Gottman Level 2 Clinical Training Manual

Citation preview

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

PROPER USE OF THESE MATERIALS Please note that copyright and other laws protect these materials. Participants in Gottman Method Therapy training workshops have our permission to reproduce materials as necessary for use with their clients in couples therapy and for no other use. If a therapist wishes to place Gottman Method Assessments on their personal web site, they may do so only on their own private website for use with their own clients, and may do so only if passcode access is required of their clients, so that public access is prohibited. They do not have our permission to use these methods or materials in any form to offer workshops either for couples or for other therapists or to make these materials available to the public. This permission is reserved as the sole province of The Gottman Institute, Inc., and may be revoked at any time. Any misuse of these materials may be the subject of legal action.

COPYRIGHT AND TRADEMARK NOTICE

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. All rights reserved. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc. This manual may not be used, modified, rented, leased, loaned, sublicensed, distributed, re-distributed, or reproduced in any manner whatsoever, in whole or in part, without the written permission of The Gottman Institute. The “Gottman Method” is a trademark owned by The Gottman Institute, Inc. Any promotion of this trademark or the Gottman name without the express written permission of the Institute may be subject to legal action. “The Gottman Institute,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Certified Gottman Therapist,” “Couples Therapy: A Research-Based Approach,” “The Gottman Referral Network,” “The Art and Science of Love,” “The Sound Relationship House,” and our logo are trademarks of The Gottman Institute and may not be used in any manner without the prior written consent of The Gottman Institute.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

A Certified Gottman TherapistTM A Certified Gottman Therapist is an individual who has completed the certification program offered by The Gottman Institute. This program includes completion of the following steps of training:

GOTTMAN METHOD COUPLES THERAPY:

1. 2. 3. 4.

Level 1—Bridging the Couple Chasm— A two-day professional workshop led by Dr. John Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman or by a Certified Gottman Trainer, either in person or on DVD/videotape

Level 2—Assessment, Intervention, and Co-Morbidities— A three-day workshop led by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman or a Certified Gottman Trainer, either in person or on DVD/videotape

Level 3—Practicum Training— A three-day workshop led by Dr. John Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman or by a Certified Gottman Master Trainer Certification Track—

• Consultation

At least eight individual sessions or 12 group sessions of consultation with a Senior Certified Gottman Therapist Consultant

• Tape Review

Submission and passing of required DVD/videotapes for review by a Senior Certified Gottman Therapist Video Reviewer.

Please note: Any therapist or health professional that has not completed ALL of the above requirements may not refer to him- or herself as a “Certified Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” “Level 1, 2, or 3 Gottman Therapist” or any name of similar title. Use of these terms are reserved ONLY for use by Certified Gottman Therapists, as they have demonstrated their competency in these methods. Certified Gottman Therapists must comply with our guidelines for continued use of this certification mark. For more information on becoming a Certified Gottman Therapist, please contact us at 888-523-9042, ext. 2 or email [email protected]

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

TERMINOLOGY Therapists that have completed The Gottman Institute’s Levels 1, 2, or 3 training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy may use the following description(s) to represent themselves.

COMPLETED LEVEL 1 TRAINING IN GOTTMAN METHOD COUPLES THERAPY: a. Therapists may state that they have completed Level 1 Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy, and that they use Gottman Method Couples Therapy in their work. b. Therapists may NOT refer to themselves as a “Level 1 Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” “Certified Gottman Therapist,” or refer to themselves with a name of similar title.

COMPLETED LEVEL 2 TRAINING IN GOTTMAN METHOD COUPLES THERAPY: a. Therapists may state that they have completed Level 2 Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy, and that they use Gottman Method Couples Therapy in their therapy work. b. Therapists may NOT refer to themselves as a “Level 2 Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” “Certified Gottman Therapist,” or refer to themselves with a name of similar title.

COMPLETED LEVEL 3 PRACTICUM TRAINING: a. Therapists may state that they have completed the Level 3 Practicum Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy, and that they use Gottman Method Couples Therapy in their therapy work.

b. Therapists may NOT refer to themselves as a “Level 3 Gottman Therapist,” “Certified Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” or refer to themselves with a name of similar title.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

CERTIFICATION TRACK: Participated in Certification Consultation Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy: a. Therapists may state that they have participated in Certification Consultation Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy, and that they use Gottman Method Couples Therapy in their therapy work.

b. Therapists may NOT refer to themselves as having “completed Consultation Training,” or as a “Level 3 Gottman Therapist,” “Certified Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” or refer to themselves with a name of similar title. Completed Certification Consultation and Video Review in Gottman Method Couples Therapy: a. Therapists may state that they have completed Level 3 Certification Training in Gottman Method Couples Therapy, and that they use Gottman Method Couples Therapy in their therapy work.

b. Therapists MAY refer to themselves as a “Certified Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Therapist,” “Gottman Trained Therapist,” “Gottman Method Therapist,” or refer to themselves with a name of similar title once they have completed the post-Level 3 consultation process and have passed all required video segments for Certification Video Review and have received a certificate designating them as a Certified Gottman Therapist. The preferred recognized title by The Gottman Institute is, “Certified Gottman Therapist.”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

i

Created by Drs. John and Julie Gottman

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

ii

About Drs. John and Julie Gottman John Gottman, Ph.D., is world renowned for his work on relationship stability and divorce prediction, involving the study of emotions, physiology, and communication. Dr. Gottman is the co-founder of The Gottman Institute where he currently teaches weekend workshops for couples and clinical training workshops for professionals. He is the Executive Director of the Relationship Research Institute, where programs have been developed for parents transitioning to parenthood and are beginning a new research project on treatment for Domestic Violence. He is Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Washington, where he founded “The Love Lab” at which much of his research on couples’ interactions was conducted. His 40 years of breakthrough research on marriage, relationships and parenting has earned him numerous major awards. Dr. Gottman is the author of 190 published academic articles and author/co-author of 40 books, including the bestselling The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work; What Makes Love Last?; The Relationship Cure; Why Marriages Succeed or Fail; and Raising An Emotionally Intelligent Child. He was recently voted as one of the Top 10 Most Influential Therapists of the past quartercentury by the PsychoTherapy Networker publication. Dr. Gottman is also available for intensive marathon couples therapy on Orcas Island, WA, where both he and Dr. Julie Gottman also offer weekend retreats for small groups of couples.

Julie Schwartz Gottman, Ph.D., is the co-founder and President of The Gottman Institute, co-creator of a curriculum for couples in poverty, and Clinical Director for the Couples Together Against Violence research study. A highly respected licensed clinical psychologist and educator, she is sought internationally by media and organizations as an expert advisor on marriage, the treatment of trauma, the treatment of affairs, sexual harassment and rape, domestic violence, gay and lesbian adoption, same-sex marriage, and parenting issues. She is the co-creator of the immensely popular Art & Science of Love weekend workshops for couples, and she co-designed the national clinical training program in Gottman Couples Therapy. Dr. Gottman was also recently honored as the Washington State Psychologist of the Year. Julie is the author/co-author of three books: Ten Lessons to Transform Your Marriage, And Baby Makes Three, and The Marriage Clinic Casebook, and receives wide recognition for her clinical psychotherapy treatment, with specialization in distressed couples, abuse and trauma survivors, substance abusers and their partners, and cancer patients and their families Inspiring, empowering, respectful, and kind, Julie’s leadership of The Gottman Institute has made it possible to identify and integrate the expertise of her staff, therapists, and the wider research and therapeutic community. Her commitment to excellence and integrity assures that as The Gottman Institute grows, it continues to maintain the highest ethical and scientific standards. She is in private practice in the Seattle area, providing intensive marathon therapy sessions for couples.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

iii

Welcome to Gottman Method Couples Therapy Level 2 Assessment, Intervention, and Co-Morbidities Dear Clinician, Welcome to Level 2: Assessment, Intervention, and Co-Morbidities training for mental health professionals. This workshop provides a wealth of information about relationship theory, observation, couple dynamics, relationship assessment, treatment planning, when and how to use interventions, and working with co-morbidities. All materials may be used in clinical settings. At the completion of Level 2, you should have the clinical familiarity, knowledge and resources to integrate Gottman Method Couples Therapy assessments and intervention into your practice. In this you will learn: • • •

How to assess the quality of a couple’s friendship, romance and passion using Gottman Method Assessments; How to assess the effectiveness of a couple’s management of conflict and what key areas need improvement, and How to evaluate a couple’s ability to create shared meaning and honor each other’s dreams.

You will be able to use research-based interventions to strengthen your couple’s relationship skills, including: • • • •

How to interrupt the Four Horsemen in order to have a more constructive dialogue; How to physiologically self-soothe in order to prevent escalated quarrels; How to avoid “Attack-Defend” cycles in order to listen, and How to help couples dialogue about their grid-locked conflicts, rather than avoid them.

You will be able to help your couples deepen their connection by: • •

Helping them create rituals of connection, and Guiding them to create a system of shared values and meaning.

And for the more difficult couples, you’ll be aided to: •

Identify, assess and provide intervention for at least five different co-morbidities common to couples, including affairs, PTSD, domestic violence, and addiction.

Wishing you all the best, John M. Gottman, Ph.D., and Julie Schwartz Gottman, Ph.D.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

iv

Objectives 1. Describe the three qualities every therapist needs. 2. Explain the basics of observation including why it’s important to recognize Emotions on the Human Face, Tension in the Voice, the Importance of Words and the use of the SPAFF coding system. 3. Describe the seven levels of the Sound Relationship House theory. 4. Describe how to recognize Bids and Turning Towards. 5. Explain and demonstrate how to conduct an Oral History Interview. 6. Assess a couple’s “Friendship Profile,” “Conflict Profile,” and “Shared Meanings Profile”. 7. Explain and demonstrate how to use the 3 profiles to choose appropriate interventions for the couple. 8. Describe the use of the core assessments with couples, including the Locke-Wallace, Weiss-Cerretto, Gottman Sounds Relationship House Questionnaires, Gottman 19 Areas Checklist, EAQ, SCL-90, Detour Scales, CAGE, b-MAST, and Supplemental Assessments. 9. Formulate a treatment plan and present it to the couple including using the Sound Relationship House model. 10. Develop interventions that couples can use as antidotes to the “Four Horsemen.” 11. Help couples to physiologically soothe when flooded. 12. Select and implement interventions to help deal with conflict. 13. Apply different modes of changing the “Attack/Defend System” in a couples interaction. 14. Assist couples to establish dialogue about their grid-locked conflicts. 15. Select and implement interventions to help couples deepen their “Friendship System” with Rituals of Connection. 16. Select and implement interventions to help couples create a shared system of values and meaning. 17. Use and describe the Stress-Reducing Conversation to minimize relapse. 18. Identify and formulate a plan for different co-morbidities common to couples using Gottman Method Couples Therapy Assessment and Intervention. 19. Describe how to apply Gottman Method Couples Therapy to a couple who has experienced an affair. 20. Describe when it is appropriate and inappropriate to use Gottman Method Couples Therapy with a couple dealing with substance abuse. 21. Describe the differences between situational and characterological domestic violence and when it is appropriate and inappropriate to use Gottman Method couples therapy with a couple dealing with domestic violence.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

v

Gottman Method Couples Therapy Level 2 Assessment, Intervention, and Co-Morbidities OUTLINE DAY ONE INTRODUCTION • Overview of Workshop BASICS OF OBSERVATION • Emotions in the Human Face • Tension in the Voice • The Words Themselves BIDS AND TURNING • Overview • “Spain Without Interest,” “Bread With Interest” • “Greg and Jennie—Northwest Afternoon” SESSION #1: ASSESSMENT

FRIENDSHIP PROFILE: ORAL HISTORY INTERVIEW • The spirit of the interview • Content and Questions in the interview • Coding notes • Oral History Benchmarks • FILM: “Oral History Interview Samples” EVALUATING CONFLICT AND REPAIR • Setting up a Conflict Discussion • Evaluating Conflict • Gridlocked Conflict • Videotaping and Physiological Flooding SESSION #1: PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER • • • • •

FILM: “Initial Session” Couple’s Narrative Oral History Interview Conflict Discussion Group role play practice: Oral History Interview

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

vi

SESSION #2: INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS

• FILM: “Assessment Individual Session - Michael & Trudi” • Assessment Questionnaires and Scoring • Scoring Summary Sheet

SESSION #3: GIVING FEEDBACK AND TREATMENT PLANNING FEEDBACK SESSION • Overview • Feedback Session benchmarks • Clinician’s Checklist for Relationship Assessment • Sound Relationship House Theory • Gottman Method Clinical Hours Documentation Form • Gottman Treatment Plan Form • FILM: “Masters and Disasters” • Group Role Play Practice: Feedback Session GOTTMAN METHOD INTERVENTIONS INTERVENTION OVERVIEW • Intervention benchmarks • Three qualities every therapist needs INTERVENTIONS TO MANAGE CONFLICT INTERVENTION: GENTLE START-UP CASE INTRODUCTION: STEVE AND CRYSTA • FILM: “Family Dinner” • FILM: “Four Horsemen Examples” INTERVENTION: LABEL THE FOUR HORSEMEN AND REPLACE THEM WITH THEIR ANTIDOTES • FILM: “Four Horsemen examples”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

vii

DAY TWO INTERVENTIONS TO MANAGE CONFLICT INTERVENTION: FLOODING • FILM: “Flooding & Soothing” • Group Role Play: Flooding INTERVENTION: GOTTMAN-RAPOPORT EXERCISE • FILM: “Gottman-Rapoport Intervention” • Group Role Play Practice: Gottman-Rapoport INTERVENTION: THE DAN WILE INTERVENTION • FILM: “Dan Wile Intervention” • Group Role Play: Dan Wile INTERVENTION: INTERNAL WORKING MODEL • FILM: “Internal Working Model” INTERVENTION: COMPROMISE • FILM: “Compromise” • Group role play practice: Compromise INTERVENTION: DREAMS WITHIN CONFLICT • FILM: “Dreams Within Conflict” • Group role play practice: Dreams Within Conflict INTERVENTION: AFTERMATH OF A FIGHT OR REGRETTABLE INCIDENT • FILM: “Aftermath of a Fight” • Group role play: Aftermath of a Fight INTERVENTIONS TO STRENGTHEN FRIENDSHIP AND ROMANCE • Overview • Turning Towards Exercises INTERVENTION: WORKING ON FONDNESS AND ADMIRATION “I APPRECIATE...” ADJECTIVE CHECKLIST • FILM: “Working on Fondness & Admiration”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

viii

DAY THREE INTERVENTIONS TO STRENGTHEN FRIENDSHIP AND ROMANCE (continued) INTERVENTION: STRESS REDUCING CONVERSATION • FILM: “Stress Reducing Conversation” • Group role play exercise: Stress Reducing Conversation INTERVENTIONS TO CREATE SHARED MEANING INTERVENTION: CREATE SHARED MEANING AND BUILD RITUALS OF CONNECTION • FILM: “Rituals of Connection” RELAPSE PREVENTION CO-MORBIDITIES DEALING WITH AFFAIRS DEALING WITH ADDICTION PTSD DEALING WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE • “Pit bulls” • “Cobras” • “CTAV Collage Video”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

ix

CONTENTS Outline................................................................................................................... v 1.

Basic Observation..................................................................................1-1 1.1. Introduction..........................................................................................................1-1 1.2. Facial Expression Drawings................................................................................1-4 1.3. Facial Expression..............................................................................................1-12 1.3.1. About Brows.........................................................................................1-12 1.3.2. Beyond Brows......................................................................................1-17 1.3.3. Conversational Markers .......................................................................1-20 1.3.4. Detecting Emotion from FACS..............................................................1-21 1.3.5. Table of Action Units of the Human Face ...........................................1-22 1.4. Specific Affect Coding System Manual..............................................................1-23 1.4.1. DISGUST..............................................................................................1-24 1.4.2. CONTEMPT.........................................................................................1-25 1.4.3. BELLIGERENCE..................................................................................1-26 1.4.4. DOMINEERING....................................................................................1-28 1.4.5. CRITICISM...........................................................................................1-30 1.4.6. ANGER.................................................................................................1-32 1.4.7. TENSION..............................................................................................1-33 1.4.8. TENSE HUMOR...................................................................................1-35 1.4.9. DEFENSIVENESS...............................................................................1-36 1.4.10. WHINING..............................................................................................1-37 1.4.11. SADNESS............................................................................................1-38 1.4.12. STONEWALLING.................................................................................1-39 1.4.13. NEUTRAL.............................................................................................1-40 1.4.14. SPECIAL NOTE FOR POSITIVE CODES............................................1-41 1.4.15. INTEREST............................................................................................1-41 1.4.16. VALIDATION.........................................................................................1-43 1.4.17. AFFECTION.........................................................................................1-44 1.4.18. HUMOR................................................................................................1-46 1.4.19. SURPRISE/JOY...................................................................................1-46 1.4.20. SPAFF CRIB SHEET............................................................................1-48

2.

Tension in the Voice...............................................................................2-1 2.1.

3.

Fear (Tension/Stress/Worry/Fear).......................................................................2-1

The Words Themselves..........................................................................3-1 3.1. 3.2.

How the Story Is Told...........................................................................................3-1 Specific Affect Coding System (10-Code Version) Test Tape Segments.............3-4

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

x

4.

Bids and Turning....................................................................................4-1 4.1. Introduction..........................................................................................................4-1 4.2. Bids......................................................................................................................4-2 4.2.1. Definition.................................................................................................4-2 4.2.2. Bantering................................................................................................4-2 4.2.3. Exclusions..............................................................................................4-3 4.3. Bid Types.............................................................................................................4-3 4.3.1. Silent Bid................................................................................................4-3 4.3.2. Comment Bid..........................................................................................4-3 4.3.3. Question.................................................................................................4-4 4.3.4. Playful Bid...............................................................................................4-5 4.3.5. Negative Bid...........................................................................................4-6 4.3.6. Rebid......................................................................................................4-7 4.3.7. Drop Out.................................................................................................4-8 4.4.

4.5.

4.6.

4.7.

5.

Couples Assessment Overview............................................................5-1 5.1. 5.2. 5.3.

6.

Turning Towards Responses...............................................................................4-8 4.4.1. Passive Response..................................................................................4-8 4.4.2. Low-Energy Response...........................................................................4-9 4.4.3. Attentive Response..............................................................................4-10 4.4.4. Enthusiastic Response......................................................................... 4-11 4.4.5. Playful Response..................................................................................4-12 Turning Against Response.................................................................................4-12 4.5.1. Contempt..............................................................................................4-13 4.5.2. Belligerence..........................................................................................4-13 4.5.3. Domineering.........................................................................................4-13 4.5.4. Criticism................................................................................................4-13 4.5.5. Defensiveness......................................................................................4-13 Turning Away Response....................................................................................4-14 4.6.1. Preoccupied Away................................................................................4-14 4.6.2. Interrupt Away.......................................................................................4-14 4.6.3. Disregard Away....................................................................................4-14 Embedded Codes..............................................................................................4-15 4.7.1. Affection................................................................................................4-15 4.7.2. Gender..................................................................................................4-16 4.7.3. Humor...................................................................................................4-17 4.7.4. Shared Moment....................................................................................4-17 Format of the Couples Assessment: Session 1: Conjoint 1½ Hours...................5-1 Session 2: Individual Meetings............................................................................5-4 Session 3: Conjoint Treatment Planning.............................................................5-4

How to Conduct an Oral History Interview...........................................6-1 6.1. 6.2.

The Spirit of the Oral History Interview................................................................6-1 The Actual Content of the Interview.....................................................................6-2 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xi 6.3. 6.4.

6.5. 6.6.

7.

Things to Notice...................................................................................................6-4 Oral History Questions........................................................................................6-4 6.4.1. Part 1: History of the Relationship..........................................................6-5 6.4.2. Part 2. Their Philosophy of their Relationship........................................6-6 Oral History Interview Benchmarks.....................................................................6-6 Oral History Interview Summary Sheet...........................................................6-7 Group Role Play: Oral History Interview .......................................................6-9 Oral History Coding Notes................................................................................. 6-11

Evaluating Conflict Management and Repairs.....................................7-1 7.1. 7.2. 7.3. 7.4.

Setting Up the Conflict Discussion .....................................................................7-1 Observing Conflict Management ........................................................................7-3 Symbolic Conflict ................................................................................................7-3 Repair - Definitions from the Research............................................................. 7-11 7.4.1. Affection................................................................................................ 7-11 7.4.2. Agreement............................................................................................7-12 7.4.3. Compromise.........................................................................................7-12 7.4.4. Defining the Conflict.............................................................................7-12 7.4.5. Guarding...............................................................................................7-13 7.4.6. Humor...................................................................................................7-13 7.4.7. Making Promises..................................................................................7-14 7.4.8. Monitoring Discussion..........................................................................7-14 7.4.9. Repair Questions..................................................................................7-14 7.4.10. Request for Direction............................................................................7-15 7.4.11. Self-Disclosure.....................................................................................7-15 7.4.12. Softening..............................................................................................7-16 7.4.13. Stop......................................................................................................7-17 7.4.14. Taking Responsibility............................................................................7-17 7.4.15. Tooting Your Own Horn.........................................................................7-18 7.4.16. Understanding......................................................................................7-18 7.4.17. We’re OK / Teamwork...........................................................................7-19 7.5. Responses ........................................................................................................7-19

8.

Individual Interview ...............................................................................8-1 8.1. 8.2.

9.

Setting the Stage for the Individual Interview......................................................8-1 Content of Individual Interviews...........................................................................8-2 Individual Interview Summary Sheet...............................................................8-3

Gottman Method Assessment Questionnaires....................................9-1 9.1.

Gottman Core Assessment Questionnaires Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test�����������������������������������������������������9-3 Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory����������������������������������������������������9-5 The Sound Relationship House Questionnaires (5 item scale)��������������������������9-7 Love Maps..............................................................................................9-7 Fondness and Admiration System..........................................................9-7 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xii Turning Towards or Away.......................................................................9-7 Negative Sentiment Override.................................................................9-8 Harsh Startup.........................................................................................9-8 Accepting Influence................................................................................9-8 Repair Attempts......................................................................................9-9 Compromise...........................................................................................9-9 Gridlock on Perpetual Issues..................................................................9-9 The Four Horsemen.............................................................................9-10 Flooding................................................................................................9-10 Emotional Disengagement and Loneliness..........................................9-10 Quality of Sex, Romance, and Passion in the Relationship����������������������������� 9-11 Shared Meanings Questionnaire����������������������������������������������������������������������9-13 Your Rituals..........................................................................................9-13 Your Roles............................................................................................9-13 Your Goals............................................................................................9-13 Your Symbols........................................................................................9-13 Trust������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-14 Commitment�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-15 The Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems����������9-17 The Three “Detour” Scales�������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-27 Chaos...................................................................................................9-27 Meta-Emotions (Your Own Feelings About Emotions)..........................9-28 My Family History.................................................................................9-30 Gottman Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ)���������������������������������������������9-33 Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and ���������������������������������������������������������������9-35 Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires����������������������������������������������������9-35 Control..................................................................................................9-35 Fear......................................................................................................9-35 Suicide Potential...................................................................................9-35 Acts of Physical Aggression.................................................................9-36 SCL-90�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-37 The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID)�������������������9-41 Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST)���������������������������������������������9-41 9.2. The Gottman Relationship Checkup..................................................................9-43 9.3. Core Assessment Scoring and Interpretation���������������������������������������������������9-45 Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test Scoring & Interpretation������������9-47 Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory Scoring & Interpretation�����������9-48 Sound Relationship House Assessment 5-Item Scale Scoring & Interpretation������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-49 Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems in Your Relationship Scoring & Interpretation���������������������������������������������������������������9-51 The Three “Detour” Scales Scoring & Interpretation����������������������������������������9-53 Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ) Scoring & Interpretation���������������������9-54

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xiii 9.4. 9.5.

Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires Scoring������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-55 SCL-90 Scoring & Interpretation Instructions���������������������������������������������������9-56 The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) Scoring & Interpretation������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-57 Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST) Scoring & Interpretation.....................................................................................9-58 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary Sheet and Interpretation Guidelines����������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-59 Supplemental Assessment Questionnaires������������������������������������������������������9-63 Gottman Areas of Strength Checklist���������������������������������������������������������������9-65 The Distance and Isolation Questionnaires - Overview������������������������������������9-67 Self-Test: Flooding�������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-69 Self-Test: Do You Lead Parallel Lives?������������������������������������������������9-71 Self-Test: How Lonely is Your Relationship?���������������������������������������9-73

9.6.

Areas of Disagreement�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-75 Areas of Change Checklist: Solvable Problems�����������������������������������������������9-77 Innocent Victim and Righteous Indignation Scale��������������������������������������������9-79 Supplemental Assessment Scoring and Interpretation�������������������������������������9-81 Gottman Areas of Strength Checklist Scoring & Interpretation�������������������������9-81 The Distance and Isolation Questionnaires Scoring ����������������������������������������9-81 Self-Test: Flooding................................................................................9-81 Self-Test: Do You Lead Parallel Lives?.................................................9-81 Self-Test: How Lonely is Your Relationship?........................................9-82 Areas of Disagreement�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-82 Areas of change checklist: Solvable Problems�������������������������������������������������9-82 Innocent Victim and Righteous Indignation Scale��������������������������������������������9-82 9.7. Reliability and Validity of the Gottman Sound Relationship House Scales By John Gottman, Ph.D.�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-83 References�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-106

10.

Feedback Session and Treatment Planning......................................10-1 10.1. 10.2.

Feedback Session—Overview..........................................................................10-1 The Sound Relationship House and The Gottman Theory for Making Relationships Work..........................................................................10-1 10.2.1. Build Love Maps...................................................................................10-1 10.2.2. Share Fondness and Admiration..........................................................10-2 10.2.3. Turn Towards........................................................................................10-2 10.2.4. The Positive Perspective......................................................................10-2 10.2.5. Manage Conflict....................................................................................10-3 10.2.6. Make Life Dreams Come True..............................................................10-5 10.2.7. Create Shared Meaning.......................................................................10-6 10.2.8. Trust .....................................................................................................10-6 10.2.9. Commitment.........................................................................................10-6

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xiv 10.3. 10.4. 10.5.

11.

Clinician’s Checklist for Relationship Assessment ...........................................10-7 Feedback Session Benchmarks......................................................................10-12 Group Role Play: Feedback Session...........................................................10-15 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary Sheet for Steve and Crysta.....10-16 Treatment Planning.........................................................................................10-17 100 Gottman Method Clinical Hours Documentation.................................10-19 Gottman Treatment Plan...............................................................................10-21 Interpretation Guidelines..............................................................................10-24 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary Sheet.........................................10-25

Gottman Method Interventions Taught at Level 2............................. 11-1 11.1. 11.2. 11.3. 11.4. 11.5. 11.6.

Interventions Related to Building Friendship and Intimacy................................ 11-2 Interventions to Help Couples Manage Conflict................................................ 11-2 Interventions to Build Shared Meaning.............................................................. 11-3 When to Terminate Therapy.............................................................................. 11-4 When to Give Up............................................................................................... 11-4 Gottman Method Interventions Taught at Level 2.............................................. 11-5



Intervention: “I Appreciate . . .” Adjective Checklist........................................... 11-9 Exercise: “I Appreciate . . .” Adjective Checklist.............................................. 11-11





Intervention:The Stress-Reducing Conversation and Earning Points in the Emotional Bank Account............................................................................ 11-15 Exercise: The Stress-Reducing Conversation and Earning Points in the Emotional Bank Account............................................................................ 11-17 Group Role Play: Stress Reducing Conversation............................................ 11-19



Intervention: Gentle Start-up........................................................................... 11-23 Exercise: Gentle Start-up .............................................................................. 11-27



Intervention: The Four Horsemen - The Concept ........................................... 11-29 Intervention: Labeling and Replacing the Four Horsemen With Their Antidotes................................................................................................. 11-31 Group Role Play: Stop The Four Horsemen and Replace Them With Their Antidotes................................................................................................. 11-35





Intervention: Flooding - Physiological Soothing and the Relaxation Exercise........................................................................................................... 11-37 Exercise: The Relaxation Exercise................................................................. 11-39 Group Role Play: Flooding - Self-Soothing and How to Do It.......................... 11-43



Intervention: The Gottman-Rapoport Exercise................................................ 11-45 Group Role Play: The Gottman-Rapoport Exercise........................................ 11-47



Intervention: The Dan Wile Intervention.......................................................... 11-49 Group Role Play: The Dan Wile Intervention................................................... 11-51



Intervention: Internal Working Model............................................................... 11-53 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xv

Intervention: Compromise............................................................................... 11-55 Exercise: The Art of Compromise................................................................... 11-57 Group Role Play: Compromise........................................................................ 11-59



Intervention: Dreams Within Conflict - The Concept....................................... 11-61 Intervention: Dreams Within Conflict - Releasing the Dreams........................ 11-63 Exercise: Dreams Within Conflict - Releasing the Dreams............................. 11-65 Group Role Play: Dreams Within Conflict........................................................ 11-67

Intervention: Aftermath of a Fight or Regrettable Incident............................... 11-69 Exercise: Aftermath of a Fight or Regrettable Incident ................................11-71 Group Role Play: Aftermath of a Fight or Regrettable Incident....................... 11-77

12.



Intervention: Build Rituals of Emotional Connection........................................ 11-81 Exercise: Build Rituals of Emotional Connection............................................. 11-83



Group Role Play: Build Rituals of Connection................................................. 11-85

Additional Gottman Method Interventions.........................................12-1

Intervention: The Gottman Love Map Exercise ................................................12-5 Exercise: The Gottman Love Map Exercise .....................................................12-7



Intervention: Build a Map of Your Partner’s Everyday Life................................12-9 Exercise: Build a Map of Your Partner’s Everyday Life................................... 12-11



Intervention: Injury and Healing.......................................................................12-13 Exercise: Injury and Healing ...........................................................................12-15



Intervention: Ask Open-Ended Questions.......................................................12-17 Exercise: Ask Open-Ended Questions Card Deck..........................................12-19



Intervention: Thanksgiving Checklist...............................................................12-23 Exercise: Thanksgiving Checklist....................................................................12-25



Intervention: 7-Week Guide for Creating Fondness & Admiration...................12-27 Exercise: 7-Week Guide for Creating Fondness & Admiration........................12-29



Intervention: Fondness and Admiration in Everyday Life................................12-31 Exercise: Fondness and Admiration in Everyday Life.....................................12-33



Intervention: An Exercise in Thanksgiving.......................................................12-35



Intervention: Behavior Exchange.....................................................................12-39 Exercise: Behavior Exchange..........................................................................12-41



Intervention: Working as a Team: Building the Paper Tower...........................12-43



Intervention: Negotiating Power: Who Does What in the Relationship?..........12-47 Exercise: Negotiating Power: Who does what in the relationship?.................12-49

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xvi

Intervention: The Aftermath of Failed Bids......................................................12-53 Exercise: The Aftermath of Failed Bids ..........................................................12-55



Intervention: How Do You Change Your Relationship?...................................12-59 Exercise: How Do You Change Your Relationship?........................................12-61



Intervention: The Emotional Communication Game........................................12-63 Exercise: The Emotional Communication Game.............................................12-65 Exercise: The Emotional Communication Game.............................................12-69



Intervention: Sex, Romance, and Passion (Salsa Card Deck)........................12-73 Exercise: Salsa Cards.....................................................................................12-75



Intervention: Three Skills of Intimate Conversation.........................................12-81 Exercise: Three Skills of Intimate Conversation..............................................12-83



Intervention: Choosing One Gridlocked Issue and One Solvable Issue .........12-89 Exercise: Choosing One Gridlocked Issue and One Solvable Issue .............12-91



Intervention: Ending Gridlock: Fears of Accepting Influence...........................12-95



Intervention: Accept Influence: Find Common Ground....................................12-97



Intervention: Consensus Decision-Making Task: Mountain Survival Problem..............................................................................12-99 Exercise: Mountain Survival Problem Individual Form..................................12-101 Exercise : Mountain Survival Problem Consensus Form..............................12-103



Intervention: Working Together as a Team: The Island Survival Task...........12-105 Exercise: Island Survival Task Individual Form.............................................12-107 Exercise: Island Survival Task Consensus Form..........................................12-109 Exercise: Evaluation Form: Island Survival Task.......................................... 12-111



Intervention: Accept What You Cannot Change; Accept One Another.......... 12-113 Exercise: Accept What You Cannot Change; Accept One Another............... 12-115



Intervention: Find Dreams In Each Other’s Gridlock..................................... 12-117 Exercise: Find Dreams In Each Other’s Gridlock.......................................... 12-119



Intervention: Video Playback.........................................................................12-135



Intervention: Repair Checklist........................................................................12-137

Intervention: Meta-Emotions and Relationship Communication....................12-141 Intervention: Meta Emotion Interview Questions...........................................12-145 Intervention: Dealing with Meta-Emotion Mismatch............................................ 12-151 Exercise: The History and Philosophy of Your Emotions..............................12-153

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xvii

Intervention: Which Relationship Style Do You Prefer? ................................12-155 Exercise: Which Relationship Style Do You Prefer?......................................12-157



Intervention: The Meanings Interview............................................................12-161 The Meanings Interview: Creating Shared Symbolic Meaning .....................12-161 Intervention: The Meanings Interview Questions..........................................12-165



Intervention: Build Shared Meaning..............................................................12-169 Exercise: Build Shared Meaning ..................................................................12-171



Intervention: Mission and Legacy..................................................................12-175 Exercise: Mission and Legacy ......................................................................12-177



Intervention: Triumphs and Strivings.............................................................12-179 Exercise: Triumphs and Strivings .................................................................12-181

12.1. Interventions for Preventing Relapse...............................................................12-183 Intervention: The Relationship “Poop Detector”............................................12-185 Exercise: The Relationship “Poop Detector”.................................................12-187

13.



Intervention: Preventing, Assessing, and Managing Relapse.......................12-189 Exercise: Relapse Questionnaire..................................................................12-191



Intervention: Expect Relapse.........................................................................12-193



Intervention: The Magic Five and One-half Hours a Week ...........................12-195 Exercise: The Magic Five and One-half Hours a Week.................................12-197

Co-Morbidities.......................................................................................13-1 13.1. Affairs................................................................................................................13-1 13.2. Addiction............................................................................................................13-3 13.3. Alcoholism and Drug Addiction........................................................................13-17 13.4. Treatment of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)....................................13-21 13.5. Violence...........................................................................................................13-23

14. Therapist Disclosure Statement and Additional Gottman Forms........ 14-1 14.1. 14.2.

15.

Therapist Disclosure Statement........................................................................14-1 Video Recording Sessions and Release Forms................................................14-3 Permission for Digitally Recording and Videotaping Therapy Sessions............14-5 Therapist Release Attestation............................................................................14-7 100 Gottman Method Clinical Hours Documentation........................................14-9 Gottman Treatment Plan................................................................................. 14-11 Interpretation Guidelines.................................................................................14-14 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary.........................................................14-15

Additional Training and Services........................................................15-1 15.1. Introduction........................................................................................................15-1 15.1.1. Post-Level 2 Teleconferences..............................................................15-1 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

xviii 15.1.2. Membership in the New Gottman Referral Network.............................15-1 15.1.3. The Art & Science of Love Weekend Workshop for Couples ..............15-2 15.1.4. Level 3 - Practicum Training.................................................................15-3 15.2. Becoming Certified - Next Steps.......................................................................15-4 15.2.1. The Gottman Method Certification Track..............................................15-4 15.2.2. Fees......................................................................................................15-4 15.2.3. Certification Readiness Check-list .......................................................15-5 15.2.4. Certification Track Application..............................................................15-6 15.2.5. Consultation..........................................................................................15-6 15.2.6. Consultation Content............................................................................15-7 15.2.7. Asking for Help.....................................................................................15-7 15.2.8. 100 Hours of Gottman Method.............................................................15-8 15.2.9. Submitting Videos for Certification.......................................................15-8 15.3. The Seven Principles for Making Certification Work ........................................15-9 15.4. 15.5.

Six Steps to Sail Through Certification............................................................15-12 Intervention Criteria for Submitting Certification Video....................................15-14 15.5.1. General Requirements for All Interventions........................................15-14 15.5.2. Criteria for Specific Interventions........................................................15-16 FOUR HORSEMEN............................................................................15-16 FLOODING ........................................................................................15-17 DREAMS WITHIN CONFLICT ..........................................................15-18 COMPROMISE USING TWO OVALS................................................15-19 15.6. Basic Video Skills for the Gottman Therapist..................................................15-20 15.6.1. Types of Video Cameras (camcorders)..............................................15-20 15.6.3. Selecting a Camcorder.......................................................................15-22 15.6.4. Recording with a smartphone or tablet...............................................15-23 15.6.5. Video Production ...............................................................................15-24 15.6.6. Burning a Disk for Playback...............................................................15-30 15.6.7. Using Video Playback with Couples...................................................15-30 15.7. HIPAA Summary..............................................................................................15-31 15.8. Professional Opportunities for Certified Gottman Therapists..........................15-43

16.

Assessment, Intervention, and Co-Morbidities Slides......................16-1

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-1

1. Basic Observation In this section, we will teach you how to become an expert observer. We believe that observation is one of the keys to becoming a good therapist and is, therefore, a part of Gottman Method Couples Therapy. With observations made about their clients’ habits, lifestyles, and personalities, therapists can move toward a deeper understanding of who their clients are and how to help them.

1.1. Introduction Shakespeare suggested that all the world is a stage. If that were true, people-watching would be easy. People would then work at revealing their character to us, and they would actively display their roles in their unfolding drama. Hamlet would wait in the airport for his luggage and deliver his famous speech lamenting the hollowness of life on this planet and his lack of delight in both man and woman. But these soliloquies and other dramatic episodes are rare, and most human behavior is far more subtle than it is on the stage. Yet in an important way the world is a stage. You know very well that you are the central character, playing—even when alone—to some unseen audience that appreciates your actions, playing to what Kurt Vonnegut called the Great Eye in the Sky. You turn to the Great Eye and replay the latest scene in which your feelings were hurt, only this time it is a retake and you are the victor, ready with the immediate devastating comeback that leaves your opponent cringing in humiliation and the secret audience howling with laughter. In this Great Play, you observe all the others, the minor characters in your play, with great interest. You scan them carefully, waiting for them to reveal their roles, to perform in the subplots you live through. In the Great Play, you are the director, and the director is the ultimate interpreter of human nature. And so you see that people-watching is something you do when you wait in an airport, when you sit in a staff meeting, when you are alone at home, or when you read the newspaper and try to understand the motives and psychology of a mass murderer. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-2

Although people-watching is a very human and a very frequent activity, you probably have not considered that it is possible to fine tune your abilities. But that is precisely what we will teach you to do. If you follow some basic principles and dedicate yourself to the pleasant task of people-watching, you will become much more skillful at it. Perhaps the greatest people-watcher of all was Sherlock Holmes, and, in fact, the inspiration for this section of the Specific Affect Coding System (SPAFF) manual came from a Sherlock Holmes story called “A Study in Scarlet,” which describes Dr. Watson’s first meeting with Sherlock Holmes. In this story, Holmes reveals a small bit of the methods he uses to astound others with his ability to watch and analyze people. He alludes to his methods, but he never spells them out. Watson has just returned from the war in Afghanistan, impoverished financially, depressed, and aimless, when he runs into an old friend named Stamford at the Criterion Bar. Stamford tells Watson that he knows someone who might be interested in a roommate, and together they ascend the dark creaky steps leading to Holmes’s laboratory. Holmes is immersed in an experiment, surrounded by bubbling test tubes and Bunsen burners. As they enter, Holmes proclaims, “Egad, we found it! A reagent for hemoglobin and nothing else!” Looking up, Holmes sees Stamford and a stranger, and Stamford introduces them, “Dr. Watson, Mr. Sherlock Holmes.” Holmes looks at Watson, says, “How are you?” and then quickly adds, “You have been in Afghanistan, we perceive.” “How on earth did you know that?” asks Watson, amazed, and Holmes replies, “Never mind,” chuckling to himself. Later the two men have been living together and Watson has been observing his new roommate’s habits for a few weeks when, one morning at breakfast, Watson notices a magazine opened to an article called, “The Book of Life.” He does not realize that Holmes is the author of the article and he reads, “From a drop of water,” said the writer, “a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic or a Niagara without having seen or heard of one or the other. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-3

whenever we are shown a single link of it. Like all other arts, the Science of Deduction and Analysis is one which can only be acquired by long and patient study nor is life long enough to allow any mortal to attain the highest possible perfection in it. Before turning to these moral and mental aspects of the matter which present the greatest difficulties, let the enquirer begin by mastering more elementary problems. Let him, on meeting a fellow-mortal, learn at a glance to distinguish the history of the man, and the trade or profession to which he belongs. Puerile as such an exercise may seem, it sharpens the faculties of observation, and teaches one where to look and what to look for. By a man’s fingernails, by his coat-sleeve, by his boot, by his trouser knees, by the callosities of his forefinger and thumb, by his expressions, by his shirt cuffs—by each of these things a man’s calling is plainly revealed. That all united should fail to enlighten the competent enquirer in any case is almost inconceivable” (Sherlock Holmes, in Arthur Conan Doyle’s “A Study in Scarlet,” p. 13). Watson is unimpressed. He says, “What ineffable twaddle. I never read such rubbish in my life.” Holmes appears then and announces that he is the author. He says, “Observation with me is second nature. You appeared to be surprised when I told you, on our first meeting, that you had come from Afghanistan.” “You were told, no doubt,” says Watson, but Holmes responds: Nothing of the sort. I knew you came from Afghanistan. From long habit the train of thoughts ran so swiftly through my mind that I arrived at the conclusion without being conscious of intermediate steps. There were such steps, however. The train of reasoning ran, “Here is a gentleman of a medical type, but with the air of a military man . . . . Clearly an army doctor, then. He has just come from the tropics, for his face is dark, and that is not the natural tone of his skin, for his wrists are fair. He has undergone hardship and sickness, as his haggard face says clearly. His left arm has been injured. He holds it in a stiff and unnatural manner. Where in the tropics could an English Army doctor have seen Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-4

such hardship and got his arm wounded? Clearly in Afghanistan. . . . I then remarked that you came from Afghanistan, and you were astonished (Arthur Conan Doyle’s “A Study in Scarlet,” p. 24). In this way, this chapter is an attempt to complete the fictional article that Watson read at breakfast. Holmes tells us that his powers are not magical, that they can be learned through patient study. We will demonstrate to you that this is the case.

1.2.

Facial Expression Drawings Now we’ll look at drawings of seven fundamental emotional expressions. They are fear, sadness, disgust, anger, surprise, happiness, and contempt. In each drawing, let’s examine how the parts of the face differ and together, form a universal expression of each emotion.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-5

Fear

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-6

Sadness

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-7

Disgust

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

2-81-8

Anger Anger

© 2000–2007 by Dr. John M. Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-9

Surprise

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-10

Happiness

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-11

Contempt

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-12

1.3.

Facial Expression The state of the art in coding facial expressions is, in my opinion, Ekman and Friesen’s (1978) Facial Action Coding System (FACS). The FACS is an anatomically based coding system that describes facial movement in terms of the action of specific groups of facial muscles. Each muscle group is called an “Action Unit,” abbreviated AU, and is given a number. For example, the muscle group that draws the brows down and together and creates a vertical furrow between the brows is called AU4, “brow lowerer.”

1.3.1.

About Brows In the Human Ethology1 paper, Paul Ekman distinguishes two types of facial signals: emotional expressions and conversational actions. He uses an anatomically based catalog to describe facial action; it is centered on describing the muscles involved in creating any particular visible facial expression. To better illustrate this point, in this paper he focuses on a rather salient party of facial expression: the eyebrow movement. There are seven distinctly different eyebrow actions. Each of these is the result of a different muscle or a combination of muscles. All seven eyebrow actions could be considered a social signal; five are also involved in displaying emotional expression; two of the eyebrow actions play an important part in many conversational signals. To describe facial action, Ekman and his colleague Wallace Friesen spent two years studying anatomy, learning to move their own facial muscles in accordance with anatomical descriptions, and acquiring the ability to contract specific muscles. They also reviewed more than 5,000 different combinations of specific muscular actions. They then taught other people how to recognize facial actions, determining which actions could be reliably distinguished. The results of these findings were incorporated into a manual and other accompanying self-teaching material (Ekman & Friesen,

Ekman, P. “About brows: Emotional and conversational signals.” In: M. von Cranach, K. Foppa, W. Lepenies, and J.D. Ploog (eds.). Human Ethology. London: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

1

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-13

1978)2 on how to score facial behavior. The following description of eyebrow movements is taken from this manual. Ekman describes the muscle units used in eyebrow movements as “action units.” Action Unit 1 (denoted AU1) shows the change that occurs when just the medial portion of the frontalis muscle contracts. The inner corner of the eyebrow is raised, which may result in the appearance of short wrinkles in the center of the forehead. Action Unit 2 (AU2) describes the appearance changes when just the lateral portion of the frontalis muscle contracts. The outer corners of the eyebrows are raised. The skin in the lateral portion of the forehead is pulled up, which may cause short wrinkles to appear in the lateral portion of the forehead. Action Unit 4 (AU4) describes the appearance changes when the corrugator, depressor gabella, and/or depressor supercilli contract. The eyebrows are pulled down and drawn together. The skin between the brows is bunched, often causing a vertical wrinkle between the brows. These three action units are the building blocks for the three combinations shown in subsequent text. Note the inverted horseshoe form of the brow in AU 1 + 4. In AU 1 + 2 + 4, only the medial brow is horizontally furrowed. The horizontal lines do not extend all the way across the brow as they do in a 1 + 2 (full brow raises). The 1 + 2 + 4 is the distress or fear facial expression. In describing emotional expression, there is crosscultural evidence to support the theory that specific patterns of facial actions universally signify particular emotions. These studies include the work of anthropologists, ethologists, pediatricians, psychologists, and sociologists. However, some still argue that there are no universals in facial expressions of emotion. They offer a linguistic analogy. In language, particular sounds are not associated Ekman, Paul, and Friesen, Wallace V. 1978. Unmasking the Face. Copyright 2003.

2

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-14

with particular meanings. Because this is the case, there also may not be any consistent association between nonverbal signals and meaning in different cultures. Ekman explains that, while a linguistic analogy is misleading concerning facial expression of emotion, it is useful in describing the function of facial conversation signals. He attempts to clarify this while offering a theoretical framework that incorporates the theory of those who argue for a linguistic analogy as well as those who argue from an evolutionary viewpoint. Disagreement stems from many sources—such as the failure of universalists to explain what they mean by emotion terms such as anger, fear, surprise, happiness, etc. Ekman considers that these emotive terms also imply an antecedent and classification system that includes the following: l

Elicitors—This is what stimulates the event to take place.

l

Co-occurring response—This term refers to the skeletal muscular action, autonomic nervous system action, vocalization, etc., that occur.

l

Subsequent interpersonal behavior—This refers to how a person copes with the source of emotional arousal.

Having discussed, to some degree, what he means by emotion, Ekman then asks us to regard the seven eyebrow movements (we will discuss only four of them here) and consider their role in a few emotions for which there is clear-cut universal evidence of definition. In Sadness, Action Unit 1 or 1 + 4 occurs. In Surprise, Action Unit 1 + 2 is accompanied by raising the upper eyelid and dropping the jaw. In Fear, the combination, 1 + 2 + 4 is accompanied by raising the upper eyelid, tightening the lower eyelid, and horizontally stretching the lips (AU20). The 1 + 2 + 4 Action Unit makes the brows appear horizontal.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-15

In Anger, Action Unit 4, without brow raising, is accompanied by the same actions around the eyes as described for fear, but the lips are pressed together or tightened and squared. The preceding has described and classified the role of eyebrow action in emotional expression. In comparison to emotional expression, there is little known about conversational signals. In focusing on eyebrow action, Ekman describes the most frequent facial actions used as conversational signals. Speaker conversation signals include what Ekman called the “baton,” “underliner,” “punctuation,” “question mark,” and “word search.” The baton usually coincides with voice stress (or with a word that is spoken more loudly). The usual accompanying facial expression for the baton is 1 + 2 and 4. The underliner is also for emphasis, but usually stretches out over more than a single word. Action units most common with the underliner are 1 + 2 and 4. Punctuation is the term used when there is a pause, much like a comma, after each event in the series. Both 1 + 2 and 4 appear to be used as punctuation. The question mark refers to brow-raising to indicate a question. Both 1 + 2 and 4 are used. In the word search, the speaker is holding the floor with “ah” while he is searching for a particular word or turn of phrase. Facial expressions associated with this may include 1 + 2 (with eyes toward the ceiling in concentration) or 4. In addition to the speaker’s conversational signals, listener responses are associated with facial expressions and, in particular, with specific eyebrow movements. Agreement responses are associated with 1 + 2 with a smile or a head nod. Eyebrows can indicate a call for more information: Action Unit 4 or 1 + 2 can indicate perplexity or that the individual does not understand and needs more explanation. While the previous signals involved spoken conversation, the following will refer to “emblems” or conversational signals without speech: the eyebrow Flash is a repeated brow raise (1 + 2), and it can be used as a greeting signal; Disbelief is shown by 1 + 2 and pulling the corner of the lips down, relaxing the upper eyelid, pushing up the lower lip, raising the upper lip and/or rocking the head Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-16

from side to side; Mock Astonishment involves 1 + 2 with raised upper eyelid, and a dropped open jaw; Affirmation– Negation is shown in two separate ways. Affirmation is generally associated with eyebrow raise (1 + 2) in most cultures; negation is often associated with the drawing together of the brows (AU4). As you may have noticed, Action Units 1 + 2 and 4 are the two eyebrow actions that appear most frequently. It is suggested that, because they are the easiest to perform, they might be the most prevalent social signals. Thus, Ekman distinguishes between emotional and conversational facial signals, although both occur in conversation. He chooses to separate them on the basis of their differences. Emotional expressions are precursors of speech as well as of conversational signals. Emotional expression is not always voluntary, whereas conversational facial signals usually are voluntary. Conversational facial signals only occur in the presence of others, although emotional expressions also occur when a person thinks he is unobserved. While there is much evidence for the universality of emotional facial signals, for conversational facial signals there may be no universals, although this is not known. For both emotional and conversational signals, why do some actions rather than others become particular signals? Some investigators believe certain actions have been incorporated into our repertoire through natural selection and that facial actions associated with emotional expressions originally served a biological function for our early ancestors 3. Through ritualization, a particular behavior is modified through genetic evolution to become an efficient signal. I will illustrate this kind of comparative evolutionary speculation by examining what has been written about the adaptive value of certain facial expressions. The adaptive value of 1 + 2: Darwin offered the explanation that 1 + 2 helps raise the upper eyelid quickly and that this movement increases the superior portion of the visual field. Blurton, Jones, and Konner (1971) noted that children use this Andrew, 1963; Darwin, 1872; Eibl-Eiblesfeldt, 1970.

3

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-17

action in visual search and when looking up at an adult. The adaptive value of 4: This action will decrease the visual field, shutting out extraneous influences and aiding concentration. The adaptive value of 1 + 4: Darwin explained that, when we want to inhibit crying, the only way to counteract the involuntary action of the depressor glabellae, which lowers the inner portion of the brows, is by the upward movement of Action Unit 1. But the corrugator muscle, which we see drawing the brows together, cannot be completely prevented from movement by Action Unit 1. This results in the combined action of brows being drawn together while, at the same time, being raised at the inner ends. The adaptive value of 1 + 2 + 4: This merges two actions observed in other primates during threat behavior; 1 + 2 and 4. If we think of this action as anticipatory of fight or flight, it would make sense that the initial action of 1 + 2 would increase the superior visual field in preparation for attack, while 4 would narrow the visual field in concentration as well as making the eyeball less vulnerable to blows. In conclusion, by focusing on just a particular part of the face, the eyebrow, Ekman and his colleagues were able to demonstrate how an anatomically-based descriptive system can be a powerful tool for classifying, discriminating and describing facial movement.

1.3.2.

Beyond Brows All SPAFF coders are expected to be proficient coders using FACS and EMFACS (“Emotion FACS,” unpublished). They use the FACS materials4 to help recognize specific facial actions that Ekman and Friesen have identified in an emotion predications table (p. 142 ff. Investigator’s Guide, Part 2). It is, therefore, necessary to supplement this manual with the FACS materials. I have added a few facial expressions to Ekman and Friesen’s

Available from Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc., 577 College Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94306.

4

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-18

EMFACS list, based on consultation with Ekman, but I have been conservative. Wherever possible, I have followed the recommendations of Ekman’s and Friesen’s more rapid coding EMFACS system. I have also followed those expressions used in Ekman, Levenson, and Friesen’s (1983) directed facial action task, which produces distinct autonomic profiles. Researchers who read this manual should note that I think that the SPAFF coders ought to be trained to be FACS coders and not just to recognize the specific set of facial cues I have selected that may or may not have emotional significance. However, I have used SPAFF coders in three studies to date (1986), and most of them have not known the FACS. Still, my experience with those SPAFF coders who learned the FACS, suggests that it is a good idea for SPAFF coders to learn the FACS. One word of caution: investigators should be sure that FACS coders pass the post-test, administered at cost by Ekman and Friesen’s laboratory 5. Coders will receive feedback about errors they are making. I take full responsibility for including these selected facial actions as emotions in this manual and do not claim that they are Ekman’s and Friesen’s choices. To continue, I would like to call your attention to a small set of facial expressions that could be indicative of specific emotions. Note that these are only a few examples. You will still be acting as a cultural informant, not a physicalfeatures coder. It is important to begin by knowing a person’s neutral face. It is always important to begin by finding a neutral face so you can identify permanent facial features that are not facial expressions. For example, one person can have a permanent vertical brow furrow that becomes deeper during a facial action, while another person may not have this feature. These features are unrelated to either emotion or character. Distress or Sadness. Distress in the brow area of the face: The central portion of the brow is raised, giving the brows an oblique shape. (This is due to Action Unit 1.) The brow is furrowed, but only the medial (central) portion of the brow is furrowed. The brows are also Write to the Human Interaction Laboratory, 401 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94143.

5

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-19

drawn together (AU4). This produces inverted-U wrinkles in the medial portion of the brow, also called “Darwin’s grief muscle.” In a complete brow raise (AU1 and AU2), the entire brow is furrowed. Contempt, Disgust, Disapproval. There are two possible indicators for disgust. One is the nose wrinkle, produced by Action Unit 9 (AU9). The second is created by raising the upper lip, a result of action unit 10. For contempt, a possible indicator is the result of Action Unit 14, called the dimpler muscle. Another contempt indicator is the eye roll. Sadness. Sadness may look like distress in the upper face. Look for the following cue in the lower face: mouth corners pulled down (AU15). Remember to make sure this is not a permanent feature. Sadness is also conveyed by the combination of two action units: AU6, which raises the cheeks and creates crows feet in the eye corners, and AU15 (lip-corner depression). Ekman, Levenson, and Friesen (1983) include in sadness the following action units: 64 (glance down), 17 (chin raises), and 6 + 12 (cheek raise and lip-corner pull). Anger. The lips and chin boss regions of the face provide clues to anger. The action unit is AU23, rolls the red part of the lips inward so that they are tight and lips are more narrow; AU23 can affect only one lip. AU24 presses the lips together without pushing the chin boss up. It tightens and narrows the lips. The chin boss may also be contracted. Action Unit 17 (AU17), called the chin raiser, pushes the chin boss up, wrinkles the chin boss, and gives the mouth a slight inverted-U shape. If AU17 is strong, the lower lip may protrude as in a pout. AU17 can act in combination with AU23 or AU24 to create a stronger potential signal for anger. Sometimes this action unit is involved when someone is trying to control a display of emotion on the face. Sometimes a strong signal for anger may be observed in the upper face. Anger can also be portrayed by the action units 4 + 5 + 7 + 23. Fear. Signals of fear may be detected in the mouth, particularly the result of AU20. AU20 may entail an open mouth, which can be open Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-20

to varying degrees (i.e., lips part, jaws drop, or mouth stretched). Fear Brow. In a 1 + 2 + 4, only the medial portion of the brow is horizontally furrowed. The horizontal lines do not extend all the way across the brow as they do in a 1 + 2 (full brow raise). The 1 + 2 + 4 is the distress or fear facial expression.

1.3.3.

Conversational Markers As Ekman suggested, not all facial expressions are emotional signals. At least five are: (1) underliners that emphasize words or phrases; (2) expressions that express questioning; (3) punctuation; (4) expressions that accompany a word search (when a person cannot find the right word); and (5) turn taking (giving up or wanting the floor of the conversation). In particular, I want to call your attention to two conversational markers that might, at times, relate to an inner feeling about what is being said. These two expressions are AU4 and AU 1 + 2. The Action Unit 4 pulls the brows down and together and creates a vertical furrow between the brows. Linda Camras suggested that it is usually used when a person is expressing worry, doubt, or consternation; and when the person is anticipating or discussing something difficult or complex or asking a question for which the answer is unknown. People tend to lower their pitch when doing an AU4. Try it the other way: i.e., try doing an AU4 and raising the pitch of your voice. It is difficult. People use AU 1 + 2 when they are looking forward to something, have positive expectations about is outcome, or are asking a question that they do not know the answer to. It is usually accompanied by rises in pitch. You will, of course, need to use other information to have confidence in these judgments of tone color. My goal is only to sensitize you to some cues that might have emotional significance. They also might not. You are the judge. Do not use automatic, easy rules. Use your own personal sensitivity. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-21

1.3.4.

Detecting Emotion from FACS

Affect

AU

combination

Happiness

6 12

(cheek raise) (lip corner pull)

*Sadness

1+4 15 17 6+20

(inner brow raise + brow lowerer) (lip corner depress) (chin raise) (cheek raise + lip corner stretch)

*Anger

4 5 17 23 24

(brow lowerer) (upper lid raise) (chin raise) (lip tight) (lip press)

Fear 1+2+4 5 7 20

(inner brow raise + outer brow raise + brow lowerer) (upper lid raise) (lids tight) (lip stretch)

*Disgust

9 (nose wrinkler) 10 (upper lip raise) 16+25 (lower lip depress + lips part)

19

(tongue show)

*Contempt

14

(dimpler)

*Surprise

1+2 5

(inner brow raise + outer brow raise) (upper lid raise)

26

(jaw drop)

*Interest

1+2 6 12

(inner brow raise + outer brow raise) (cheek raise) (lip corner pull)

*Domineering

2 1+2 4 5 7

(outer brow raise) (inner brow raise + outer brow raise) (brow lowerer) (upper lid raise) (lids tight)

*Used in SPAFF coding system

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-22

1.3.5.

Table of Action Units of the Human Face6

Action Unit #

6

1 2 4

Name Inner Brow Raiser Outer Brow Raiser Brow Lowerer

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18

Upper Lid Raiser Cheek Raiser Lid Tightener Lips Toward Each Other Nose Wrinkler Upper Lip Raiser Nasolabial Furrow Deepener Cheek Puffer Dimpler Lip Corner Depressor Lower Lip Depressor Chin Boss Raiser Lip Puckerer

20 22 23 24 25

Lip Stretcher Lip Funneler Lip Tightener Lip Presser Lips Apart

26

Jaw Drops

27 28 38 39

Mouth Stretches Lip Suck Nostril Dilator Nostril Compressor

41 42 43 44 45

Lids Droop Eyes Slit Eyes Close Squint Blink

46

Wink

Facial Muscles Frontalis pars medialis Frontalis pars lateralis Depressor Glabellae, depressor super cillii, corrugator Levator Pal pebrae superioris Orbicularis Oculi, Pars Orbitalis Orbicularis Oculi, Pars Palpebralis Orbicularis Oris Levator Labii superioris, alaeque nasi Levator Labii superioris, caput infraorbitalis Zygomatic Minor Caninus Buccinator Triangularis Depressor Labii Inferioris Mentalis Incisivii Labii Superioris; Incisivus Labii Inferioris Risorius Orbicularis Oris Orbicularis Oris Orbicularis Oris Depressor Labii, or relaxation of Mentalis or Orbicularis Oris Masseter; Temporal and Internal Pterygoid Relaxed Pterygoids; Digastric Orbicularis Oris Nasalis, par alaris Nasalis, pars transversa, and Depressor Septi alae nasi Relaxation of Levator palpebrae Seperioris Orbicularis Oculi Relaxation of Levator palpebrae Seperioris Orbicularis Oculi, pars palpebralis Relaxation of Levator Palpebrae and Contraction of Orbicularis Oculi, pars palpebralis Orbicularis Oculi

from Ekman and Friesen 1978 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-23

1.4.

Specific Affect Coding System Manual

20-CODE VERSION (4.0) JOHN M. GOTTMAN ERICA M. WOODIN JAMES A. COAN 1998 DISGUST. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-24 CONTEMPT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-25 BELLIGERENCE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-26 DOMINEERING . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-28 CRITICISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-30 ANGER. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-32 TENSION. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-33 TENSE HUMOR . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-35 DEFENSIVENESS . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1-36 WHINING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-37 SADNESS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-38 STONEWALLING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-39 NEUTRAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-40 SPECIAL NOTE FOR POSITIVE CODES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-41 INTEREST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-41 VALIDATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-43 AFFECTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-44 HUMOR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-46 SURPRISE/JOY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-46 CODE-SPECIFIC AFFECT-CODING SYSTEM (SPAFF). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-48

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-24

1.4.1. DISGUST This code involves verbal and nonverbal rejection of some kind of noxious stimulus. It underlines feelings of revulsion. The image communicated by the partner displaying this code is one of nausea, and the object of this nausea should always be either something that the partner prefers or a behavior that the partner exhibits. Attributes Involuntary Reaction—Often a disgust code occurs immediately after a noxious behavior is mentioned in the conversation. It is almost as if the partner cannot control making a vomiting or gagging gesture or wrinkling up his nose when hearing about something that he finds disgusting. Distaste—Something that appears to make the subject feel sick. The subject may turn her head and say “eeewwww” or “yuck” or may simply display a subtle AU10. Aversion—A turning away from and active rejection of something with a strong suggestion of nausea (including AUs 9 or 10). It may include quotes such as “Oh, gross!” or “That make me sick.” Physical Cues—AUs 9 or 10. Possibly a 4 or 17. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: What I’d really like, darling, is for you to go out with me for a snack of raw oysters. Partner 2: (slight AU 1 + 10) Really? Hmmmm. (Distaste) Partner 1: I’d love to go see that new Stallone movie where he decapitates, like four people with one punch! Partner 2: (AUs 4 + 9) Oh my God! That is TOTALLY sickening! (aversion)

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-25

Considerations l

Be careful when viewing rejection and disapproval that you be aware of voice tone in order not to confuse this code with domineering or contempt, which include a suggested superiority.

l

Note the difference between “That is really sickening!” (disgust) and “You make me sick!” (contempt).

1.4.2. CONTEMPT Contempt is the attempt to insult or otherwise communicate a lack of respect toward one’s partner. Its expression is considered to be very powerful, and, as such, it takes precedence over any other code witnessed simultaneously. Contempt is entirely different from a simple disagreement. There is a distance with contempt—an icy quality with a suggestion of superiority—as if looking down one’s nose at one’s partner. Attributes Sarcasm—Derisive laughter or a ridiculing comment regarding something the subject’s partner has said. Can be comments as short as “Sure!” or “I’ll bet you did!” when the meaning of the statement is obviously the reverse of its words. Mockery—Repeating something that one’s partner has said with an exaggeration intended to show a lack of respect for the statement or the individual to whom the statement is attributed. Insults—An active communication of disrespect for one’s partner through verbal cruelty. It is intended to humiliate the partner with the suggestions that the partner is foolish, incompetent, ugly, or otherwise without virtue. Hostile Humor—Humor that is sarcastic, mocking, or insulting. Even if the partner laughs along, still code the speaker as contempt. An exception is good-natured teasing, which is coded Humor. Physical Cues—AUs 1, 2, or 14 (uni or bilateral). An eye roll is virtually always considered contempt. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-26

Dialogue Examples Partner 1: It’s hard work taking care of the kids all day. Partner 2: Sure it is. (sarcasm) Partner 1: Can’t you just help me in the kitchen once? Partner 2: (AUs 1 + 10 +15 + 25; high pitched, exaggerated voice tone) Can’t you just help me once?! (mockery) Partner 1: Why can’t you just talk to me for awhile when you get home from work? Partner 2: I don’t talk to you because you’re so boring. I’d rather just read the paper. (insult) Considerations l

Contempt takes precedence over all other codes.

l

Contempt expressed at someone other than the partner is neutral, unless it is clear that the contempt at the other is an indirect put down of the partner.

1.4.3. BELLIGERENCE Belligerence is provocative. The belligerent person disagrees with or contests whatever her partner is saying, seemingly regardless of content. This person appears to be provoking a response in her partner, as if trying to start a fight. She may present her partner with a challenge or appear to delight in her partner’s discomfort. Attributes Taunting Questions—Questions that serve only to confuse and irritate one’s partner for one’s amusement. The belligerent person may be struggling to repress a smile as he asks these questions, while his spouse becomes enraged.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-27

Unreciprocated Humor—The belligerent person may think she’s being funny, but her partner obviously thinks otherwise. This can include teasing—which is not playful, fun, nor shared humor—or sarcastic, mocking and insulting comments. Interpersonal Terrorism or The Dare—Here the belligerent person attempts to test the agreed-upon limits or fundamental rules of the relationship. It is likewise daring one’s spouse to keep the rules from being broken. Questions like “so?” and “what would you do if I did?” and “what are you going to do about it?” fall into this category. Physical Cues—Jaw thrust forward. AUs 1 or 2. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: I’m really serious about this! Partner 2: (stifling a smirk) Are you sure you’re really serious about this? (taunting question) Partner 1: I don’t like the way you kept putting your arm around him. It seemed like you were flirting with him. Partner 2: What if I was? (Interpersonal Terrorism or The Dare) Partner 1: It hurts my feelings when you call me ‘boopsie.’ Partner 2: (Laughing) But, boopsie, it’s only in fun! (more laughter) (Unreciprocated Humor) Partner 1: (Angry) C’mon! I’m serious! Partner 2: (Giggling) Boopsie, boopsie, boopsie! (cracks up) (Unreciprocated Humor) Considerations l

When pitted against belligerence, anger is considered to be a positive and therefore belligerence would take precedence in the event they occur simultaneously.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-28 l

When deciding between belligerence and domineering, remember that the intent of belligerence is to provoke, while the intent of domineering is to force compliance.

l

An aid in determining the belligerent code is voice tone. A rising inflection at the end of a challenging question will usually denote a belligerent affect.

1.4.4. DOMINEERING The goal of an individual displaying this affect is to dominate the other person in no uncertain terms. Domineering individuals will try to control the conversation. These partners are trying to force compliance, to get the other person to withdraw, retreat, or submit to their views. Attributes low intensity Low Balling—In salesmanship, there is a strategy called low balling in which one tries to get unwary customers to say “yes” to the simplest of facts that most people agree on. Then the statements slowly escalate and customers continue to agree even though the statements are far different from their own point of view. Invalidation—The partner actively denies the validity of previously expressed feelings of his or her partner. Note that invalidation is not the absence of validation, but rather the presence of a statement that says, in effect, “you are wrong.” Lecturing—Picture a mother shaking her finger at a son who has run off to a friend’s house without asking permission. She will be telling him, as a figure of authority, that he was wrong, why she is right and will lay down the rules. In domineering people, look for platitudes, clichés, and quotes from authorities or the ambiguous “everyone” (as in “everyone knows”) to support their point of view. Lecturing also includes talking over the partner in an attempt to actively control or dominate the conversation. Patronizing—Lecturing in a distinctly patronizing quality, as if doing one’s best to talk patiently to a child. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-29

Incessant Speech—This is one tool the domineering person may use to maintain the floor at all times. There is a repetitious, steady, almost rhythmic quality to it. By doing this, the domineering person may repeatedly summarize her own views while paying little, if any, attention to the views of her partner. high intensity Threats—Statements such as “if you ever do that again, I’ll . . .” that are intended to scare the partner by promising negative consequences if she or he engages in a certain activity. Ultimatums—A statement such as “if you don’t improve, I’m leaving.” Ultimatums serve as an extreme threat. They are all-or-nothing statements that tell the partner that this is the last straw and that if something doesn’t happen, dire consequences will result. Physical Cues—AUs 2, 1 + 2, 1 + 2 + 7, 1 + 2 + 5, 4 + 7, 4 + 5 + 7. Head forward, chin down, shaking finger, head cocked to one side, glowering. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: I just feel so afraid that if you get that motorcycle, you’ll get killed in some terrible accident. Partner 2: But, sweetheart, you want me to be happy, don’t you? (Low Balling) Partner 1: And so when you get pissed off and shout and slam doors, it really scares me! Partner 2: Oh, it does not! (Invalidating) Partner 1: I’m sorry, I didn’t realize traffic would be so bad. Partner 2: How many times do I have to tell you (AUs 2; head forward; speech slow and deliberate), rush hour starts at four and then often lasts until six-thirty or seven. During rush hour, it is nearly Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-30

impossible to drive to your mother’s and back within a half-hour. Now, if you’ll pay more attention to what I tell you, we’ll be able to avoid problems like this in the future. (Patronizing and/ or Lecturing) Considerations l

If the patronizing quality blends with contempt, then contempt takes precedence.

l

Whereas belligerence is trying to get a rise out of someone, domineering behavior is trying to stifle or shut up the other person.

l

If domineering is present along with defensiveness, defensiveness usually takes precedence. It often helps to step back from the conversation and make a decision about what role the individual is playing. In general, is she trying to defend her position (defensiveness), or is she trying to influence her partner (domineering)

1.4.5. CRITICISM Criticism involves attacking someone’s personality or character rather than a specific behavior and often couples with blame. Criticism is very different from complaining. A complaint is a specific statement of anger, distress, displeasure, or other negativity. Criticism is much less specific. Attributes Blaming—Assigning fault to one’s spouse with a personal attack or accusation. “The reason the car blew up is because you never put oil in it.” Character Attacks—Statements that are critical of the spouse’s character. Often expressed in “you always/you never” kinds of statements or in statements including the word “should.” Examples might include statements such as “You don’t care,” “You always put yourself first,” or “You should know better than to leave the porch light on all day.”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-31

Kitchen Sinking—A long list of complaints. Even though each item in the list may be expressed as a complaint, when the complaints begin to pile up they become overwhelming to the spouse on the receiving end and are to be considered criticism. An example might be “I don’t feel listened to by you, and you don’t touch me very often. I asked you to do certain chores, but you didn’t. I’m just not having any fun.” Betrayal Statements—Much the same as blaming, this kind of statement is more specific to trust. It implies (or states directly) that one spouse betrayed the other. “I trusted you to balance the checkbook, and you let me down.” “How could you do that when you know how much this means to me?” Negative Mind-Reading—A mind-reading statement is any attribution that the partner makes about the other’s feelings, behaviors, or motives. These statements often include the phrases, “you always . . .” or “you never . . . .” Mind-reading statements are coded criticism only when delivered with negative affect. Physical Cues—A wide variety. Dialogue Examples (for the sake of clarity, we contrast critical statements with complaints. Examples are from Dr. John Gottman’s book Why Marriages Succeed or Fail). Complaint: We don’t go out as much as I’d like to. Criticism: You never take me anywhere. Complaint: It upset me when I came home and there were dirty dishes in the sink. This morning we agreed that you would wash them. Criticism: You left dirty dishes all over the kitchen again. You promised me you wouldn’t. I just can’t trust you, can I? Complaint: I expected you to come home right after work. When you didn’t, it made me feel like you care more about going out with your friends then spending time with me. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-32

Criticism: I hate that you’re the type of person who never thinks to call and tell me you’ll be late coming home. You always leave me hanging. You care more about your friends than you do about our relationship. Considerations l

Often, criticism is delivered with a domineering or angry affect. Criticism takes precedence because it is the more corrosive behavior.

l

Be on the lookout for counter-criticism. The person uses criticism as a way to deflect blame. This is coded defensive.

1.4.6. ANGER The angry person sounds like he is fed-up, like he’s “had it up to here.” In this code, voice tone, facial expressions, gestures, and the content of the communication are all important. Words may be biting or abrupt with one-syllable words more strongly stressed. Attributes Irritation or Annoyance—The speaker is very frustrated and will often employ changes in the rhythm of speech and in the way certain words are stressed. Raising Voice—This is an open anger, often with a loud voice tone, while in the midst of confronting, scolding, or accusing the partner. The speaker may sound irrational or show evidence of being upset, with involuntary twitches or jerks. Constrained Anger—Attempts made to control being angry. An example is the lowering of the voice and speaking in an even, staccato rhythm, as if to communicate to the partner that the speaker is at the end of her rope. Look particularly for AUs 4, 5, 7 and tight jaws and clenched teeth in the lower face. Direct Anger—Statement of anger (“I am angry . . .”) or complaints with angry affect such as yelling or raising the voice. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-33

Physical Cues—AUs 4, 5, 7, 23, 24. The voice is lowered or raised beyond limit of normal tone. Involuntary twitches or jerks, tight jaw, clenched teeth. Short, quick sighs. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: If you weren’t so irresponsible, this never would have happened! Partner 2: (AU 4 + 5 + 23; teeth clenched; high voice volume) I am not a child! I made a mistake, and it makes me so mad when you treat me this way!! (direct anger) Partner 1: . . . and another thing, next time your mother comes, tell her to do something about that awful growth on the end of her nose. That thing is so disgusting! Partner 2: (after a pause; slight AU 4 + 23; clenched teeth; low voice volume; words spoken very even, staccato, and rhythmic) I think that was really unfair of you to say. There isn’t much she can to about that. (constrained anger) Considerations l

Anger is often expressed as a blend with other negative codes such as contempt and belligerence. In these cases of blending, all other negatives take precedence over anger.

l

Very often a smile is used to cover anger. Look for the “unfelt smile”—a smile without an accompanying 6.

1.4.7. TENSION Tension is an uncomfortable feeling that results from feeling worried or anxious when an undesirable topic is introduced into the conversation. The tense person often has a hard time speaking coherently, spends a lot of time biting her lip or nails and may behave as if she is feeling embarrassed.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-34

Attributes Speech Disturbances—The speaker is obviously having a difficult time expressing what it is he wants to say. This may include several incomplete or unfinished thoughts within one speaking turn, repetitive uhs or ahs within a sentence, and stuttering repeatedly (nonbaseline behavior). Fidgeting—Excessive or repeated plucking at clothes and/ or hands. Rubbing areas of the face such as the temple or the chin mouth. Also lip biting where the upper or lower lip appears to be “swallowed.” This is not the same as the lip disappearing due to a lip press, which is a tightening of the lips and is coded anger. Shifting—When individuals are nervous, the phrase “they’re in the hot seat” is meant to explain this kind or tension. Partners cannot seem to sit still, almost as if their chairs are on fire. There is the sense that individuals feel like an insect squirming on a pin. Nervous Laughter—Often laughing or smiling will act as an icebreaker when a situation becomes very tense. These smiles or attempts at laughter look very forced and often do not “fit in” with the context of the conversation (there was no joke told, no humorous event). A listener may smile when a partner is discussing a very sensitive issue. The smile looks pasted on as if it were an effort, not a revelation of happiness. Physical Cues—AUs 20, 1 + 2 + 4, 1 + 2 + 4 + 5, frequent eye movement, swallowing lips, nervous smile or laugh. Dialogue Example Partner:

Well, I uh . . . it’s just that whenever . . . I mean, ummmm, when I war . . . want to uhr . . . want to go out, I feel that I. . . it’s like I always have to ask. (speech disturbance)

Considerations l

When both people are exhibiting nervous laughter, code tense humor.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-35 l

1.4.8.

If fidgeting behaviors become stationary (i.e., individual rests chin on hand after rubbing chin), code neutral.

TENSE HUMOR Tense humor is nervous laughter that occurs in both partners at the same time. The laughter often comes at the beginning of, or in the midst of, a serious conversation and is used as a release of tension. It can also be used to avoid an unpleasant topic. The duration is short, and there is an uncomfortable feel to it. Attributes Nervous giggling—The couple looks at one another and erupts into spontaneous giggling for no apparent reason and then becomes serious. This often happens in the first few seconds of an interaction or at a transition between topics. Tense joking—One partner makes a joke during a conversation, and the other partner responds with a short, quick laugh and tense smile. Physical Cues —1 + 12, 12 + 20, absence of 6. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: (tense smile) OK. You start. Partner 2: (smiles back) No, you start. (both fidget in their chairs and laugh) (nervous giggling) Partner 1: (after a pause in conversation) So what do you want to do? Partner 2: Let’s just get a maid. (both laugh nervously) (tense joking) Considerations l

The key to differentiating tense humor from humor is the amount of tension the couple is displaying. In humor, the couple is relaxed, and the laughter is warm and hearty, often ending with both partners smiling. In tense humor, on the other hand, both partners are tense and uncomfortable, and the laughter is short-lived.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-36 l

If there is any negativity in the joking, such as contempt or belligerence, the negative code takes precedence. (If the partner still laughs, code it as tension.)

1.4.9. DEFENSIVENESS This code communicates an innocent victim kind of stance— a communication of blamelessness—as if to say, “Leave me alone. What are you picking on me for?” Also, there is an implicit message that seems to say, “It’s not my fault, I didn’t do anything wrong.” These statements can also be communicated in an aggressively defensive manner. Attributes Yes–But—The statement starts off sounding like an agreement, but ends up being a disagreement. There must be a “yes,” “yeah, I know,” or some other kind of agreement immediately followed by a disagreement in the same statement. Cross-Complaining—This involves meeting a complaint directly with a counter-complaint. One partner complains about Subject A, and the other partner immediately complains about Subject B. This is a way of deflecting the blow of the initial complaint. Excuses— Instead of meeting a complaint with “yes, I know,” an excuse always seems to find another place to rest the ultimate blame in a given situation. Rubber man/woman—The partner is defending himself or herself from attack but also blames the other partner. The person tries to suggest that guilt or blame actually rests with the other partner or an outside influence. It is as if to say, “whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you.” Counter-Criticism—There is a juvenile quality to this kind of response. The speaker acts pouty and victimized. The response to a complaint is saying, “Well, you don’t either.” Aggressively Defensive—The intensity is high. The individual does not back away, but rather vehemently or assertively defends herself or himself. Most often, this Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-37

initial defensive response will be accompanied by domineering. An example is “No, I did not do that!” Physical Cues—AUs 1, 1 + 2, 5. Folding arms across chest. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: I stay at home with the kids and then you come home and want to be alone. Partner 2: Well, I’m tired from working all day and want a little time to unwind from all the tension. (cross-complaining) Partner 1: You always get tense when my mother talks about how to raise the children. (delivered with negative affect) Partner 2: I don’t always feel that way. It’s just that your mother is so sanctimonious. (excuse) Considerations l

If defensiveness is delivered in a whining tone, code defensive.

l

If defensiveness is displayed in a domineering way, defensiveness still takes precedence. A key to distinguishing the two is to know the intent of the speaker. If the speaker is trying to defend his position in any way—even if he is extremely domineering while doing it—code defensive.

1.4.10. WHINING This code really only refers to voice quality during the airing of a complaint. The words of a whining person will sound very nasal and sing-songy and may sound something like fingernails on a chalkboard—not at all unlike the whiners on Saturday Night Live. Dialogue Example Partner 1: We need to start eating at the dining room table. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-38

Whining: Partner 2: (very high, drawn out voice) Whyyyy? I like using the TV trays. *versus* Defensiveness: Partner 1: (similar high voice tone) I’ve never said we shouldn’t. You’re the one who won’t clean up the papers you have spread all over the table. Considerations l

Whining is only coded when associated with a complaint.

l

If there is any defensiveness involved, code defensive.

1.4.11. SADNESS Sadness is characterized by a marked decrease in energy and a passive, resigned countenance. It can be expressed in a very subdued, quiescent state or in a plaintive poignant way. Attributes Passivity—The person behaves as if resigned or hopeless. She may appear unable to cope with her partner’s behavior, family, and so on. She lack energy, may be sorry for herself, feel a minor loss, or miss something or someone. Listen for long pauses between phrases or words—as if it takes an extra effort to speak. Sighing—All slow sighing (as opposed to the rapid exhalations of anger) are to be coded sadness. Look for the deep intake of breath and slow droop to the shoulders as he lets the air go. He may appear tired. Pouting and/or Sulking—The individual feels hurt or dejected and is actively showing it, as opposed to behaving passively. Look for a sad facial expression and a dejected, droopy stance.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-39

Crying—Code all tears sadness if the context suggest grief, remorse or regret, or rejection or hopelessness. Feeling Hurt—The individual shows grief, remorse, or desolation. She has a quavering voice tone, and it may be either abnormally high or low in pitch. There may be a sense of depression or hopelessness. Physical Cues—AUs 1, 4, 6, 11, 15, 17. Considerations l

Pouting and/or sulking may be confused with stonewalling because of a similar withdrawal form the interaction. Usually there will be some eye contact; whereas with stonewalling, there will be very little eye contact. Think of the line from a Paul Simon song “sad as a little wrinkled balloon” (sadness) versus the energy of a rubber band stretched to the limit and then held there (stonewalling).

1.4.12. STONEWALLING Individual ceases to attend to what their partner is saying. Look for this behavior only as a response to something aversive that the partner is doing. The partner is complaining, blaming, criticizing, raising an issue, or otherwise upset or expressing negative affect. The partner may be talking about doing something the other partner views as irresponsible. There is a total lack of listening behavior and an active tuning out of the partner. Attributes Away Behavior—The individual focuses on something trivial in order to avoid eye contact with the partner. Automanipulation includes playing with hair or hands (e.g., cleaning nails, looking for split ends) when the partner is expressing negative affect. The listener is conveying to the speaker, “I’d rather not be here right now.” No Backchannels—There are no vocal or nonverbal backchannels, no head nods, rigid neck, no verbal or vocal assents (“umm-hmmm,” “yeah,” “uh-huh,” “mmm,” etc.), no verbal response. There is no facial movement, no facial mirroring, little eye contact or monitoring gaze (looking Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-40

away and back, away and back rapidly). It may include leaving the conversation abruptly. Individuals behave as if they actively want to become a wall to block what they are hearing. There is a total lack of listening behavior. Monitoring Gaze—This consists of the same general behavior stated in “No Backchannels,” although here the stonewalling person frequently glances at her partner, each time quickly looking away. Physical Cues—Face appears stiff or frozen. Jaw may be clenched, and the muscles in the neck may become more pronounced. Considerations l

Be aware of the difference between passive listening in which there is a lack of backchannels and other listening behavior, and stonewalling in which the individual actively shuts out the partner.

l

If the individual looks deflated and resigned versus stiff and withdrawn, consider coding sadness.

1.4.13. NEUTRAL This is the dividing line between negative and positive. It is recognizable as being nonemotional in content and voice tone. The voice has an even, relaxed quality, without marked stress on individual syllables and within comfortable pitch range. If you see something that cannot be defined by SPAFF or is too subtle to recognize immediately, code neutral. Become familiar with a person’s resting face. He may naturally have turned down lips or other permanent features that may appear to be emotional expressions. Attributes Statements and/or Information Exchange—Matter-offact exchange of day-to-day information. Question and response exchange without positive or negative affect. Non-codable Interaction—Any behavior or affect that does not fit the code categories.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-41

Physical Cues—The face is neutral (be careful of wrinkles, pouches, and bags that are permanent). Dialogue Examples Partner 1: Are we going out to eat? Partner 2: No, I made some dinner to heat up the night before. Partner 1: I took the dog for a walk this morning. Partner 2: I guess that was after I left for work. Considerations l

1.4.14.

If the affect is directed at another individual and is not indirectly aimed at the partner, code neutral. If however, there is any possibility that the affect may be indirectly aimed at the partner (i.e., “your mom talks too much”), then code that affect.

SPECIAL NOTE FOR POSITIVE CODES AUs of Happiness l

These can be associated with validation, affection, humor, and joy. The most common are the 6, 7, and 12.

l

The FACs manual mentions looking for a “twinkle in the eye.” A smile may also be used as a mask to hide other emotions, but you will often be able to see leakage of other emotions in the brow and forehead area.

1.4.15. INTEREST There is a positive energy in relation to what the partner has said or done, with a definite involvement on the part of the listener. The voice can be relaxed and calm and still have this positive energy as the partners ask questions and probe an issue in greater depth. The interested person appears genuinely concerned about the partner’s thoughts and feelings, not merely attempting to avoid a fight or to appease. Interest is an active code; passive (neutral) listening is not to be coded interest. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-42

Attributes Elaboration Seeking—The individual reflects or questions in order to seek clarification; asks for additional information or elaboration. It is important that there be positive energy and that the listener is open and receptive. This can happen in the middle of a conflict discussion, but be careful that the tone is positive and not domineering or belligerent. Opinion Question—This can be any question that elicits opinion and thought rather than just information. The question is asking why instead of just what. Physical Cues—1 + 2, 6 and 12. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: And so when you get pissed off and shout and slam doors, it really scares me! Partner 2: (positive energy/genuine quality) Does it make you feel like I’m taking it out on you? (elaboration seeking) Partner 1: I’m very frustrated that we haven’t had a vacation together in so long. Partner 1: Let’s start planning one. Would you like to go camping sometime? (opinion question) Considerations l

Paraphrasing is validation unless it is used in a question format to seek clarification—then it should be coded interest.

l

Domineering individuals will often ask questions as a way of proving their point to their partner. The way to distinguish this from interest is the intent of the question. Ask yourself whether the individual really wants to know the answer to the question or if they are just asking leading questions much like a lawyer arguing a case would. Also, there is always a pause after a real interest question to allow the partner to respond;

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-43

whereas with domineering, there is often a barrage of questions with no pauses in between.

1.4.16. VALIDATION Validation is coded when the couple is talking about one of the partner’s feelings. It involves acceptance and openness to a partner’s viewpoint, even if he disagrees. There is a communication of respect—that the partner makes sense and that the individual is open to suggestions. Attributes low level Backchannels—This indicates the individual is listening to the partner in an affirmative fashion by using paralinguistic cues, such as head nods, “umm-humm,” or other physical and vocal assenting behaviors. There must be eye contact for backchanneling behavior to be coded validation. high level Understanding and/or Acceptance—This includes direct expression of understanding and/or acceptance of the partner’s point of view. It also includes explicit expressions of respect or agreement and the paraphrasing of the partner’s viewpoint. Paraphrasing—Individual repeats back what her partner has just said in a slightly different style. Think of the “so what you’re saying is . . .” format. If the individual paraphrases in question format, however, code interest. Apology—Acceptance of the partner’s point of view coupled with an apology. Finishing Sentences—The individual places an ending to the sentences the partner has begun. This is a way to let the partner know the individual is “on the same page” and can follow the partner’s train of thought. Physical Cues —Head nod with eye contact.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-44

Dialogue Examples Partner 1: I just feel so afraid that if you get that motorcycle, you’ll get killed in some accident. Partner 2: Wow. It sounds like it really scares you. (understanding and/or acceptance) Partner 1: And so, when you got pissed off and slammed the door, it really scared me! Partner 2: I bet! I’m really sorry about that! (Apology) Considerations

1.4.17.

l

If the individual expresses empathy instead of just understanding, code affection.

l

Do not code validation for information exchange (i.e., answering a yes/no question).

AFFECTION This is a direct expression of caring. The voice sometimes slows, with a drop in amplitude, yet even then there remains a definite intensity or energy in its expression. There may be a romantic feel to their conversation because of the warmth of their voices and sharing of intimate moments. Attributes Tenderness and Closeness—Reminiscing, sharing a moment that brings them close together. There is often a sort of warm dreamy quality to this kind of interaction. The affectionate partner appears peaceful, mellow, contented, and friendly. Loving and Caring Statements—Statements such as “I love you,” “I care about you.” Compliments—Statements that communicate pride in one’s partner.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-45

Empathy—Mirroring a partner’s feelings. Not necessarily verbal (partner makes sad face, then individual mirrors sad face back). This sort of mirroring let’s people know that their feelings are understood and shared. This is more than validation, it is validation coupled with affect that mirrors that of the partner. Common Cause—A perhaps less intuitive form of affection, here one partner expresses anger (perhaps even contempt) for some third party, and the other spouse joins in a sort of verbal mirroring. Think of it as “we-againstothers.” It needn’t be the sharing of negative thoughts or feelings; positive things can be shared too. Physical Cues—There is no action unit that distinguishes affection. The important factor is the warm voice tone. They may be crying with the partner, or angry at the same person with the partner. A 6 + 12 shows a positive energy that can be linked to affection. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: (sigh) And so then Dad told me he wished I’d been more like my brother (sad face). Partner 2: (sad face – AU1) Ouch. That sounds like it hurt. (Empathy) Partner 1: Can you believe the way they treated us? What jerks! Partner 2: No kidding! What a couple of creeps! (Common Cause) Partner 1: Remember that big sand castle we made at the beach? Partner 2: (warm smile) Yep. I couldn’t believe how cute you were, diggin’ around in the sand all day. (closeness/compliment) Consideration l

If affection is present, it takes precedence over all other positive codes.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-46

1.4.18. HUMOR Moments of shared laughter that are not tense. The laughter here is characterized by an underlying feeling of shared happiness. Attributes Joking and/or Good-Natured Teasing—Jokes and teasing that both partners think is funny enough to laugh at. Wit—Mutual recognition of absurdity that causes laughter. It is a sort of “we-against-other” behavior where the partners are laughing at someone or something else’s behavior or nature. Think of it as shared deviance. Giggling and/or Private Joke—Although elusive to outside observers, something is going on that both partners think is entirely funny. Fun and/or Exaggeration—The partners are thoroughly enjoying themselves and are actively trying to make each other laugh by using exaggerated, animated, or imitative behavior. More energy, and often a deeper laughter, accompanies this. Physical Cues – AUs 1, 2, 6, 12, 25-27. Considerations l

If affection is present, that takes precedence over humor. For example, if the individual is teasing the partner, but is doing so in a way that turns out to be a compliment.

l

If the humor is at all tense or short-lived, or if it seems out of place in the conversation, consider coding tense humor.

l

If only one person is laughing, and the other one seems upset, consider coding belligerence, contempt, or tension.

1.4.19. SURPRISE/JOY A positive, happy, or emphatic reaction to some event. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-47

Attributes Positive Surprise—An emphatically happy reaction to some unanticipated event or remark. Big smiles and exclamation points characterize this code. Joy—Moments of happiness such as when someone has received a compliment. Often one can see a broad, warm smile appear on a subject’s face after his or her partner has remarked on how wonderful he or she is. This is Happiness. Look for a bright, beaming, positive expression. Physical Cues—AUs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 23, 24, 25-27. Dialogue Examples Partner 1: Guess who is coming to visit us this weekend? Jeff! Partner 2: Wow, it’s been years since I saw him. I can hardly believe it. We have lots to catch up on. (positive surprise) Partner 1: . . . and I know I’ve told you before that I’m not willing to compromise on this, but I’m starting to think that moving to Idaho to be near your family might not be such a bad idea. Partner 2: (big smile, warm glowy look) I’m so happy to hear you say that. (joy) Considerations l

To differentiate from interest, look for expressions of delight or pleasure.

l

Be careful not to code mock surprise or surprise that is overly prolonged or exaggerated—if there is not warmth or positive energy, do not code surprise/joy. joy.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-48

1.4.20.

SPAFF CRIB SHEET

Disgust (DIS) • Involuntary reaction • Distaste • Aversion Contempt (CON) • Sarcasm • Mockery • Insults • Hostile humor • Eye rolls • Dimples Belligerence (BEL) • Taunting questions • Unreciprocated humor • Interpersonal terrorism • The dare Domineering (DOM) Low Level • Low balling • Invalidation • Lecturing, patronizing • Incessant speech High Level • Threats • Ultimatums Criticism (CRI) • Blaming • Character attacks • Kitchen sinking • Betrayal statements • Negative mind-reading Anger (ANG) • Irritations/Annoyance • Raised voice • Constrained anger • Direct anger Tension (TEN) • Speech disturbances • Fidgeting • Shifting • Nervous laughter



Tense Humor (T/H) Same as nervous laughter but involves both partners Brief segments Nervous giggling Tense joking Defensiveness (DEF) Yes–But Cross-complaining Excuses Rubber man/woman Counter-criticism Aggressive defense Whining (WI) • Nondefensive complaint • Sing-song voice quality • High pitched and/or nasal tone

Affection (AFF) • Tenderness/closeness • Loving/caring statements • Compliments • Empathy • Common cause (we against others) Humor (HUM) • Joking/good-natured teasing • Wit • Giggling or private joke • Fun/Exaggeration • Longer segments than T/H Surprise/Joy (SPJ) • Positive Surprise • Emphatic Reaction

Stonewalling (STO) • Away behavior • No backchannels • Monitoring gaze

Notes Generally, when two codes appear, code the one you see the most of. The remaining guidelines are as follows: • Negative codes take precedence over positive codes. • Contempt takes precedence over all other negative codes. • Affection takes precedence over all other positive codes. • When choosing a code, ask yourself whether the person is on the offensive or defensive.

Neutral (N) • Neutral affect • Statement/Information exchange • Noncodable interaction

Parts of a Code • Verbal content • Voice tone • Facial expression

Sadness (SAD) • Passivity • Sighing • Pouting/sulking • Crying • Feeling hurt

Interest (INT) • Elaboration seeking • Opinion question

Remember Be a coding machine. No mercy

Validation (VAL) Low Level • Backchannels High Level • Understanding and/or acceptance • Paraphrasing • Apology • Finishing sentences

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-49 CODE-SPECIFIC AFFECT-CODING

SYSTEM (SPAFF)

1. NEUTRAL 2. HUMOR 3. AFFECTION–CARING 4. INTEREST–CURIOSITY (needs definite energy) 5. ANTICIPATION–SURPRISE–EXCITEMENT–JOY (needs more energy) 6. ANGER 7. DISGUST–SCORN–CONTEMPT 8. WHINING 9. SADNESS 10.

TENSION

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

1-50

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

2-1

2. Tension in the Voice 2.1.

Fear (Tension/Stress/Worry/Fear)



Type 1: Speech Disturbances Speech disturbances have been studied, and two kinds have been distinguished. One kind, called “ah-disturbance,” is neutral. Words like “ah,” “er,” and “um” are usually designed to provide the speaker with thinking time; they tend to be a vehicle for keeping the floor (i.e., for the speaker to hold on to his or her turn). The other kind of speech disturbance is called “non-ah-disturbances”: l

Sentence change in the middle of a sentence

l

Repetition in mid-sentence

l Stuttering l Omissions l

Sentence incompletion

l Slips l

Intruding incoherent sounds

They are generally indicative of tension. The following table gives examples of categories of speech disturbances (from Cook, 1969). Category

Example

1.

Sentence change

2. 3. 4. 5.

Repetition Stutter Omission (e.g., leaving out a word or leaving it unfinished) Sentence incompletion

I have a book which . . . the book I need for finals. I often . . . often work at night . . . I sort of I . . . I . . . leaves me I went to the lib . . . the Bod.

6. 7.

Tongue slip Incoherent intruding sound

He said the reason was . . . anyway, he couldn’t go. I haven’t much term (i.e., time) these days. I don’t really know why . . . uh . . . I went . . .

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

2-2

Fear is indicated when non-ah-speech-disturbances are negative in tone. Also, any other utterances of fear, worry, or anxiety indicate fear. People will also display nonah-speech-disturbances when excited and happy, so it is important not to code these excitement affects as indicating tension. Also, non-ah-speech-disturbances could be common in some cultural groups and should not be taken as indicators of tension (e.g., people for whom English is a second language).



Type 2: Fundamental Frequency Shifts When people speak in a relaxed way, their voices tend to be in what is called a “chest register.” They speak in their normal “fundamental frequency.” However, when they become tense, the fundamental frequency shifts upward as the vocal pillars become tense and the regular voice shifts from a chest to a head register. It is possible to hear this tightness and tension in the voice.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-1

3. The Words Themselves 3.1.

How the Story Is Told We want to reiterate a point we made about watching people. When you read a transcript, you must view how characters tell their story as a choice. There are a million different ways of saying the same thing. What precisely is this person communicating by this particular choice of words? In order to perceive the information gained by how someone has acted, you need to do a very important mental exercise. You must pretend that this action was chosen from a set of alternative actions. This means that you must imagine other possibilities. For example, let’s say one partner says, “Today I lost my favorite bracelet.” How might her partner respond? He might say, “Oh, no, that’s terrible, you always loved that bracelet.” This is empathetic and supportive. Or he might say, “I told you to get that clasp fixed,” which might be angry. Or he might say, “You keep losing things,” which could have a range of meaning (usually it is contemptuous), depending on the context and how it is said. His response could be a long speech. Or he could not respond at all (e.g., he could say, “What’s for dinner?”), which could be negative or positive. Your job is to imagine a range of alternatives in order to give meaning to the response you actually observe. We want to give you an example here of one couple talking about how their day went. When he asks about her day, she goes into a long narrative about losing a bracelet. Read this segment and think about what she is saying and how she is saying it by her choice of words. How is she describing the events? What picture of herself is she trying to convey to her partner? Partner 1: What else did you do? Partner 2: Well, Susan got upset. She’s still having problems with her boyfriend, so, well, she and Peggy invited me to lunch and, well, you know, I haven’t been out with them for a while. So we went over to the Pizza Hut and I had a salad and two pieces of pizza and a beer. I had a nice time there, and then I went to the store Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-2

and came home. And, ah, well you know that bracelet that I bought from Terra, well . . . , I lost it today. And, well, the clasp on it wasn’t very tight. . . . So, I backtracked and went everywhere lookin’ for that bracelet. I couldn’t find it anyplace, an’ so I posted up notices at the IGA store, Value Plus, where I went, and back at the Pizza Hut and everywhere. And I didn’t even get home until shortly before you got home, and I straightened up the apartment, and ah, ah, you know, and I thought, well it was getting so close to the time you were gonna get home, I thought I’d let you come home and take a shower first before I took a shower. Now, how does she act? We think she is trying to prepare for his criticism. She is trying to tell him that it was not her fault, she lost it because of the faulty clasp. Also, she did everything possible to track it down. Then she did everything possible to post up notices. Then she was a good partner to boot. She straightened the apartment and she let him take a shower first. What is her message? We think it is somewhat fearful of his criticism. She is telling him and perhaps herself the message, “I am not incompetent.” She is expecting his contempt and criticism. Imagine other ways this story might have unfolded. For example, Partner 1: What else did you do? Partner 2: Well, I went out for pizza with Susan and Peggy, and then I had a frustrating afternoon looking for that dumb bracelet with the faulty clasp. But never mind, it’ll probably turn up. How was your day? These are roughly the same facts, but they tell an entirely different story. Here is an example of contempt that is communicated just by the words. Partner 1: You are in a position where you should be on time for work. You are supposed to be a supervisor. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-3

Partner 2: Well, I am not late for work everyday now. Partner 1: No, because you have to be there an hour early to drive me to work. If it weren’t for me, you’d still be late. Partner 2: Well, yeah. Ah, I, I sort of like being to work early, getting to work early. Partner 1: You sort of like it. You sort of like it. (Her repetition of his last statement is said with mockery and contempt.) Partner 2: Well, I’d like to make it a habit, really. I really would. Partner 1: I would like to make it a habit for you to make it a habit that when I say . . . Partner 2: to get up out of bed . . . Partner 1: George, it’s time to get up, then you get up. The words themselves can communicate a great deal of affective information. A common behavior in couples interaction is one what the Couples Interaction Scoring System (CISS) calls “mind-reading.” Mind-reading is any attribution of feeling, thought, action, or motive to the other person. For example, “You always get tense at my mother’s house,” or “You don’t care about the house,” or “You didn’t take out the garbage.” Mind-reading has different effects depending on whether it is delivered with positive or negative affect. We have discovered that when mind-reading such as, “You always get tense at my mother’s,” is said with an accusing, blaming tone of voice, the response will be to disagree and then to elaborate (e.g., “I don’t always get tense, just when she starts criticizing how I act around my children and you take her side.”). If the mind-reading is delivered with neutral or positive affect, the response is to agree and then to elaborate (e.g., “Yeah, I do. She does get me going, and it’s worse when you take her side. Why do you do that?”). Pay attention to the use of “you always” and “you never” forms of mindreading; often they are accompanied by negative affect.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-4

3.2.

Specific Affect Coding System (10-Code Version) Test Tape Segments The following dialogues are transcripts of filmed conversations between partners. Each time our coders detected an emotional expression, their coding is included in bold and parentheses.

Segment 1: DUO 83, 103, Conversation B Partner 1: The light’s on.1(tension) Partner 2: Uhhhmmm. Communication.2(sadness) The question is . . .3(tension) Partner 1: How we disagree.4 Partner 2: On communication?5 Partner 1: You don’t see a need for it.6(whining) Partner 2: Oh yeah.7 Partner 1: You just said you kept to yourself.8(neutral) Partner 2: Well, yeah I just . . . . semi, I dunno. Idle chit chat I guess.9(tension) Partner 1: You what?10(anger) Partner 2: Some of the idle chit chat I guess if that is what you refer to as communication.11(neutral) Partner 1: What do you mean idle chit chat?12(anger) Partner 2: General run of the mill bullshit (laughter).13(tension) Partner 1: There’s nonverbal communication if you’re tuned in.14(neutral) Partner 2: (Head nod)15 Partner 1: Like that man said in that canoeing class, as they went over the rapids that they were still communicating.16(neutral) Partner 2: That’s true. What do you think we need to talk more about then? Huh?17(neutral) Partner 1: Well,18(sadness) I think when there’s uh, a problem, or I’m trying to tell you something, sometimes I shouldn’t have to say anything. You can know when I am in a hurry or tired Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-5

and have to be somewhere and I don’t have enough time to do something or what should be done.19(neutral) Partner 2: You talk about chores or, er . . . ?20(neutral) Partner 1: I am, yes.21(neutral) Partner 2: Or communication? 2(neutral) Partner 1: Well chores, that’s what I was saying. I shouldn’t have to ask you to help me. You should know.23(neutral) Partner 2: Well that’s chores. We’re talking about communication.24(neutral) Partner 1: But that is communication.25(neutral) Partner 2: Giving job assignments is communication.26(neutral) Partner 1: Well, that’s communication.27(neutral) Partner 2: Sweeping the floor is a chore.28(neutral) Partner 1: Well, if you were . . .29(neutral) Partner 2: I, I just, just take as communication being uhh, uhh no should we sit down and discuss things more fully.30(tension) Partner 1: We don’t sit down and discuss nothing unless it’s a problem, or if somebody gets mad. You know lots of families have what they call, which is kinda silly, but a weekly meeting or some weekly time when they just sit down there and talk about everything that has been going on there all week, what they like and don’t like.31(anger) Partner 2: Uhhhmmm.32(low level validation) We used to have those at home. (laughter)33(affection) Partner 1: That’s a little farfetched maybe, but I’m just saying.34(tension) Partner 2: I know what you mean. I just . . . 35(neutral) Partner 1: If you think about a family or a home,36(neutral) Partner 2: Well you, you37(neutral)

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

3-6

Partner 1: It should be run like a business, I mean it’s38(neutral) Partner 2: Yeah, but you know39(neutral) Partner 1: It makes sense40(neutral) Partner 2: You know, you know what the major problems we have at work? Really is communication.41(neutral) Partner 1: It’s a major problem everywhere42(neutral) Partner 2: Yeah, Yeah43(neutral) Partner 1: People don’t say what they mean44(whining) Partner 2: Or45(neutral) Partner 1: Or they say something else and expect the other person to read their minds. 46(whining) Partner 2: Or assume that people know what they mean or want.47(whine) Partner 1: Well, how many times have I asked you what’s wrong and you say nothing. And then a month later or a week later you say what was wrong and I couldn’t have guessed it in a million years.48 Partner 2: I don’t know why that is. Why, you know, why people. You can even ask almost anybody or anything else I know at work what’s bothering or troubling them and oh. 49(tension) Partner 1: But you never ask me what’s wrong.50(sadness) Partner 2: Maybe I know.51(neutral) Partner 1: No, I don’t think you do.52(sadness) Partner 2: Maybe I just enjoy the quietness of it. I don’t know.53(neutral) Partner 1: Well seriously, I think that as long as we’ve been married that you don’t, you don’t know very much about me at all.54(sadness) Partner 2: No, I think it’s true about, about both of us maybe.55(sadness) Partner 1: No, but I’ll ask you if something is wrong and you get mad . . . 56(neutral) Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-1

4. Bids and Turning 4.1. Introduction The following is an instruction guide for research staff who code interactions. Thus, it is not addressed to clinicians. However, the information may prove interesting and useful for you, as it supplies a more in-depth analysis of bid-andturning interaction. Bids and turning can best be evaluated during the narrative and oral history portions of Assessment Session 1. The Turning Towards vs. Turning Away coding system was designed for a very unique observational situation called the Apartment Lab. Couples who participated in this study agreed to live in a studio-type apartment for 24 hours. During much of this time, we videotaped them using four, remote cameras positioned in the corners of the room. The Apartment Lab had a kitchenette, a dining table, couches, TV, and stereo. The couples were asked to bring groceries, music, videos, or work with them for the day. In this seminatural environment, we did not give them any specific tasks to perform but asked them to live as they would at home. Although the Apartment Lab had a great potential to tell us about the many ways couples interact in their daily lives, it produced an unexpected difficulty: subtlety. Couples do not interact in overt and exciting ways in everyday life. This subtlety challenged us to create a new coding system to capture small and often insignificant moments for the couples. The Turning Towards vs. Turning Away coding system (Turning System) was the result of that effort. This Turning Manual is designed to train research coders to observe couples in a structured and objective format. One of the most important tasks for a coder is to learn to watch for specific behaviors regardless of your personal perspective. When Dr. John Gottman was first learning to code, he was being trained to observe various emotions in couples while they were arguing. During one of the training meetings, the instructor asked the class to identify a specific behavior by the wife. In a room of 12 coder trainees, no one was able to identify the behavior. The instructor then showed us that the wife’s behavior should have been Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-2

objectively coded with Contempt. The difficulty in coding this behavior lay in the fact that the coders all liked the wife and didn’t like the husband. The wife’s sarcastic comment seemed well timed and appropriate for the situation. It did not seem contemptuous. One of the most difficult challenges in learning to code, however, is to set aside this type of judgment. If the behavior occurs, code it. This Turning Manual is organized in the same order as the coding sheet used in research. Once you have learned these codes, it can be used as a reference.

4.2. Bids 4.2.1.

Definition The term “Bid” relates to the idea that a partner is bidding for an interaction. One partner is trying to engage the other in some type of communication. These bids cover a wide range of interaction from a simple look to a funny story. The partner uses a Bid to initiate conversation or to encourage further interaction. A Bid that is used to begin a conversation is the easiest to recognize. It is the first interaction after a period of silence.

4.2.2.

Bantering It is more difficult to identify a Bid when the couple is bantering back and forth in conversation. The couple is already engaged in an interaction, so we are looking for bids that enhance or continue the discussion. During these banters, there are two criteria for capturing new bids: change in the topic of the conversation or change in the type of Bid. When there is a change in the topic of the conversation, one partner is encouraging further interaction. As a new topic arises, the partner is initiating a new Bid. If the couple is bantering on the same topic, it is also a new Bid if there is a change in Bid type. For example, if a wife is making a series of comments and changes to a question, it is considered a new Bid. This is a new Bid even when it involves the same subject. There are eight different types of bids, so this process can be challenging to distinguish at times. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-3

4.2.3.

Exclusions Although most initiations for interaction are considered bids, we have some exclusions. Talking to yourself or an animal is not a Bid, nor is talking to someone on the phone. The partner can hear these conversations, but they are not attempts to interact. Comfortable banter on the same topic with the same Bid type. If one partner starts a Bid, but does not finish it, it is not a Bid.

4.3.

Bid Types We’ve designated five Bid types:

4.3.1.

Silent Bid

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Silent Bid Comment (Low and High) Question (Low and High) Playful Bid Negative Bid

Any nonverbal Bid will be coded as a Silent Bid. It must be a Silent behavior that the partner can notice and acknowledge. Examples Pointing out the window Handing their partner an object Staring

Exclusion A fleeting glance is not considered a Bid for an interaction.

4.3.2.

Comment Bid

Low Level The Low-Level Comment Bid is any verbal remark, observation, or statement to a partner. It can either be an opening remark to a conversation or can be used to change the topic of the conversation. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-4

Examples That’s a huge boat! We’ll be going home soon. These vegetables are soft. Considerations It is important to rule out the other Bid types before coding a Comment Bid.



Sighs and grunts are not Comment Bids Often a partner will begin with a Silent-type Bid, but move into a Comment-type Bid. With these interactions, the Evertz will begin with the Silent, but it will be coded as a Comment Bid.

High Level The High-Level Comment is a statement about opinions, thoughts, or feelings. These comments seem to have a more personal touch than a simple exchange of information. High-Level Comments are not necessarily associated with energy level. We are more concerned with content when coding this Bid.

Examples Low-Level Comment There’s another boat. Here’s some broccoli I’m going to lunch with Kate.

4.3.3.

High-Level Comment I’d love to have a boat like that! I don’t like broccoli. Kate is a wonderful friend.

Question

Low Level The Low-Level Question is a Bid of general interest or information. This is not a question about thoughts or feelings, but a tool to gain information. Because the Low-Level Question is a request for information, it will likely change the topic of the Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-5

conversation. When it is used this way, it is considered a new Bid even if the couple is already interacting. So the Low-Level Question can come at the beginning of an interaction or during a comfortable banter back and forth. Examples Do you want some milk? Is your potato hot? Do you have to be at work at eight o’clock tomorrow?

High Level A question that asks a partner about opinions, thoughts, or feelings is coded as High Level. This type of Bid is not necessarily complex; it can be as simple as, “Do you like green beans?” As coders, it is important to look for the distinction between that and, “Do you want some green beans?” (Low-Level Question). The High-Level Question can come at the beginning of an interaction or during a comfortable banter back and forth. When a couple is already engaged in an interaction, the High-Level Question bids for a more intense response. Examples Low-Level Question Do you want some salad? Did Jim say we’re boring? Are we going to your mom’s for Christmas?

4.3.4.

High-Level Question Do you like your salad? Are we boring? Do you want to go to your mom’s for Christmas?

Playful Bid A Playful Bid is full of fun and good spirits. It often involves some physical sparring with good-natured jesting. It is important that both partners are laughing and enjoying the interaction in order to code it Playful.



Examples Throwing a ball at their partner. Thumb wrestling Bopping their partner

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-6

4.3.5.

Negative Bid

Attributes The Negative Bid is based on another coding system called SPAFF. The following behaviors will be coded together under the Negative Bid code. These explanations are from the Apartment Lab SPAFF manual.



Contempt Contempt is the attempt to insult or otherwise communicate a lack of respect toward one’s partner. Its expression is considered to be very powerful. There is a distance with contempt, an icy quality with a suggestion of superiority, as if looking down one’s nose at one’s partner.

Belligerence The belligerent person disagrees with or contests whatever her or his partner is saying, seemingly regardless of content. This person appears to be provoking a response in the partner, as if trying to start a fight. He or she may present the partner with a challenge or appear to delight in the partner’s discomfort. It includes Taunting Questions, Unreciprocated Humor, and Interpersonal Terrorism and Dare. Domineering The goal of the Domineering Bid is to control his or her partner. This person will attempt to control the conversation by attempting to force compliance, getting the partner to withdraw, retreat, or submit. It has the flavor of a parental interaction. Criticism Criticism involves attacking someone’s personality or character, rather than a specific behavior, and is often coupled with blame. Criticism is very different from complaining. A complaint is a specific statement of anger, distress, displeasure, or other negativity. Criticism is much less specific. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-7

It includes Blaming, Character Attacks, Kitchen Sinking, and Betrayal Statements. Defensiveness People who are behaving defensively are effectively saying that they are not at fault, that they are blameless regarding whatever their partners may be upset about. If their spouses are upset with them, they are the innocent victims of misplaced blame, and so on. Considerations A Negative Bid takes precedence over all other bids. For example, if a partner asks a question in a domineering or contemptuous way, the Bid is coded as Negative not as a Question.

4.3.6.

Rebid A “Rebid” is a repeat of an original Bid after the other partner has failed to respond. It does not have to be the exact Bid, but something very close to it. For example: If a husband asks his wife, “Would you like something to drink?” he may rebid with, “Would you like water or milk?” His intent was clear in both bids: he wanted a response about drinks. In order to code a Rebid, there must be a Passive or Away Response preceding it. A rebid does not include multiple attempts to engage the partner on different topics. These should be coded as a series of unsuccessful Bid attempts.

Examples Partner 1: I’m going to turn on the fan. Partner 2: [No response] Partner 1: Do you want me to turn on the fan? Partner 2: Did you call Jerry? Partner 1: [No response] Partner 2: Didn’t Jerry want you to call him today? Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-8

4.3.7.

Drop Out Occasionally, a couple will be involved in a conversation in which one partner simply drops out. They abruptly stop interacting. When this happens, it is noticeable, because it is not a natural break. It seems as if the conversation has fallen off a verbal cliff. In order to code Drop-Out behavior, the couple must be involved in a banter back and forth on the same topic of conversation, when one person stops interacting. This is not the same as an Away, because the Bid was received and acknowledged. We will code a Drop Out from the Evertz of the last word of either partner.

4.4. 4.4.1.

Turning Towards Responses Passive Response Passive is the first level of the Turning Towards Responses. In a Passive Response, it is clear that the Bid has been received, but minimal effort is taken to reply. The partner may simply look out the window when his partner comments about a boat. At times, the partner may even give a one- or two-word comment, but with no effort and with no reaction. When coding Passive, it is important that the bidding partner is able to see or hear the response. If a partner looks at the TV, for example, but has a newspaper between him or her and his or her partner, it is impossible for her or him to understand that he or she did respond to her or his Bid. This code requires careful consideration to distinguish it form an Away Response.

Examples No verbal response and only a mild change in behavior. Looks at the TV, then back to previous activity. Looks up briefly, then looks away. Takes a fork from spouse, no comment. One- or two-word comment while doing something else. Comments such as “yeah” or “uh huh” without any other behavior change. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-9

Considerations If the partner changes his or her behavior or posture AND makes a comment, it should be coded as a Low-Energy Response. Some ACTIONS are Passive. The couple is washing dishes, for example, and the wife hands the husband a plate to dry. If he takes the plate without comment, it is a Passive Response. If, however, he has to cross the room to take the plate from her, it is a Low-Energy response.

4.4.2.

Low-Energy Response When a partner uses a Low-Energy Response, he or she is answering the Bid only. He or she does respond, but with standard information, minimal behavior, and limited energy. The type of interaction here is almost businesslike. There is some necessity to responding. For brief yeah-type responses, there must be a change in behavior to be coded as a Low Energy. If she or he answers briefly but also stops what she or he is doing or turns towards the partner, it is a Low-Energy Response Any ACTIONS that answer only the Bid are Low-Energy Responses. Also included are brief questions that clarify the Bid with low energy “What?” “A small what?” “Did it?” Examples Partner 1: Go get a spoon for the salad. Partner 2: Goes and gets the spoon without comment. Partner 2: Do you work tomorrow? Partner 1: Sets down her or his book to reply, “Yeah.”

Criteria Brief responses with some postural change: Looks up at the boat AND comments, “Yeah.” One sentence responses: Partner 1: “Are you getting some air?” Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-10

Partner 2: “Yeah, I’m getting some air.”

Brief Questions: “What?”

Actions without Comment: He or she gets up to get a spoon when asked to do so.

Humor: Smirks and brief chuckles are Low-Energy Humor. Also, if partner seems to give a “courtesy laugh,” it is a Low-Energy Response.

4.4.3.

Attentive Response This is the first response that welcomes the Bid. It doesn’t necessarily have a lot of energy associated with it, but the spouse wants to hear his or her partner and makes an effort to let him or her know. Attentive Responses are usually more than one sentence such as an explanation or comment. They can, however, include one or two words if those words are given with some energy and effort. One partner may laugh and say, “I know.” If the partner uses backchannels and/or validation-type responses, it is coded as at least an Attentive Response. This includes good eye contact with head nodding, even if there is no verbal response. Attentive Responses may include some action. For example, a woman asked her partner if he would pour some milk for her. He pleasantly said, “Sure” and poured the milk. It was clear that he was happy to oblige. Directed questions where the partner seeks to clarify the Bid or seeks more information are included in an Attentive Response. “An 8:00 meeting?” “Is it? Why?” One example was a woman who was washing dishes when her partner made a comment. She stopped washing the dishes, turned to look at him and said, “What, honey?” This question was brief, but she was clearly interested in hearing his comment. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-11

Criteria l

Single word or sentence response with some energy and effort

l

Multiple-sentence responses

l

Directed questions (Why? You did?)

l

May include some action

Humor

4.4.4.

l

Joking and good natured teasing: Jokes and teasing that both partners think are funny enough to laugh at.

l

Giggling and private jokes: Though elusive to outside observers, something is going on that both partners think is entirely funny.

l

Wit: Here, there is a mutual recognition of absurdity that causes laughter. It is a sort of a “we-against-other” thing where the partners are laughing at someone or something else’s behavior or nature. Think of it as a shared deviance.

l

Adding humorous comments: When a partner responds with a humorous comment, it is also coded as Attentive Humor.

Enthusiastic Response With an Enthusiastic Response, the partner is eager to answer the bid. It is characterized by high energy, good eye contact, and lots of back channels. The difficulty with the Enthusiastic Response is that it is based on energy. One partner may have a multiple-sentence response with no energy and little effort. Another partner, however, may only say one sentence, but it’s given with great excitement.

Criteria High Energy with at least one sentence as a response.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-12

Humor To be Enthusiastic Humor, the response must be full laughter. Fun and Exaggeration: Here, the two partners are thoroughly enjoying themselves and are actively trying to make each other laugh by using exaggerated, animated, or imitative behavior. There is more energy and often a deep laughter behind this.

4.4.5.

Playful Response A Playful response, like the Playful Bid, is full of fun and good spirits. It often involves some physical sparring with good-natured jesting. Examples Partner 1: Throws a napkin at his partner. Partner 2: She immediately throws it back. Partner 1: “Hey, Watch it!” They both laugh.

Criteria Playful is distinguished from Enthusiastic Humor by the physical involvement. Both partners must think it is funny but it doesn’t need to be hilarious.

4.5.

Turning Against Response The Turning Against Response is defined as any NEGATIVE Towards Response. With the Turning Against code, we will be using the same criteria as for the Negative Bid. All negative responses will be coded together under Turning Against. It is based on the SPAFF criteria for negative codes. The following explanations are from the Apartment Lab SPAFF manual.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-13

4.5.1.

Contempt Contempt is the attempt to insult or otherwise communicate a lack of respect towards one’s partner. Its expression is considered to be very powerful. There is a distance with contempt, an icy quality with a suggestion of superiority, as if looking down one’s nose at one’s partner.

4.5.2.

Belligerence The belligerent person disagrees with or contests whatever her partner is saying, seemingly regardless of content. This person appears to be provoking a response in the partner, as if trying to start a fight. She or he may present the partner with a challenge or appear to delight in the partner’s discomfort. It includes Taunting Questions, Unreciprocated Humor, and Interpersonal Terrorism and Dare.

4.5.3.

Domineering The goal of the domineering individual is to control his or her partner. This person will attempt to control the conversation by attempting to force compliance, getting his or her partner to withdraw, retreat, or submit. It has the flavor of a parental interaction.

4.5.4.

Criticism Criticism involves attacking someone’s personality or character, rather than a specific behavior, and is often coupled with blame. Criticism is very different from complaining. A complaint is a specific statement of anger, distress, displeasure, or other negativity. Criticism is much less specific. It includes Blaming, Character Attacks, Kitchen Sinking, and Betrayal Statements.

4.5.5.

Defensiveness People who are behaving defensively are effectively saying that they are not at fault, that they are blameless regarding whatever their partners may be upset about. If their partners are upset with them, they are the innocent victims of misplaced blame, and so on.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-14

Considerations A Turning Against Response takes precedence over all other responses.

4.6. 4.6.1.

Turning Away Response Preoccupied Away Often a partner is engaged in an activity when his partner speaks to him. Regardless of whether or not the spouse heard the bid, we’re coding this as a Preoccupied Away Examples Watching TV Reading Trying to figure out the Apartment Lab VCR (!)

4.6.2.

Interrupt Away An Interrupt Away occurs when one partner begins a bid and the spouse breaks in with a nonrelated bid of his or her own. The initial bid is ignored as if it never began When there is an Interrupt Away, it is important to code as Away and a new Bid for the same interaction. Often the other partner will stop her or his bid to answer the new bid. Example Partner 1: Honey, did you see— Partner 2: Where are the pans around here?

Exclusions If both partners start a bid at the same moment, whoever wins the floor is the bidder. This is not considered an Interrupt Away. Finishing a sentence for a partner is not considered an interruption.

4.6.3.

Disregard Away This code is characterized by a complete lack of response to the bid as if it never occurred. No change in behavior, no Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-15

response. In the Apartment Lab, it is rare that partners are doing nothing when they Disregard the bid. We can distinguish this from a Preoccupied code, however, by the excessive attention to something minor. In this study, Stonewalling is coded as an Away behavior, so do not code it as a Turning-Against Response. Examples One partner plays with her hair, after her partner makes a bid. One partner takes his plate to the sink. One partner plays with her fingers.

4.7.

Embedded Codes There are certain codes that seem to occur at every level of the Bids and Responses. Humor, for example, can be shared with a simple look and a smirk or with a funny story. These interactions can appear with multiple levels of response, so we decided to Embed them among the other codes. Embedded Codes do not take precedence over the Bids and Responses, but are intended to further describe the interaction.

4.7.1.

Affection From the Apartment Lab SPAFF Manual: This is a direct expression of caring. The voice sometimes slows, with a drop in amplitude, yet even then there remains a definite intensity or energy in its expression.

Attributes Tenderness and Closeness: Reminiscing, sharing a moment that brings them close together. There is often a sort of warm, dreamy quality to this kind of interaction. The affectionate partner appears peaceful, mellow, and contented and friendly. Loving and Caring Statements: Statements such as, “I love you” and “I care about you.” Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-16

Compliments: Statements that communicate pride in one’s partner. Empathy: Mirroring a partner’s feelings. Not necessarily verbal (partner makes a sad face, then you mirror a sad face back…), this sort of mirroring lets people know that their feelings are understood and shared. This is more than validation, it is validation coupled with affect that mirrors that of the partner. Common Cause: This is perhaps a less intuitive form of affection. Here one spouse expresses anger (perhaps even contempt) for some third party, and the other spouse joins in a sort of verbal mirroring. It needn’t be the sharing of negative thoughts or feelings: positive things can be shared too! Examples Partner 2: I finally finished that card I was making for my parent’s anniversary. Partner 1: (looking at it) Wow! That’s fantastic! I love your artwork. Partner 1: (sigh)…and so then Dad told me he wished I’d been more like my brother (sad face). Partner 2: (sad face) Ouch. That sounds like it hurt. (Empathy) Partner 2: Can you believe the way they treated us? What jerks! Partner 1: No kidding! What a couple of creeps! (Common Cause) Partner 1: Remember that big sand castle we made at the beach? Partner 2: (warm smile) Yep. I couldn’t believe how cute you were, diggin’ around in the sand all day. (Closeness/compliment)

4.7.2.

Gender For both the Bid and the Response, it is important to identify who is interacting at what. Even though we know that a wife must be the responder if the husband made the bid, we need to write H for the bid and W for the response. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-17

Because this coding is done by hand, we will need to be able to count the husband and wife interactions separately.

4.7.3.

Humor Humor has been detailed under each of the necessary codes, but the general criteria for Humor is taken from the SPAFF Manual. Moments of shared laughter that aren’t tense: The laughter here is characterized by an underlying feeling of shared happiness. Though generally considered shared, low-level humor can be coded when one individual is laughing while not being tense, belligerent, or contemptuous.

4.7.4.

Shared Moment Shared Moment is a look towards the bidder BEFORE responding to the bid. It is a subtle look that acts as an intermediary response to the bid and seems to positively reference the responder to the bidder. Perhaps the best way to demonstrate the Bidder Referencing is by comparing it with a normal response. Examples Low Level Response

Partner 2: “That’s a huge boat!” Partner 1: Looks out the window and remarks, Yeah” Low Level Response with Bidder Referencing

Partner 2: “Oh!” (regarding the TV) Partner 1: Looks at his wife, then looks at the TV and says, “Yeah!”

Reference Gottman, John M., Coan, James A., McCoy, Kim, and Collier, Holly. Apartment Lab SPAFF Manual.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

4-18

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

5-1

5. Couples Assessment Overview 5.1.

Format of the Couples Assessment: Session 1: Conjoint 1½ Hours During the first session of the assessment, several tasks must be accomplished. First, you need to elicit from the couple their narrative explanation of why they’re coming to therapy, how they view their problem, and what their goals are. A series of gentle questions can initiate this discussion—e.g., “What bring you here today?” Out of the 80 minutes or so of your session, this discussion should only take about 15–20 minutes. Then, you should conduct an informal oral history interview (detailed later) lasting about 30 minutes. Finally, the couple should be asked to discuss a problem with one another for 10 minutes while you sit back and watch like a “fly on the wall.” The purpose of this piece is to get an idea of how the couple processes conflict. The session can then be closed with a scheduling of individual sessions for each partner with you, a handing out of the questionnaires, and a request made to fill these out and bring them to you when they meet with you individually.

In summary, the first session of assessment should include: The Narrative Elicit the couples narrative of their situation as they understand it, their history of their current situation and dilemma, and their hopes for therapy. The couple needs to tell their own story of their relationship dilemma and its history, and they need to present their theory of what the problems are in their relationship. This seems to be an essential need of all couples coming for therapy. During this process, it is important that the therapist listen fairly and nonjudgmentally to both partners, periodically summarize what is heard (and ask if there is anything else still missing from this summary), and form therapeutic alliances with both people. The best published source that describes this process is Jerry Lewis’s (1997) book Marriage as a Search for Healing. For example, Lewis describes a couple in which Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

5-2

the husband, a physician, has just retired. This is a couple in the empty-nest stage of development. However, they are having major problems with closeness. The husband feels that his wife is not there for him emotionally, and he needs her. There is a long history to this issue in this relationship. The husband was often very involved with his career and not available to the wife during the relationship. This was especially true during the traumatic period when they were dealing with the suicide of their daughter. In many ways, the relationship never got past this trauma. Lewis frequently empathetically summarizes the unfolding narratives, establishing a therapeutic liaison with the pain of both spouses. His goal is also to help them see that each subjective reality has validity. Oral History Interview In the context of discussion, conduct an interview for about one-half hour that is an abbreviated version of the Oral History Interview. Ask about the history of the relationship, how the couple views this history, and their philosophy of relationships. We began developing this interview in 1980 and quantifying it in 1990. The idea of some of the questions for such an interview date back to the Jackson and Satir days in Palo Alto. This interview is a lot of fun for most couples (not all) to do. It usually generates a lot of good feelings between the two partners, and it also permits an assessment of strengths as well as problem areas in the relationship. The most important dimensions to get from the Oral History Interview are Love Maps (Cognitive Room for partner and relationship), the Fondness and Admiration System, and Turning Towards, Bids, and the Emotional Bank Account. Major Dimensions Tapped by the Oral History Interview • Cognitive Room, or what we call “Love Maps” • Fondness and Admiration System • We-ness (what is the common ground in the relationship?) • Negativity Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

5-3

• Disappointment • Chaos: A sense that the couple has little control over events • Their philosophy on relationships, especially “Glorifying the Struggle,” or “Couple Efficacy” • What the couple thinks is a good time, how they get over hard times, the parental relationship systems, their own creation of the relationship culture • Shared or unshared Meta-Emotion structure around anger, sadness, fear, pride, and shame • The couple’s transition to parenthood, parental agendas with each child, emotion-coaching or emotiondismissing philosophy, and parenting issues • Can also get at gender stereotypy, relationships with parents, and their philosophy with respect to conflict avoidance or engagement Evaluating Turning Towards Observe how partners respond to each other’s bids during both the narrative and the Oral History Interview. Do they turn towards each other, or away from or against each other? Relationship Conflict Discussion Then videotape the couple talking about a current disagreement or problem for 10 minutes. Have them talk to one another, trying to come to a mutually satisfying resolution of their problem while you observe. Do not show them the videotape. Only use it for your own assessment information. If you have questions about their interaction at home, give the couple a microcassette recorder to take home and talk about another area of continuing disagreement or ask them to record a reunion conversation at the end of the day in which they talk about how their days went.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

5-4

Closing the First Session Give each of them a questionnaire packet to take home, fill out privately, and bring to their next individual session. The questionnaire packet always contains the following: • Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test • Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory • Sound Relationship House (SRH) Questionnaires • Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems • The Three “Detour” Scales • Gottman Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ) • Control, Fear, Suicide Potential and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaire • SCL-90 • CAGE AID and b-MAST Finally, schedule two individual sessions, each lasting 3/4 hour.

5.2.

Session 2: Individual Meetings The therapist next meets with each partner. The 80-minute session time can be divided into two parts, half for each partner, or the half-sessions can be scheduled at totally different times. The individual sessions are used to build more trust and learn more about each partner’s perspective, family –of-origin , history, and possible co-morbidities.

5.3.

Session 3: Conjoint Treatment Planning The third session is devoted to reviewing your assessment findings with the couple, and together, arriving at treatment goals.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-1

6. How to Conduct an Oral History Interview 6.1.

The Spirit of the Oral History Interview If you have never had the chance to hear Studs Terkel do a radio interview, you have missed the inspiration for our developing the Oral History Interview. You may wish to read one of his many books in which people tell their stories. Now, Terkel is trying to create radio shows, so he wants to structure the interview so that he can edit himself out of it, so that what the interviewee says seems like a long monologue. The results of this approach he developed are amazing because people really wax poetic, and often their words are real stream-of-consciousness. Terkel did a show with an old woman who was going through her attic. She started telling him about all the things stored there, and he asked her about one china doll. “Oh,” she said, “that was a gift from the only man I ever loved. We were to be married, and on the wedding day he was killed in a crash.” Terkel was very sympathetic. He asked her to tell him the story of this man and her feelings for him. He took a long time to get to the fact that she was a grandmother who had married and raised five children. Here was a memory of her only true love. Terkel brought all this out, and both he and she were in tears at the end of the story. Then they kept moving through the attic: baby clothes, pram, her daughter’s confirmation dress, a man’s straw hat. A lot of interviews are like going through someone’s photo album or attic with them with the therapist trying to learn all about who Uncle Oscar was, the annual family reunion to Iowa City, and so on. Unlike what clinical interviewers are trained to do, Terkel never interrupts, while a person is talking, with the usual backchannels (uh-huh, I see, etc.). He stays quiet until the person is done for a stretch of time, and then, puffing on his cigar, he talks a whole bunch (“That’s absolutely fantastic! You mean you haven’t been up into this attic to have a look around in 35 years? My God! What’s this thing? Looks like a doll or something? Was it a gift? Where’d you get it?”). The result of this process is amazing. People go off into long stream-of-consciousness monologues, filled with images, metaphors, reminiscences, and so on. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-2

Terkel is obviously a gifted interviewer. Not everyone can be Studs Terkel. However, the spirit of the Oral History Interview is to try to be like Terkel. Fortunately, most couples love talking about how they met, what drew them together, the epochs of their relationship, etc. All but the most unhappy of relationships wind up feeling more connected to one another, a little on the glowing, romantic side, after one of these interviews. So the therapist has this in his or her favor.

6.2.

The Actual Content of the Interview The interview is a semi-structured interview, which means that, while the therapist covers some of the more pertinent questions, they can be given in any order whatsoever. The important thing is to follow naturally where the person is going. The therapist should not ask the questions in rapidfire sequence, as if the questions were woodenly read from a clipboard. They should appear very natural. Remember, the couple is helping you to paint a portrait of their relationship. It is your job to follow along, to try to understand, to understand emotionally what every phase of their relationship was like, and to draw out this emotional information from them. Here are some rules to follow: Try to memorize the more important questions. Don’t assume you understand. For example, suppose a woman tells you that there was a year during courtship when she was still in high school in the rural town they grew up in and he was in college; she visited him twice during that year. So, ask yourself, what was this like for him? Was he embarrassed by her visits? Was he sorry he was still dating a high-school girl? Or was he proud of her? Was he sad and lonely when he was away from her and excited to see her? Had he met someone else in the meantime, was this a period of great growth for him but not for her? What was it like for her? Was she scared? There are many, many possibilities about what this year apart may have been like for each of them emotionally. Find out which one is the case and, if there were conflicts, how they dealt with them, if there were joys, what these were, and so on. Don’t assume you already know—find out. Your job is not to get the facts, but to get the inside Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-3

emotional picture of each of the major epochs of their relationship. Find the key that opens each person up. In one of our couples, I recall that a husband was very shy and uncomfortable. The research interviewer asked him about his work, and he said, “I sell seeds. That’s it. Nothing fancy. I sell seeds.” The interviewer was stumped about what to do when this man fell into silence, so later she came back to him. She said, “Can you give me more of an idea of your job? Do you just wait for a farmer to order? Do you visit him?” He said, “No, I travel around, I visit them.” She said, “Do you recommend the same thing for everyone?” “Oh, no, I know my farmers, and I know what they ought to plant each year. I make careful studies of it.” She said, in an act of inspiration, “Then you’re kind of like a teacher, aren’t you?” “You’re darn right I am. Look, let me tell you a story of this one farmer who listened to me every year, and his stubborn neighbor Mr. Know-ItAll.” And that man was off and running. He had become expansive because she had found the key in getting him to talk. Your interest must be genuine. This is not easy, and the principle is You have to be genuinely interested in the people you are interviewing. If your interest is fake, if you have to pretend to be interested, the interview will be dull and lifeless. There is no substitute for genuine curiosity. You must be nonjudgmental. You don’t have to be in this relationship, you just have to find out what it’s like. Realize that they are the experts about this relationship. Their ideas about what a good time is, their ideas about hard times, their expectations about the relationship, their views of their parents’ relationships, their relationships with their parents, how this all relates to them, their ideas on conflict, etc. They know all about it and are the experts. Let them teach you how they see things. If you get to an interesting place in an interview, try saying, “Tell me the story of that.”

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-4

You’re trying to get people to tell you their stories. Use probe questions if you don’t follow what they are telling you or if you want them to expand on something.

6.3.

Things to Notice We-ness You will find some couples who emphasize “we-ness” in these interviews, while some couples do not. Sometimes one person will be talking in terms of “we” while the other is emphasizing separateness and difference. Glorifying the Struggle Some couples will express the philosophy that a relationship is hard, that it is a struggle, but that it is worth it. Gender Differences See if you can identify differences between partners that relate to gender differences in emotional expression, responsiveness, and role. Conflict-Avoiding versus Conflict-Engaging Couples Some couples minimize the emotional side of their interaction, either positive or negative affect. They tend to avoid disagreements and tend to speak about the events of the day in terms of errands rather than feelings. Self-disclosure is minimized. Their roles tend to be fairly stereotyped and prescribed by cultural norms.

6.4.

Oral History Questions What follows is the complete list of questions for the Oral History Interview (OHI). When the OHI is used for clinical purposes, only pertinent questions need to be asked. However, the following list gives an idea of how all the questions can be asked. Be sure to always include the ones regarding the beginning of the relationship, (Questions 1 and 2), the transition into a committed relationship (if there was one, Question 3), and the transition into parenthood (if the couple has had children, Question 5). Later important transitions (such as into retirement) should be queried if they seem relevant for the couple. A summary sheet for the Oral History Interview is included in this section for your convenience. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-5

6.4.1.

Part 1: History of the Relationship Question 1. Why don’t we start from the very beginning. Let’s discuss how the two of you met and got together. Do you remember the time you met for the first time? Tell me about it. Was there anything about your partner that made her or him stand out? What were your first impressions of each other? Question 2. When you think back to the time you were dating, before you got married (or committed to each other), what do you remember? What stands out? How long did you know each other before your commitment? What do you remember of this period? What were some of the highlights? Some of the tensions? What types of things did you do together? Question 3. Tell me about how the two of you decided to get married or to commit to each other. Of all the people in the world, what led you to decide that this was the person you wanted to be with? Was it an easy decision? Was it a difficult decision? Were you ever in love? Tell me about this time. Question 4. Do you remember your wedding or commitment ceremony? Tell me about it. Did you have a honeymoon? What do you remember about it? Question 5. When you think back to the first year you were married (or living together), what do you remember? Were there any adjustments to being married (or living together)? Question 6. What about the transition to becoming parents? Tell me about this period of you relationship. What was it like for the two of you? Question 7. Looking back over the years, what moments stand out as the really good times in your relationship? What were the really happy times? What is a good time for you as a couple? Has this changed over the years? Question 8. Many of the couples we’ve talked to say that their relationships go through periods of ups and downs. Would you say that this is true of your relationship? Question 9. Looking back over the years, what moments stand out as the really hard times in your relationship? Why do you think you stayed together? How did you get through these difficult times? What is your philosophy about how to get through difficult times? Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-6

Question 10. How would you say your relationship is different from when you first got married or committed to each other? (Lots of people have losses here; they have stopped doing things that once gave them pleasure. Explore these with the couple.)

6.4.2.

Part 2. Their Philosophy of their Relationship Question 11. I’m interested in your ideas about what makes a relationship work. Tell me about why you think some relationships work while others don’t. Think of a couple you know that has a particularly good relationship and one that you know who has a particularly bad relationship. Decide together which two couples these are. What is different about these two relationships? How would you compare your own relationship to each of these couples? Question 12. Tell me about your parents’ relationship. (Ask each partner.) What was/is their relationship like? Would you say it’s very similar or different from your own relationship? Question 13. Tell me what you currently know about your partner’s major worries, stresses, hopes and aspirations. How do you stay in touch with one another on a daily basis? What are your routines for staying in emotional contact?

6.5.

Oral History Interview Benchmarks Below is a list of criteria to help you deliver an effective and successful Oral History Interview. • Demonstrate respect and empathy for clients. • Read and interpret your clients’ affect appropriately. • Exhibit good rapport with clients. • Ask appropriate Gottman Oral History questions and stay on track with sensitivity to couple’s issues and building rapport • Conduct the interview with appropriate timing. • Conduct the interview with sensitivity to issues of co-morbidity.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-7 Client ID#:

Date:

Oral History Interview Summary Sheet 1. Meeting. Why don’t we start from the very beginning. Let’s discuss how the two of you met and got together. Do you remember the time you met for the first time? Tell me about it. Was there anything about your partner that made her or him stand out? What were your first impressions of each other?

2. Dating. When you think back to the time you were dating, before you got married (or committed to each other), what do you remember? What stands out? How long did you know each other before your commitment? What do you remember of this period? What were some of the highlights? Some of the tensions? What types of things did you do together?

3. Decision to Marry or Commit. Tell me about how the two of you decided to get married or to commit to each other. Of all the people in the world, what led you to decide that this was the person you wanted to be with? Was it an easy decision? Was it a difficult decision? Were you ever in love? Tell me about this time.

4. Wedding and Honeymoon. Do you remember your wedding or commitment ceremony? Tell me about it. Did you have a honeymoon? What do you remember about it?

5. First Year Adjustments. When you think back to the first year you were married (or living together), what do you remember? Were there any adjustments to that?

6. Adjustments to Parenthood. What about the transition to becoming parents? Tell me about this period of you relationship. What was it like for the two of you?

7. Good Times. Looking back over the years, what moments stand out as the really good times in your relationship? What were the really happy times? What is a good time for you as a couple? Has this changed over the years?

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-8 Client ID#:

Date:

8. Relationship Ups and Downs. Many of the couples we’ve talked to say that their relationships go through periods of ups and downs. Would you say that this is true of yours?

9. Hard Times. Looking back over the years, what moments stand out as the really hard times in your relationship? Why do you think you stayed together? How did you get through these difficult times? What is your philosophy about how to get through difficult times?

10. Relationship Changes Over Time. How would you say your relationship is different from when you first got married or committed to each other? (Lots of people have losses here; they have stopped doing things that once gave them pleasure. Explore these with the couple.)

11. Good and Bad Relationships. I’m interested in ideas about what makes a relationship work. Why do you think some relationships work while others don’t? Think of a couple you know that has a particularly good relationship and one that you know who has a particularly bad one. (Let them decide together which two couples these are). What is different about these two relationships? How would you compare your own relationship to each of these couples?

12. Parents’ Relationship. Tell me about your parents’ relationship. (Ask each partner.) What was/is their relationship like? Would you say it’s very similar or different from your own relationship?

13. Love Maps and Rituals of Connection. Tell me what you currently know about your partner’s major worries, stresses, hopes and aspirations. How do you stay in touch with one another on a daily basis? What are your routines for staying in emotional contact?

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-9

Group Role Play: Oral History Interview Michael

Trudi

•

Runs a computer hardware business

•

•

Works really hard in his job and with the projects at home

Stay at home mom; daughter was having problems

•

•

Feels that Trudi isn’t pitching in or doing much to help

Depressed; hasn’t felt like having sex in a long time

•

•

Feels that Trudi is using the rape as an excuse

Was raped in college; suspects depression is related to the rape

•

•

Feels responsible for maintaining their lifestyle

Feels that Michael doesn’t want to listen to or hear about her problems

Oral History: •

Met while volunteering for the Peace Corps in Africa.

•

He was shy, but she was really impressed with the work he was doing. She was outgoing, flirty, pretty, intelligent and stood out from the crowd.

•

Travelled to Southeast Asia and South America, had a great adventure. She was the “dreamer” and he was the “can-do” person who made their plans a reality.

•

As they settled down and started a family, they both liked it at first but now she feels lost in it or bored. When he comes home from work, they don’t connect.

•

She has the same feelings from her rape when Michael wants to have sex, but when she tries to talk about it, he shuts down.

Conflict Discussion: Trudi suspects that her depression is related to the rape. She feels lonely and misses Michael. He spends a lot of time away from home. He feels responsible for managing family projects and funding their kids’ activities. He feels like he’s working really hard between his business and the projects at home. Neither feels heard.

Below is a list of criteria to help you deliver an effective and successful Oral History Interview. • Demonstrate respect and empathy for clients. • Read and interpret your clients’ affect appropriately. • Exhibit good rapport with clients. • Ask appropriate Gottman Oral History questions and stay on track with sensitivity to couple’s issues and building rapport • Conduct the interview with appropriate timing. • Conduct the interview with sensitivity to issues of co-morbidity.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-10

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-11

6.6.

Oral History Coding Notes

The following is a system of scoring the Oral History Interview (OHI) that we have used in our research. It gives the general idea of what qualities are evaluated and how to score them for each partner or the couple. When the OHI is used clinically, it’s not necessary to do this exact scoring. However, we include it here to demonstrate how to evaluate the OHI information your couple gives you. Fondness and Affection Positive affect (warmth, humor) Emphasizes good times over bad Compliments or is proud of spouse low high Partner 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Partner 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Negativity Toward Partner Negative affect (anger, contempt) Unfavorable and/or vague first impression Cynical, sarcastic, critical, disapproving low high Partner 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Partner 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

We-ness versus Separateness Emphasizes good communication Emphasizes unity and togetherness Emphasizes same beliefs, values, goals low high Partner 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Partner 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

6-12

Expansiveness versus Withdrawal Describes memories vividly and distinctly Positive and energetic during interview Self-discloses during interview low high Partner 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Partner 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Chaotic Relationships Struggles for relationship to survive Unexpected conflict, they argue or fight Major, unpleasant life circumstances low high Couple 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Glorifying the Struggle Have survived difficult times Emphasizes commitment Proud of their relationship low high Couple 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Relationship Disappointment or Disillusion The relationship isn’t what they thought it would be Depressed, hopeless, or bitter about their relationship Does not advocate the relationship; people should wait low high Partner 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Partner 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Comments:

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-1

7. Evaluating Conflict Management and Repairs 7.1.

Setting Up the Conflict Discussion How the conflict discussion is set up is very important. The issue needs to be a real issue (area of continuing disagreement) for both people. (In the early days of marital interaction research, tasks were used that generated conflict for distressed couples, but nondistressed couples just laughed at the experimental procedures and never engaged in any conflict. Because of this problem, differences between the two types of couples were not differences in how they went about resolving conflict, but an artifact of the methodology used). Set up a grounded and very specific conflict conversation. In research, the conflict discussion is set up after both people have individually filled out the Gottman Areas of Disagreement (located Supplemental Assessments), they have selected a few issues to talk about in more depth with the therapist. Next, videotape the conflict discussion for 10 minutes. Attach biofeedback units to the couple during this discussion. In his office, Dr. John Gottman uses two pulse oximeters, which are also finger units and give heart rate and percentage oxygen in the blood. Get a reading from the biofeedback units before they start talking (this gives you an index of their bodies’ anticipation of how the conversation is going to go). Get a reading during and after the conversation. Sit behind the video camera on a chair, monitoring the audio and video quality, and take a few notes about strengths and weaknesses you see in their interaction. For 10 minutes, at least, say nothing. You may let the tape run for longer than 10 minutes if you think it will be interesting. You don’t want to prematurely cut off something interesting. Ask how typical that interaction was. Many couples say that they never get that long to talk about the issue; others say that it is typical, and they have been over the same ground many times. This videotaped interaction is usually very revealing, particularly of strengths and disaster scenarios. In our clinical assessment, it is not necessary for the couple to fill out the Disagreement Form unless the couples can’t Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-2

think of any problem to discuss. In most cases, you can say the following to the couple: To help me understand how the two of you manage conflict, I’d like you to please discuss a problem for 10 minutes. I’m not going to intervene. Instead, I’m going to just watch for now. This way I can get an idea of how you talk over problems at home. It might not look exactly the same as at home. That’s OK. I can get the basic idea. The problem can be anything you like. What would you like to discuss? OK— go ahead now. Just pretend I’m not here. Afterwards, thank the couple for allowing you to watch, and tell them that, during the therapy, you’ll work on making conflict management more comfortable and effective for them (if they struggled here). Getting conflict avoiders to conflict. The way to get conflict avoiders to engage in conflict that is fairly typical of what they normally do is to ask them about an upcoming potentially stressful event in their lives. Then, the discussion task is as follows: Given the differences in your two personalities, how can you set things up so that your stresses during this event will be minimized? This question works because it is ecologically valid. It plays into the very best philosophy of the conflict-avoiding couple in minimizing conflict and stress. They naturally talk about things in this way, especially about how they can minimize conflict given the differences between them. The therapist should ask some more probing questions to ensure that a good event has been found.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-3

7.2.

Observing Conflict Management Observe while the couple discusses a conflict, and watch for the following components of the couple’s ability to manage conflict: The Four Horsemen Criticism Defensiveness Contempt Stonewalling Emotional Disengagement Startup (Gentle and Harsh) Repair (Effective and Ineffective) (see section on Repair) Accepting and Rejecting Influence Compromise Gridlock

7.3.

Symbolic Conflict People usually become gridlocked on issues that have some type of symbolic value to them. For example, if the issue being raised is about the family’s budget, it has symbolic value if one person is being accused (or thinks he or she is being accused) of being a spendthrift or a poor provider. This conflict gets enhanced when the symbolic value is central to the person’s self-concept. Family discipline of children then gets converted to “You’re a bad father,” even if that message isn’t directly expressed in the words used. The symbolic value of a statement determines the amount of threat that it carries for the listener. Symbolic threat lies in the listener’s mind, and it may also be in the message expressed. Another form of symbolic conflict concerns aspects of the relationship rather than the individual. These kinds of symbolic conflicts are called “hidden dreams.” A hidden dream is an issue that is underneath the discussion the couple is having in the sense that it is more fundamental. We’d like to teach you to recognize a hidden dream, because if a hidden dream exists, it can be a key to figuring out the affect and the changes in affect that you see. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-4

In the discussion of a problem, one way (not the only way) of detecting a hidden dream agenda is that the discussion seems to keep cycling back repeatedly over old ground and not moving forward to a resolution. This suggests that the hidden dreams have been allowed to go on undiscussed for several days, weeks, or even years, and so they continue to pop up in problem-solving discussions and steer the couple away from effective problem-solving solutions. The couple then spins their wheels and seems unable to arrive at a compromise solution to the problem under discussion; or, if they negotiate a solution, it tends not to be implemented. This is called Relationship Gridlock. Consider the following dialogue in which the problem being discussed is the equitable distribution of the household chores. There are notes in this example that explain how a hidden dream operates. You will notice that an agenda can be expressed and still remain hidden if it is not fully discussed (meaning that there is an acceptance of the underlying emotions). When a couple has a hidden dream you will rarely see that kind of discussion. Partner 1: What do you feel about the house? Partner 2: What do you mean, what do I feel? Partner 1: What do you feel? These possessions; a lot of these possessions are important to you. Partner 2: Not a lot of them. Partner 1: Some of them. Partner 2: Very few. Partner 1: A few of them then. Partner 2: Having a home is important to me, but our issue is housekeeping. Partner 1: Hummm. Partner 2: I really do know that you’re doing more than you should of the housework, and I did read that article. Partner 1: Which one? Partner 2: On a couple that worked out a sharing basis for housekeeping; they split the chores down the middle.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-5

Partner 1: That seems fair. Fifty-fifty. Partner 2: Yeah. It seems at this point that the couple may be close to a solution. The next line is typical of conversations that have a hidden dream. Instead of moving to an agreement, they begin to recycle back through the issue, as if something has been left behind. And something has indeed been left behind—the feelings that surround the hidden dream. Partner 1: I’d still like to know more of your feelings, though. You know, I don’t know . . . I do the work and you act like it’s your responsibility. He is dissatisfied. He still has some issue or dream that is unresolved. Partner 2: (sighs) What are we talking about right now? Partner 1: Your feelings of responsibility, demarcating what you’re responsible for and what you aren’t responsible for. You act as if somehow you are in charge, even when I’m doing things. Partner 2: This is a sidetrack, Ted. Partner 1: No it is not. Because when I was cooking the liver . . . Partner 2: That has nothing to do . . . Partner 1: It does. I was cooking the liver, and you acted like it was still your responsibility, telling me how to cook it. He wants to have the authority to do tasks his way, without any interference from his partner. Partner 2: Ted, this is a different issue. Partner 1: It is not because you see my goal is to drop the house as soon as possible. Partner 2: But that will never happen in this relationship. Partner 1: Ha ha ha ha ha. You want to go over that again? Partner 2: Yeah. Because, Ted, I am equal to you. Partner 1: Good for you. (sarcastic) This is her issue. She feels that she is not being treated by Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-6

Ted as an equal. Now let’s see if they give each other’s issue a fair hearing. Partner 2: And while I agree and know and feel bad about the fact that you are doing much more than your share, I don’t want to live in a messy house. Partner 1: Honey, I’m speaking from experience. I’ve had you nag at me about how to do something. That is the real issue. Partner 2: It can’t be “my house” that you’ll help with. Partner 1: What’s distasteful to you is the bad parts of the house. The good parts you like. Do you feel bad about not doing it? He thinks it is “her house” because she insists on her standards even when he is doing the housework. He thinks if things have to be done by her standards, then she should do the housework. Partner 2: Yes I do. Partner 1: Then why don’t you do it? Partner 2: I can’t. You don’t understand that, do you? You never have understood that. You never will. Partner 1: No, I don’t. I have no intention of spending my life puttering around the house. This is indeed a complicated tangle of issues. It seems that another issue of his is that he would like to see an end in sight to his doing the housework. She, on the other hand, wants him to recognize how serious she is in wanting him to help. Partner 2: If you have no intention of doing half of the work, who is going to do it? Who do you expect to do it? Partner 1: (coughs) Beats me. Partner 2: Want to try again? Partner 1: Yeah. A maid. Partner 2: A maid? Partner 1: Yes, then I can quit it all. You and the maid can do it then. You can work it out with the maid. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-7

Partner 2: And what happens if you can’t afford a maid, Ted? Partner 1: Then I’ll do half of it. It’s as simple as that; but as soon as I can, I’m gonna not do it. Partner 2: Then you have a goal in mind, don’t you? Partner 1: That’s exactly right; I have a goal in mind. I’m only going to pay for 50% of a maid. You can, you can do whatever you want with your 50%. I don’t care. I’ll help you. You’re working, you’ve got a career. I’ll help in part. This won’t do for her. She doesn’t want him helping “her.” It is symbolic to her that they both have ownership of the housework, even though she does none of it. Partner 2: That’s not what I want, Ted; I don’t want you to help me in “my chores,” because I’m telling you that the role of woman is . . Partner 1: I don’t give a damn about your role. Partner 2: . . . is going to have to stop right here. Partner 1: I don’t care. Partner 2: Are you going to accept that? Partner 1: Accept what? Accept what? I don’t care about you and your role. You figure that out. You take care of it. Listen, I told you I’d do half, without loading it on you. It seems to me that I’m taking care of your role right there; I’m paying attention to your role. Partner 2: Do you see it as something of us? Partner 1: What? No, I don’t see it as something of us. I see it as something of the house. His agenda of doing things his way has to do with wanting to be an individual with separate authority. He sees her plea for unity as a threat to this. She, on the other hand, sees the plea for unity as a demand for equality and respect. Partner 2: You see, Ted, when we got married, I didn’t feel that I became a lesser person. Partner 1: I don’t think you became a lesser person either. To me it has nothing to do with role. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-8

Partner 2: OK. OK. We both hate housework. Partner 1: Yeah. Partner 2: And we’re both working right? Partner 1: Yeah, yeah. Partner 2: Why should you say that you’re gonna help me in the housework? Partner 1: Because . . . Partner 2: Why don’t we work together on the housework? Partner 1: . . . it’s your house and not mine. Partner 2: It’s my house? Partner 1: As far as I’m concerned it is. You were the one who wanted pots and pans, and you were the one who wanted . . . Partner 2: And if I hadn’t wanted pots and pans, Ted, how would you eat? Partner 1: I don’t know. I don’t care. Partner 2: When you’re cleaning, who are you helping? Partner 1: I’m helping you. Partner 2: You’re helping us. Partner 1: Us! Partner 2: We’re two people living together. Partner 1: Yeah. Partner 2: We’re an us. Partner 1: Mmmm. Partner 2: We’re not one person becoming stronger than the other one, we’re two people—Us. Partner 1: (disgusted) Us. Partner 2: Coming together as equal people, giving to the other person part of what we are, taking from that person a part of what they are. To him, it seems as if being an “us” means that he will be swallowed up by the relationship without room for his individuality or independence. To her it means being loved and respected. This is the real impasse. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-9

Partner 1: Mmmmm. Partner 2: But always to be equal. Different in some ways, but equal. Partner 1: Well, I’ll pay for a maid just as any husband pays for a maid, you know. Partner 2: And if you can’t afford a maid, Ted, you will work. Partner 1: Well, I’ll do my part every day if you do your part. Partner 2: I’ll try. At this point it seems as if the discussion may stop, but it will not because the hidden agendas have not been dealt with. Partner 1: We still haven’t solved anything, you know. Partner 2: Why haven’t we? Partner 1: You want to have your career and be an equal, and yet you want all the joys and none of the work being “the little woman.” Partner 2: What makes you say that? What examples can you give? Partner 1: Concerning the possessions in the house. I mean you’re the one who reads Ladies Home Journal and Family Circle and all that stuff, not me. Partner 2: In addition to other things. They’re not my total reading. Partner 1: They’re not even in my reading. Partner 2: What does that mean, Ted? Partner 1: I don’t know what it means. Partner 2: Does it mean that because I have an interest in having a home that looks pretty, because I happen to love a piece of wood, a piece of furniture, that I am somehow, what? Men love furniture. Partner 1: Good for them. Partner 2: Maybe you don’t, but men love furniture. Partner 1: Good for them. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-10

Partner 2: Men love things in the house. Partner 1: I’m glad they do. Partner 2: Why should that somehow be some sign of weakness in me because I do? Partner 1: I don’t say it’s a weakness. I say if you’re concerned about it, do something about it. But don’t expect me to get all excited. Partner 2: I don’t. Partner 1: OK. Partner 2: I don’t expect you to love an old chest like I do. Partner 1: OK. Partner 2: And I don’t ever ask that from you. Partner 1: Well, I’m willing, if you’re working, to help out in the house. And you don’t like that phrase. Partner 2: As a part of our responsibility. Partner 1: Yeah. Partner 2: To help out in our house. Partner 1: I will help. Partner 2: But you’ll be helping us, not me. Partner 1: Well, that’s what you say. Partner 2: Just like I will help. I will help in the house, Ted. Partner 1: Your part is your part to do. You can use whatever words you want to describe it. I’m using the words that I’m gonna use. Partner 2: OK. We’ll make it like fun. Partner 1: But don’t tell me how to do what it is that I do. There’s his hidden dream again. As he hears it, she will now dictate not only how he will do the housework, but his experience of it as well. Partner 2: It will be like fun. Partner 1: You can’t manufacture something like that. If it’s fun, it’s fun; if not, it’s not. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-11

Partner 2: And you can’t ever laugh. Partner 1: I can laugh about so much and that’s all. Shitty diaper after shitty diaper, and it’s not fun. (pause) Does it feel to you like we’ve accomplished anything? Partner 2: What? Partner 1: Does it feel to you like we’ve accomplished anything? Partner 2: Yeah. The last time we had this argument you got very upset about the fact that I wanted to be treated as an equal human being. Partner 1: Oh ho, that’s unfair. All we’ve accomplished—a word game. Partner 2: That was unfair. This couple was on the way towards developing a perfectly good solution to a housework problem, but their hidden dreams did not get dealt with. So they seemed to go around and around, being unable to accomplish more than what seems like just a word game. Notice how much emotion (anger, sadness, contempt) is tied up with the words themselves.

7.4.

Repair - Definitions from the Research Although the following definitions were used in the research to code interactions, clinically it is not necessary to code every repair type. These definitions are included here to help you understand what repairs are so you can observe repairs more easily.

7.4.1. Affection Affection occurs when one partner compliments or admires the other partner. Affection includes when one partner praises a specific quality or trait in his or her partner or praises something the partner has done (including something he or she has said). Affection shows one partner’s appreciation for the other, and it can include loving statements. Examples You’re becoming a good communicator. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-12

You’ve been better about picking up lately. I like you.

7.4.2. Agreement To code an Agreement, one partner has to do a 180° turn on his or her own position based on the partner’s argument. The Agreement Repair happens when one partner agrees with the other only after having previously disagreed. An agreement is only coded when one partner has been effectively persuaded on a point. Another type of agreement is one partner complains about the other, and the other agrees. Example (scenario) Partner 1: I think we haven’t been able to spend time together lately because you’ve been working so much. Partner 2: That’s not true. I don’t work anymore than I usually do. (disagreement) Partner 1: Well, you seem to stay at work later on Tuesday and Thursday nights now. Partner 2: That’s true, you have a point. (180-degree turn, now it’s an Agreement)

7.4.3. Compromise In this Repair, one partner tries to use both partners’ input to come up with a solution or compromise. One person is taking into account the other person’s side of the issue. Compromise does not include when one person dictates a plan of resolution; you must see willingness to find middle ground. Examples How do we accomplish the process? Let’s make a mutual goal to leave work early.

7.4.4.

Defining the Conflict One partner gains some perspective on what he or she believes that conflict to be about. This person steps out Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-13

of the conflict discussion, at least temporarily, to define the issue at hand. When defining the conflict, one partner clearly states how they are both contributing to the conflict. The conflict is summarized or explained in terms of how they are both contributing to it rather than laying the blame on one person. Examples This is just a tool that we both use. What I’m getting at here is you and I have different mechanisms for problem-solving some of these things . . . .

7.4.5. Guarding When an argument gets into an area that one partner believes will be too emotionally intense, she or he may use the Guarding Repair to avoid that area. This repair is essentially saying that the conflict is approaching dangerous territory and is used as a warning. This is different from the Stop Repair in that they can continue arguing about the topic as long as they avoid the warning zone. A type of Guarding can be when one partner essentially asks the other to back off. This is an attempt to back away from the force with which their partner is pursuing the conflict. They may not ask to stop entirely, but will try to set a limit on intensity. Examples You’d better be careful. Don’t call my dog smelly! (warning) OK . . . OK . . . OK . . . OKAY!!! (back-off)

7.4.6. Humor Any joke, witticism, or silliness used to lighten up the conversation as long as the humor is lacking malicious intent. The humor code includes teasing. The humor must either involve the issue at hand or happen during a topic of conflict.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-14

Example Honey, you look beautiful in that headset . . . and that earclip is doing it for me.

7.4.7.

Making Promises One partner promises the other to take some action in the future. The intention of this promise must be to somehow help the partner. The promise should be related to the conflict. Example I will try to be more sensitive to your needs.

7.4.8.

Monitoring Discussion This code includes comments directed specifically at the process of the conversation rather than at the issue being discussed. One partner directly addresses something negative in how they are talking to each other. Monitoring the Monitoring Discussion Repair can include attempts at self-correction. The code can also be used to steer the conversation off a negative track. With these statements, couples are addressing how they are interacting with each other rather than what they are talking about. Examples Why are we arguing about this anyway? This isn’t the issue. (keeping discussion on track) You’re telling me how it’s going to be, and I don’t appreciate that. (addressing negativity in how partner is speaking) I’m trying to say what you could do, not what you have to do. (self-correction)

7.4.9.

Repair Questions Because couples use questions often during an interaction, we have limited this Repair definition to those questions that relate specifically to the conflict. One partner uses the Repair Question to check in with the other over the issue. With these questions, one partner attempts to pull the other Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-15

partner into the conversation in a new way. The questions show one partner’s concern for the other. Do not code low-ball type questions as Repair Questions. Low-balling occurs when the speaker is obviously asking a question to elicit a specific answer. These questions are used as traps and are not repairs. During coding, it will be important to distinguish a Question Repair from a Repair that’s given in question form. For example, someone may use a question to provide humor and lighten the moment. This would be a Humor Repair instead of a Question Repair. The Question Repair must be focused on the issue and the partner. Examples Does that sound reasonable? What would you like to do? Would you like to just not talk about it at all? You got really sour. What happened?

7.4.10.

Request for Direction With this Repair, one partner is asking the other for specific instructions on how they can make the situation better. This is a specific type of question that should be coded separately from the Repair Question code. Examples What do I do that bothers you that I could change? What do you want from me in this process?

7.4.11. Self-Disclosure These statements express information, thoughts, or experiences of a personal nature. You get the sense that one partner is putting him- or herself in a vulnerable position or going out on a limb by disclosing this information to his or her partner. To code Self-Disclosure, the disclosure needs to explain that partner’s own negative behavior or reason for the conflict.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-16

Example That free time you had, you were spending it with someone else, so I felt left out. (explained why the partner was feeling jealous)

7.4.12. Softening Softening is a way one person can bring up an issue or complaint during a conflict discussion without criticizing or blaming their partner. Softening is a complaint with a positive approach.

Types of Softening “I” or “We” Statements Complaints that begin with the words “I” or “We” instead of “You” can be a form of softening. With an “I” statement the speaker explains how he or she feels about a situation as a way to frame the complaint. With a “We” statement, the speaker takes some of the blame from the partner by also taking responsibility for the situation. The complaint is about a situation that includes both partners (see following examples).

Describing the Situation In this type of Softening, the speaker complains by describing what she or he sees happening without evaluation or judgment. The speaker is complaining about a specific situation without blaming the partner’s behavior (see following examples).

Appreciation Before the Complaint Before complaining, the speaker compliments or shows appreciation for his or her partner having done something right in the past. This type of appreciation is different from the Affection Repair because it is used to air a complaint (see following examples). Examples This doesn’t really seem like a problem, but what should we do about the checkbook? (“We” statement) Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-17

Last week, when there were newspapers in the living room and computer papers on the kitchen counter, it bothered me. (Describing the Situation) I’m not even sure this bothers me that much, just sometimes. In fact, you’ve been a lot better lately, but I sometimes get frustrated when the laundry doesn’t get done. (Appreciation before the complaint and “I” statement)

7.4.13. Stop When an argument becomes too intense, one person may try to postpone or end a particular subject. The threshold for negativity is different for each couple, so the emphasis here is on the abruptness of the change or end of the subject and not on the outward intensity of the conflict. One type of Stop is an abrupt change of subject; this does not include those times when the couple naturally makes a transition to a new topic. The new subject may be as trivial as a comment about their socks or as significant as another relationship issue. Another type of Stop can be more direct and forceful. With this type of Stop one partner is too upset to continue the discussion and ends it. The point of this Repair is to escape the current topic. Examples I guess we ought to discuss money. (change of subject) I don’t want to talk about this anymore. (end of subject)

7.4.14.

Taking Responsibility This Repair happens when a partner acknowledges her or his own part in the conflict. The speaker admits responsibility. This code can also occur in the form of an apology. Examples I’m sorry. I know I escalate the dog thing just because I don’t like her.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-18

7.4.15.

Tooting Your Own Horn This code can be in either question or statement form. One person wants something he or she has done to be acknowledged by his or her partner. A person may seek acknowledgement or approval by directly asking the spouse for it or by putting the question less directly, in the form of a statement. Without using a question, one partner may ask for credit by simply listing or mentioning what they have accomplished that is related to the area of disagreement. Examples Wait! That’s something I do almost every night! I’ve tried to do less nagging. I’ve been better with money.

7.4.16. Understanding Feeling Probe The Feeling Probe communicates the speaker’s empathy or understanding of the other person’s thoughts or feelings about the conflict. A feeling probe can also be thought of as positive mind reading. Examples I understand how you feel because she’s your family. I know how I would feel. Part of you wants to remain loyal, but it’s really difficult. I can see that going to church is not something you’re comfortable doing.

Ah-Ha! We also code Understanding when one person seems to finally grasp what her or his partner is saying about the conflict. It’s as if she or he didn’t comprehend the complaint earlier, but now they do. It’s the Ah-Ha or LightBulb type of interaction.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-19

Example Oh, I see what you’re saying.

7.4.17.

We’re OK / Teamwork In this code one partner is trying to develop a sense of togetherness or we-ness with the other partner. One person points out what they’ve done “right” as a couple and/or tries to reinforce similarities between them. This code often sounds like a partner is saying, “We’re doing OK, look at what we’ve done.” One partner is trying to acknowledge similarities between them as well as praise their relationship. Examples I think we do a pretty good job of . . . We’ve got that thing figured out, it just needs tweaking now and then.

7.5.

Responses Another aspect to Repair Attempt coding is coding the listener’s response to each repair. After coding a repair, wait 8–10 seconds and decide which numbered response applies.

1—Repair The Response to a Repair made by one partner, is a Repair by the other partner.

2—Acceptance The partner goes along with the partner’s Repair. Acceptance includes agreement. It can also include questions for clarification.

3—Reassurance The Reassurance Response may sound like a type of acceptance. In this Response, the partner is attempting to comfort the other in response to a Repair.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-20

4—Resolving The partner responds to a Repair by offering a solution or start to organize a plan.

5—Laugh or Smile 6—Back Channel This indicates the individual is listening to the partner in an affirmative fashion by using different cues, such as head nods, “umm-hmms,” or other physical and vocal assenting behaviors.

7—Neutral A Response is neutral when the spouse is looking at the speaker and appears to be listening (which is different from stonewalling). A Neutral Response is neither positive nor negative. This Response doesn’t show acceptance or rejection of the repair.

8—Disagreeing with the Repair In this type of Response, the partner is disagreeing with the statement made it the Repair. As a disagreement, however, it cannot contain any of the elements of the Reject response such as Contempt, Criticism, or Defensiveness.

9—Damage The Damage Response will be coded similarly to the Damage Repair. Code a Damage Response when you see that a partner has started to respond positively to a Repair but then continues to attack, complain, or criticize. In these cases, the attacking behaviors negate the initial attempt to respond positively.

10—Rejecting the Repair A rejection is a hostile Response that is not a disagreement. An attack on the Repair, it can contain defensiveness and criticism. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-21

11—Ignoring the Repair Ignoring or interrupting a Repair.

Consideration If someone responds with a “3” or “4” along with another Response, the other Response take precedence (e.g., one partner does a Stop Repair, and the other partner laughs and helps him or her change the subject, code that a “2” for Acceptance).

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

7-22

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

8-1

8. Individual Interview 8.1.

Setting the Stage for the Individual Interview Tell each partner the ground rules you have for the individual sessions, particularly that anything that gets raised in the individual sessions is not secret, but can be disclosed at your discretion. Make sure that this is understood by both partners and is acceptable to them. In the individual sessions, try to get each person’s personal narrative of the relationship, what they expect and want, their big cost-benefit analysis of the relationship, and what they hope for and also fear about the therapy. Ask about physical abuse directly and about extra-relational affairs. Look at their commitment to the relationship (look for differential commitments and conditional commitments) and to working it out, recognizing that most people delay for six years before coming to therapy and many use therapy as a gentle way to exit the relationship. Try to actively build a rapport with each person that validates each person’s perspective of the relationship. Ask about gridlocked issues, recurring sources of pain, major complaints. Fully expect to see the emergence of the Fundamental Attribution Error, namely, each person thinks, “I’m okay, my partner’s character is defective. Fix my partner and please do this inexpensively, without blaming me. Thank you.” In this session, introduce the Jerry Lewis idea that in every relationship dispute there are two different subjective realities, both right. What’s hard is for each person to see the validity of his or her partner’s very different perspective. Also try to get a sense of each partner’s family of origin history, because old dynamics may be getting re-enacted in this current relationship. Finally, thank each partner for coming in and tell her or him that, in the next couples session, you’ll be offering a treatment plan based on these last sessions and the data from their questionnaires.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

8-2

8.2.

Content of Individual Interviews • The individual narrative • Relevant family history • History of prior relationships • History of prior therapy • Each person’s commitment to the relationship, and discrepancies. • Their hopes and expectations for the relationship (including potentially getting out of the relationship) and for the therapy. • Their personal goals. • Their Big Cost/Benefit analysis of the relationship. (How do they evaluate the benefits and costs of staying in and working on trying to make this relationship better, versus getting out?) • The presence of ongoing or previous physical abuse, especially a pattern of using violence to intimidate and control one’s partner. • The presence of ongoing or previous betrayals, especially ongoing extra-relational affairs. • Psychopathology and other potential resistances (e.g., depression, anxiety, PTSD, OCD) • The presence of ongoing or previous sexual abuse. • The presence of ongoing or previous drug and alcohol abuse, or other addictions.

A summary sheet of the Individual Interview is included in this section for your convenience.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

8-3 Client ID#:

Date:

Individual Interview Summary Sheet The individual narrative:

Relevant Family History:

History of prior relationships: History of prior therapy: Commitment to the relationship: Hopes and expectations of the relationship and therapy: Personal goals: Cost-benefit analysis of the relationship: Ongoing and previous physical abuse and battering: Ongoing and previous extra-relational affair(s): Depression, anxiety, PTSD, OCD: Sexual abuse history: Drug and alcohol abuse, other addictions: Anything not yet discussed helpful to understand you, your partner or your relationship? (Use back of page for more space to write notes) Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

8-4

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-1

9. Gottman Method Assessment Questionnaires 9.1. Gottman Core Assessment Questionnaires........................................... 9-1 Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test�������������������������������������������������������9-3 Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory������������������������������������������������������9-5 The Sound Relationship House Questionnaires (5 item scale)�����������������������������9-7 Love Maps.................................................................................................. 9-7 Fondness and Admiration System.............................................................. 9-7 Turning Towards or Away........................................................................... 9-7 Negative Sentiment Override.................................................................... 9-8 Harsh Startup.............................................................................................. 9-8 Accepting Influence.................................................................................... 9-8 Repair Attempts......................................................................................... 9-9 Compromise............................................................................................... 9-9 Gridlock on Perpetual Issues...................................................................... 9-9 The Four Horsemen.................................................................................. 9-10 Flooding................................................................................................... 9-10 Emotional Disengagement and Loneliness.............................................. 9-10 Quality of Sex, Romance, and Passion in the Relationship��������������������������������9-11 Shared Meanings Questionnaire������������������������������������������������������������������������9-13 Your Rituals............................................................................................... 9-13 Your Roles................................................................................................. 9-13 Your Goals................................................................................................. 9-13 Your Symbols............................................................................................ 9-13 Trust��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-14 Commitment������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-15 The Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems������������9-17 The Three “Detour” Scales��������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-27 Chaos .................................................................................................... 9-27 Meta-Emotions (Your Own Feelings About Emotions)............................. 9-28 My Family History..................................................................................... 9-30 Gottman Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ)����������������������������������������������9-33 Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-35 Control .................................................................................................... 9-35 Fear .................................................................................................... 9-35 Suicide Potential....................................................................................... 9-35 Acts of Physical Aggression...................................................................... 9-36 SCL-90����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-37 The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID)��������������������9-41 Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST)����������������������������������������������9-41 Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-2

9.2. The Gottman Relationship Checkup������������������������������������������������� 9-43 9.3. Core Assessment Scoring and Interpretation����������������������������������� 9-45 Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test Scoring & Interpretation������������9-47 Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory Scoring & Interpretation������������9-48 Sound Relationship House Assessment 5-Item Scale Scoring & Interpretation9-49 Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems in Your Relationship Scoring & Interpretation����������������������������������������������������������������9-51 The Three “Detour” Scales Scoring & Interpretation����������������������������������������9-53 Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ) Scoring & Interpretation����������������������9-54 Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires Scoring��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-55 SCL-90 Scoring & Interpretation Instructions�����������������������������������������������������9-56 The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) Scoring & Interpretation�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-57 Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST)����������������������������������������������9-58 Scoring & Interpretation Instructions�����������������������������������������������������������������9-58 Interpretation Guidelines�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-60 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary������������������������������������������������������������9-61

9.4. Supplemental Assessment Questionnaires��������������������������������������� 9-63 Gottman Areas of Strength Checklist����������������������������������������������������������������9-65 The Distance and Isolation Questionnaires - Overview�������������������������������������9-67 Self-Test: Flooding.................................................................................... 9-69 Self-Test: Do You Lead Parallel Lives?...................................................... 9-71 Self-Test: How Lonely is Your Relationship?............................................. 9-73 Areas of Disagreement���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-75 Areas of Change Checklist: Solvable Problems�������������������������������������������������9-77 Innocent Victim and Righteous Indignation Scale����������������������������������������������9-79

9.5. Supplemental Assessment Scoring and Interpretation��������������������� 9-81 Gottman Areas of Strength Checklist Scoring & Interpretation������������������������9-83 The Distance and Isolation Questionnaires Scoring ������������������������������������������9-83 Self-Test: Flooding.................................................................................... 9-83 Self-Test: Do You Lead Parallel Lives?...................................................... 9-83 Self-Test: How Lonely is Your Relationship?............................................. 9-84 Areas of Disagreement���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-84 Areas of Change Checklist: Solvable Problems�������������������������������������������������9-84 Innocent Victim and Righteous Indignation Scale����������������������������������������������9-84

9.6. Reliability and Validity of the Gottman Sound Relationship House Scales By John Gottman, Ph.D.��������������������������������������������� 9-85 References��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-108

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-3 Client ID#:

Date:

Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test ircle the dot on the scale line that best describes the degree of happiness, everything C considered, of your present relationship. The middle point “happy” represents the degree of happiness that most people get from their relationship, and the scale gradually ranges on one side to those few who are very unhappy and, on the other, to those few who experience extreme joy or felicity in their relationship. l

l

l

l

Very Unhappy

l

l

l

Happy

Perfectly Happy

State the approximate extent of agreement or disagreement between you and your partner on the following items. Please check each column. Always Agree

Almost Always Agree

Occasionally Disagree

Frequently Disagree

Almost Always Disagree

Always Disagree

1. Handling Family Finances 2. Matters of Recreation 3. Demonstration of Affection 4. Friends 5. Sex Relations 6. Conventionality (right, good, or proper conduct) 7. Philosophy of Life 8. Ways of Dealing with In-laws

For each of the following items, check one response:   9. When disagreements arise, they usually result in (a) me giving in___ (b) my partner giving in___ (c) agreement by mutual give and take___ 10. Do you and your partner engage in outside interests together? (a) all of them___ (b) some of them___ (c) very few of them___ (d) none of them___ 11. In leisure time, do you generally prefer: (a) to be “on the go”___ (b) to stay at home ___ 12. Does your partner generally prefer: (a) to be “on the go”___ (b) to stay at home ___ 13. Do you ever wish you had not committed to this relationship? (a) frequently___ (b) occasionally___ (c) rarely___ (d) never___ 14. If you had your life to live over again, do you think you would: (a) commit to the same person ___ (b) commit to a different person ___ (c) not commit at all __ 15. Do you ever confide in your partner? (a) almost never___ (b) rarely___ (c) in most things___ (d) in everything___

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-4

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-5 Client ID#:

Date:

Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory We would like to get an idea of how your relationship stands right now. Please answer the questions below by circling TRUE or FALSE for each item with regard to how things stand right now. For items that are true, please indicate what year the item began to be true. 1.

I have made specific plans to discuss separation (or divorce) with my partner. I have considered what I would say, etc.

TRUE

FALSE

Year:

2.

I have set up an independent bank account in my name in order to protect my own interests.

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

3.

Thoughts of separation (or divorce) occur to me very frequently, as often as once a week or more.

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

4.

I have suggested to my partner (spouse) that I wish to be separated, divorced, or rid of him/her.

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

5.

I have thought specifically about separation (or divorce). I have thought about who would get the kids, how things would be divided, pros and cons, etc.

TRUE

FALSE

Year:

6.

My partner and I have separated. This is a [CHECK ONE] otrial separation, or olegal separation.

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

7.

I have discussed the question of my separation (or divorce) with someone other than my partner (trusted friend, psychologist, minister, etc.).

TRUE

FALSE

Year:

8.

I have occasionally thought of separation (or divorce) or wished that we were separated, usually after an argument or other incident.

TRUE

FALSE

9.

I have discussed the issue of separation (or divorce) seriously or at length with my partner.

TRUE

FALSE

______

______

______ Year: ______ Year: ______

10.

We are separated, I have asked that the separation be permanent (or filed for divorce), or we are completely broken up (or divorced).

TRUE

I have made inquiries about separation (or how long it takes to get a divorce, grounds for divorce), costs involved, etc.

TRUE

12.

I have contacted a lawyer to make preliminary plans for a separation or custody arrangement (or divorce).

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

13.

I have consulted a lawyer or other legal aid about the matter.

TRUE

FALSE

Year: ______

14.

I have considered separation (or divorce) a few times, other TRUE than during or after an argument, although only in vague terms.

FALSE

Year:

11.

FALSE

Year: ______

FALSE

Year: ______

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

______

9-6

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-7 Client ID#:

Date:

The Sound Relationship House Questionnaires (5 item scale) Love Maps

Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. STATEMENT

TRUE

FALSE

I can tell you some of my partner’s life dreams.

q

q

I can list the relatives my partner likes the least.

q

q

My partner is familiar with what are my current stresses.

q

q

I can list my partner’s major aspirations and hopes in life.

q

q

I know my partner’s major current worries.

q

q

Fondness and Admiration System Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. STATEMENT

TRUE

FALSE

My partner really respects me.

q

q

I feel loved and cared for in this relationship.

q

q

Romance is something our relationship definitely still has in it.

q

q

When I come into a room, my partner is glad to see me.

q

q

My partner appreciates the things I do in this relationship.

q

q

Turning Towards or Away Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. STATEMENT

TRUE

FALSE

I really enjoy discussing things with my partner.

q

q

We always have a lot to say to each other.

q

q

We have a lot of fun together in our everyday lives.

q

q

We really have a lot of interests in common.

q

q

We like to do a lot of the same things.

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-8 Client ID#:

Date:

Negative Sentiment Override

Fill this form out thinking about your immediate past (last 2 to 4 weeks) or a recent discussion of an existing issue. Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. IN THE RECENT PAST IN MY RELATIONSHIP, GENERALLY

TRUE

FALSE

I felt innocent of blame for this problem.

q

q

I felt unjustly accused

q

q

I felt personally attacked.

q

q

I felt unjustly criticized.

q

q

I wanted the negativity to just stop.

q

q

Harsh Startup Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. WHEN WE DISCUSS OUR ISSUES

TRUE

FALSE

Arguments often seem to come out of nowhere.

q

q

I seem to always get blamed for issues.

q

q

My partner criticizes my personality.

q

q

Our calm is suddenly shattered.

q

q

I find my partner’s negativity unnerving and unsettling.

q

q

Accepting Influence Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. WHEN WE DISCUSS OUR ISSUES

TRUE

FALSE

I generally want my partner to feel influential in this relationship.

q

q

I can listen to my partner, but only up to a point.

q

q

My partner has a lot of basic common sense.

q

q

I don’t reject my partner’s opinions out of hand.

q

q

My partner is basically a great help as a problem solver.

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-9 Client ID#:

Date:

Repair Attempts Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. DURING OUR ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE CONFLICT BETWEEN US

TRUE

FALSE

We are good at taking breaks when we need them.

q

q

Even when arguing, we can maintain a sense of humor.

q

q

We are pretty good listeners even when we have different positions on things.

q

q

If things get heated, we can usually pull out of it and change things.

q

q

My partner is good at soothing me when I get upset.

q

q

Compromise Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. DURING OUR ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE CONFLICT BETWEEN US

TRUE

FALSE

We are usually good at resolving our differences.

q

q

We both believe in meeting each other halfway when we disagree.

q

q

In discussing issues, we can usually find our common ground of agreement.

q

q

Yielding power is not very difficult for me.

q

q

Give and take in making decisions is not a problem in this relationship.

q

q

Gridlock on Perpetual Issues Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. WHEN WE DISCUSS OUR ISSUES

TRUE

FALSE

We keep hurting each other whenever we discuss our core issues.

q

q

My partner has a long list of basically unreasonable demands.

q

q

I don’t feel respected when we disagree.

q

q

My partner often acts in a selfish manner.

q

q

When we discuss our issues, my partner acts as if I am totally wrong and he or she is totally right.

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-10 Client ID#:

Date:

The Four Horsemen Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. WHEN WE DISCUSS OUR ISSUES

TRUE

FALSE

I have to defend myself because the charges against me are so unfair.

q

q

I often feel unappreciated by my partner.

q

q

My partner doesn’t face issues responsibly and maturely.

q

q

I am just not guilty of many of the things I get accused of.

q

q

My partner has a lot of trouble being rational and logical.

q

q

Flooding

Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. STATEMENT

TRUE

FALSE

Our discussions get too heated.

q

q

I have a hard time calming down.

q

q

One of us is going to say something we will regret.

q

q

I think to myself, “Why can’t we talk more logically?”

q

q

My partner has a long list of unreasonable demands.

q

q

Emotional Disengagement and Loneliness Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. STATEMENT

TRUE

FALSE

I often find myself disappointed in this relationship.

q

q

I will at times find myself quite lonely in this relationship.

q

q

It is hard for my deepest feelings to get much attention in this relationship.

q

q

There is not enough closeness between us.

q

q

I have adapted to a lot in this relationship, and I am not so sure it’s a good idea.

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-11 Client ID#:

Date:

Quality of Sex, Romance, and Passion in the Relationship For each item check the one box below that applies to your relationship right now: 1. Our relationship is 2. I would say that 3. I would say that

4. I would say that 5. I would say that 6. I would say that 7. I would say that 8. I would say that 9. I would say that 10. I would say that 11. I would say that

12. I would say that 13. I would say that 14. I would say that

m

Romantic and passionate

m

Becoming passionless, that is, the fire is going out

m

My partner is still verbally affectionate

m

My partner is not very verbally affectionate

m

My partner expresses love and admiration to me

m

My partner expresses love or admiration less frequently these days

m

We do touch each other a fair amount

m

We rarely touch each other these days

m

My partner courts me sexually

m

My partner does not court me sexually

m

We do cuddle with one another

m

We rarely cuddle with one another

m

We still have our tender and passionate moments

m

We have few tender or passionate moments

m

Our sex life is fine

m

There are definite problems in this area

m

The frequency of sex is not a problem

m

The frequency of sex is a problem

m

The satisfaction I get from sex is not a problem

m

The satisfaction I get from sex is a problem

m

Being able to just talk about sex, or talk about sexual problems is not a serious issue between us

m

Being able to just talk about sex, or talk about sexual problems is a serious issue between us

m

The two of us generally want the same thing sexually

m

The two of us want different things sexually

m

Differences in desire are not an issue in this relationship

m

Differences in desire are an issue in this relationship

m

The amount of love in our lovemaking is not a problem

m

The amount of love in our lovemaking is a problem

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-12 Client ID#:

Date:

Quality of Sex, Romance, and Passion in the Relationship (continued) 15. I would say that

16. I would say that 17. I would say that 18. I would say that 19. I would say that 20. In this relationship 21. In this relationship

22. I would say that 23. I would say that 24. I would say that

25. I would say that 26. I would say that 27. Overall I would say that

m

The satisfaction my partner gets from sex is not a problem

m

The satisfaction my partner gets from sex is a problem

m

My partner is still physically very affectionate toward me

m

My partner is not very physically affectionate toward me

m

I feel romantic toward my partner

m

I do not feel very romantic toward my partner

m

My partner finds me sexually attractive

m

My partner does not find me sexually attractive

m

I find my partner sexually attractive

m

I do not view my partner as sexually attractive

m

I feel romantic and passionate toward my partner, or

m

I feel passionless, my own fire is going out

m

My partner is romantic and passionate, or,

m

My partner is passionless, that is, the fire is going out in my partner

m

My partner compliments my appearance

m

My partner does not compliment my appearance

m

I am satisfied by how we initiate sex

m

I am dissatisfied with the ways we initiate sex

m

It is possible for me to refuse sex and have it be okay

m

I am unable to refuse sex and have it be okay with my partner

m

I hardly ever have sex when I don’t want to

m

It seems as if I often have sex when I don’t want to

m

We have many ways to satisfy one another sexually

m

We have very few ways to satisfy one another sexually

m

We are good sexual partners

m

We are not very good sexual partners

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-13 Client ID#:

Date:

Shared Meanings Questionnaire We want you to think about how well you and your partner have been able to create a sense of shared meaning in your lives together. We think that when people become committed to one another they create a new culture, and some relationships also involve the union of two very different cultures. But even if two people are coming from the same regional, cultural, ethnic, and religious backgrounds, they will have been raised in two very different families, and their merging involves the creation of a new culture. Read each statement and place a check mark in the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. YOUR RITUALS

True

False

Reunions at the end of each day in our home are generally special times in my day.

q

q

During weekends, we do a lot of things together that we enjoy and value.

q

q

I really look forward to and enjoy our vacations and the travel we do together.

q

q

When we do errands together, we generally have a good time.

q

q

We have ways of becoming renewed and refreshed when we are burned out or fatigued.

q

q

True

False

We share many similar values in our roles as lovers and partners.

q

q

My partner and I have compatible views about the role of work in one’s life.

q

q

My partner and I have similar philosophies about balancing work and family life.

q

q

My partner supports what I would see as my basic mission in life.

q

q

My partner shares my views on the importance of family and kin (sisters, brothers, moms, dads) in our life together.

q

q

True

False

If I were to look back on my life in very old age, I think I would see that our paths in life had meshed very well.

q

q

My partner values my own accomplishments.

q

q

My partner honors my own very personal goals, unrelated to my relationship.

q

q

We have very similar financial goals.

q

q

Our hopes and aspirations, as individuals and together, for our children, for our life in general, and for our old age are quite compatible.

q

q

True

False

We see eye-to-eye about what “home” means.

q

q

We have similar views about the role of sex in our lives.

q

q

We have similar views about the role of love and affection in our lives.

q

q

We have similar values about the importance and meaning of money in our lives.

q

q

We have similar values about “autonomy” and “independence.”

q

q

YOUR ROLES

YOUR GOALS

YOUR SYMBOLS

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-14 Client ID#:

Date:

Trust Instructions: For the following items answer the degree to which you agree or disagree with each item by checking the box under Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree. Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

1. There were important times when my partner has not been there for me emotionally when I was really in need. 2. My partner has been or is emotionally involved with someone else, which feels like a betrayal. 3. My partner has been or is sexually involved with someone else, which feels like a betrayal. 4. I don’t have much trust in any relationship. 5. Once, when I really needed to turn to my partner for emotional support, I was terribly disappointed and left utterly alone. 6. Sometimes I don’t feel important to my partner. 7. My partner has forced me to do some things against my principles, or to do things that I find objectionable, repulsive, or disgusting. 8. My partner lies to me. 9. There are some wounds my partner has created that can never fully heal between us. 10. My trust in this relationship has been seriously shattered. 11. I don’t feel that I am my partner’s first or even major priority in his or her life. 12. My partner has cheated me and I feel betrayed by that. 13. My partner has betrayed me financially. 14. When going through hard times in our relationship, I don’t feel I can count on my partner to be there for me. 15. Our vows aren’t really sacred to my partner. 16. My partner can be deceitful with me in many ways. 17. When I get sick I am abandoned by my partner. 18. I can’t really count on my partner. 19. If I should have financial problems my financial problems are totally my own. I cannot rely on my partner to help me out. 20. I suspect that my partner has betrayed our relationship contract in the past. 21. My partner is not really loyal to me. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-15 Client ID#:

Date:

Commitment Instructions: For the following items answer the degree to which you agree or disagree with each item by checking the box under Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree. Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

1. I feel confident that my partner will stay in this relationship even if we are going through hard times. 2. When I am feeling bad, my partner is willing to meet my needs. 3. During a fight, my partner does not threaten to leave me. 4. I am committed to this relationship. 5. I consider my relationship rock solid. 6. I would refuse to have sex with a person other than my partner. 7. I will sometimes make major sacrifices for my partner even if it goes against what I need. 8. I make sure that my partner feels loved by me. 9. When my partner is sick, I think it is very important that I take care of him or her. 10. When I compromise with my partner, I don’t feel controlled and manipulated. 11. Being a team is sometimes more important to me than my own needs 12. I feel that my partner’s financial security is in part my responsibility. 13. If my partner were in emotional trouble, I would be there 100%. 14. After an argument, I am not thinking that I could be happier with someone else. 15. During a fight, I do not threaten to leave my partner. 16. I am not waiting for someone better to come along. 17. We are not usually engaged in a power struggle. 18. I want to stay with my partner forever. 19. I would avoid flirting if it made my partner feel insecure. 20. No matter what’s going on, I never fantasize about divorce or separation. 21. No matter how bad things get I never long for the days when I was single. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-16 Client ID#:

Date:

Commitment (continued)

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

22. I never envy my friends who are single. 23. I never fantasize about what life would be like being someone else’s partner. 24. I love it when my partner and I dream about our future together. 25. I love thinking about my partner and I growing old together 26. My worst nightmare is my partner dying before me. 27. I feel loved by my partner.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-17 Client ID#:

Date:

The Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems Instructions. Please think about how things are RIGHT NOW in each of the following areas of your relationship. Think about each area of your life together, and decide if this area is fine or if it needs improvement. For each of the statements below, check the box that best describes your relationship. 1. We are o

staying emotionally connected, or o

Check all the specific items below: Just simply talking to each other Staying emotionally in touch with each other Feeling taken for granted Don’t feel my partner knows me very well right now Partner is (or I am) emotionally disengaged Spending time together

becoming emotionally distant. Not a problem

o o o o o o

Is a problem

o o o o o o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

2. We are o handling job and other stresses effectively, or o “spill-over” of other stresses. Check all the specific items below: Helping each other reduce daily stresses. Talking about these stresses together. Talking together about stress in a helpful manner. Partner listening with understanding about my stresses and worries. Partner takes job or other stresses out on me. Partner takes job or other stresses out on others in our life.

experiencing the

Not a problem

Is a problem

o o o o

o o o o

o o

o o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-18 Client ID#:

Date:

3. We are o handling issues or disagreements well, or o gridlocking on one or more issues. Check all the specific items below: Differences have arisen between us that feel very basic. These differences seem unresolvable. We are living day-to-day with hurts. Our positions are getting entrenched. It looks like I will never get what I hope for. I am very worried that these issues may damage our relationship.

Not a problem

o o o o o o

Is a problem

o o o o o o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

4. Our relationship o is romantic and passionate, or o is becoming passionless; the fire is going out. Check all the specific items below: My partner has stopped being verbally affectionate. My partner expresses love or admiration less frequently. We rarely touch each other. My partner (or I) have stopped feeling very romantic. We rarely cuddle. We have few tender or passionate moments.

Not a problem

o o o o o o

Is a problem

o o o o o o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-19 Client ID#:

5. o

Date:

Our sex life is fine, or o There are problems in this area.

Check all the specific items below: The frequency of sex.

Not a problem

Is a problem

Problems of desire.

o o o o o

o o o o o

The amount of love in our lovemaking.

o

o

The satisfaction I (or my partner) get from sex. Being able to talk about sexual problems. The two of us wanting different things sexually.

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

6. An important event (e.g., changes in job or residence, the loss of a job or loved one, an illness) has occurred in our lives. o Yes o No

The relationship o is dealing with this well or o is not dealing with this well Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

We have very different points of view on how to handle things. This event has led my partner to be very distant. This event has made us both irritable. This event has led to a lot of fighting. I’m worried about how this will all turn out.

o

o

o o o o

o o o o

We are now taking up very different positions.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-20 Client ID#:

Date:

7. Major issues about children have arisen (this could be about whether to be parents). o Yes o No

The relationship o

is dealing with this well or o

Check all the specific items below:

is not dealing with this well Not a problem

Is a problem

We have very different points of view on goals for children. We have different positions on what to discipline children for. We have different positions on how to discipline children. We have issues about how to be close to our children. We are not talking about these issues very well.

o

o

o

o

o

o

o o

o o

There is a lot of tension or anger about these differences.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

8. Major issues/events have arisen about in-laws, a relative, or relatives. o Yes o No

The relationship o is dealing with this well or o is not dealing with this well Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

I feel unaccepted by my partner’s family. I sometimes wonder which family my partner is in. I feel unaccepted by my own family. There is tension between us about what might happen. This issue has generated a lot of irritability.

o o o o

o o o o

o

o

I am worried about how this is going to turn out.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-21 Client ID#:

Date:

9. o Being attracted to other people or jealousy is not an issue, or o My partner is flirtatious or there may be a recent extra-relationship affair Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

This area is a source of a lot of hurt. This is an area that creates insecurity. I can’t deal with the lies. It is hard to re-establish trust. There is a feeling of betrayal.

o o o o o

o o o o o

It’s hard to know how to heal this.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

10. o There has been a recent extra-relationship affair (or I suspect there is one), or o This is not an issue Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

This is a source of a lot of pain. This has created insecurity. I can’t deal with the deception and lying. I can’t stop being angry. I can’t deal with my partner’s anger.

o o o o o

o o o o o

I want this to be over but it seems to never end.

o

o

I am tired of apologizing.

o

o

It’s hard to trust again.

o

o

I feel that our relationship has been violated.

o

o

It is hard to know how to heal this.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-22 Client ID#:

Date:

11. When disagreements arise, o we resolve issues well, or o unpleasant fights have occurred Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

There are more fights now. The fights seem to come out of nowhere. Anger and irritability have crept into our relationship. We get into muddles where we are hurting each other. I don’t feel very respected lately.

o o o o o

o o o o o

I feel criticized.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

12. o We are in synchrony on basic values and goals, or o Differences between us in these areas or in desired lifestyle are emerging. Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

Differences have arisen in life goals. Differences have arisen about important beliefs. Differences have arisen on leisure time interests. We seem to be wanting different things out of life. We are growing in different directions.

o o o o o

o o o o o

I don’t much like who I am with my partner.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-23 Client ID#:

Date:

13. Very hard events (for example, violence, drugs, an affair) have occurred within the relationship. o Yes o No

The relationship o is dealing with this well or o is not dealing with this well Check all the specific items below: There has been physical violence between us. There is a problem with alcohol or drugs. This is turning into a relationship I hadn’t bargained for. The “contract” of our couples relationship is changing. I find some of what my partner wants upsetting or repulsive. I am now feeling somewhat disappointed by this relationship.

Not a problem o o o o o o

Is a problem o o o o o o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

14. We o work well as a team, or o are not working very well as a team right now Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

We used to share more of the household’s workload. We seem to be pulling in opposite directions. My partner does not share in housework or family chores. My partner is not carrying weight financially. I feel alone in managing our family.

o o o o o

o o o o o

My partner is not being very considerate.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-24 Client ID#:

Date:

15. o We are coping well with issues of power or influence, or o We are having trouble in this area Check all the specific items below:

I don’t feel influential in decisions we make. My partner has become more domineering. I have become more demanding. My partner has become passive. My partner is “spacey,” not a strong force in our relationship. I am starting to care a lot more about who is running things.

Not a problem

Is a problem

o o o o o

o o o o o

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

16. o We are handling issues of finances well, or o We are having trouble in this area Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

I or my partner just doesn’t bring in enough money. We have differences about how to spend our money. We are stressed about finances. My partner is financially more interested in self than in us. We are not united in managing our finances.

o o o o o

o o o o o

There is not enough financial planning.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-25 Client ID#:

Date:

17. We are o doing well having fun together, or o not having very much fun together Check all the specific items below:

We don’t seem to have very much time for fun. We try, but don’t seem to enjoy our times together very much. We are too stressed for fun. Work takes up all our time these days. Our interests are so different now that there are no fun things we like to do together. We plan fun things to do, but they never happen.

Not a problem

Is a problem

o o

o o

o o o

o o o

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

18. We are o feeling close in building/being a part of the community together, or o not feeling close in building/being a part of the community together Check all the specific items below:

Being involved with friends and other people or groups Caring about the institutions that build communities Putting time into the institutions of community (e.g., school, agencies) Doing projects or work for charity. Doing other good deeds for members of the community. Taking a leadership role in the service of community.

Not a problem

Is a problem

o

o

o o

o o

o o

o o

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-26

19. We are o feeling very close in the area of spirituality together, or o not doing well in that area these days Check all the specific items below:

Not a problem

Is a problem

Sharing the same beliefs. Agreeing about religious ideas and values. Issues about specific house of worship (mosque, church, synagogue). Communicating well about spiritual things. Issues that are about spiritual growth and change.

o o o

o o o

o o

o o

Spiritual issues involving our family.

o

o

Comments, and if things are fine, describe how you are managing this area of your lives. If things are not fine, describe the obstacles you see to improving this area of your relationship.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-27 Client ID#:

Date:

The Three “Detour” Scales CHAOS Instructions: Check Yes or No for each item below. STATEMENT

YES

NO

1. Does your home life together feel chaotic?

q

q

2. Is there any sense of disorder in your life together?

q

q

3. In this relationship are you unable to function well in your own life?

q

q

4. Do major unplanned events keep happening to the two of you?

q

q

5. Are the two of you always having to adapt to changing circumstances?

q

q

6. Do you sometimes feel personally out of control of your life?

q

q

7. Do you sometimes feel like a “feather in the wind” in this relationship?

q

q

8. Is it hard for you both to work regularly?

q

q

9. Is it hard for the two of you to maintain a regular and reliable schedule?

q

q

10. Does your financial life seem unstable?

q

q

11. Do your finances feel out of control?

q

q

12. Do the two of you have trouble eating well (nutritiously)?

q

q

13. Have the two of you been unable to have a routine for grocery shopping?

q

q

14. Have the two of you been unable to have a regular routine for meals?

q

q

15. Have the two of you been unable to maintain good health?

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-28 Client ID#:

Date:

META-EMOTIONS (YOUR OWN FEELINGS ABOUT EMOTIONS) What’s your emotion philosophy?

Instructions: For the following items answer the degree to which you agree or disagree with each item by checking the box under Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree. Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

1. I try not to think much about my own emotional states. 2. I believe that people should just roll with the punches and get on with life. 3. There’s not much point in dwelling on your inner feelings. 4. I generally view being emotional as being out of control. 5. People ought to be more rational and less emotional. 6. I think expressing emotion is okay only if it’s in control. 7. Anger is a very dangerous emotion. 8. People often act emotional just to get what they want. 9. If you ignore negative emotions, they tend to go away and take care of themselves. 10. It is best to just “ride out” negative emotions and not dwell on them. 11. I don’t mind other people’s negative moods as long as they don’t last too long. 12. I try to get over sadness quickly so I can move on to better things. 13. I set some definite limits on other people’s staying in a negative emotional state. 14. I tend to get impatient with people’s sadness. 15. I believe in not paying attention to people if they aren’t positive or cheerful.

16. People can’t be very rational if they are being emotional. 17. I really don’t want to experience negative emotions. 18. It isn’t important to dwell on why you are feeling the way you feel. 19. When people get sad they are just feeling sorry for themselves. 20. I think if you want to you can make yourself feel positively about almost anything. 21. I am not sure anything can be done when someone is feeling down. 22. I just don’t think people should ever show their anger. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-29 Client ID#:

Date:

META-EMOTIONS (continued)

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

23. It is unnecessary to look deeply at the causes of one’s emotions. 24. I just try not to make a big deal out of my own emotions. 25. There is very little to be gained by dwelling on why one is feeling a certain way. 26. People can definitely not tell what I am feeling. 27. Anger is always a very toxic emotion. 28. Feelings are private and I try not to express them outwardly. 29. There’s not much difference between anger and aggression. 30. Expressions of affection are usually embarrassing for me. 31. I try to avoid people when they are sad. 32. Generally, I am fairly neutral and don’t experience very much emotion. 33. Sadness is a form of weakness. 34. Feelings are best kept to one’s self. 35. Ideally, it is better to stay in control, upbeat, and positive. 36. If people are emotional they may lose control. 37. To get over a negative emotion, just get on with life and don’t dwell on things. 38. I don’t feel comfortable with outward displays of love. 39. People ought to know when you love them without your having to say so. 40. Dwelling on your fears just is an excuse for not getting things done. 41. In general it’s better not to express your sad feelings. 42. I’m not sure that there’s much that can be done to change strong negative feelings. 43. Trying to problem solve with an emotional person is a waste of time. 44. When my partner is angry it means there is something wrong with our relationship. 45. Just the passage of time solves most things.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-30 Client ID#:

Date:

MY FAMILY HISTORY

We’d like to ask you some questions about stresses and supports you experienced as a child growing up in your family. Please answer these questions as honestly as you can. For the following items answer the degree to which you agree or disagree with each item by checking the box under Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Agree, or Strongly Agree. Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

1. The family I grew up in struggled financially. 2. I was physically abused by my parent(s). 3. My relationships with my siblings were not close. 4. I was sexually abused or molested in my family. 5. My family home was a place of instability and insecurity. 6. My family moved too often. 7. My parents were not affectionate toward me. 8. One or both of my parents were alcoholic. 9. My parents were unhappy with one another. 10. I never really trusted my parents. 11. My parents had no faith in my abilities. 12. My parents didn’t praise me very much. 13. My parents didn’t often show me that they loved me. 14. I was lonely as a child. 15. My parents didn’t protect me from danger very well. 16. We didn’t travel very much together as a family. 17. Growing up I could never talk to my parents about my feelings. 18. My home was very chaotic. 19. My parents used unnecessarily strict and harsh discipline. 20. It was never okay for me to tell my parents what my needs were. 21. I was not accepted by my peers. 22. My parents would use shame, or belittle me. 23. There was no love and affection expressed in my family. 24. Ours was not a child-centered home. 25. The kids were ignored by my parents. 26. There was lots of rivalry between my siblings. 27. My home was not open socially to guests and visitors. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-31 Client ID#:

Date:

MY FAMILY HISTORY (continued)

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

28. My parent(s) used illicit drugs or alcohol. 29. My parents forced me to do a lot of chores. 30. There was a lot of conflict in my family. 31. My parents gave me very little freedom to explore my interests. 32. I experienced cruelty from my family. 33. I witnessed violence between my parents or adults in my family. 34. I had no supportive teachers at school. 35. I didn’t have a sense of belonging in my family. 36. I experienced abuse or bullying from peers at school. 37. My parents were not understanding and empathic toward my feelings. 38. My father was not present, or absent a lot. 39. My parents were emotionally volatile. 40. I often got blamed when something went wrong at school. 41. I had no good friends growing up. 42. My parents rarely came to my own special events. 43. My parents had bad temper outbursts. 44. I didn’t get the attention I needed growing up. 45. My father was a cold person. 46. My parents were neglectful. 47. I was not accepted by my peers. 48. My parents never really knew me well. 49. There was a lot of tension in my home growing up. 50. My mother was a cold person. 51. I was given few choices as a kid. 52. I was physically hungry as a kid. 53. I never really got know my father. 54. I rarely look forward to family gatherings or visits from relatives. 55. We are not a strong or unified family. 56. I never took fun vacations with my family. 57. My family was not emotionally expressive. 58. My parents were strict and authoritarian.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-32 Client ID#:

Date:

MY FAMILY HISTORY (continued)

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither

59. I dislike some of my brothers or sisters. 60. I am competitive with one or more of my siblings. 61. My family was not active in the community. 62. It was never okay for me to make mistakes. 63. I was compared unfavorably to others by my parents. 64. My parents were too perfectionist. 65. My mother and father were critical of me. 66. We did not usually eat together as a family. 67. We rarely had fun family holidays together. 68. My preferences as a kid were usually ignored. 69. My birthdays were never well celebrated. 70. My siblings were not given preference over me. 71. My parents’ discipline was inconsistent. 72. My parents were financially stingy toward me. 73. There was no music in our home. 74. There was no laughter in my home growing up. 75. I couldn’t usually come to my parents and ask for help. 76. I rarely had friends over to my house. 77. We rarely had fun together as a family. 78. We rarely played together as a family. 79. If I had a problem as a kid, I usually kept it to myself.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

Agree

Strongly Agree

9-33 Client ID#:

Date:

Gottman Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ) Read each statement and check the appropriate TRUE or FALSE box. TRUE

FALSE

q q q

q q q

q q

q q

q q

q q

q q q q q q q q q q q

q q q q q q q q q q q

19. My partner makes me engage in sexual practices I consider perverse.

q

q

20. In bed, my partner makes me do things I find repulsive.

q q q q q q

q q q q q q

1. I have to do things to avoid my partner’s jealousy. 2. My partner tries to control who I spend my time with. 3. My partner repeatedly accuses me of flirting with other people. 4. My partner is overly suspicious that I am unfaithful. 5. My partner acts like a detective, looking for clues that I’ve done something wrong. 6. My partner keeps me from going places I want to go. 7. My partner threatens to take the money if I don’t do as I am told. 8. My partner forcibly tries to restrict my movements. 9. My partner tries to control all my money. 10. My partner tries to control all my freedom. 11. My partner tries to convince other people that I’m crazy. 12. My partner has told me that I am sexually unattractive. 13. My partner insults my family. 14. My partner humiliates me in front of others. 15. My partner makes me do degrading things. 16. My partner intentionally does things to scare me. 17. My partner threatens me physically during arguments. 18. My partner warns me that if I keep doing something, violence will follow.

21. I feel pressured to have sex when I don’t want to. 22. My partner threatens to hurt someone I care about. 23. My partner intentionally damages things I care about. 24. My partner does cruel things to pets or other animals. 25. My partner threatens to hurt my children.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-34

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-35 Client ID#:

Date:

Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires CONTROL In the past 6 months did your partner: YES

NO

1. Try to control your every move?

q

q

2. Withhold money, make you ask for money, or take your money?

q

q

3. Threaten to kill you?

q

q

4. Threaten to hurt your family, friends, or pets?

q

q

5. Refuse to take responsibility for violent behavior, putting the blame on you?

q

q

6. Try to isolate you by keeping you away from your family or friends?

q

q

7. Stalk or harass you or someone else at work or elsewhere?

q

q

YES

NO

1. Are you afraid of your partner?

q

q

2. Are you uncomfortable talking in front of your partner?

q

q

3. Do you worry that therapy might lead to violence?

q

q

YES

NO

1. Have you ever attempted suicide ?

q

q

2. Have you ever planned a suicide attempt ?

q

q

3. Are you currently thinking about suicide ?

q

q

FEAR People Who Fear Their Partner as a Potential Result of Therapy

SUICIDE POTENTIAL



How often?

q

Daily

q

Weekly

4. Does the following describe you at the moment?

“I would like to kill myself”

q

q



“I would kill myself if I had a chance”

q

q

5. Do you currently have a suicide plan?

q

q

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-36 Client ID#:

Date:

ACTS OF PHYSICAL AGGRESSION In the past 6 months has your partner: Yes Without Injury

Yes With Injury

No

Comments

1. Slapped you? 2. Hit you? 3. Kicked you? 4. Bit you? 5. Scratched you? 6. Shoved you? 7. Tripped you? 8. Whacked you? 9. Knocked you down? 10. Twisted your arm? 11. Pushed you? 12. Pulled your hair? 13. Poked you? 14. Pinched you? 15. Strangled you? 16. Smothered you? 17. Karate chopped you? 18. Kneed you? 19. Stomped on you? 20. Slammed you? 21. Spit on you? 22. Threw an object at you? 23. Hit you with an object? 24. Threatened you with a weapon? 25. Used a weapon (gun, knife, etc.) against you? 26. Forced you to have sex? 27. Raped you?

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-37 Client ID#:

Date:

SCL-90 Below is a list of problems and complaints that people sometimes have. Please read each one carefully. After you have done so, select one of the numbered descriptors that best describes HOW MUCH THAT PROBLEM HAS BOTHERED OR DISTRESSED YOU DURING THE PAST WEEK, INCLUDING TODAY. Circle the number in the space to the right of the problem and do not skip any items. Use the following key to guide how you respond:

Circle 0 if your answer is NOT AT ALL Circle 1 if A LITTLE BIT Circle 2 if MODERATELY Circle 3 if QUITE A BIT Circle 4 if EXTREMELY

Please read the following example before beginning: Example:

In the previous week, how much were you bothered by:

Backaches 0 1 2 3 4

NOT AT ALL

A LITTLE BIT

MODERATELY

QUITE A BIT

EXTREMELY

In this case, the respondent experienced backaches a little bit (1). Please proceed with the questionnaire.

1.

Headaches

0

1

2

3

4

2.

Nervousness or shakiness inside

0

1

2

3

4

3.

Unwanted thoughts, words, or ideas that won’t leave your mind

0

1

2

3

4

4.

Faintness or dizziness

0

1

2

3

4

5.

Loss of sexual interest or pleasure

0

1

2

3

4

6.

Feeling critical of others

0

1

2

3

4

7.

The idea that someone else can control your thoughts

0

1

2

3

4

8.

Feeling others are to blame for most of your troubles

0

1

2

3

4

9.

Trouble remembering things

0

1

2

3

4

10.

Worried about sloppiness or carelessness

0

1

2

3

4

11.

Feeling easily annoyed or irritated

0

1

2

3

4

12.

Pains in heart or chest

0

1

2

3

4

13.

Feeling afraid in open spaces or on the streets

0

1

2

3

4

14.

Feeling low in energy or slowed down

0

1

2

3

4

15.

Thoughts of ending your life

0

1

2

3

4

16.

Hearing voices that other people do not hear

0

1

2

3

4

17.

Trembling

0

1

2

3

4

18.

Feeling that most people cannot be trusted

0

1

2

3

4

19.

Poor appetite

0

1

2

3

4

HOW MUCH WERE YOU BOTHERED BY:

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-38 Client ID#:

Date:

NOT AT ALL

A LITTLE BIT

MODERATELY

QUITE A BIT

EXTREMELY

SCL-90 (continued)

20.

Crying easily

0

1

2

3

4

21.

Feeling shy or uneasy with the opposite sex

0

1

2

3

4

22.

Feeling of being trapped or caught

0

1

2

3

4

23.

Suddenly scared for no reason

0

1

2

3

4

24.

Temper outbursts that you could not control

0

1

2

3

4

25.

Feeling afraid to go out of your house alone

0

1

2

3

4

26.

Blaming yourself for things

0

1

2

3

4

27.

Pains in lower back

0

1

2

3

4

28.

Feeling blocked in getting things done

0

1

2

3

4

29.

Feeling lonely

0

1

2

3

4

30.

Feeling blue

0

1

2

3

4

31.

Worrying too much about things

0

1

2

3

4

32.

Feeling no interest in things

0

1

2

3

4

33.

Feeling fearful

0

1

2

3

4

34.

Your feelings being easily hurt

0

1

2

3

4

35.

Other people being aware of your private thoughts

0

1

2

3

4

36.

Feeling others do not understand you or are unsympathetic

0

1

2

3

4

37.

Feeling that people are unfriendly or dislike you

0

1

2

3

4

38.

Having to do things very slowly to insure correctness

0

1

2

3

4

39.

Heart pounding or racing

0

1

2

3

4

40.

Nausea or upset stomach

0

1

2

3

4

41.

Feeling inferior to others

0

1

2

3

4

42.

Soreness of your muscles

0

1

2

3

4

43.

Feeling that you are watched or talked about by others

0

1

2

3

4

44.

Trouble falling asleep

0

1

2

3

4

45.

Having to check and double-check what you do

0

1

2

3

4

46.

Difficulty making decisions

0

1

2

3

4

47.

Feeling afraid to travel on buses, subways, trains

0

1

2

3

4

48.

Trouble getting your breath

0

1

2

3

4

49.

Hot or cold spells

0

1

2

3

4

50.

Having to avoid certain things, places, or activities because they frighten you

0

1

2

3

4

51.

Your mind going blank

0

1

2

3

4

52.

Numbness or tingling in parts of your body

0

1

2

3

4

53.

A lump in your throat

0

1

2

3

4

54.

Feeling hopeless about the future

0

1

2

3

4

55.

Trouble concentrating

0

1

2

3

4

HOW MUCH WERE YOU BOTHERED BY:

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-39 Client ID#:

Date:

NOT AT ALL

A LITTLE BIT

MODERATELY

QUITE A BIT

EXTREMELY

SCL-90 (continued)

56.

Feeling weak in parts of your body

0

1

2

3

4

57.

Feeling tense or keyed up

0

1

2

3

4

58.

Heavy feelings in your arms or legs

0

1

2

3

4

59.

Thoughts of death or dying

0

1

2

3

4

60.

Overeating

0

1

2

3

4

61.

Feeling uneasy when people are watching or talking about you

0

1

2

3

4

62.

Having thoughts that are not your own

0

1

2

3

4

63.

Having urges to beat, injure, or harm someone

0

1

2

3

4

64.

Awakening in the early morning

0

1

2

3

4

65.

Having to repeat the same actions such as touching, counting, washing

0

1

2

3

4

66.

Sleep that is restless or disturbed

0

1

2

3

4

67.

Having urges to break or smash things

0

1

2

3

4

68.

Having ideas or beliefs that others do not share

0

1

2

3

4

69.

Feeling very self-conscious with others

0

1

2

3

4

70.

Feeling uneasy in crowds, such as shopping or at a movie

0

1

2

3

4

71.

Feeling everything is an effort

0

1

2

3

4

72.

Spells of terror or panic

0

1

2

3

4

73.

Feeling uncomfortable about eating or drinking in public

0

1

2

3

4

74.

Getting into frequent arguments

0

1

2

3

4

75.

Feeling nervous when you are left alone

0

1

2

3

4

76.

Others not giving you proper credit for your achievements

0

1

2

3

4

77.

Feeling lonely even when you are with people

0

1

2

3

4

78.

Feeling so restless you couldn’t sit still

0

1

2

3

4

79.

Feelings of worthlessness

0

1

2

3

4

80.

Feeling that familiar things are strange or unreal

0

1

2

3

4

81.

Shouting or throwing things

0

1

2

3

4

82.

Feeling afraid you will faint in public

0

1

2

3

4

83.

Feeling that people will take advantage of you if you let them

0

1

2

3

4

84.

Having thoughts about sex that bother you a lot

0

1

2

3

4

85.

The idea that you should be punished for your sins

0

1

2

3

4

86.

Feeling pushed to get things done

0

1

2

3

4

87.

The idea that something serious is wrong with your body

0

1

2

3

4

88.

Never feeling close to another person

0

1

2

3

4

89.

Feelings of guilt

0

1

2

3

4

90.

The idea that something is wrong with your mind

0

1

2

3

4

HOW MUCH WERE YOU BOTHERED BY:

Reference: Derogatis, L.R., Lipman, R.S., & Covi, L. (1973). SCL-90: An outpatient psychiatric rating scale—Preliminary Report. Psychopharmacol. Bull. 9, 13–28. Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-40

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-41 Client ID#:

Date:

The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) YES

NO

1. Have you felt you ought to cut down on your drinking or drug use? 2. Have people annoyed you by criticizing your drinking or drug use? 3. Have you felt bad or guilty about your drinking or drug use? 4. Have you ever had a drink or used drugs first thing in the morning to steady your nerves or to get rid of a hangover (eye-opener)?

Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST) Carefully read each statement and decide if your answer is “Yes” or “No”. Then check the appropriate box beside the question. Please answer every question. If you have difficulty with a statement, then choose the response that is mostly right. YES 1. Do you feel that you are a normal drinker? 2. Do friends or relatives think you are a normal drinker? 3. Have you ever attended a meeting of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA)? 4. Have you ever lost friends or girlfriends/boyfriends because of your drinking? 5. Have you ever gotten into trouble at work because of your drinking? 6. Have you ever neglected your obligations, your family, or your work for two or more days in a row because you were drinking? 7. Have you ever had delirium tremens (DTs), severe shaking, after heavy drinking? 8. Have you ever gone to anyone for help about your drinking? 9. Have you ever been in a hospital because of drinking? 10. Have you ever been arrested for drunken driving, or driving after drinking?

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

NO

9-42

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-43

9.2.

The Gottman Relationship Checkup www.gottmanconnect.com

You can now invite your couples to use the Gottman Assessment Questionnaires in a digital format! Our new, online relationship assessment tool not only automatically scores your couples’ strengths and challenges, it also provides you with detailed clinical feedback and a suggested treatment plan with specific recommendations for intervention. To learn more, visit www.gottmanconnect.com.

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-44

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-45

9.3.

Core Assessment Scoring and Interpretation Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test Scoring & Interpretation������������9-47 Weiss-Cerretto Relationship Status Inventory Scoring & Interpretation������������9-48 Sound Relationship House Assessment 5-Item Scale Scoring & Interpretation9-49 Gottman 19 Areas Checklist for Solvable and Perpetual Problems in Your Relationship Scoring & Interpretation����������������������������������������������������������������9-51 The Three “Detour” Scales Scoring & Interpretation����������������������������������������9-53 Emotional Abuse Questionnaire (EAQ) Scoring & Interpretation����������������������9-54 Control, Fear, Suicide Potential, and Acts of Physical Aggression Questionnaires Scoring��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-55 SCL-90 Scoring & Interpretation Instructions�����������������������������������������������������9-56 The CAGE Questionnaire Adapted to Include Drugs (CAGE-AID) Scoring & Interpretation�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-57 Brief Michigan Alcohol Screening Test (b-MAST) Scoring & Interpretation Instructions����������������������������������������������������������������������������������9-58 Interpretation Guidelines���������������������������������������������������������������������������� 9-60 Gottman Assessment Scoring Summary����������������������������������������������������� 9-61

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-46

Copyright © 2000–2014 by Dr. John M. Gottman and Dr. Julie Schwartz Gottman. Distributed under license by The Gottman Institute, Inc.

9-47

Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test Scoring & Interpretation Circle the dot on the scale line that best describes the degree of happiness, everything considered, of your present relationship. The middle point “happy” represents the degree of happiness that most people get from their relationship, and the scale gradually ranges on one side to those few who are very unhappy and, on the other, to those few who experience extreme joy or felicity in their relationship. 0 l

2 l

7 l

15 l

Very Unhappy

20 l

25 l

35 l

Happy

Perfectly Happy

State the approximate extent of agreement or disagreement between you and your partner on the following items. Please check each column. Always Agree

Almost Always Agree

Occasionally Disagree

Frequently Disagree

Almost Always Disagree

Always Disagree

1. Handling Family Finances

5

4

3

2

1

0

2. Matters of Recreation

5

4

3

2

1

0

3. Demonstration of Affection

8

6

4

2

1

0

4. Friends

5

4

3

2

1

0

5. Sex Relations

15

12

9

4

1

0

6. Conventionality (right, good, or proper conduct)

5

4

3

2

1

0

7. Philosophy of Life

5

4

3

2

1

0

8. Ways of dealing with In-laws

5

4

3

2

1

0

For each of the following items, check one response:   9. When disagreements arise, they usually result in (a) me giving in 0 (b) my partner giving in 0  (c) agreement by mutual give and take 10 10. Do you and your partner engage in outside interests together? (a) all of them 10  (b) some of them 8  (c) very few of them 3  (d) none of them 0 11. & 12.

In leisure time, do you generally prefer:  (a) to be “on the go” (b) to stay at home Does your partner generally prefer: (a) to be “on the go”  (b) to stay at home (a) “on the go” for both 3 ; (b) stay at home for both 10 ; disagreement 2

13. Do you ever wish you had not committed to this relationship? (a) frequently 0 (b) occasionally 3 (c) rarely 8 (d) never 15 14. If you had your life to live over again, do you think you would: (a) commit to the same person 15 (b) commit to a different person 0 (c) not commit at all 1 15. Do you ever confide in your partner? (a) almost never 0 (b) rarely 2 (c) in most things 10 (d) in everything 10

Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Scale (