How is a relationship ruptured?9 signs need attention

Many users leave a message in the KY background, what exactly is the sign of the intimate relationship?

Repeat the same thing to quarrel with the same thing? When quarreling, accusing each other with infinite old accounts? Avoid communication and start cold violence? Are these all indicated that the relationship is about to break down?

Indeed, when we feel a "existence problem" of an intimate relationship, it is difficult for us to determine whether these problems are temporary and can be overcome, or it really leads to the breakdown of the relationship.

In the love laboratory of psychologist John Gottman, he can predict whether the TAs will eventually divorce by observing the way of getting along with a couple in 5 minutes, and the accuracy rate is as high as 91%. Although it sounds a bit "metaphysics", John Gottman believes that there are indeed some "signs" in daily life, which may indicate the rupture of intimate relationships.

Let's take a look today, which signs may indicate the breakdown of intimate relationships.

Let's take a look at how our intimacy is broken?

John Gottman believes that trust is the basis of all intimate relationships. In general, trust means that you believe that you are always loved in this relationship. The process of intimacy to break down is also the process of gradually collapse of trust between the two sides.

First of all, there is a very important moment in intimacy, called "sliding door moment". In daily life, we will continue to seek support and understanding from our partners through words and movements. For example, this may be a simple sentence on the weekend, "Can you accompany me to the supermarket?" Or a phrase "I am sad, can you accompany me?" When the sliding door will be opened all the time.

After the sliding door is turned on, the other side will have two reactions: "turning tower" and "turning away from".

It should be noted that the difference between "orientation" and "back" is not to accept or reject the request of a partner, but whether it is to respond to the needs of the partner. For example, after one party's request to go out to the supermarket, the other party answered "Can we go together in half an hour?" Or "I really want to accompany you, but there may be no way today. I have a more important job. Do."

Although one of these two reactions is to accept the invitation to refuse the invitation, both answers have responded to the needs of the partner, so they belong to the "facing" partner.

The other response is called "back" partner because TA does not respond to the needs of the partner. For example, only answering "not going" or "tired for a day, I don't want to go out."

Get the experience of "back" response at the moment of sliding doors will be marked as unsatisfactory moments in our memory. This unpleasant memory will continue to play in the brain and always active. As we repeatedly recall, our negative emotions for our partners have continued to rise. The more you do n’t get a response, the more negative emotions, and the trust of both parties is gradually destroyed.

Slowly, both parties dominated by negative emotions will make negative interpretations of each other's behavior. The two sides will interpret the other party's harmless or even positive events into negative meanings (Weiss, 1980). For example, the husband took the initiative to cook for cooking one night, and because the trust in the relationship was exhausted, the first reaction of his wife would be suspicious and felt that he had another purpose.

Due to negative emotions, trust has gradually consumed. The communication mode of both parties will be in the cycle of Criticism-Contempt-DefensiveNESS-Stonewalling, and the intimate relationship is finally ruptured.

Criticism: Most refers to the negative expression of "always" and "always" the words "always" and "always". For example, "what you said can never be done."

Contempt: imply the other party's words abuse, including irony, ridicule, derogation and abuse. For example, "people like you really have no concept of time. I really can't stand living with people like you."

Defense: The party attacked by words will want to protect themselves. For example, your partner accuses you of being late. You said, "If you stay in the toilet for so long in the morning, we will have arrived long ago."

Building the wall: When the tension situation finally made both sides angry, the wall of isolation wasolated signal was erected, which was indifferent to the other party.

Nine signs of cracking relationships

It was mentioned earlier that the basic element of building an intimate relationship is trust, and any behavior that may disintegrate the trust of both parties is essentially a sign of the broken relationship. Gottman proposed 9 common signs of cracking relationships, hoping to help you.

"Emotional absence or indifference"

John Gottman believes that the "most fatal error" in intimacy is that one party has emotional needs in the intimacy, and the other party has never responded. This "emotional absence" can quickly open the distance between the two sides.

Psychologists GIGY and Dr. Kelly's investigation on divorce couples showed that derailment is not the root cause of the breakdown. 80%of the divorced couples think that the relationship between TA has broken relationships because the TAs have alienated each other and lost their intimacy. This relationship is no longer provided, such as understanding, support, respect, attention, and concern, these things that should be provided by intimacy (GIGY & Kelly, 1992). Studies have stated that the degree of emotional support for each other in the relationship can significantly indicate the end of the relationship.

"Refusal to make in -depth commitments/incomplete investment commitments"

There are many moments that need to be promised in a close relationship, such as living or marriage. If one party is always requested, and the other party is always avoiding or ignoring, this means that TA is unwilling to give up other possible opportunities for this relationship.

The TAs have never been fully devoted to intimate relationships, but seem to be waiting for a "better choice". And any trivial matter will become an excuse for TAs to not invest.

"Spiritual derailment"

An important judgment rule is: Once you think you need to conceal your partner, or if you feel that your partner is concealing the existence of another person, then your firm intimacy is likely to have a crisis. Compared to your intimacy, getting along with another person is more relaxed and happy, and understands the most secretive details of each other's life, and even show the other side that has never been seen by partners. This is very dangerous.

"Excessive lying"

We all agree that "lies and trust are a pair of natural enemies". When the two sides began to have their own secrets and were ready to cover up, the lie was born. However, lying is normal, and occasionally lying generally does not pose too much threat to intimacy.

But what really consumes the trust of both parties is habitual deception. Some people are deceiving all the time, and the TAs will lie in some things that do not need to lie, because for the TAs, lying has become a habit. At this time, people's lies for the peaceful people, and even good -faith lies, can also damage the relationship.

"Anti -Partner Alliance"

Sometimes, one party in the relationship may find a "third person" as a helper to fight against the other side. For example, the alliance formed by the husband and mother -in -law to fight against his wife. At this time, the two people with intimate relationships began to stand in two hostile camps, and they were broken by the isolated side that they felt the original intimate relationship with the partner. Therefore, this anti -partner alliance is usually the reason why the war begins.

"Understand/look low"

This means that in the communication with your partner, TA has been implying that you are the weak, and you feel that you are despised.

Whether it is frequent negation or small refutation/picked stabilization, it is essentially an emotional abuse. For example, when you complain that no one shares housework, your partner always uses a refutation ("I don't complain about going to work so tired, how can you do housework and be tired") to ignore your contribution to your family.

"Power is not equal"

Power in intimate relationships always develops dynamically, and everyone always has a peak or wind. However, if the long -term serious power is not equal to the relationship, and the feeling of being exploited by one party, it indicates that there is a problem with the intimacy.

What is most likely to reflect in the relationship is housework and financial decisions. For example, who does housework on weekends and who will pay this month's loan bill? Always bear the heavy housework or bearing the economic burden on us and our partners, and it will also lead to the breakdown of the relationship.

"Selfish"

Maintaining long -term stable marriage and love means that sometimes one party sacrifice themselves for the common interests of both parties. For example, before the marriage, the two sides agreed to take part of their respective income and deposit part of them in a common account for later buying a house or other common expenses. Once one party began to refuse this dedication, TA also began to put personal interests above common interests. After the other party feels this change, both sides will start to become "selfish", and resentment will take root.

"Breach of promise"

Decision to live together means that you reach consensus on certain basic problems and daily expectations, and promise to live well with each other.

However, research shows that addiction problems can significantly predict whether a relationship will end (CACES ET Al., 1999). For example, when a person has problems such as drug addiction and alcohol addiction, TA is likely to be unable to comply with the promise of living together, and TA will make a choice of harm and betrayal because of his addiction.

The disappointment brought by this betrayal will eventually lead to trust.

Before the relationship breaks, you should at least try::

When the above signs appear, it does not mean that your intimate relationship now will break down. Understanding the real role of these signs is to release a signal to both parties -your relationship is problematic.

Once most of the above signs appear in the relationship, you can try to initiate a sincere in -depth communication. Before communicating, you can briefly record the problems you think in the relationship, and discuss with your partner at the same time. Everyone should not interrupt the other party when expressing.

In the process of communication, the task of telling the party is to provide your partner with a "expecting blueprint" for this relationship and the better, for example, "I hope we can cook together every weekend and clean it and clean it together. Kitchen. "The responsibility of the listening party is to control the urge to defend itself, and use active listening (Active Listening) to learn about TA's views on this relationship as much as possible and give empathy about TA feelings. Listening can ask more open questions, such as "As a partner, do you have any expectations for me?" "What do you want me to do?"

Psychologist La Port has proposed a very interesting point of view. If the two sides cannot state each other's point of view and satisfy them, don't delusional to solve the problem or reach an agreement. (Related reading: 6 psychological skills of "saving relationship").

At the same time, you also need to prepare for "unable to reach consensus". The intimate relationship is established and operated by the two parties together, and saving intimacy is also a thing that requires many "conditions" and participation. Actual actions and so on.

Therefore, if you find that the expectations of the relationship between the two parties will never reach a consensus after communication, you don't have to press the task on yourself, you may try to let go to avoid being trapped in the pain of excessive persistence.

References:

CACES, M. F., Harford, T. C., Williams, G. D., & Hanna, E. Z. (1999). Alcohol Consumption and DIVORCE RATES in the United States. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5), 60 (5),

GIGY, L., & Kelly, J. B. (1992). Reason for divorce: Perspectives of divorcing men and water. Journal of divorce & remarriage, 18 (1-2), 169–187.

Gottman, J. & Silver, N. (2012). What makes love last.new york: Simon & Schuster.

Gottman, J. & Silver, N. (2000) .the Seven Principles for Maching Marriage Work.orion.

Weiss, R.L. (1980). Strategic Behavioral Marital Therapy: Toward a Model for Assessment and Intervention, Vol. 1. In: Vincent, J.P., Ed., Advances in Family Intervention, Assessment and Theory, JAI Press, Greenwich, 229-271 Then, then, then

- END -