Category: Relationships

A warning signal that someone is a higher risk for cheating on their partner.

A man with a deeper voice and a woman with a higher voice are more likely to cheat on their partner, research finds.

Voice pitch is linked to levels of the sex hormones testosterone and oestrogen.

People naturally find men with deeper voices and women with higher voices more attractive.

However, they also seem to be naturally aware that they could be markers of trouble down the line.

Dr Jillian O’Connor, the study’s first author, said:

“In terms of sexual strategy, we found that men and women will use voice pitch as a warning sign of future betrayal.

So the more attractive the voice — a higher pitch for women and lower pitch for men — the more likely the chances he or she will cheat.”

In the study people listened to recordings of male and female voices that were manipulated to be higher and lower in pitch.

They were asked which one was most likely to cheat on their partner.

Both men and women thought that lowered male voices and raised women’s voices suggested the person would be more likely to cheat.

Dr O’Connor said:

“Infidelity is costly with the emotional impact, financial costs and potential loss of the family unit.

But this suggests that through the evolutionary process, we have learned ways to avoid partners who may be unfaithful as a protection mechanism.”

Dr David Feinberg, study co-author, said:

“The reason voice pitch influences perceptions of cheating is likely due to the relationship between pitch, hormones and infidelity.

Men with higher testosterone levels have lower pitched voices, and women with higher estrogen levels have higher pitched voices.

High levels of these hormones are associated with adulterous behaviour and our findings indicate individuals are somewhat aware of the link and may use this in their search for a romantic partner.”

The study was published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology (O’Connor et al., 2011).

Naive cynicism can poison your relationships, psychological research finds.

People tended to assume that others are more biased than they really are.

This bias is called ‘naive cynicism’.

It is wrongly thinking the worst of other people.

Naive cynicism example

Of course, cynicism has its uses.

Being suspicious about the motives of others won’t leave you gasping when you are tricked.

Expecting negative events means you are never disappointed.

Anything good is a bonus.

But can cynicism go to far? A study by Kruger and Gilovich (1999) suggests it can.

The authors asked married couples to estimate how often their partner was responsible for both desirable and undesirable relationship events.

This came out about even: each person admitted causing some bad events while claiming responsibility for some of the good events in the relationship.

Half and half, fair’s fair.

They then asked each person to estimate what their partner had claimed.

Here’s the surprise.

On average people assumed their partners would take more responsibility for the good events and deny the bad events.

Actually they’d done nothing of the sort.

People tended to assume that others are more biased than they really are.

It’s not just married people who show this bias.

The authors also studied video game players, debaters and darts players.

A similar type of bias was seen in these groups as well.

Naïve cynicism develops early

Research in children shows this bias develops early.

Mills and Keil (2005) found that by as young as seven children have learnt to be cynical. The authors even suggest children may be more cynical than adults.

Life can be more pleasant – especially with your partner – when you give the benefit of the doubt. It may well be the cynics who are deluding themselves.

.

Modern societies are often highly mobile, with people moving around for work, school or just to start afresh.

People in modern societies tend to move home frequently, which is damaging to the nature of their friendships.

Research finds that moving regularly is linked to thinking that friendships and close social ties are more disposable.

Unfortunately, without strong social ties to friends and family it is harder to feel safe and secure.

Similarly, moving around a lot is also linked to the same attitude of disposability towards objects.

Dr Omri Gillath, one of the book’s authors, said:

“We found a correlation between the way you look at objects and perceive your relationships.

If you move around a lot, you develop attitudes of disposability toward objects, furniture, books, devices — basically whatever merchandise you have at home, your car even.”

Modern societies are often highly mobile, with people moving around for work, school or just to start afresh.

The research found that the more people have moved around the country, the more they tend to have a disposable view of both objects and close social ties.

Dr Gillath said:

“This isn’t a new idea of the United States as a mobile country — for many people here, moving up means moving around.

If you’re willing to move for school or a job, you have a higher chance of being successful.

But we’re saying it also makes things superficial and disposable.

It might be fine to have disposable diapers but not disposable friendships.

If you know you’re moving and develop the idea that everything can be replaced, you won’t develop same strong and deep ties.

We’re suggesting this is a broad phenomenon where we all tend to look at relationships to co-workers, friends and social network members as replaceable.

Even in romantic relationships, when I ask my students what would they do when things get difficult, most of them say they would move on rather than try to work things out, or God forbid, turn to a counselor.”

These kinds of attitudes can be psychologically unhealthy, Gillath thinks:

“Research suggests only deeper high-quality ties provide us with the kind of support we need like love, understanding and respect.

You need these very close ties to feel safe and secure and function properly.

If social ties are seen as disposable, you’re less likely to get what you need from your network, which can negatively affect your mental and physical health as well as your longevity.”

The friendship crisis

There’s little doubt that having friends is tremendously good for people.

Those who invest in their friendships experience greater psychological and physical health, particularly among the elderly (Lu et al., 2021).

Despite this, people find it hard to make friends.

Dr William Chopik, an expert on relationships, said:

“In today’s world there’s a general feeling that we’re in a ‘friendship crisis’ in which people are lonely and want friends but struggle to make them.

We show here that they’re beneficial for nearly everyone, everywhere.

But why are they so hard to form and keep?”

It is likely that one of the many answers is that friends are viewed as disposable.

The book is called “Adult Attachment: A Concise Introduction to Theory and Research” (Gillath et al., 2016).

Partners with an avoidant attachment style do not want to get close.

One of the most toxic relationship patterns is called an ‘avoidant attachment style’.

It is when one person (or both) in a relationship won’t commit because they want to avoid getting too attached to the other.

Around one quarter of people are avoidant.

However, simple exercises that build intimacy can help to improve this relationship pattern, research shows.

For one exercise, couples in the study took turns answering a series of questions that involved sharing information with each other.

Here are a few of the questions:

• Complete this sentence: “I wish I had someone with whom I could share …”
• When did you last cry in front of another person? By yourself?
• Name three things you and your partner appear to have in common.
• What would constitute a “perfect” day for you?
• Would you like to be famous? In what way?

All of these questions — which were designed by New York psychologist Professor Arthur Aron — help make couples feel more intimate with each other.

You can read all 36 question to fall in love here.

People in the study also did partner yoga, which is a series of poses designed for two people.

After doing the yoga and asking and answering the questions, partners with a more avoidant attachment style gave higher ratings to the relationship.

The researchers also gave some couples diaries to complete for three weeks.

These showed that listening and making the other feel loved did a lot to improve relationships.

Many activities to improve a difficult relationship take relatively little effort.

Just asking and answering thoughtful questions can make a real difference in reducing negative emotions and promoting satisfaction.

In addition, people found reflecting on positive relationship memories to be beneficial.

The study’s authors conclude:

“Although individuals who are more avoidantly attached tend to eschew intimacy and experience negativity in their relationships, recent research suggests that positive relationship contexts may help avoidant persons be more comfortable with closeness and experience better individual and relationship outcomes.

Simple positive and intimacy-promoting relationship experiences had both short and long-term effects for more avoidant persons.”

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Stanton et al., 2017).

How parents turn their children into relationship cheats.

People whose parents cheated on their partner are more likely to cheat on their partner as well, research finds.

Infidelity runs in the family.

When offspring knew their parents had cheated, they were more likely to cheat themselves.

It is partly down to subtle messages about relationships passed down from one generation to the next.

Parental infidelity indirectly tells offspring that this behaviour is acceptable.

The study’s authors write that infidelity is reasonably common:

“…infidelity is the single most common reason for relationship
dissolution in both dating relationships and marriages.

Moreover, approximately 22%–25% of married men and 11%–15% of married women report having engaged in sexual
infidelity, and 75% of male college students and 68% of female college students report having engaged in some form of infidelity in their dating relationships.”

For the research, 1,254 people took part in three separate studies.

They were asked about their attitudes towards infidelity, including the extent to which they agreed with statements like:

• “Relationship partners should always be faithful.”
• “In order to have a successful relationship, individuals should only be involved with their relationship partner.”

They were also asked about the messages they received from their parents about relationships.

For example, did they agree with statements like:

• “My parents told me that infidelity is sometimes justified.”
• “My parents discussed with me the importance of being
  faithful in romantic relationships.”

The authors explain the results:

“…parental infidelity is associated with offspring’s
own likelihood of having engaged in infidelity.

Offspring who had knowledge of a parental infidelity were significantly more likely to have engaged in infidelity…”

Naturally, this does not mean that cheating partners can blame their parent’s for their own behaviour — everyone makes their own decisions.

However, people often take after their parents.

The study was published in the journal Personal Relationships (Weiser & Weigel, 2017).

While breakups are painful, most people recover and even gain some strength from them.

Self-esteem takes around one year to recover from a relationship breakup, psychological research finds.

It did not matter if people remained single or not in this period, it still took the same amount of time for self-esteem to recover.

However, while breakups are painful, most people recover and even gain some strength from them, the study’s authors write:

“Even though relationship break-ups are painful, people
tend to recover from them and move on.

Especially in adolescence and young adulthood, when individuals are dating, have their first romantic relationship, try different types of relationships, and search the right partner to spend their life with, relationship breakups are not unusual and, thus, normative.

[…]

…individuals tend to report positive changes after experiencing relationship break-up, such as gaining inner strength and maturity, and report having learned important lessons that will be useful in future relationships.”

The conclusions come from over 9,000 German adults who were followed for three years.

The results showed that breakups of relationships that had lasted a year or more are particularly damaging to self-esteem.

Subsequently starting a new relationship increased self-esteem, as long as the new relationship lasts.

However, shorter relationships — those lasting less than a year — tended to reduce people’s self-esteem.

Recovery from a breakup took around one year, the authors write:

“…the decrease in self-esteem after a relationship break-up is only temporary and that the person’s self-esteem is recovered already one year later.

Thus, although research on many psychological phenomena suggests that “bad is stronger than good” —that is, the effects of negative events, negative interactions, and negative emotions are often stronger than the effects of positive events, positive interactions, and positive emotions—in the present research the effect of beginning a relationship
(i.e., a positive transition) was more sustained than the
effect of relationship break-up (i.e., a negative transition).”

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Luciano & Orth, 2017).

Parenthood brings many stressors including lack of sleep and endless chores, which puts immense strain on parents and their relationship.

Most couples remain committed to each other and satisfied with their relationships after having children, a study finds.

While the transition to parenthood is filled with stressors, like lack of sleep and endless chores, the majority of couples get through it with their connection to each other intact.

The conclusions come from a study of over 200 couples who were tracked over more than a year as they had their first child.

Mr Nathan Leonhardt, the study’s first author, explained the results:

“The clear majority (81 percent) of the 203 couples navigated the transition with high commitment and at least moderately high satisfaction.

And we learned that a huge differentiation as far as who ended up transitioning well were people that had good relationships going into this transition period.”

The study also found some factors that predicted the most successful transition to parenthood:

• More realistic expectations of having children,
• feeling their partner helped them grow as a person,
• believing their partner was committed to the relationship,
• and remaining emotionally connected to their partner.

Professor Emily Impett, study co-author, said:

“I think the focus on commitment as an outcome during the transition to parenthood is really important, and the take-home that most couples begin but remain highly committed over this life transition is a message that should be music to many couples’ ears.”

Many people believe that relationships suffer from parenthood, but Mr Leonhardt thinks this is unnecessarily gloomy:

“I like being able to point out exceptions to the norm, to ‘myth bust’ a little bit.

So with something like the transition to parenthood, I wanted to be able to see if we could break some of the common narratives and give people a little bit more hope.”

Children won’t save a relationship

However, parents should not expect having a child to save their relationship, Mr Leonhardt said:

“As a general rule, if things aren’t going well in your relationship, adding another person to this family probably isn’t the thing that you should be doing to try to resolve any relationship problems that you have.”

Mr Leonhardt is fascinated by relationships and how they affect our lives:

“If you were to ask somebody about the best and worst experiences they’ve had in their lives, there’s a high percentage of experiences that would have something to do with their relationship.

It’s just such an integral part of who we are as human beings and how we come to understand ourselves, and what’s ultimately most important to us in our lives.”

The study was published in the journal Journal of Marriage and Family (Leonhardt et al., 2021).

Single vs married: two surveys reveal who is happier.

Being married brings people more lifelong happiness than being single, research finds.

The boost to happiness in being married also persists into old age.

The positive effect of marriage is even stronger for those people who described their partner as their best friend.

The findings were just the same for those people who lived together but were not actually married.

Professor John Helliwell, study co-author, said:

“Even after years the married are still more satisfied.

This suggests a causal effect at all stages of the marriage, from pre-nuptial bliss to marriages of long-duration.”

Surveys of single vs married

The results come from two surveys that involved around 370,000 people in the UK.

The honeymoon phase was not the only time when marriage boosted happiness.

Typically, middle-aged people see a dip in their satisfaction with life.

However, Professor Helliwell said:

“Marriage may help ease the causes of a mid-life dip in life satisfaction and the benefits of marriage are unlikely to be short-lived.”

The social effects of being married appeared to be how it increases happiness.

Having a lifelong friend — indeed a ‘super-friend’ — helps explain why the positive effects of a partnership last so long.

Professor Helliwell said:

“The well-being benefits of marriage are much greater for those who also regard their spouse as their best friend.

These benefits are on average about twice as large for people whose spouse is also their best friend.”

The study was published in the Journal of Happiness Studies (Grover & Helliwell, 2017).

Divorce runs in families because negative personality traits like neuroticism are passed down genetically.

Genetics is the main reason why divorce runs in families, research finds.

Psychologists used to think that the potential for divorce was transmitted from one generation to the next by psychological means.

But this study finds that it is really genetics that are at the root — although psychological factors are important.

For example, neurotic people tend to see their partners in a more negative light.

The personality trait of neuroticism is passed down through the generations.

This, along with other psychological characteristics passed on genetically, mostly explains why divorce runs in families.

Why divorce runs in families

Dr Jessica Salvatore, the study’s first author, said:

“At present, the bulk of evidence on why divorce runs in families points to the idea that growing up with divorced parents weakens your commitment to and the interpersonal skills needed for marriage.

So, if a distressed couple shows up in a therapist’s office and finds, as part of learning about the partners’ family histories, that one partner comes from a divorced family, then the therapist may make boosting commitment or strengthening interpersonal skills a focus of their clinical efforts.”

However, strengthening commitment may not be the best way to approach the problem, said Dr Salvatore:

“…what we find is strong, consistent evidence that genetic factors account for the intergenerational transmission of divorce.

For this reason, focusing on increasing commitment or strengthening interpersonal skills may not be a particularly good use of time for a therapist working with a distressed couple.”

Instead, the key for couples having problems may be looking at personality issues.

Dr Salvatore said:

“For example, other research shows that people who are highly neurotic tend to perceive their partners as behaving more negatively than they objectively are [as rated by independent observers].

So, addressing these underlying, personality-driven cognitive distortions through cognitive-behavioral approaches may be a better strategy than trying to foster commitment.”

The study was published in the journal Psychological Science (Salvatore et al., 2018).

The technique does not help you work out what they are feeling or if they are lying, despite the constant claims.

Putting yourself in someone else’s shoes does NOT help you understand what they are thinking, a series of 25 experiments has shown.

It debunks one of the most commonly used ways to work out what other people are thinking.

In fact, putting yourself in someone else’s shoes only gives you the impression that you know them better.

Far better, to just ask them.

The study’s author’s explain:

“We incorrectly presume that taking someone else’s perspective will help us understand and improve interpersonal relationships.

If you want an accurate understanding of what someone is thinking or feeling, don’t make assumptions, just ask.”

Across 25 different experiments, people were asked to put themselves in someone else’s shoes and imagine all kinds of things about them, such as:

• whether they were truly smiling,
• whether they were lying,
• and what they were really feeling.

The authors explain the results:

“Initially a large majority of participants believed that taking someone else’s perspective would help them achieve more accurate interpersonal insight.

However, test results showed that their predictive assumptions were not generally accurate, although it did make them feel more confident about their judgement and reduced egocentric biases.”

Dale Carnegie popularised this way of understanding other people in his bestseller ‘How to Win Friends and Influence People’.

The only benefit to imagining you are someone else is in reducing the ‘egocentric bias’.

This is the tendency people have to rely too much on their own opinions in order to satisfy their own egos.

Imagining you are someone else helps people take into account other perspectives and reduces reliance on egotistical opinions.

What it doesn’t do, though, is let you read other people’s minds.

The study was published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Eyal et al., 2018).