John Gottman and the research on lasting relationships

John Gottman is a psychologist who spent decades watching couples argue on video and then checking, years later, who was still together. Much dating advice comes from coaches' own experience. His work is published research on married and long-term couples, which bears on what comes after the first dates.

Who he is

Gottman was born on April 26, 1942, in the Dominican Republic, according to Wikipedia. He studied mathematics-physics at Fairleigh Dickinson University, earned a master's at MIT, and took a PhD in clinical psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1971. He taught at the University of Illinois and then for 16 years at the University of Washington, where he's now professor emeritus. He has been executive director of the Relationship Research Institute in Seattle since 2002.

In 1996 he and his wife, Julie Schwartz Gottman, co-founded the Gottman Institute. They married in 1987.

The Love Lab

His research lab at the University of Washington earned the nickname "the Love Lab." Couples came in and talked about a real disagreement while researchers observed and recorded them. Researchers then followed up with the couples years later. The Gottman Institute describes one early study this way: couples tried to resolve a conflict within 15 minutes, and a follow-up nine years later was used to see who had stayed together.

The Gottman Institute says systematic observation of couples began in the 1970s and that its research includes seven longitudinal studies. Wikipedia's page on his best-known book says more than 650 couples were observed over 14 years.

The Four Horsemen

Gottman named four communication habits that his research linked to relationships ending. The Gottman Institute describes them like this:

Criticism: attacking a partner's character instead of raising a specific complaint
Contempt: mockery, name-calling or mocking gestures, from a position of perceived moral superiority. The Institute says contempt is "the single greatest predictor of divorce."
Defensiveness: deflecting blame, making excuses or casting yourself as the victim, often in response to criticism
Stonewalling: the listener withdraws and stops engaging

The Institute pairs each with an "antidote": a gentle start-up for criticism (name a feeling and a need with "I" statements, not blame), a culture of appreciation and respect for contempt, taking responsibility for defensiveness, and a timeout of at least 20 minutes of self-soothing for stonewalling.

The 5:1 ratio

The Gottman Institute credits this finding to Gottman and the psychologist Robert Levenson, with studies starting in the 1970s. It says stable, happy marriages had five or more positive interactions for every negative one during conflict, and that a ratio of 1:1 or lower signals a couple near divorce. The Institute describes the ratio as measured during conflict, not across everyday life. The Institute also says the researchers predicted who would stay together and who would divorce with "over 90%" accuracy.

The Seven Principles

In 1999 Gottman published, with Nan Silver credited as co-author, The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work, which Wikipedia lists as a New York Times bestseller. The seven, in short:

Build love maps: know your partner's world, likes and worries
Nurture fondness and admiration
Turn toward each other: respond when your partner reaches out
Accept your partner's influence and share decisions
Solve the problems that can be solved
Work through gridlocked problems that won't fully go away
Create shared meaning, with rituals and a sense of purpose

What the research does and doesn't cover

Two plain points. First, the studies were of married or committed couples, often newlyweds. Nothing in them tests openers, texting or first dates, so anything here that applies before a relationship starts is a habit borrowed from the findings, not a result.

Second, the prediction claims are debated in print. According to Wikipedia, the psychologist Richard Heyman reviewed divorce-prediction models in 2001 and raised concerns about overfitting and small samples, and the journalist Laurie Abraham wrote in Slate in 2010 that the approach was a formula built after outcomes were known. The Gottman Institute cites accuracy of over 90%. The Seven Principles page on Wikipedia also records objections from other clinicians to some of his claims about therapy outcomes. If you see a precise figure for one habit, check where it came from.

What to take from John Gottman

Learn the difference between a complaint and a criticism. "You were late and I felt stuck waiting" names a specific thing. "You're always so selfish" attacks a person. Practice the first form out loud this week, even about small things with friends.
Build love maps from the first month. After each date, write three new facts about her: a friend's name, something she's nervous about, what she'd do with a free Saturday. Ask about one of them next time. (Our guide to the first month of dating has more on that stretch.)
Notice bids and answer them. When someone shares a small thing, like a photo, a joke or "you won't believe my day," respond with interest, not a nod and your phone. Try it in five conversations and note how they go.
Take a 20-minute break when you're flooded. If a talk gets heated, say "I want to finish this, give me 20 minutes," and do something calming. Then actually come back.
Do a rough check after a disagreement. Count what you said that was warm or appreciative against what was sharp. It's a self-check, not the observer-scored ratio from the studies.
Use it when it's time to define things. If you're wondering whether she wants the same thing (signs she wants a relationship lists behaviors to look for) or asking where it's going, asking her to be your girlfriend is a good place to apply a gentle start: say what you feel and what you want, then listen.

If you log your own dating in Run Game, the session notes are a handy place to write down those three new facts about someone after a date.