Revisiting “ill will versus poor skill”: Relationship dissatisfaction, intimate partner violence, and observed “communication skills deficits”

Abstract

For decades, researchers, interventionists, and the lay public have subscribed to the notion that couples low in relationship satisfaction and/or experiencing psychological, physical, or sexual intimate partner violence (IPV) have communication skills deficits. In contrast, experimental studies of communication have concluded that differences were more likely due to partners' “ill will than poor skill.” We revisited this debate by recruiting a fairly generalizable sample of couples (N = 291) via random‐digit dialing and asking them to discuss two top conflict areas (“at your best” and “as you typically do”), thus measuring will—conscious inhibition of hostility and negative reciprocity and production of positivity (i.e., the “conflict triad”). The conflict triad was observed with the Rapid Marital Interaction Coding System, Second Generation. We found partial support for the hypotheses grounded in Finkel's I3 meta‐model. Frequency of hostility was associated with a complicated satisfaction × IPV‐extent × conversation type × gender interaction, indicating that couples' communication skills are multi‐determined. Unhappier couples showed almost no change in positivity when at their best, whereas happier couples nearly doubled their positivity despite their considerably higher typical positivity mean. Negative reciprocity was associated with satisfaction and IPV‐extent but not conversation type, implying that immediate instigation combined with risk factors overwhelms conscious inhibition. Intervention implications are discussed.

The heterogeneity of intimate partner violence and its associations with distressed couples’ emotional communication.

“…Interestingly, this propensity toward mutual hostility appears to be all the more present in relationships with physical IPV. Investigations from the 1980s and 1990s (e.g., Burman et al, 1993; Cordova et al, 1993; Margolin et al, 1988), in conjunction with more recent findings (e.g., Heyman et al, 2023a, 2023b; Stith et al, 2011), suggest that distressed couples with physical IPV have greater difficulty exiting situations of reciprocated or escalating hostility than distressed-only partners.…”

“…While we cannot evaluate whether these “all-or-nothing” approaches to emotional arousal are adaptive or maladaptive based on the current findings, given the distressed nature of this sample, these patterns might well be associated with ineffective communication between partners. As noted throughout, prior studies of observed conflict have demonstrated that distressed, different-gender couples who engage in IPV are likely to behave in hostile ways across conversation topics (Heyman et al, 2023a), even when prompted to inhibit this hostility during their interactions (Heyman et al, 2023b). Paired with the current findings, it may be that attempts to contain or control emotion eventually “backfire” among unhappy couples, contributing to prolonged negative exchanges between partners.…”

“…Following this logic, one of the most surprising findings was that recipients (not perpetrators) of unilateral violence showed escalations in arousal during conversations focused on the woman’s topic. Previous research suggests that those who engage in psychological and/or physical IPV may have difficulty downregulating their negative affect and behavior (e.g., Heyman et al, 2023a; 2023b), whereas recipients of IPV may walk a fine line between escalating their own emotions and fear of upsetting their partner (e.g., Margolin et al, 1988). This prior work also suggests that this may be a gendered interactional pattern in which women who are IPV recipients may withdraw to prevent further retaliation from their male partner.…”