Predicting Marital Happiness and Stability from Newlywed Interactions

Gottman, John M.; Coan, James A.; Carrère, Sybil; Swanson, Catherine

doi:10.2307/353438

Cited by 897 publications

(960 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

863

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This reflects the complicated nature of physical aggression in couples' relationships; for some couples, physical aggression may not necessarily impact their views of their partner and relationship. To some extent, this is in line with Gottman, Coan, Carrere, and Swanson's (1998) finding that positive affect (e.g., humor, interest, and affection) observed during problem-solving tasks was the only affective process that was predictive of both relationship stability and satisfaction for newlywed couples. None of the negative affective processes (e.g., reciprocation or escalation of negative affect) were related to relationship satisfaction.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Relationship separation for young, at-risk couples: Prediction from dyadic aggression.

Shortt

Capaldi

Kim

et al. 2006

Journal of Family Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dyadic physical aggression in the relationships of 158 young, at-risk couples was examined as a predictor of relationship separation over the course of 6 years. A high prevalence of physical aggression and a high rate of separation were found, with 80% of couples engaging in physical aggression (as reported by either partner or as observed) and 62% separating over time. As predicted, physical aggression significantly increased the likelihood of relationship dissolution even after accounting for psychological aggression, prior relationship satisfaction, and relationship contextual factors (length of relationship, relationship type, and children in the household). Of the contextual factors, relationship type was predictive of relationship dissolution: married couples were least likely to dissolve their relationships compared to cohabiting and dating couples.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Relationship separation for young, at-risk couples: Prediction from dyadic aggression.

Shortt

Capaldi

Kim

et al. 2006

Journal of Family Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies report similar divorce rates at 6 to 9 years after marriage (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1998;Houston, Caughlin, Houts, Smith, & George, 2000;Lindahl, Clements, & Markman, 1998).…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 59%

When "New" Meets "Old": Configurations of Adult Attachment Representations and Their Implications for Marital Functioning.

Treboux¹,

Crowell²,

Waters³

2004

Developmental Psychology

187

189

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies addressed the implications of concordance versus discrepancy of attachment representations in individuals at 2 stages in their marital relationships. Engaged (n ϭ 157) and dating (n ϭ 101) couples participated in a multimethod 6-year longitudinal study of adult attachment. Individuals completed the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI), the Current Relationship Interview (CRI), and various questionnaires and were observed in interactions with partners. On the basis of AAI and CRI classifications, participants were placed in one of four groups: Secure AAI /Secure CRI , Secure AAI /Insecure CRI , Insecure AAI /Secure CRI , or Insecure AAI /Insecure CRI . Each of the configurations showed a particular pattern of behavior, feelings about relationships and the self, and likelihood of relationship breakup. The findings of the studies address important points about the protective effects of attachment security and have interesting implications for the extension of attachment theory into adulthood.The value of attachment theory in understanding marriage rests in large part on the theory's emphasis on links between childhood relationships and later marital success, "links . . . that are underemphasized in or absent from exchange or behavioral theories" (Karney & Bradbury, 1995, p. 6). However, attachment theory has been criticized for its failure to describe how personal history and individual differences "affect the development of a marriage once two people with different relationship needs come together" (Karney & Bradbury, 1995, p. 6).The goal of the attachment behavioral system is to promote safety (and felt security) through a secure base relationship with an attachment figure. The theory focuses on how relationships with attachment figures have an impact on development, adaptive functioning, stress management, safety, and well-being. The attachment system provides an organizational framework for requesting help when needed and for recognizing requests for help and providing support (Crowell, Treboux, Gao, et al., 2002). Given this function, individual differences in attachment organization can be expected to play a role in the development of marriage and the challenges faced by couples (Paley, Cox, Harter, & Margand, 2002).In adult relationships, individual differences in the cognitive organization of the attachment system have at least two components. The first organizing element is the generalized representation of attachment that has its origins or foundation in childhood attachment experiences with caregivers and that generalizes to other attachment experiences and relationships (Bowlby, 1969(Bowlby, / 1982. The second is the specific representation of attachment that emerges out of attachment experiences within the adult partnership. In the two studies presented here, we investigated the implications of individual differences in configurations (consistency vs. discrepancy) of adults' generalized and specific attachment representations for their relationships with partners and experiences of stressful li...

show abstract

“…3 More information on the reliability of this coding can be found in previous reports by Gottman and colleagues (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1998;Gottman, Swanson, & Murray, 1999). This was initially done using the ratings from the first cohort of coders.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…will remain intact and which dissolve with more than 80% accuracy (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1998).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reading Others' Emotions: The Role of Intuitive Judgments in Predicting Marital Satisfaction, Quality, and Stability.

Waldinger¹,

Schulz²,

Hauser³

et al. 2004

Journal of Family Psychology

110

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined links between emotion expression in couple interactions and marital quality and stability. Core aspects of emotion expression in marital interactions were identified with the use of naïve observational coding by multiple raters. Judges rated 47 marital discussions with 15 emotion descriptors. Coders' pooled ratings yielded good reliability on 4 types of emotion expression: hostility, distress, empathy, and affection. These 4 types were linked with concurrent marital satisfaction and interviewer ratings of marital adjustment as well as with marital stability at a 5-year follow-up. The study also examined the extent to which naïve judges' ratings of emotion expression correspond to "expert" ratings using the Specific Affect Coding System (SPAFF). The unique advantages of naïve coding of emotion expression in marital interaction are discussed.

show abstract

Predicting Marital Happiness and Stability from Newlywed Interactions

Cited by 897 publications

References 33 publications

Relationship separation for young, at-risk couples: Prediction from dyadic aggression.

Relationship separation for young, at-risk couples: Prediction from dyadic aggression.

When "New" Meets "Old": Configurations of Adult Attachment Representations and Their Implications for Marital Functioning.

Reading Others' Emotions: The Role of Intuitive Judgments in Predicting Marital Satisfaction, Quality, and Stability.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About