The Best Relationship Advice That Everyone Needs to Hear (From the World’s #1 Love Researchers)

KEYPOINTS

• 01

  It's not whether you fight but how you fight

  Drs. John and Julie Schwartz Gottman have studied thousands of couples over 50-plus years. John started the work with his friend Bob Levenson 54 years ago, when, he says, neither had a clue what made relationships work. Their central finding is that conflict is normal in every relationship. Lasting couples are the ones whose conflict becomes calmer, gentler, more constructive and more compassionate. The aim of a fight is to understand your partner's world, not to tear them down.

• 02

  The first three minutes predict the relationship's future

  With 15 minutes of a couple discussing a conflict, John and Levenson could predict with almost 90% accuracy whether the couple would divorce and how happy they'd be if they stayed. A lab member kept cutting three minutes off the data, and the prediction stayed accurate down to the first three. Couples headed for divorce or unhappiness open the conversation very differently from the 'masters of relationship'.

• 03

  The masters' rule: when your partner is upset, the world stops and you listen

  If John had to boil 54 years down to one thing, this is it. When Julie says the 'four terrifying words', 'we need to talk', he slowly takes a 3x5 notebook from his back pocket, opens it and says 'Okay baby, talk to me. What's on your mind? What's on your heart?' He writes down what she says, and the more defensive he feels, the more notes he takes. The notebook slows him down so he doesn't react with something he'll regret.

• 04

  Flooding hijacks your thinking

  Partners can look calm while one heart rate is over 100 beats per minute. That's fight or flight, and Julie says blood leaves the prefrontal cortex, so you can't think or listen clearly. Flooded people tend to repeat themselves louder, thinking it will be more persuasive. John's joke: '63 times later. Have I listened?'

• 05

  Horseman 1, criticism: blaming a problem on their character

  'You're so selfish, lazy, inconsiderate.' In their role-play of a disaster fight, John attacked Julie as obsessive and needing therapy. She called him a slob. Both talked over each other, went straight to persuading, got louder, and nobody listened. John mimed the 'halo' of the partner who is always innocent.

• 06

  Horseman 2, contempt: the single best predictor of breakup

  Contempt is criticism from superiority: sneering, disgust, scorn, mockery, sometimes sarcasm. Julie says the number of times a listener hears contempt in 15 minutes of conflict predicts how many infectious illnesses they'll have over the next four years. John calls it 'sulfuric acid for the immune system'.

• 07

  Horseman 3, defensiveness: counterattack or whine

  Everyone gets defensive unless they have 'an ego of a rock'. It shows up as counterattack or whining ('I did too clean the kitchen!'). The repair they model is to name it: 'I'm really feeling defensive right now. I don't want to be, but the way you're describing me feels like a put-down.'

• 08

  Horseman 4, stonewalling is panic, not indifference

  Stonewalling is shutting down for long minutes or hours. Physiology showed heart rates rising to 140–150 about 10 seconds before a person stonewalled. Julie says she had never seen stonewalling as someone panicked and overwhelmed. Levenson's startle studies, using a blank gun fired behind people, found women felt fear while men felt rage and a desire to get even, which keeps them physiologically aroused for longer.

• 09

  Take a real break of 20 minutes to 24 hours, and don't rehearse

  A break needs at least 20–30 minutes and at most 24 hours. Don't replay the fight or plan comebacks, or you'll stay flooded. Read, watch TV, play with the puppy or go for a run. Say when you'll return ('Let's come back in half an hour when I'm calmer') so your partner doesn't feel rejected or think the issue will be dropped.

• 10

  Turning toward bids is the everyday glue

  Graduate student Janice Driver coded small bids for attention in the lab. Each response was turning toward, turning away (ignoring) or turning against (irritable). Couples who had divorced six years later had turned toward only 33% of the time, while couples still married had turned toward 86% of the time. After a partner turns away, the chance of a new bid is just 22%.