Gottman Couples Therapy Analysis

Gurman, A. S. (2008). Clinical handbook of couple therapy (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Chapter 21 discusses the Forgiveness and Reconciling Though Experiencing Empathy (FREE) model as a useful model for couple therapy (Ripley & Worthington, 2014). Forgiveness interventions creates a platform to resolve issues that are affecting the ability to maintain a stable relationship. Forgiveness is not an isolated event but a filtration of hurt and emotional pain which takes considerable time to work through (Strelan, 2010). It is very difficult to move past any type of pain. When couples find themselves in a place that the pain seems to not go away then it may be time for interventions such as Forgiveness interventions to support the couple’s effort in relieving the relationship of the hurt and allow it to heal and for them move forward.

During treatment Cognitive-Behavioral Couple Therapy (CBCT) and Integrative Behavioral Couple Therapy (IBCT) will use feedback sessions to help assess how the couple is doing in a positive way (Gurman, 2008). Both CBCT and IBCT both use conflict and emotional expressions as avenues for couples to express their affection and understanding for one another (Gurman, 2008). Both CBCT and IBCT also have the same value system of creating a general closeness and intimacy between partners (Gurman, 2008). Regardless of the differences, the two therapies have the general

Relationship satisfaction is an important part of romantic relationships. A lack of satisfaction can lead to consequences in other areas of life and eventually, the destruction of the relationship. For example, job performance is heavily influenced by romantic relationship satisfaction. In a study by Greenhaus and Beutell (1985), they argued that poor satisfaction leads to poor job performance and vice versa. They stated this was to because these two spheres are “interdependent.” Satisfaction can also influence quality of health. Conflict in a marital relationship is associated with higher heart rates and blood pressure (Broadwell & Light, 1999; Ewart, Taylor, Kaemer & Agras, 1991; Flor, Breitenstein, Birbaumer & Furst 1995; Frankish & Linden, 1996; Kiecolt-Glaser, 1993; Mayne, O’Leary, McCrady, Contrada & Labouvie, 1997; Morell & Apple, 1990; Shwartz, Slater & Birchler, 1994; Thomsen & Gilbert, 1998). It is also strongly associated with depression and depressed syndromes (Beach, Fincham & Katz, 1998; Fincham & Beach, 1999). This relationship between marital conflict and depression seems to be bidirectional meaning depression is not only a result of conflict but also is caused by the conflict (Beach, et. al., 1998; Fincham & Beach, 1999). Because a lack of relationship satisfaction can negatively affect so many important areas of life, it is important to understand what influences the level of satisfaction held in romantic relationships.

14. What is it like to tell her how it makes you feel when you feel rejected?

With the research study of John Gottman (1954), he observed 2000 couples. He indicated that “marital success at least five to one ratio of positive to negative interactions.” While with stable marriages, more than five times of instances were couples of “smiling, touching, complimenting, and laughing, then of sarcasm, criticism, and insults.” Gottman conducted that don’t look at how in love a couple is, look at the one’s that “refrain” from putting down their other

And how can we, exactly? Well now, Gladwell walks us through how Gottman determines the success or failure of a couple. First, he talks about the complex and intricate coding system that Gottman created, the SPAFF, that has twenty separate categories, which correspond to every emotion a married couple could possibly make during a conversation (21). Gottman uses the SPAFF codes to assign an emotion to every second of the couple’s interaction. So, when a 15 minute conversation is broken down in this way, it could end up looking like this: angry for 6 seconds, defensive for 10 seconds, whining for 5 seconds, and so on. Gottman discovered that typically, the couples who stayed together had more positive emotions compared to negative emotions during these 15 minute conversations. The couples that ended up divorced had a higher ratio of negative emotions to positive ones instead (26). When Gottman sat down, watched 15 minutes worth of married couple’s conversations, and then analyzed them using the methods Gladwell described to us, he was 90% accurate at determining which couples would

The two therapy techniques that are being questioned this week are Emotional Focused Couple Therapy and Hope Focused Couple Therapy. Both techniques are effective in marital and couple therapy and both systems can be utilized effectively, however, I think comparable to other techniques the results depend on the people and the therapist. Hope focused therapy is centered around the brain and how couples perceive where their marriage is and where they want it to go. Watson (2017) states, “The approach is oriented around hopefulness and strengths, helping couples assess their strengths and create a positive narrative around them and their relationship to combat the discouragement and hopelessness that couples typically bring into counseling,”

Emotionally focused therapy is designed to be short-term in structure. Developed principally by Dr. Susan Johnson, the main target of this type of therapy is couples and is focused on expressing emotions. The primary goal of emotionally focused therapy is to create a safe and long-lasting bond between romantic partners and family members while expanding and restructuring significant emotional responses. Partakers in emotionally focused therapy are emboldened to express their thoughts and emotions in a safe environment without fear of judgment. In this paper, we will discuss a therapy session between Sue Johnson and a couple, Leslie and Scott.

When it has been compared to traditional behavioral couple’s therapy (TBCT), it was even shown to be more effective in the long-run (cite that article). An additional strength is in the versatility of this model. In discussing the model, Jacobson and Christensen say that there are “very few prerequisites to a positive outcome with acceptance work” (Jacobson & Christensen, 1996, p. 94). As it is so widely usable, it could be very beneficial for therapists to know and practice as they may be able to apply it to the vast majority of couples seeking

Gottman's vision when facing a couple crisis, I think is very successful, as it seeks the positive aspects of the couple and part of them to solve problems based on the love and respect that must be shown within The relationship, making the other person feel valued. Making yourself feel valued, respected and loved by the other person can be easy, if people strive to make small gestures in which the other party can see that you know it, that you support it and that you take it into account in the decisions. All this in turn, I think it can help strengthen an emotional relationship, feeling within the couple satisfied, and happy. However, that the "love map" is established at the beginning of a relationship, when we want to know everything about

Gottman method couple therapy or Gottman's Sound Relationship House (SRH) theory (Gottman, 1999) is grounded on years of John Gottman’s research and exploration about what makes marital relationships succeed or fail. The outcomes of these studies reveal that couples with successful

Emotion-Focused Therapy was developed in the early 1980s by Sue Johnson and Leslie Greenberg to provide a clear framework for working with emotion in couple therapy. (Karris & Caldwell, 2015, p. 346). In working with distressed couples, Greenberg and Johnson noted that those people were overwhelmed by intense emotions that keep them fixed into malicious pattern of interactions (as cited in Karris & Caldwell, 2015, p. 347). The priority of EFT was to identify the negative interactional cycle early in treatment and, then, access “on each partner’s unexpressed underlying emotions” (Johnson and Greenberg, 1988, p. 29) that are hidden from the self and the

To measure their satisfaction, the RDAS evaluates and differentiates the couple’s dyadic adjustment in both distressed and nondistressed relationships (Gangamma et al., 2012). Lower scores on this scale indicate greater relationship distress while higher scores indicate greater relationship satisfaction (Gangamma et al., 2012). Thus, both of these measures may aid the therapist in determining each partner’s perception of unfairness and satisfaction within their relationship (Gangamma et al., 2012). These measures also provide the therapist with a greater understanding of where each partner stands in regards to their relationship. Moreover, this greater understanding of the relationship can help the therapist determine a good starting point for contextual couple’s

     Marital satisfaction and the contributing factords are of extreme importance at this juncture in our society, though it has become obvious that there is a degeneration of communication and a lack of satisfaction in today’s married couples. This disatisfaction results in the divorce rate being sohigh that it begs the question: how does this marital satisfaction originate?