The 'secrets' of a successful long-term relationship

Abstract
The ABS (2001) reported that 53.6% of Australian marriages end in divorce. This is an increase of 25% since 1983. So is this increase due to more unhappy marriages? More unhappy individuals? Or a society that is more accepting of divorce? Through undertaking study of the societal, dyad and individual aspects of divorce the 'secrets' of a successful long-term relationship may be uncovered.


Introduction
In Australia and many other parts of the world divorce and separation are on the rise. The study of social norms, dyad models and individual aspects may all play a role in determining the successfulness of a long-term relationship and an understanding of the increase in divorce rate. To understand divorce and maybe more importantly to find the secrets of a successful long-term relationship each of these levels should be explored. Firstly, there is less social stigma and more assistance (eg. financial) available to divorced persons. Additionally, culture may also play a role at this level. Secondly, transition from passionate love into companionate love, Gottman's work and the investment model all focus on the dynamics between the two people in the relationship. And thirdly, attachment styles are an individual assessment, which is believed to play a role in the success of a relationship. Therefore, relationship success is a very complex area of study with many variables. However, through this study particular variables have been identified as 'secrets' of a successful relationship.

Societal level
As the divorce rate rises so does its acceptance in society. With such high rates, divorce is almost the 'norm'. Gardern (2002) reported that in the past there were just as many unhappy marriages but as divorce resulted in social stigma and alienation couples mostly just stuck with it to avoid these consequences. Additionally, many women could not afford to leave unhappy marriages, as they were dependent on their husbands. The introduction of the supporting parent benefit in 1973 and the 'no-fault divorce' laws in 1976 meant that married individuals, particularly women, were able to leave their marriage (Gardern, 2002). The introduction of these benefits and laws also showed a change towards more social acceptance. As women have begun working outside the home, again their independence has increased and this maybe reflected in the increase in divorce rates. To summarise, many barriers within the societal level have now been removed and termination of a long-term relationship may now have fewer consequences than in the past.

However, this differs in different cultures as they do not have the same social norms. As social norms differ so do the meanings of long-term relationships. One example is arranged marriages in the past in non-Western cultures. In East China marriage is a family business and is arranged by the parent in accordance with the social hierarchy (Higgins, Zheng, Liu & Sun, 2002). These different views of marriage can result in varied successfulness, as China still has a low divorce rate. This does not neccessarily mean the couples themselves are happier.

Dyad Level
When referring to long-term relationships or marriage we are studying the interactions of two individuals. Over the life time of a relationship individuals are likely to come across many new experiences; having children, retirement, moving homes or states. The passionate to companionate love theory, Gottman's work and the investment model all aim to identify qualities between the individuals within the relationship that determine the likelihood of success or divorce.

Firstly, a relationship is likely to begin with passionate love. Passionate love includes; strong desires for one another, excitement and feelings of longing for one another. This love seems to be the easy bit and results in the initail attraction. The success lies in transforming this love into companionate love. Companionate love is calmer, it consists of perceiving your partner as your best friend and soul mate, and means there is a strive to make the relationship work. It is imperative to a successful long-term relationship as it signifies commitment (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008).

Secondly, Gottman's work has been reported to have a 93% success rate in predicting if a couple will stay together (Parra-Cardona & Busby, 2006). Gottman studies many couples and his theory aims to predict; divorce or martial stability, relationship satisfaction and adaptibility to childbirth or retirement (Tell, Pavkov, Hecker & Fontaine, 2006). The main conclusion behind Gottman's theory was that, positivity towards one's partner should outweigh the negativity. Furthermore, he believed that the presence of certain negative affects were more detrimental for the relationship than others. This is the basis of 'The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse' as Gottman called it. The Four Horseman include; criticism, contempt, defensiveness and withdrawal (Holman & Jarvis, 2003).
Gottman describes criticism as the change from complaining about their partner, which is essentially about their behaviour to criticising them, which is more detrimental as it is essentially about their personality. Gottman indicates that complaints are healthy for a relationship, however, if they go unheard the individual places blame on their partner, such as thinking they are selfish. Secondly, contempt includes; insults and psychological abuse against one's partner. There is no longer mutual attraction and compliments are rare. Thirdly, defensiveness results as a response to contempt. This is a natural response when insults are hurled at you, however, it is further damaging to the relationship. Lastly, withdrawal occurs as one is exhausted and overwhelmed by the insults and/or defensiveness and so they are no longer responsive at all. This results in a complete communication breakdown. At this point of the sequence the relationship is in a downward spiral, and the relationship requires a great deal of work to prevent its ending (Gottman & Silver, 1994).

Finally, the Investment model, initiated by Caryl Rusbult, identifies three factors to explain why people stay together. The three factors are; great satisfaction, poor alternatives and greater investment size (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). Satisfaction is defined as positive emotion and attraction to one's relationship. That is the relationship provides high rewards (similar values as partner) and low costs (infrequent arguments) and meets one's expectations of a close relationship (Rusbult, Johnson & Morrow, 1986). Secondly, low alternatives refers to the individuals beliefs that there is low quality alternative partners. That is a belief that there is not anyone better available or with whom they would be better off with (Rusbult, Martz & Agnew, 1998). Lastly, investment size is the idea that if one has invested a lot into the relationship they are more likely to stick with it. Investments can include; time, effort, emotion and resources (such as raising kids or accumulating savings). Basically, there is a belief that their relationship could not be rebuilt with another person (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). A strong role of one factor can keep an individual in a relationship and counteract the others. For example one may not be satisfied in their relationship but if there are no better alternatives or they have invested a lot they are unlikely to leave. While this model is useful to determine why someone might stay in a relationship, even in unpleasant circumstances such as during domestic violence, only the satisfaction factor describes the successfulness of the relationship rather then just succeeding in staying together.

Individual Level
A relationship consists of two individuals, each playing their part. Therefore, if one is not participating in prosocial behaviours there may not be much their partner can do.

One hypothesis on individual contributions towards a successful long-term relationship is that attachment styles can predict behaviours towards their partner. Brennan and Shaver (1995) propose that attachment styles formed in childhood can effect attachment in romantic relationships. Their study found that securely attached (low fear of closeness, low fear of abandonment) people are the happiest in relationships. Furthermore, a study by Klohnen and Bera (1998) found that 95% of women with secure attachment styles got married, with 24% experiencing divorce. In contrast, 75% of women with avoidant (high fear of closeness, high fear of abandonment) attachment styles got married but 50% divorced. This provides evidence that attachment styles play a role in the success of long-term relationships. There are many benefits of a secure attachment style for a relationship. Chappell and Davis (1998) report one benefit is that securely attached people have more positive than negative emotions, as already identified as important by Gottman. Baldwin, Keelan, Fehr, Enns & Koh-Rangarajoo (1996), report increased trust, commitment and a deeper friendship as contributors of securely attached individuals towards successful relationships.


Conclusion
Success of long-term relationships can be due to societal, dyad or individual contributors. Societal norms, culture, passionate to companionate love, Gottman's theory, the investment model and attachment styles all identified 'secrets' of a successful long-term relationship. These secrets include; following social and cultural norms, a deep friendship, high commitment, more positivity than negativity, satisfaction, good communication and absence of criticism, contempt, defensiveness and stonewalling.


References

Baldwin, M., Keelan, J., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh-Rangarajoo, E. (1996). Social cognition conceptualization of attachment working models: Availability and accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 94-109.

Brennan, K.,& Shaver, P. (1995). Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 267-283.

Baumeister, R., & Bushman, B. (2008). Social psychology and human nature (1st Ed.). Belmont, California: Thomson Wadworth.

Chappell, K., & Davis, K. (1998). Attachment, partner choice, and perception of romantic partners: An experimental test of the attachment-security hypothesis. Personal Relationships, 5, 327-342.

Gardner, M. (2002). The unholy war on divorce. Social Alternatives, 21, 52-56.

Gottman, J., & Silver, N. (994). What makes a marriage work? Psychology Today, 27, 38-45.

Higgins, L., Zheng, M., Liu, Y., & Sun, C. (2002). Attitudes to marriage and sexual behaviours: A survey of gender and culture differences in China and United Kingdom. Sex Roles, 46, 75-89.

Holman, T., & Jarvis, M. (2003). Hostile, volatile, avoiding and validating couple-conflict types: An investigation of the Gottman's couple-conflict types. Personal Relationships, 10, 267-282.

Klohnen, E., & Bera, S. (1998). Behavioural and experimental patterns of avoidantly and securely attached women across adulthood: A 31-year longitudinal perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 211-233.

Parra-Cardona, J., & Busby, D. (2006). Exploring relationship functioning in premarital Caucasian and Latino/a couples: Recognising and valuing cultural differences. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 37, 345-359.

Rusbult, C., Johnson, D., Morrow, G. (1986). Predicting satisfaction and commitment in adult romantic involvements: An assessment of the realizability of the investment model. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49, 81-89.

Rusbult, C., Martz, J., & Agnew, C. (1998). The investment model scale: Measuring commitment level, satisfaction level, quality of alternatives and investment size. Personal Relationships, 5, 357-391.

Tell, S., Pavkov, T., Hecker, L., & Fontaine, K. (2006). Adult survivors of child abuse: An application of John Gottman's sound marital house theory. Comtempory Family Therapy, 28, 225-238.