Good Life Project - Inside the Love Lab | Julie & John Gottman

Episode Date: May 28, 2019

Love. What makes it work? And, keep working for life? That's where we're headed in today's conversation with legendary co-founders of the Gottman Institute a/k/a the "Love Lab," Julie and John Gottman. Drawing upon Julie's decades of clinical observations and John's 40 years of breakthrough research with thousands of couples, they've developed stunning insights into what makes relationships work and last.Julie and John lead The Art and Science of Love and many other workshops in Seattle and Julie has also co-designed the national clinical training program in Gottman Method Couples Therapy. Between them, they've written a number of bestselling books on love and relationships, the latest of which, Eight Dates: Essential Conversations for Lifetime of Love, integrates their decades of collaboration into a prescription for couples to make eight dates that will bring them together and keep their relationship vibrant.Check out our offerings & partners: Join My New Writing Project: Awake at the WheelVisit Our Sponsor Page For Great Resources & Discount Codes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

So when you think about the experience that so many people pretty much say makes life worth living, the word love tends to come up pretty often. And a ton of questions tend to follow. How do you find it? How do you keep it? Can you keep it? Is staying in love something that is mythical? You only see it in the movies and TV. Is it a skill set that you develop? What are the things that tend to trip people up? And what can you do to really build beautiful relationships that allow you to stay in love for life? Is that even possible? That is where I go in my conversation today with John and Julie Gottman. They are sort of luminaries in the field of relationships and love, founders of something that has become known as the Love Lab, where for decades they have studied relationships,

successful, disastrous, and really been able to deconstruct and figure out what are the things that go into creating and sustaining extraordinarily beautiful, in love, deeply committed relationships for long times. They have a new book out called Eight Dates as well, which is really fantastic. It is eight dates and how to have them that cover eight different topics that are super important for pretty much anyone who is in a relationship or who is looking to find that person to explore. We dive into all of this. We dive into their personal journeys,

their individual research. They both started out in psychology, one though with a very experimental mindset and the other with a very clinical mindset and came together to create not just a fantastic relationship and marriage between them, but also incredible professional collaboration that has benefited now millions of people. So excited to share this conversation. tuning in to our special second weekly episode this month as we introduce you to new musicians and singers and songwriters and performers every Thursday throughout the month of May. Super excited to bring this to you. I'm Jonathan Fields, and this is Good Life Project. The Apple Watch Series 10 is here.

It has the biggest display ever. It's also the thinnest Apple Watch ever, making it even more comfortable on your wrist, whether you're running, swimming, or sleeping. And it's the fastest-charging Apple Watch, getting you 8 hours of charge in just 15 minutes. The Apple Watch Series X. Available for the first time in glossy jet black aluminum.

Compared to previous generations, iPhone Xs are later required. Charge time and actual results will vary. Mayday, mayday. We've been compromised. The pilot's a hitman. I knew you were gonna be fun. On January 24th. Tell me how to fly this thing. Mark Wahlberg.

You know what the difference between me and you is? You're going to die. Don't shoot him. We need him. Y'all need a pilot? Flight Risk. I am so fascinated by you individually and by the work you've done together and your latest work as well. What I think would be kind of fun to do would be explore a little bit of your individual journeys, then how they come together, and then the work that you've been doing, and then your latest obsession slash passion slash date focus. And why don't we start with you, Julie?

So interesting to me, too, because from what I understand, you're from Portland, Oregon, one of my favorite places in the world. And you went to CC for college, where my daughter is actually headed shortly. You're kidding. Oh, fantastic. Fantastic. Wonderful. What drew you from Portland out to Colorado? What was it about that? Skiing, skiing, and skiing. Yes. So at the time, they didn't have the block system. Oh, no kidding. Yeah, no block system. So it was a normal college curriculum. And my sophomore year, we were the guinea pigs of the block system. Oh, so you were here when weeks of a class and so on. I was on the ski team, which was absolutely wonderful. I love the mountains. I have to be near mountains. So I really wanted to go to Colorado College. No, was that all they were talking about were rats and pigeons.

Oh, no. I wanted actually to study human beings. So I created 11 independent studies for myself and managed to squeeze human beings into the curriculum. So as an undergrad, then you're completely changing the paradigm and doing your own research. That's correct. Which is highly unusual. It can be. I, you know, tend to try very hard to pursue my own passions. I always have. Whether they actually conform to the outlines of where I am or not. Right.

And so that leads you, so you have clearly an early interest in the world of psychology and why people do what they do in the world, which leads you into a career. And you've been in clinical practice for, well, at least that's sort of like the beginnings, and then it's turned into something much bigger than that. Right. What was the driver behind the choice to go clinical, to work individually in that way with people? You really want to know? I do. Okay. Well, the real answer is that I came from an extremely dysfunctional family and I spent a lot of time, given I was in Portland,

Oregon, in a forest two blocks away from our house. I used to sleep there at night, sneak out of the house. I spent a lot of time there. And at 10, basically the trees told me, someday you'll use this pain to help others. And I did. So at 10, I got a very clear, you know, internal direction that I really should work with people. And I never look back, really, from 10 on. Amazing. So you're one of the people that kind of had a sense for what you were here to do at a very young age, which is so unusual. That's right.

Yes, I was very, very fortunate. Yeah. Right. Incredible. Okay, I was very math, and I was at MIT going for a PhD in mathematics. And your first year at MIT, at least when I went there, you had to live in the graduate house for that first year. And you were randomly assigned a roommate. My roommate was studying psychology, a guy named William Bruce. And I found his books a lot more interesting than my books. So I decided, you know, I ought to learn something about psychology.

And MIT is an arrangement with Harvard, so I got to take classes at Harvard with some pretty famous psychologists and people at MIT. And I decided, you know, I think I want to study psychology. So then I took a year off and went around the country, actually happened to settle in Berkeley during the free speech movement in 1964. So I was very politically active and also applied to the University of Wisconsin for a PhD in psychology. They were very empirically oriented.

Which, I mean, it's interesting to go, because the mindset that I associate with math is very different than the mindset that I associate with somebody who would pursue psychology, because one is, it's so focused on, there is a defined answer, my job is to find it. Whereas psychology, I feel like it's almost the exact opposite. You know, it's so broad and soft and nuanced

and you might never know like what the thing is. Right. It does feel that way. The great thing about the University of Wisconsin was that they were studying, many people there were studying very hard, important concepts, like Harry Harlow, who was studying love and attachment between moms and babies, and trying to understand what it is that made babies feel safe with their moms. Studying really important ideas, but measuring things and looking at them in the laboratory. So Harlow's experiments with

wire mothers and cloth mothers showed that- Legendary. Yeah, legendary research. And here's this guy studying really hard stuff and he's disproving what Freud claims, that babies are only interested in milk. They're not, they're interested in comfort. And, you know, he's really establishing scientifically what John Bowlby is saying in England about the importance of attachment. It's coming out of World War II when 700,000 kids were moved out of London

to avoid the Blitz and separated from their mothers and into very nice homes, very nice English homes, and yet getting very depressed because they're not with their moms and their dads. So here's University of Wisconsin has this tradition of studying really hard stuff like love, but measuring things. And so I got trained on how to measure that kind of stuff, how to do statistics and mathematics with really tough ideas. And that appeals to sort of like the way that your brain is wired and also sort of helps

me understand why you took the sort of behavioral experimental path. Very true. Yeah. So a real basis in observation. So that the Primate Center at the University of Wisconsin. You know, they're really observing animals, sometimes in the wild, looking at chimpanzees and monkeys, rhesus macaques, you know. And I took seminars with people like Jim Sackett, who was a primatologist and later became one of my colleagues

at the University of Washington and was interested in looking at not just behavior, but patterns and sequences of behavior, which I applied to looking at couples and the sequences of behavior between partners to see what is it that discriminates couples who are happy with one another and in stable relationship from couples who are really miserable with one another and about to break up. So, you know, using some of these methods of studying nonverbal behavior, facial expressions, emotions, very, very basic things, and measurement was really key in my training at the University of Wisconsin. Yeah, which brought a whole different lens to this exploration of something that has always been this poetic, ethereal, indescribable, unmeasurable thing that we live and breathe for. Exactly.

Yet nobody really sort of said, okay, so let's see if we can, is this actually deconstructible in a meaningful way? Julie, it was funny as you were sharing your early experience, actually, in the lab with pigeons and rats, I had a minor flashback. My dad had one job his entire life. He researched human cognition in a lab, and he was a professor. And I remember as a young child going into his lab, and he has these chambers, and all they're doing is researching with rats and pigeons. And I literally, I remember when he switched over to actual students. Yes. You know, and he's like, and I remember rows of racks with, you know, like, you know, like, beeping, flashing things. And all of a sudden, everything got compressed to computers.

And then human beings, it was like a whole new world. Exactly. Exactly. Well, you know, in Colorado, in Colorado Springs at the time, it was during the Vietnam War. And there were lots and lots of people who were trying to dodge the draft. There were protests. I was protesting as well. It was also the era of feminism, the birth of feminism, 69 through 73, when I was there. And there were also a lot of people who were trying to escape through drugs, through LSD and so on.

And so I was one of a small group of people that started a counseling drop-in center. Oh, no kidding. Yeah. So I never had college friends. They were usually people who were older. So we started a drop-in center and it was really an interesting experience because we had a van that would go from place to place to place. Sometimes there were army people. There was a huge army base nearby, army people who may have raped women on the campus or who may have dropped acid during R&R and were having a horrible bad trip, were terrified of going to Vietnam. So we were out

there on the streets trying to support and comfort these people who were having very negative experiences. And so those were the earliest days that I was working on the streets with people and was always drawn to those in particular who were struggling with the most difficult issues. People who'd already been traumatized, people who may have been suffering from addiction, and so on. And that all began when I was about 19 years old. Wow. So you're out there at 19 years old. How do you know what to do in circumstances like that? Well, my family was a great teacher. As was the forest. Yes, as was the forest. And I guess, you know, I always had been pretty good at reading people's emotions. I think, you know, I had to develop that as a young kid. So I could read people's emotions.

And I didn't know how to fix anybody's problems, but I also had a sense that that wasn't my job. My job was to witness what they were going through, to express empathy, to support their journey, whatever that was, and help them be less alone with it. So supply care, understanding, nuanced witnessing in order to keep people who were oftentimes terrified from feeling that terror alone. And that is something that we can all do. Yes, absolutely we can do. We can teach people how to do that. Yeah. So once you ended up in clinical practice, did you have a focus on trauma? Yes, I did. So what ended up happening is after college, I did all kinds of work for five years before I went to is PTSD. And I lived in India for a year and really wanted to see, okay, so we live in Hollywood in the United States, right? We live in Disneyland. So what's the real world like? So took myself to India for a year, lived there, worked in Calcutta, saw poverty, saw disease, saw trauma, and then returned to graduate school and really focused on treating trauma.

Working with folks who had been incested, sexually abused, raped, created the first anti-sexual harassment program with my supervisor while doing an internship at University of Cal San Diego. So it was working with very tough problems and then interning on Skid Row in Los Angeles with vets who were returning from Vietnam at that time, also during a time when all the hospitals were closing and the mental health clinics were closing and people were living on the streets. That was the beginning of it in 1984. So you're building your life and your career with this focus. And then at the same time, John, you're out there in the world, in a different part of the world, building a career, but with a focus on the experimental side, on love, on relationships. And on children. Tell me more about that part of it? So at the University of Wisconsin, I got to study with some of the great developmental psychologists in the country, Ross Park, Mavis Etherington, people who were focusing on families. And I was very interested in the study of interacting systems, families, organizations,

parents and children interacting, and really focused on child clinical for a postdoc I did. And so I'm oriented much more toward development. And of course, that's a really great strength at the University of Wisconsin, looking at families, looking at interaction. And that became something I got trained to do. Right. So when you move on from the universe to its content and you start to actually build your own thing, what becomes the central focus? Observation. Really observing moment by moment what's going on in two people

interacting with one another or parents interacting with children or interacting with infants and kids in classrooms. So I started studying kids' peer social relationships in classrooms and kids' friendship, studying, well, how do kids make friends and why do they reject one another and what are the consequences of peer rejection and bullying and things like that? So, you know, something that I was very interested in, sort of interacting systems, social interaction. And then I teamed up with my best friend, Bob Levinson, and we combined studying emotion not only by observing, but also looking at physiology

and people's internal experience of emotion as well. So that was my focus. What were some of the big ahas that came out of that collaboration? And people's internal experience of emotion as well. Yeah. So that was my focus. What were some of the big ahas that came out of that collaboration? One of them was that in a great relationship, even during conflict, the ratio of positive emotions to negative emotions was five to one. Five times as much positivity as negativity. Bob and I had gone from one disastrous relationship with a woman to another.

And I know in my relationships, I would have been happy if there was as much negativity as positivity, not overwhelmingly more negativity. But here in great relationships, it was five times as much positivity as negativity, even when they're conflicting about something. So a great relationship was something I'd never experienced before. I hadn't met Julie yet, but you know.

Let's make that one perfectly clear. Tell me what you mean by positivity and negativity though. Well, all the positive emotions like interest in one another, amusement, shared humor, empathy, understanding, kindness, compassion, calming your partner down, reassuring your partner, all kinds of things that people do to be nice to one another, kindness and generosity. All those positive emotions, including joy and ecstasy and things like that, which we rarely observe in a laboratory. And all the negative emotions like hostility, and belligerence, and domineering, and anger, and disappointment, and sadness, and hurt feelings, and all those negative things. And those come out in conflict as well. But in unhappy relationships, it's like negativity is like one of those whirlpools that just spiral down and people can't dig out of it. They're caught in this trap, this whirlpool of negativity.

But in good relationships, they have so much of a cushion of positive emotion that they can easily escape when negativity hits. They can exit as well as enter. And in unhappy relationships, they can't exit. They can enter, but they get sucked into it and they can't get out. So that was a real surprise. In a way, those findings are really very simple in describing the differences between happy and unhappy marriages. So to think that we need five of these positive experiences for every negative experience to reach, however we describe healthy. Well, that's only during conflict. Okay. During non-conflict, it's 20 positives to one negative.

Right. How do you define conflict versus non-conflict? Conflict is when you're trying to solve a problem and you have a disagreement. Okay. That's what we mean by conflict. So you're discussing a problem, you have different points of view about it, and you're trying to figure out how to solve it. That's how we're defining conflict. So during that phase of discussion, the good couples, five to one positive to one negative.

And when you're just going about your everyday interaction, you're cooking in the kitchen, you're just having fun with the kids, you're hanging out together, that's 20 positives to one negative. See, that sounds so counterintuitive to me. How so? Because to me, I would seem like, okay, so when you're in it, when you're in the conflict, that the potential to go into that downward spiral is so much higher that you would need a higher ratio of positive to negative rather than when you're just kind of every day, things are good,

but you're going about your life that you would actually need four times that number of positive to negative. It seems... Well, here's why. We're looking for the good enough relationship, not the perfect relationship. So any disagreement typically is going to bring forth negative emotion, right? So it's less likely that you're going to have a huge number of positive emotions expressed or positive interactions compared to negative. But if you can at least succeed at five to one, that's doing really well. It's much easier to elicit the positive interactions during non-conflict. Got it.

That makes sense. Now I get it. Okay, good. I'm a little slow on the update. No, not at all. Or when you're just hanging out, right? And your partner tries to get your attention and the other person really, you know, doesn't respond.

It seems like a small thing, but it kind of hurts when people are trying to connect, you know, and just say something like, oh, Jonathan, look out there, you know, that looks like that's a hawk, isn't it? On that ledge. And there's no response. It hurts a lot more because you expect nice interaction when you're not conflicting. So when there's a turning away, you know, during one of those moments, it's much more painful. Yeah, that makes sense to me. And I guess that also introduces this concept from the work that you do of bids. Tell me more. So John and I created on the University of Washington campus, an apartment lab. And in this little apartment, we created a room that was very much like a B&B. So people stayed there for 24

hours. They were, you know, bringing groceries in, they would make meals, there was a TV and so on. And we watched them for 24 hours. So it was just like a B&B, except that we had three cameras bolted to the walls, we took their urine, we took their blood, you know, but other than that, it was a perfect B&B experience, right? And what we noticed in all of the tape we were watching was that people would make these little tiny bits for connection. So at first, you know, we couldn't figure out what were the differences between the successful couples and the ones who didn't do well because we were following these couples for years after they came to the apartment lab. And finally, John and a colleague of his figured out that there were these little bits for connection, meaning you might just call your partner's name and see if your partner said, yeah, that's a good response to a bid for connection. Or one person would look out the window because

there was a beautiful view outside and might say, wow, look at that fantastic boat going by. And the other person could do one of three things. They could either turn against, which looked like, stop interrupting me, I'm trying to read. Or they could turn away, meaning nothing. There'd be no response whatsoever. Or they could turn towards, and that would just look like this. Huh. Wow. That's all it took. And it made a huge difference. We found that when we followed these couples, the successful couples turned towards each other's bids for connection 86% of the time. 86, that's a lot. The disastrous couples who ended up really unhappy or divorcing turned towards each other only 33% of the time. See that difference? 53% difference

in whether they turned towards or turned away or against. So we saw that this was an incredibly powerful factor in what made relationships successful or disastrous. Tell me how to fly this thing. You know what the difference between me and you is? You're going to die. Don't shoot him. We need him. Y'all need a pilot. The Apple Watch Series 10 is here. It has the biggest display ever. It's also the thinnest Apple Watch ever, making it even more comfortable on your wrist,

whether you're running, swimming, or sleeping. And it's the fastest-charging Apple Watch, getting you eight hours of charge in just 15 minutes. The Apple Watch Series X. Available for the first time in glossy jet black aluminum. Compared to previous generations, iPhone XS or later required, charge time and actual results will vary.

How much of the result of success versus failure was due to the act of turning towards versus the response to? to me, I guess my curiosity is how much of it was about simply noticing that there was a bid being offered and acknowledging it versus the nature of the response to the bid? Was that something that was even deconstructible? No, not usually. I mean, basically the unit was the attempt to connect and the response to it.

So it's a kind of interaction unit rather than, but it was true, interestingly enough, that in couples where there wasn't much turning toward, there was also not very much bidding. There was not very much attempt to really connect as well. But of course, you know, in all of these findings, these are correlational findings. So we don't know what's causing what, right?

Is it the happy relationship that's causing this? So we had to do experiments. And it turns out when you increase the amount of turning toward noticing bids, you know, which is an important part of that, and the willingness to really meet the need that's being expressed, sometimes non-verbally expressed, then a lot of other good stuff increases. So we could really measure and assess whether these

things were causally related or just correlations of being in a happy relationship. So it turns out that these things really are skills. If you build the skills, you'll change the nature of the relationship. That's what Julie and I discovered when we first started working together. Julie, from her really huge amount of experience doing therapy with the most distressed people, my experience measuring things, put that together and we created a theory

with hypotheses about causal connection. And then in 23 years of working together, we could test those out. And mostly we were wrong. So the data were informing both of us. But it was a combination of her clinical experience, her sensitivity for people in pain, and my training and measurement and mathematical modeling of relationships and statistics combined together experimentally that could create a theory that could help people. Yeah, it's like the super skill of observation, the super skill of coding sort of like together creates this near magical. Yeah.

Let me also point out that because we studied over 3,000 couples, what we could do is look at the successful couples, see exactly what they were doing. Because there were really very clear patterns about what they were doing to make their relationship successful, then we could create exercises and interventions to help those who were distressed to do the same things in their relationships that the successful couples were doing. So we very carefully analyzed what were they doing, created exercises, tested those exercises to see if they actually worked. And sure enough, they did.

And then we began teaching those to couples who came to our workshops, who came to therapy. Yeah. So it's almost like if, John, as you described, when you noticed in the problematic relationships that there were just very low level of bids happening in the first place, and then you do the research to figure out causation versus correlation, then you can start to understand maybe this is actually more of learned helplessness that you just give up.

Right. And then if you can see that, you reverse it and say, okay, if people are learning helplessness, well, then maybe they can also relearn to be constructive together. Beautifully, beautifully put, Jonathan. What we were really trying to do is create the safety for those couples to actually make more bids for connection so that they could slowly build trust. And teaching the other partner how to respond to those bids, it didn't take a lot. It was just a small little tiny response like, yeah, or uh-huh. That's all it took. And they could change the whole course of their relationship over time. Which seems almost so counterintuitive. You know, it's that hard, yet that easy. Exactly.

You've got it. You, at some point along the way also, I know in the work that you did, you identified these things that you call the four horsemen. I think it's four horsemen, the apocalypse, right? Right. Can you sort of like walk us and walk me through those a bit? Sure. So we found very clear patterns of negative behaviors, negative emotions, and how they were expressed that were the big problem. It wasn't the emotion that was the problem. It was how they were expressed. So let me talk about each one. Criticism is when you put the blame for a problem on a personality flaw of your partner, right? So an example of that might be something like you're just too lazy.

There's the criticism. You're too lazy to clean up the kitchen. So the emotion is frustration that the kitchen is dirty, right? You're blaming a personality flaw, lazy. You're blaming the problem on that personality flaw of your partner. You're too lazy to clean up the kitchen. So it's like an identity level thing. It's a character thing.

Okay. Yes. So there's a character trait that you're seeing in your partner that's very negative, very bad. And all problems come back to that particular flaw in your partner. Okay.

You're too selfish. You know, you're so thoughtless, you're so inconsiderate. Those kinds of words are criticisms. And when you express your anger, your frustration, your resentment, and so on, by describing your partner negatively that way, that doesn't work. It creates defensiveness. Defensiveness is the second one. Defensiveness looks like, I did too clean up the kitchen. So it's kind of righteous victimhood, right? Don't get mad at me. I'm such a good person. So that's one form of defensiveness. Another form of defensiveness is counterattack. So you say something like, oh yeah, well, you didn't pay the bills, right? So you're attacking back. All right. So defensiveness doesn't work. You're not

taking any responsibility for the problem at all. You're just saying, no, it's not me, or no, you're bad, I'm good. Right? All right. The third is contempt, and contempt is the worst. It's like sulfuric acid on a relationship. So contempt is when you're also criticizing your partner, but you're doing it from a place of superiority, of moral superiority. And contempt manifests through sarcasm, through mockery, sometimes through a facial expression. Like if any of you have teenagers, right, and you see that roll of the eye, you know, or the, you know, left cheek, left lip corner going up, you know, like with an eye roll, that is contempt. And contempt makes the other person feel ashamed. It shames them. It's saying, you know, you're so disgusting to me that I can barely look at you. That's contempt. And not only does contempt create

demise in the relationship, it's also been found in our research to really destroy the immune system of the listener. So the number of times a listener in a relationship hears contempt correlates with how many infectious illnesses they'll have in the next year. So there's a whole secondary immunology thing happening. Yes, that's right. So it's really hurting the immune system. The other person is probably secreting cortisol and adrenaline when they hear that contempt, which erodes the immune system. So that's the third. So contempt literally, quite literally, causes physical harm to the other person in the relationship. Yes, psychological harm and physical harm.

You've got it. That's right. So the fourth horseman is what we call stonewalling. And it looks exactly like it sounds. The other partner turns into a stonewall and doesn't give any response whatsoever to what the speaker is trying to say. Now, we found out, because John and Bob measured physiology in the lab, we found out that stonewalling, which typically happens more in men than it does in women, is a way that that person is trying to go inside and self-soothe. What we found is when that stonewaller was actually really questioned later on about their experience, they felt like they were facing a saber-toothed tiger who was attacking them. And their heart rates would jump above 100 beats a minute,

even though they were sitting there quietly listening to their partner. They'd be aerobically escalated. They'd be in fight or flight because they felt so attacked and powerless at the same time. But my guess is, while internally, they're just trying to hold on for dear life, externally, it probably presents as something which is disrespect. As something which is, you're not even hearing me, you're shutting down. And it actually probably exacerbates the problem. Exactly. If these are the four things that are massively destructive, what can we do about them? Well, when we look at the masters of relationship, we see we get additional information.

So instead of criticism, most of the time, the masters are reassuring their partner and pointing their finger not at their partner, but at themselves and having a very gentle beginning to the conflict discussion, where they say, hey, Jonathan, don't get upset about this. You know, I love you. You're a great guy. I love this relationship. You know, we're doing fine. It's just that every now and then at dinner, you know, you'll be doing your email, And that kind of makes me feel unimportant. And I wish you wouldn't do your email during dinner. Positive need. A positive need is there.

You know, it's what you're asking for. You know, let's have conversation during dinner instead of you doing your email and us being disconnected. So a very gentle startup. But even when the partner was critical among the masters, they would be communicating, okay, you know, that makes sense. Sometimes I am kind of selfish. Sometimes I am really thoughtless. You're right. You know, tell me more about what you feel and what you need.

They're taking responsibility for the problem. Unlike defensiveness, where they're pushing it back and accelerating and counterattacking or acting like an innocent victim, they're saying, you know, you're probably right. There are times when I'm not a very good listener. There are times when I'm not a very good partner. Tell me more. I want to hear more. I want to know what you need. A totally different reaction than defensiveness creates. And then instead of contempt, in the apartment lab, we saw them in very small moments building respect and affection, saying things like, you know, you really look sexy this morning. I'm having all

these lewd thoughts about you. Or thanks for getting me the butter. Or thanks for doing the dishes. Or I enjoyed the conversation at dinner. They're doing that. And when they do get physiologically aroused, they're talking about what they need and what they feel. Okay, so they're repairing effectively when things aren't going well rather than stonewalling. So it's a whole different kind of configuration

where they're communicating to their partner. You know, when you're upset, the world stops and I listen and I'm not defensive. I try not to be defensive. So that was kind of what we learned from the good relationships. And part of our research strategy was to oversample unhappy couples and oversample happy couples. So we had enough power statistically to describe what they were doing. And you get all these wonderful recipes that can be useful in therapy from these good relationships. It's not just that they're not doing the Four Horsemen. It's that they're doing additional things that actually build that positive climate of acceptance, understanding, shared humor, all those kinds of things that really work to make understanding much more likely.

Let me add a little bit more to that. So for both criticism and contempt, you know, typically there's anger and resentment, there's sadness and so on. There's typically a need that's going on that they're trying to express, but they're doing it the wrong way. So we saw there was a formula actually that John is describing. Here's the formula. I feel something. I feel upset. I feel stressed. I feel angry. I'm worried. I'm threatened. I'm frustrated. I feel angry that the kitchen is a mess. I feel frustrated that there's a new dent in the car. Then they say, here's what I need. And when they express their need, they're expressing it positively. So they don't say what they don't need, what they don't want.

I don't want you leaving the kitchen a mess. That's a negative need. The positive need, they flip it on its head. They say, I would love it if you would wipe down the counters after dinner. They tell their partner what their partner can do to shine for them, you see. And that's a whole nother message. Doesn't make the person feel defensive. They're describing themselves, their feeling, then the situation, and the positive need that can help the partner shine for them. Now, another thing about stonewalling that's very important is that when somebody is what we call physiologically flooded, they stonewall. And that flooding means they're in fight or flight.

They're just overwhelmed at that point. They're overwhelmed. Their heart rates are high. They're in fight or flight. And physiologically, inside, they feel awful. You probably can't even hear or see what's really going on at that point. Exactly. That's exactly right. All you perceive is attack.

So what really needs to happen when somebody is stonewalling is that they need to take a break. They need to take a break. They need to call for a timeout. You know, just like sometimes we give our kids a timeout, they need to give themselves a timeout. And the best way to do that is to say to the partner, you know what, I'm flooded. Then they need to say when they'll come back. I need to take a break. I'll be back in an hour. And typically a break should last at a minimum 20 to 30 minutes, no longer though than 24 hours. So they tell their partner when they'll come back to continue to talk because the partner will feel abandoned, right? And then when they go away, a really important

thing to do when they separate is don't think about the fight. Don't figure out what you should say when you come back because if you keep thinking about the fight, Don't figure out what you should say when you come back. Because if you keep thinking about the fight, you'll keep yourself around. Yeah, it's like you're stewing and it defeats the whole process. Yeah. That's exactly right. Because you're like, you just keep yourself in fight or flight until you come back and it's probably even worse. You got it. Yeah. That's right. That makes sense. So what makes better sense is to do something that's self-soothing, something that takes your mind off it. So you can read a magazine, you can watch TV as long as it's not one of those 6,000 murder

TV shows, you know, where people are getting killed and killing each other. You can take a walk, you can meditate, you can do yoga, you can listen to music, play music, all those things that are self-soothing for us. And come back at the designated time. If you need more time, that's okay. Come back at the designated time and ask for more time and say the second time you'll come back. Also, there's a different goal for the masters in conflict. The goal for the masters is mutual understanding. For the disasters, the goal is to win. That's huge. Yep.

Yeah, I mean, that shift alone seems like it's everything. It's everything. Yeah, because one of it is adversarial and the other is collaborative. Right, exactly. Yeah. Not only is it collaborative, but it's curious, it's cooperative, and it's compassionate.

You're trying to understand with compassion where your partner's coming from. And to accept your partner as they are. With their position on the issue. Yeah. Mayday, mayday. We've been compromised. The pilot's a hitman. I knew you were gonna be fun. January 24th. Tell me how to fly this thing. Mark Wahlberg.

You know what the difference between me and you is? You're gonna die. Don't shoot if we need them! Y'all need a pilot? Flight Risk. The Apple Watch Series 10 is here. It has the biggest display ever. It's also the thinn The Apple Watch Series 10 is here. It has the biggest display ever. It's also the thinnest Apple Watch ever, making it even more comfortable on your wrist,

whether you're running, swimming, or sleeping. And it's the fastest-charging Apple Watch, getting you eight hours of charge in just 15 minutes. The Apple Watch Series 10. Available for the first time in glossy jet black aluminum. Compared to previous generations, iPhone Xs are later required. Charge time and actual results will vary. It occurs to me that all of these are, as you both described, these are skills.

They're learnable skills. But it also seems like there is a meta skill which has to be there before any of this works, which is awareness. For any of this, for you to have the ability to recognize any of the things that we're talking about and then respond intentionally rather than reactively, you've got to have the bigger skill of awareness

of being able to actually zoom the lens out in a moment and say, oh, what's actually happening here? Like, what am I feeling internally? What is this other person like showing me their feeling and what's happening between us, which is a skill, which I don't think many of us are trained in. You know, Jonathan, I beg to differ a little bit. Let me try to explain. You know, out there today, there's a lot of emphasis, of course, on awareness and mindfulness and so on, which I think tends to make people feel like, gosh, I'm not healthy enough. I'm not aware enough. I'm not mindful enough to be able to have a decent relationship. I've got to develop all that stuff first. I've got to be healthy in order to have a good relationship. And the reality is a little different. You know, again, back to the research, one of the things that was discovered

in the research is even neurotic people, highly neurotic people can have great relationships. And so I went, yes, I was really excited. She kind of cuts right through the whole awareness thing as the necessary thing. So, you know, all that you have to do really is to know how to do two things. To recognize when something doesn't feel right. You don't have to necessarily know what you're feeling exactly. You just have to sense that something doesn't feel right. And most people have that. They have that, you know, instinct that something doesn't feel right.

It's part of our self-preservation, right? So notice that things don't feel right. It's part of our self-preservation, right? So notice that things don't feel right. And then be curious. What the heck is going on? Be able to ask questions. What is going on here? Something's wrong. I don't like it. What's going on? And pause, breathe. You know, if you can sense when something is wrong and you can breathe at the same time, that's really a good thing. That's all it really takes. And then, you know, the skills can kick in. Right.

Then you can learn, you know, the skills. Yeah. I mean, and that makes a lot of sense to me. I think part of the struggle that I have with the idea, it's not even a struggle, it's just maybe an observation of what's coming up in my mind is to sense when we feel something's not right. I feel like so many of us are moved through life almost entirely disembodied. We're living from the head up. We're living cognitively, not in a sensory way.

And I feel like so many of us have become disconnected from the physiological signs that our body gives us all day, every day that would let us be like, oh, I'm not entirely sure what's going on here, but something's not right. And I'm sure, Julie, you've seen this, especially with people who've been through trauma. One of the first things that happens, you disconnect from that. But that also shuts off all the good signals that would let you know something's not quite right. Mm-hmm. You're absolutely right about that.

So, you know, when folks are really suffering from trauma, and a lot of people are, they try to disconnect from their physical sensations, from their emotions, from their fear, from everything. However, the thing that I've noticed with people in trauma, it's interesting, is that the signals are still going on. They still have those signals in their bodies. All they have to do is turn slightly to the right, and there they are, right there. So it's simply a matter of listening. It's just listening to their body, listening to themselves. And, you know, this brings up another point, which is maybe a little tangential,

but here we are sitting in New York, right? And there's a whole lot of concrete around us, tons and tons of it. And I guess I, you know, coming from the Northwest where there's forests, there's mountains, there's water and so on, I think there's a way in which people have cut off from their bodies and their emotions because they've been cut off from nature. So I so agree with that. from their own natural habitat, right? And so, you know, in Seattle, where we're based, certainly you see some of that cut off, especially in the tech industry and so on, where people are really compelled to think black and white, very cerebral, but not as much because people are still connecting with nature. Yeah, I completely agree with that. And it's funny you bring that up. Where we are right now is strategic specifically for that reason, because we are three blocks from Central Park, which is the size of some small cities, and two blocks from the Hudson River. And because I'm so aware of exactly what

you said, and I'm also, I'm somebody who really, I'm very tuned into my need for nature and how it affects me when I don't have my hit, that like we are where we are, because every day I'm either walking in the park, or I'm walking down by the water water because I just, I don't need to be, I just need to have that as it's my reset. It allows me to go in. I don't need to talk to people. I'm just to get back into that, to breathe it in, you know, to breathe a little bit of the salt water from the Hudson River or just, you know, the greenery and smell the foliage in the park is so important to me that even living in this massive city, I don't think that I could live here without having access to both of those things on a regular basis. That totally makes sense. Totally makes sense to me. Well, Jonathan, one of the reasons that we wrote this book, Eight Dates, was because many long-term relationships, people get so busy in their lives. They get so absorbed

with the minutiae of career and children that their lives turn into this infinite to-do list and they're not making time for one another. And so we wanted to write a book that would create eight dates in which people could connect with one another and we could rekindle curiosity in one another. And that's what these dates are for. They're for really talking about, you know,

what do you need in terms of play, adventure, fun, you know, what's intimate connection in terms of play, adventure, fun, you know, what's intimate connection, sexuality. What about money? What do you feel about money? What's enough money? Why is money so important? What's the history of your family with money and your own life with money? So these eight dates are designed to reconnect people. And some of that is about nature. It's about sense of meaning, about life dreams, shared purpose, children, community, family, all those kinds of things. Yeah. And what's interesting to me about, that you wrote this book also, initially it sounds like for people who are looking to find love, like here are eight days that you can go on and eight really important things to talk about and explore with a sense of openness

and curiosity to find out, are you with somebody who may be compatible, you know, long-term, but it also seems like along the way, you know, like you, you both realize, oh, this isn't just for, you know, like exploring new love. This is for people who have been together for, for potentially decades to go back in and not only revisit conversations, but maybe have conversations that you've never had, even though you may be together for a very long time, which I thought was really interesting. So we field tested these dates with 300 couples. We like to be empirical.

These couples were gay couples, lesbian couples, heterosexual couples, and they agreed to videotape their dates so we could listen to the dates and make sure they worked. Right. So, you know, what we saw was also coming from a lot of our clinical work, which is that couples can be together for decades, just like you're pointing out. And because their lives are so busy, as John was mentioning, they haven't stayed in tune with each other, right? So each individual is evolving over time, over the years, but they're not staying in tune with how that other person is changing, how they're evolving, how their values may have changed, how their experiences are

turning them in different directions. So with each chapter, we focused on something that is really important in relationships. That's what we've learned from our research. And each date is constructed so that you prepare for the date by thinking about this particular topic and addressing some questions individually. Then coming together and we describe some fun activities you can do on each date and discuss particular questions we've laid out that really take a deeper path into understanding each other. So questions like, for example, the chapter on money, how did your parents show that you either had enough money or not enough money? What did money mean in your family? Did it mean freedom? Did it mean power? Did it mean security? And what do you want it to mean in this relationship? How much money is enough? What are your values around money? How much money do you want that would leave you feeling what? Secure, powerful, et cetera.

Why is money meaningful to you? So we have chapters on money, family, sex and intimacy. What do you really like sexually? How did you learn about sex when you were a kid? That's a hilarious part of the conversation. Most people didn't or they learned through pornography or something. Who the heck knows? Also, chapters on dreams.

What are your dreams? Did your family, when you were growing up, honor your dreams? Did you even get to voice them? And what are your dreams now? And how can I support you with those, living those dreams, your underlying purpose for being on this planet, as well as spirituality? Some people have developed spirituality. Some people have lost it. Some people are not interested in it. So who are you regarding that topic? So the conversations are all very deepening of the relationship. We even have one on conflict, but it's not about, okay, let's have a fight. It's not that at all.

Instead, what it is, is so what's the style in which you feel most comfortable discussing a problem? How did your family handle conflicts and how do you want to? It's more like that. Yeah. I mean, it's really interesting also, as I mentioned in the opening of our conversation, my wife and I are about to become empty nesters. And so it's fascinating. You're not old enough for that, Jonathan. Oh, I am. You're like, you know, 30 years old. My hairline clearly reveals I'm old enough.

So it's interesting to me because when I think about, even if you've had these conversations or some variation of them very early in the relationship, so many people, when they become parents, then all of a sudden, all the focus goes to the children, the family. The family unit becomes the center of everything. Everything happens on behalf of the family, very often the kids. What's best for the kids? And then you go about life. And then if you're know, the kids grow up and at some point they, they move out and you find yourself in this place of, oh, it's just us again, you know, but it's been probably decades since it's been just us. This is such a fascinating set of exercises to revisit and sort of, it's almost like saying, and who are we now? Exactly. Yeah. So we wrote the book to be an experience. I mean, how often is a book an experience other than reading it?

But you go and have the experience of rekindling curiosity in your partner. None of the dates are confrontational. They're all fun and exploratory. That's the idea. You brought up a bunch of different topics that the dates are about. One of them kind of jumps out that I want to explore a little bit more, and that's the date around sex and sexuality. Especially because very often that and money are like the two huge sources of both tremendous joy and connection and tremendous pain and separation.

So if we talk about, you know, potentially just quickly about each one of them, but sex, you know, it feels like a topic that even more than money can be the source of great unhappiness and people just don't want to talk about or address. How important is sex really over the long-term success of a relationship? Can it actually stay alive and healthy for decades and decades and decades? And how does that conversation unfold through certain extent? Yeah, it's really interesting. I think Helen Fisher at Rutgers University has written a lot about this. She studied this idea of being in love. And a lot of people have said, well, being in love has a shelf life of about 18 months. Beyond that,

you can't sustain it. It's too exhausting. And then you love your partner, but you're not in love with your partner. That turns out to be a myth. You can stay in love with your partner forever. There's no shelf life to being in love. And again, science has helped us understand what's involved in that. And the answer is it's not very complicated. It's not rocket science. A study of 70,000 people in 24 countries recently done found that couples who have a great sex life are really different from couples who say their sex life is not alive anymore. And they're different in very simple ways. They say, I love you every day and mean it. They're affectionate, even in public.

They give compliments to their partner. They cuddle. I find time to cuddle. They have a weekly romantic date. They pay attention to their partner. They continue to play and have fun together. That's really vital. So our date on play, fun, and adventure is very important. And analyzing 40,000 couples about to start couples therapy that I've done, 80% of those couples say that fun has come to die in their relationship.

And that's so sad. So fun, play, adventure, touch, affection, sexuality, emotional connection, they're all one fabric, and they can stay alive forever. One of the other things that is really important in couples sexually to keep that passion alive is being able to talk about sex. You know, a lot of times when we listen to couples clinically talk about sex, you have no idea what they're talking about. You know, they'll say things like, well, you know, when you did that thing, that thing last night, it was really great. But, you know, it wasn't quite right.

And so I would like something else. And it's really hard to put into words. You know, they'll say things like that, and you have no idea what they're talking about. They may be talking about what they had for dinner, right? So people need to learn how to talk about what their sexual needs are. They need to also be able to refuse sex if they need to, if they want to, without crushing the other person's ego. You know, a lot of times when people bring up what their sexual preferences are, the other person hears it as criticism. Somehow that other person believes they should read the person's mind and body and know exactly what kind of touch they want, where they want to be touched, how hard they want to be touched, what's going to feel right for them, what the tempo of the sex should be. Well, how can they know all of that without really being

able to talk about it? So in this chapter, you know, it starts with kind of those fun questions of how did you learn about it? But then it goes into, well, what is it that you would prefer? What do you like sexually? What kind of intimacy do you really prefer? Where do you like to have sex? How often? When do you like to have sex? What's your favorite time for it? In what ways would you like to be touched? What would you like for foreplay? Things like that, so that people can be really clear and on the same page and feel comfortable having sex, feeling safe enough because they know what their other partner likes. It's as simple as that. to do this as an exercise because in this particular date, you lay out a set of questions that serve as prompts that don't come from either partner. So it's almost like somebody else is

telling us that these are the questions, these are the things that we have to talk to each other about. And it almost says, well, I'm just following the instructions of this particular exercise rather than the uncomfortable thing of like, here's my checklist of things that, you know, like in a weird way, I think that probably feels more comfortable to people. Right. We live in a world right now where anxiety runs rampant, where sort of like there's a heightened state of anxiety in so many people. It's causing stress. It's causing a lot of psychological angst. And my curiosity is how have you seen that affect people and their desire for sex, the way that they interact around sex. And with that being such a part of the culture these days, how do you have that conversation? God, I love that question. Well, okay, a couple of things. First of all, the millennials

went through, you know, at a very critical age, usually adolescence, they went through 2008, the big economic crash. They, as teenagers, were not able to get jobs. They were seeing their parents lose jobs. They might have lost homes. They might be on the streets. You know, that's the worst case. And as a result, there's a ton of performance anxiety going on that generalizes into the bedroom. So that's one thing. So there's a lot of emphasis on, oh my God, I have to have a career. I've got to have a job. Relationship? Well, maybe that'll come later. So still, they have sexual desire. So what crops up? Tinder or Bumble, where there's sexual connections going on that are impersonal, that are not built on deep intimacy, deep connection, that don't have anything, if you will, of the sacred in them or that deeper layer of intimacy and passion. They're more for physical reasons sometimes. And there's performance anxiety involved in that because you don't know the partner at all.

And so what does sex become? But can I reach the goal, right? So it becomes performance. Am I going to score a touchdown here? So, you know, that's a very painful thing to see out there. The other thing is that there's so much pornography that people are using, almost in some cases, in an addictive way to relieve their stress, relieve their tension, their anxiety. But unfortunately, the porn out there sets them up to have, again, very impersonal sex in which they are the ones controlling it all. There's nothing about porn that is, what would you like? They're not saying that to the screen image, right? So it's non-relational. Then they go into a real situation. What do they do? Well, it's not necessarily going to be emotionally intimate and really interactive, except on a physical level. So, you know, that's one manifestation that we're seeing out there of all the anxiety. Or people just shutting down and not having sex because they're afraid that if I have sex, does that mean I have to commit? Does that mean I have to have a relationship? I'm scared to have a relationship. I'm not ready for a relationship. My parents divorced.

I don't want one. So people are reluctant to really engage in a deeper sexual connection. There are cultural differences in America, too, that are really important. And a lot of times people don't have access to the subcultures in America that actually do sex very well and do romance very well. So in a very large study that we did with the Regis Digest, where the Gallup poll did all the work, we were able to ask about sexuality. I learned that in Hispanic and Latino cultures in the United States, actually, you don't feel like a man unless you know what turns your woman on. You don't feel like a woman unless you know what turns your man

on. So inquiry is a very important part. And when children come, it becomes even more important in Hispanic and Latino cultures to really emphasize sexuality. It's not the last item of a long to-do list. And with gay and lesbian couples we've studied in our laboratory, they're much more comfortable talking about sex in a non-defensive way, using humor and really listening to one another and being able to talk about it comfortably, compared to the European cultures, the African cultures in the United States that really are much more uncomfortable talking about sex and were seen as a test of your masculinity or femininity.

Yeah, I never really even thought about the idea that there's a cultural overlay to all of this. So I want to start to come full circle with us. But I thought I'd share a comment, what our listeners can't see is as we've been sitting here, we're in a little triangle. And as you've both been talking, I'm watching a dance happen between you, which is fascinating and beautiful. It's this, I mean, literally, you know, what listeners can see is you're sort of like, you keep tossing the ball to each other. There's a knowing glance, like, this is you. And then like, and you, and you, and there's this like, really graceful dance that's been going on the same time. So is that natural? Or have you guys been practicing all of these things for a lot of years.

Well, let's see. I think it has evolved over time. So, yes, we have practiced. We have practiced and reached agreements. And we also, because we know each other so well, we know who's strong in what topic. And so, you know, we've now got signals, eye signals to each other, but that's kind of evolved over time too, more naturally as to, okay,

that's your topic. I have no idea how to answer that, right? And I have to learn not to interrupt. There are times when I get real enthusiastic about something Julie is saying and I want to add something to it. I have to learn how to be quiet and just wait for her to finish. And I make mistakes. We both do. But, you know, part of the thing that's funny, speaking of cultures, is that, you know, John is from New York, so he'll talk fast. And, you know, I'm from Oregon, where we talk really slowly. And so poor John is stuck, you know, having to wait and wait and wait, being a New Yorker. And also the other thing, you know, that is so true, both of us are Jewish,

is that, you know, interruption and argument is Jewish love. So, you know, we have to slow things down a little bit. That's too funny. It's funny. I'm in Portland at least a few times a year. Oh, neat. And it never stops to amaze me that wherever I go to get a cup of coffee, I'll step up to the counter and the person behind the counter will just look at me and say, hey, so what are you up to today? And I'm like, we don't do that. We don't ask. We don't answer, we don't want to know.

And it's sort of, it's like, it's this perfect sort of like, just that one moment really demonstrates the difference in the way that we exist on the two different coasts. This is true. So as we come full circle here, in the name of this is good life project, if I offer out the phrase to each of you to live a good life, what comes up? Oh, well, what that means to me is keep living your purpose. So I've spent a lot of time figuring out what's my purpose. When I was in India, the problems there that I witnessed were so overwhelming. But eventually, as I wrote and wrote and wrote in my journal, I realized if I could just help one person to heal, by golly, you know, it would never offset all the luxury I grew up with, all the advantages and privileges I grew up with. But, you know, I'll try by reaching out and trying to help other people. That's my purpose. So live a good life for, means continuing to do what I do and throwing a little nature in there every now and then.

Well, for me, I think one of the really big realizations is that a really good love relationship is your best guarantee of health, longevity, happiness, success in life. And the emphasis is always so much in love relationships on getting the love you want. But I think what you really gain in a love relationship is you gain the ability to love. The joy is the opportunity to love fully. And that emphasis is what makes for good living, I think. That ability to love your children well, to love your partner well. And that's what you get. Can I just modify that phrase to fit what you're saying, which is give the love you want. Right.

Thank you both. Thank you. Thank you so much for listening. And thanks also to our fantastic sponsors who help make this show possible. You can check them out in the links we have included in today's show notes. And while you're at it,

if you've ever asked yourself, what should I do with my life? We have created a really cool online assessment that will help you discover the source code for the work that you're here to do. You can find it at sparkotype.com. That's S-P-A-R-K-E-T-Y-P-E.com. Or just click the link in the show notes. And of course, if you haven't already done so, be sure to click on the subscribe button in your listening app so you never miss an episode. And then share, share the love. If there's something that you've heard in this episode that you would love to turn into a conversation, share it with people and have that conversation. Because when ideas become conversations that lead to action, that's when real change takes hold.

See you next time. Mayday, mayday. We've been compromised. The pilot's a hitman. I knew you were going to be fun. On January 24th. Tell me how to fly this thing. Mark Wahlberg.

You know what the difference between me and you is? You're gonna die. Don't shoot him, we need him! Y'all need a pilot? Flight Risk. The Apple Watch Series 10 is here. It has the biggest display ever. It's also the thinnest Apple Watch ever,

making it even more comfortable on your wrist, whether you're running, swimming, or sleeping. And it's the fastest-nest Apple Watch ever, making it even more comfortable on your wrist, whether you're running, swimming, or sleeping. And it's the fastest-charging Apple Watch, getting you eight hours of charge in just 15 minutes. The Apple Watch Series X. Available for the first time in glossy jet black aluminum. Compared to previous generations, iPhone XS or later required,

charge time and actual results will vary.