-author, said:

“Speed-dating events and other modern contexts have many factors that can prevent a person’s ideal preferences from being expressed.

This new study identifies one such factor (lack of low-end variability) and shows that once you correct for it, people do indeed make choices closer to what they ideally want.”

Professor Douglas Kenrick, study co-author, said:

“The new study helps to dispel politically correct – but factually misguided – notions of a gender-neutral world where men and women want the exact same kind of mates.”

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Li et al., 2013).

People with this skill had higher relationship satisfaction, along with lower stress.

Being mindful has a profound positive effect on relationships, research finds.

Partners who are able to remain mindful with each other are much less stressed and much happier than those who do not.

While some people have a natural tendency to be more mindful than others, the quality can be trained.

Mindfulness is a way of paying attention to the present moment in a non-judgemental way.

Even people who are generally mindful may find that they do not always pay full attention to their partner.

It is easy for the attention to wander to future worries and past events.

People low in relationship mindfulness tend to agree with statements such as:

• “I have conversations with my partner without being
  really attentive.”
• “When I’m with my partner, I find myself saying or doing things without paying attention.”

Dr Jonathan Kimmes, the study’s first author, said:

“Relationship mindfulness is that tendency to be present with your partner in a nonjudgmental way.

It’s one thing to be mindful when you are at the grocery store, but can you be mindful with the person you are most intimate with?”

The conclusions come from a study of 218 heterosexual couples who were given surveys of their happiness and relationship mindfulness.

The results showed an association between higher relationship mindfulness and better relationship satisfaction, along with lower stress.

Women with mindful partners were also less depressed.

Dr Kimmes said:

“To me as a therapist, these results suggest that this area could be a promising target for clinical interventions.

There are many mindfulness practices that could work with clients, so which ones should you choose?

We should look at practices specific to relationships for people seeking therapy in that area.”

The study was published in the Journal of Marriage and Family Therapy (Kimmes et al., 2019).

The most common form of relationship abuse is psychological.

Women stay in abusive relationships due to a combination of low self-esteem, poor alternatives and how much they have already invested in the relationship, research finds.

Despite being abused, many women (and men) find it hard to leave their partner.

Only 12 percent of the women in this study who were abused — psychologically or physically — left their partner within two months.

Many women felt they were not worthy of something better.

Their low self-esteem was sometimes the result of experiencing childhood abuse — this appeared to raise their tolerance for abuse.

The conclusions come from a study of 323 women, all of whom reported at least one incident of abuse, whether physical or psychological.

Psychological abuse included things like “called me fat or ugly” or “insulted or swore at me”.

Most of the abuse reported in the study was psychological.

The results showed that 88 percent of women were still with an abusive partner over two months later.

The authors write that:

“…women experiencing high levels of psychological distress may not feel efficacious in their ability to leave their partners.”

Childhood abuse was an important contributory factor, the authors write:

“…women who were abused in childhood were more satisfied with their current relationships than women who were not abused in childhood.

It is possible that women with childhood abuse histories are more satisfied in their relationships than women without childhood abuse histories because they have more tolerance for mistreatment based on early life experiences and resulting interpersonal schemas.”

Being abused had an unusual effect on women: it encouraged them to work harder at their relationship.

“…the more psychological abuse women are exposed to, the more energy and effort they put forth to resolve the conflict, thus leading to increases in perceived investment.”

And the more women invested in their relationship, the more likely they were to stay in it.

The study was published in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence (Edwards et al., 2010).