Category: Relationships

Over 60% of people have been involved in this type of relationship.

Relationships that involve repeatedly breaking up and then getting back together are linked to poor mental health, new research finds.

These “on-again, off-again” relationships are associated with increased depression and anxiety, as well as worse communication, less commitment and more abuse.

Over 60% of adults have been involved in this type of unstable relationship.

Around one-third of cohabiting couples report breaking up and getting back together at some point.

Dr Kale Monk, the study’s first author, said:

“Breaking up and getting back together is not always a bad omen for a couple.

In fact, for some couples, breaking up can help partners realize the importance of their relationship, contributing to a healthier, more committed unions.

On the other hand, partners who are routinely breaking up and getting back together could be negatively impacted by the pattern.”

The conclusions come from a study of 545 heterosexual and homosexual couples.

The results showed that male-male relationships had the highest rate of ‘cycling’ (on-again, off-again), while female-female and heterosexual couples were similar.

However, whether heterosexual or homosexual, cycling relationships were linked to higher depression and anxiety.

Dr Monk said:

“The findings suggest that people who find themselves regularly breaking up and getting back together with their partners need to ‘look under the hood’ of their relationships to determine what’s going on.

If partners are honest about the pattern, they can take the necessary steps to maintain their relationships or safely end them.

This is vital for preserving their well-being.”

Dr Monk provides some pointers for people experiencing cycling relationships:

• Consider the reasons you broke up in the first place when thinking about getting back together. Can they change or are they permanent?
• Talk about what is leading to break-ups with your partner — this can be illuminating.
• Why might you consider getting back together — are they the right reasons?
• Remember that it is OK to end a toxic relationship.
• Counselling is always an option.

The study was published in the journal Family Relations (Monk et al., 2018).

How income affects whether people cheat on their partner.

People who earn less than their partner are more likely to cheat on them than those earning equal amounts, a study concludes.

Men may be more tempted to cheat in this situation because they feel threatened by their partner’s income.

However, men earning much more than their female partner are also more likely to cheat than those earning equal amounts.

Similarly, women were more likely to cheat when dependent on their partner — although not if they earned more.

Explaining the findings, Dr Christin Munsch, the study’s author, said:

“At one end of the spectrum, making less money than a female partner may threaten men’s gender identity by calling into question the traditional notion of men as breadwinners.

At the other end of the spectrum, men who make a lot more money than their partners may be in jobs that offer more opportunities for cheating like long work hours, travel, and higher incomes that make cheating easier to conceal.”

The conclusions come from a study of 18- to 28-year-old married and cohabiting couples.

All had been married for at least one year.

The results showed that men whose income is either significantly higher or lower than than their female partner are more likely to cheat on them.

Men who were most faithful generally had partners who earned around 75% of their own income.

In the six month period of the study, 3.8% of men reported cheating on their partner, while 1.4% of women reported cheating.

Women who earned more than their partners, though, were actually less likely to cheat on them.

The study was published in the journal American Sociological Review (Munsch et al., 2015).

This toxic pattern can ruin your relationship — unless you learn to deal with it.

The most toxic relationship pattern is called a ‘demand-withdraw’ pattern, psychologists find.

It is where one partner makes criticisms, complaints and requests, while the other withdraws, or gives them the silent treatment.

The best way of dealing with this pattern is by accepting and validating the other person’s identity.

This is done through improving communication.

Men should listen and understand their partner, while women should reduce their negativity and hostility.

When both partners can communicate problems and feel they understand each other, their marital satisfaction is higher.

In the ‘demand-withdraw’ pattern, often the partner making the demands is the woman and the partner withdrawing is the man, although it is damaging to both either way around.

Instead of withdrawing from conflict, men should try to hear and acknowledge their partner’s issue.

Hearing the issue, and at least trying to understand it, makes the other person feel validated.

Women, meanwhile, should concentrate on reducing the hostility and negativity of their communication — both of these only make men withdraw into their shell.

It is better to bring up issues as neutrally as possible so they can be heard.

The importance of being understood in a relationship was confirmed by a study of 53 married couples.

The study’s authors explain their results:

“The demand/withdrawal interaction pattern significantly decreases both spouses’ perception that they are understood.

An issue that one spouse sees as important and in need of discussion is not simply met with dissent, it is met with indifference.

The issue-pursuing spouse is left to feel as though his or her vision of what is important, real, and valid is dismissed as insignificant.”

The key to a successful relationship is that both partners accept and validate the other person’s identity.

The study’s authors explain why verifying your partner’s identity is so important:

“First, people tend to be attracted to those who verify their self-image.

Second, those who are skilled in maintaining their partner’s desired identity are rewarding relationship partners.

Third, the expectation that partners will accept and understand each other is a defining characteristic of intimate
relationships

Finally, trust develops in close relationships, in part, as a result of mutual verification of partners’ identities…”

The study was published in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (Weger, 2005).

The study’s results were the exact reverse of what many people expect.

Status symbols like Rolex watches and Prada handbags repel potential friends, new research finds.

It is the exact reverse of what many expect.

People assume that status symbols will make them look more socially attractive to others.

In fact, people are more friendly towards those wearing neutral or low status items, like those from Walmart.

Dr Stephen Garcia, who led the study, said:

“Often times we think that status symbols — whether a luxury car like a BMW, a brand name purse like Prada, or an expensive watch like Rolex — will make us look more socially attractive to others.

However, our research suggests that these status signals actually make us look less socially attractive, not more.”

In one experiment the researchers carried out, people chose between wearing a t-shirt with “Walmart” printed on it or “Saks Fifth Avenue”.

Fully 76% of people chose to wear the higher status Saks t-shirt, assuming it would be more socially attractive.

However, when they were evaluated as a potential friend by a group, 64% of people preferred the person wearing the Walmart t-shirt.

Dr Kimberlee Weaver Livnat, study co-author, said:

“At a societal level, we may be wasting billions of dollars on expensive status symbols that ultimately keep others from wanting to associate with us.

And to the extent that close friendships are important to well-being, we may be inadvertently hurting ourselves.”

Status symbols are not always bad, said Dr Patricia Chen, study co-author:

“Our findings right now only apply to the formation of new friendships.

Status symbols may very well be beneficial at other times and in other settings, such as when trying to establish new business contacts.”

The study was published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science (Garcia et al., 2018).

Both personality and relationship history were important in whether people cheated on their partner.

Feeling detached from their partner and having low satisfaction with the relationship are among people’s top reasons for cheating, a study shows.

Availability of another suitable partner is also a crucial predictor of whether people cheat or not.

Factors that surprisingly did not have much impact were relationship commitment and length, the University of Queensland study found.

Both personality factors and relationship history were also important in whether people cheated on their partner.

People who are more impulsive were more likely to cheat.

Impulsive people tend to act on their immediate thoughts and emotions without thinking about the consequences.

Cheating was also more likely by people who had had more sexual partners.

The conclusions come from a survey of 123 heterosexual people aged 17 to 25, all of whom were currently in a relationship.

Among many questions, they were asked whether they had cheated by kissing or having sex outside the relationship.

The study’s authors found…

“…quality of alternatives to be the strongest predictor of both extradyadic sex inclination and extradyadic kissing inclination, suggesting that it may be a key determinant of individuals’ inclination to engage in extradyadic activities.”

Those who have had more sexual partners in the past may be more inclined to cheat because they have learned the ‘trick’ of seduction.

The authors write:

“Participants who had experienced sexual intimacy with a greater number of partners also reported greater extradyadic sex and extradyadic kissing inclination.

This inclination may be attributable to the individuals’ skills at recognizing sexual advances or recruitment of sex partners.”

Finally, men were more likely to cheat by having sex outside the relationship.

However, both men and women were equally likely to cheat by kissing outside their relationship.

The study was published in the British Journal of Psychology (McAlister et al., 2005).

The conclusion comes from a study of couples who had been together for years.

Trying new things together — even for a few minutes — can improve your relationship, psychological research finds.

Something as simple as playing a new game, cooking a novel meal or listening to some music and dancing around the kitchen can do the trick — as long as it is exciting.

New activities help to fight the natural boredom that sets in after a relationship is past the honeymoon period.

New, fun and exciting activities help to continue the process of ‘expanding the self’ that happens when a couple meet and start getting to know each other, the researchers theorise.

The conclusions come from a study in which many couples who had been together for years tried a simple and novel activity together.

One activity, for example, involved the couple being velcroed together at the wrist and ankle, then they were told to carry pillows across a barrier without using their hands, arms or teeth.

The results showed that people who took part in novel, fun and exciting activities rated their relationship quality as higher.

When interacting afterwards, couples were less hostile to each other and showed more support and acceptance.

The study’s authors explain the typical pattern of a relationship:

“…when two people first enter a relationship, typically engaging in frequent, intense conversations with considerable risk-taking and self-disclosure, they are “expanding their selves” at a rapid rate.

[…]

When this rapid expansion occurs, there is hypothesized to be a high degree of positive affect, and when it is very rapid, even physiological arousal.”

Later on, after the honeymoon phase is over, things usually take a more routine turn, they explain:

“…for further rapid expansion of all these sorts would seem inevitably to decrease.

When expansion is slow or nonexistent, there should be little emotion, perhaps boredom, and the loss of enjoyable emotion may be attributed to the particular relationship, perhaps explaining the declines in satisfaction and love.”

Novel and arousing activities, though, can start the self expanding again:

“If, however, the couple engages in shared self-expanding activities (activities now other than getting to know each other), rapid self-expansion should remain associated with the relationship.

Such activities would be ones that are novel (new and thus expanding to self) or arousing (and thus associated with past rapid expansion experiences).”

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Aron et al., 2000).

The skill helps build stronger relationships and even contributes to better long-term health.

Listening from the heart can improve relationships, research finds.

Clear and explicit support helps to reduce tension and stress levels and improve the other person’s emotional state.

This helps build stronger relationships and even contributes to better long-term health.

Here are three tips for providing supportive communication:

• Acknowledging the person is under stress

While the situation might not seem stressful to you, remember that people are different.

Acknowledge that your partner requires comforting.

• Use verbal and nonverbal forms of communication

Listening and asking questions, using eye contact and touching can all help reduce stress levels.

• Provide emotional support

Unless someone asks for advice, do not offer it.

Instead, focus on providing emotional support.

This just involves listening and asking questions so you understand the problem.

Professor Jennifer Priem, who led the research, said:

“The fastest stress recovery comes from explicit messages.

When a partner is stressed they are unable to focus on interpreting messages well.

Clarity and eye contact help.”

One of the classic mistakes people make is to dismiss their partner’s stress, Professor Priem said:

“If your partner is feeling stressed, telling him or her ‘don’t worry about it’ or trying to distract the person from the stress by changing the subject is generally not going to help.”

The conclusions come from a study in which 103 people did stressful tasks while being supported by their dating partner.

Levels of the ‘stress hormone’ cortisol, along with ratings by trained observers, helped assess the type of supportive communication that was effective.

It emerged that really supportive communication helped lower cortisol levels.

Other research has shown that this can help improve sleep, reduce headaches and even benefit the heart.

Professor Priem said:

“Cookie cutter support messages don’t really work.

Stress creates a frame through which messages are interpreted.

Support that is clear and explicit in validating feelings and showing interest and concern is most likely to lower cortisol levels and increase feelings of wellbeing and safety.

If you aren’t seeing improvement in your partner’s anxiety, you may need to change your approach.”

The study was published in the journal Communication Research (Priem et al., 2015).

Continuously questioning a relationship wears both partners down.

Being highly sensitive to rejection is damaging to relationships, research finds.

People who are sensitive to rejection frequently think about their partner leaving them.

They worry that revealing their true self will lead to rejection.

This means that they are constantly on the lookout for any signs of displeasure in their partner.

The continuous questioning of the relationship wears both partners down.

Naturally, then, this thinking style is linked to lower levels of relationship satisfaction, the psychological research reveals.

The results come from a study of 217 young people who had been in relationships for at least three weeks.

They were asked about how sensitive they were to rejection with a scenario like:

• “Lately you’ve been noticing some distance between yourself and your significant other, and you ask him/her if there is
  something wrong.”

Then they were asked:

• “How concerned or anxious would you be over whether or not he/she still loves you and wants to be with you?”

The more anxious people are in these sorts of situations, the higher their fear of rejection.

One typical reaction of people who fear being rejected is to reject the other person first by cutting them off.

It’s like a pre-emptive strike.

Emotionally cutting the other person off, though, turns out to be a bad move, the researchers found.

People who did this were even less satisfied with their relationship.

The authors explain:

“Although individuals are attempting to reduce the potential for rejection, distance also reduces the potential for fulfilling, accepting, and intimate behavior.”

In other words, by pushing the other person away, you are hurting yourself to try and avoid hurting yourself — which clearly makes no sense.

Other typical reactions to perceived rejection are coercion and compliance.

The study’s authors explain:

“Coercion involves verbally and/or physically aggressive acts meant to force romantic partners to remain in the relationship.

Similarly, compliance involves giving in to one’s romantic partner’s potentially harmful or unhealthy demands to prevent further rejection.”

Both of these are also poor ways to deal with feelings of insecurity.

Instead, the best way to deal with being sensitive to rejection is to be aware of it and when it is happening.

Awareness is the first step to changing a behaviour.

Sensitivity to rejection frequently goes along with a weak sense of self.

This is especially prevalent among young people whose identities are not yet strongly formed.

People with stronger and better developed identities tend not to fear rejection as much.

They have an ability to balance their dependence and independence healthily.

Psychologists call this ‘self-differentiation’.

The study was published in the journal Couple And Family Psychology: Research And Practice (Norona & Welsh, 2016).