Content deleted Content added
Citation bot (talk | contribs) m Alter: isbn. Add: citeseerx. Removed parameters. | You can use this bot yourself. Report bugs here. | User-activated. |
moved article from Sandbox to main page ~~~~ Tags: nowiki added Visual edit |
||
Line 4:
{{third-party|date=February 2019}}
}}
'''Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution'''
The '''Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution''' is a relational communications theory that proposes four negative behaviors that lead to the breakdown of marital and romantic relationships.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|title=Handbook of interpersonal communication|last=Knapp, M.L.|first=Daly, John A.|publisher=SAGE Publications|year=2002|isbn=978-0-7619-2160-8|___location=|pages=270}}</ref> This theory focuses on the negative influence of '''[[nonverbal communication]]''' habits on the success and/or failure of marriages and other relationships.<ref name=":0" /> Gottman’s model uses a metaphor that compares the four negative communication styles that lead to the breakdown of a relationship to the biblical '''[[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]'''.<ref name=":0" />▼
▲The '''[[Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution]]''' is a relational communications theory that proposes four critically negative behaviors that lead to the breakdown of marital and romantic relationships
== Background ==▼
This model is the work of psychological researcher '''[[John Gottman]]''', a professor at the '''[[University of Washington]]''' and founder of '''[[The Gottman Institute]]''' and his research partner [https://psychology.berkeley.edu/people/robert-w-levenson '''Robert W. Levenson'''].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gottman.com/about/research/|title=Overview - Research|website=The Gottman Institute|language=en-US|access-date=2019-02-04}}</ref> Gottman and Levenson's research focuses on differentiating failed and successful marriages and notes that nonverbal emotional displays progress in a linear pattern, creating a negative emotional and physical response that leads to withdrawal.<ref name=":0" /> Prior to the development of the model (1992-1994) little research had been conducted that focused on finding specific interactive behaviors and processes that resulted in marital dissatisfaction, separation, and divorce.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Gottman|first=John M.|date=1993|title=A theory of marital dissolution and stability.|journal=Journal of Family Psychology|volume=7|issue=1|pages=57–75|doi=10.1037//0893-3200.7.1.57|issn=0893-3200|citeseerx=10.1.1.575.5882}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gottman|first=John M.|last2=Levenson|first2=Robert W.|date=1992|title=Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health.|journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume=63|issue=2|pages=221–233|doi=10.1037//0022-3514.63.2.221|issn=0022-3514|citeseerx=10.1.1.540.5826}}</ref> Additionally, Gottman and Levenson's research indicated that not all negative interactions, like anger, are predictive of relational separation and divorce.<ref name=":1" /> Gottman and Levenson's research notes that the "cascade toward relational dissolution" can be predicted by the regulation, or non-regulation, of positive to negative interactions of couples, with couples that regulated their positive-to-negative interactions being significantly less likely to experience the cascade.<ref name=":1" />▼
▲== Background: ==
== The Four Horsemen of Relational Apocalypse ==▼
▲
Gottman and Levenson's Four Horseman of the Apocalypse theory is centered around the concept that the behaviors below work in a cascade model, in which one leads to the other, creating a continued environment of negativity and hostility that creates marital dissatisfaction, leads to considerations of marital dissolution, separation, and finally dissolution.<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal|last=Fowler|first=Craig|last2=Dillow|first2=Megan R.|date=2011-02-02|title=Attachment Dimensions and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2010.518910|journal=Communication Research Reports|volume=28|issue=1|pages=16–26|doi=10.1080/08824096.2010.518910|issn=0882-4096}}</ref><ref name=":2" /><ref name=":12" /><ref name=":02" />
=== Horseman One: Criticism ===
'''[[Criticism]]''' is the first indication of the Cascade Model and is an attack on the partner's character.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":3">{{Cite web|url=https://www.gottman.com/blog/the-four-horsemen-recognizing-criticism-contempt-defensiveness-and-stonewalling/|title=The Four Horsemen: Criticism, Contempt, Defensiveness, and Stonewalling|date=2013-04-24|website=The Gottman Institute|language=en-US|access-date=2019-02-07}}</ref> Criticism is defined by Gottman as a type of complaint that blames or attacks a partner's personality or character.<ref name=":5" /> Critical comments often materialize in chained comments and are communicated by broadly through statements like ‘‘you never’’ or ‘‘you always.’’<ref name=":5" /> Research indicated that non-regulated couples, or couples whose interaction trended more negative, engaged more frequently in criticism and were more likely to begin the Cascade of Dissolution.<ref name=":2" /> Gottman and Levenson's research found the wife's criticism correlated to separation and possible dissolution, but this was not so with husbands.<ref name=":12" />
=== Horseman Two: Defensiveness ===
== Criticisms ==▼
'''[[Defensiveness]]''' is a reaction to pervasive criticism, and sometimes contempt, and the second level of the Cascade Model.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":3" /> Defensiveness is a protective behavior and is indicated by shifting [[blame]] and avoiding responsibility, often in an attempt to defend against the first two horsemen.<ref name=":3" /> Fowler and Dillow also characterize defensiveness as utilizing negative counter-attack behaviors such as [[Frustration|whining,]] making negative assumptions about the other's feelings, and denials of responsibility.<ref name=":5" /> Gottman and Levenson's research found defensiveness to be strongest amongst men.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":12" />
=== Horseman Three: Contempt ===
== References ==▼
'''[[Contempt]]''' is the result of repetitive criticism and the third level of the Cascade Model and is driven by a lack of [[admiration]] and mutual respect.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":3" /><ref name=":5" /> Contempt is expressed verbally through mocking, sarcasm, and indignation with an attempt to claim moral-superiority over the other partner.<ref name=":3" /> Contempt can also be indicated nonverbally by [[eye-rolling]], scoffing'''''.'''''<ref name=":5" /> Underlying this behavior is Gottman and Levenson's research found contempt to be the strongest predictor of relational dissolution, with contempt being the strongest overall predictor for women.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":12" />
<references group=""></references>▼
=== Horseman Four: Stonewalling ===
'''[[Stonewalling]]''' is the final phase of the model and is a reaction to the previous three behaviors. Stonewalling occurs when parties create mental and physical distance to avoid conflict by appearing busy, responding in [[Grunt|grunts]], and disengaging from the communication process.<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":5" /> Gottman and Levenson's research found stonewalling to be most common among men and a very challenging behavior to redirect, once it became habitual.<ref name=":2" /><ref name=":12" />
== Methodology and Regulated vs. Non-Regulated Couples ==
=== Behavioral Coding Systems Methodology: ===
Gottman and Levenson's primary research for this model, published in the 1990's, centered around utilizing a variety of measures, in combination, to study the conflict interactions amongst married couples.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":2" /> Gottman and Levenson physiological information garnered by [[Polygraph|polygraphs]], [[Electrocardiography|EKG]]<nowiki/>s, and pulse monitoring and behavioral information collected via survey and video recording.<ref name=":2" /> Information collected by video was coded using the Rapid Couples Interaction Scoring System (RCISS), the Special Affect Coding System (SPAFF) and Marital Coding Information System (MCIS).<ref name=":2" /> RCISS is comprised of a thirteen-point speaker behavior and a nine-point listener checklist, which can be broken down into five positive and eight negative codes.<ref name=":2" /> The SPAFF is "a cultural informant coding system" which considers verbal content, tone, and context, as well as facial expression, movement, and gestures, and body movement.<ref name=":2" /> MCIS is the oldest and most widely used affect coding system, but is not as specific as others and is generally used in addition to other methods.<ref name=":2" />
=== Regulated and Nonregulated Couples: ===
Information obtained from the RCISS and SPAFF analysis lead to the formation of the idea of regulated and non-regulated couples. Gottman and Levenson defined nonregulated couples as more prone to conflict engaging behaviors, while regulated couples tend to engage in more constructive, positive communicative behaviors.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":2" /> It is noted that not all nonregulated couples exhibit all negative affective behaviors, nor do all regulated couples exhibit all positively affected behaviors.<ref name=":5" /><ref name=":12" /><ref name=":2" /> Gottman and Levenson proposed that maintaining marriage stability is not about the exclusion of negative behavior, but about maintaining a positive-to-negative comment ratio of around 5:1.<ref name=":5" /><ref name=":2" />
== The Marital Typology ==
Gottman's research indicates that there are five types of marriages: three of which are stable and avoid entering the Cascade Model, and two that are volatile.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last=Cook|first=Julian|last2=Tyson|first2=Rebecca|last3=White|first3=Jane|last4=Rushe|first4=Regina|last5=et al|date=1995|title=Mathematics of marital conflict: Qualitative dynamic mathematical modeling of marital interaction.|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0893-3200.9.2.110|journal=Journal of Family Psychology|volume=9|issue=2|pages=110–130|doi=10.1037//0893-3200.9.2.110|issn=0893-3200}}</ref><ref name=":12" /> All of the three stable couple types achieve a similar balance between positive and negative affect; however, this does not mean that negative interactions or communication is completely eliminated.<ref name=":7" />
=== Stable Couple Typologies: ===
==== Validators: ====
mixes moderate amounts of positive and negative [[Affect (psychology)|affect]].<ref name=":7" /> This model is the preferred model of marital counselors and is a more intimate approach focused on shared experiences; however, romance may disappear overtime.<ref name=":7" /> These couples engage in reduced persuasion attempts and do not attempt to persuade until a third of the conflict has elapsed.<ref name=":7" />
==== Volatiles: ====
This couple type mixes high amounts of positive and negative [[Affect (psychology)|affect]].<ref name=":7" /> These marriages tend to be quite "romantic and passionate, but [have] the risk of dissolving into endless bickering."<ref name=":7" /> These couples also engage in high levels of persuasion from the beginning of a conflict.<ref name=":7" />
==== Avoiders: ====
This couple type mixes small amounts of positive and negative [[Affect (psychology)|affect]].<ref name=":7" /> This type of marriage avoids the pain associated with conflict, but risks loneliness and emotional distance.<ref name=":7" /> Thee couples make very few, if any, attempts to persuade each other.<ref name=":7" />
=== Volatile Couple Typologies: ===
==== Hostile ====
Hostile marriages often see the husband influence both positively and negatively, but the wife only influences by being positive.<ref name=":7" /> In general, "the wife is likely to seem quite aloof and detached to the husband, whereas he is likely to seem quite negative and excessively conflictual to her."<ref name=":7" />
==== Hostile-detached: ====
These relationships tends to display a significantly higher rate of contempt and defensiveness.<ref name=":7" /> Hostile-detached marriages see the husband influence both positively and negatively, but the wife only influences by being negative.<ref name=":7" /> In these cases, "the husband is likely to seem quite aloof and detached to the wife, whereas she is likely to seem quite negative and excessively conflictual to him."<ref name=":7" />
=== Mismatch Theory: ===
This theory proposes that "hostile and hostile-detached couples simply fail to create a stable adaptation to marriage that is either volatile, validating, or avoiding."<ref name=":7" /> The belief is that marital instability arises from a couples inability to accommodate one-another's preferences and create one of the three types of marriage.<ref name=":7" />
== Interventions and Therapeutic Strategies ==
=== Proximal Change Interventions ===
Gottman and Tabres research on proximal change interventions attempts to interrupt the negative communications process by creating chances for positive influence to help alter relational dynamics and alter or repair damage done by the cascade.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last=Gottman|first=John M.|last2=Tabares|first2=Amber|date=2017|title=The Effects of Briefly Interrupting Marital Conflict|url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/jmft.12243|journal=Journal of Marital and Family Therapy|language=en|volume=44|issue=1|pages=61–72|doi=10.1111/jmft.12243|via=}}</ref> Two interventions were implemented, a "compliments intervention" and a "criticize intervention" design to increase positivity and negativity respectively.<ref name=":4" /> Groups were randomly assigned, with a control group, and while the interventions did not have an effect.<ref name=":4" /> However, the research indicated that couples determined the effectiveness of the interventions, as many non-regulated couples who have entered the Cascade Model will "construe" interventions by coding them into criticisms and/or by communicating with contempt.<ref name=":4" /> the effectiveness of these interventions is contingent on the continued facilitation and monitoring of interventions by therapists. <ref name=":4" />
=== Avoidance and Anxiety Attachment ===
Researchers Fowler and Dillow note that avoidance attachment can be predictive of defensiveness and stonewalling whereby an individual is reluctant to depend on others.<ref name=":5" /> Those with avoidance attachment may also struggle to regulate negative emotions and be prone to lashing out at partners.<ref name=":5" /> Fowler and Dillow hypothesized that avoidance attachment can be predictive through self-reports of criticism, contempt and defensiveness; however, research finding indicated that avoidance attachment was only predictive of stonewalling.<ref name=":5" /> Additionally, Fowler and Dillow noted that anxiety attachment, characterized by over-dependence, flooding, and fear of rejection, will also predict criticism, contempt, and defensiveness as those who exhibit anxiety attachment tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies.<ref name=":5" />
=== Gottman Method Couples Therapy: ===
==== Homosexual Couples: ====
Research from 2017 indicates that while the study of the Gottman Method's application to homosexual couples is relatively new, that most same-sex couples are not inherently different from their heterosexual counterparts.<ref name=":6" /> Garanzini, et. al.'s research indicated that the length of treatment for homosexual couples was not statistically different from the comparable national averages for heterosexual couples.<ref name=":6" /> There was a significant increase in effect noted, which can be attributed to the idea that "same-sex couples generally function better than heterosexual couples due to smaller gender-role and inequality."<ref name=":6" /> It is also noted that the Gottman Model of Therapy created a better platform for the discussion of relationship equality preferences.<ref name=":6" />
▲== Criticisms: ==
[[John Gottman|Gottman]] has been criticized for claiming that his Cascade Model can predict divorce with over a 90% accuracy.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal|last=Stanley|first=Scott M.|last2=Bradbury|first2=Thomas N.|last3=Markman|first3=Howard J.|date=Feb. 2000|title=Structural Flaws in the Bridge From Basic Research on Marriage to Interventions for Couples|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00256.x|journal=Journal of Marriage and Family|volume=62|issue=1|pages=256–264|doi=10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00256.x|issn=0022-2445|via=}}</ref> Additionally, research Stanley Scott and his colleagues noted that Gottman's highly publicized research findings from 1998, which recommended significant shifts in focus and application for marital educators and therapists, including the de-emphasis of anger management and active listening, has several flaws.<ref name=":8" /> Among the concerns raised, the most significant are methodological, including Gottman and his fellow researchers not providing justification for the nonrandom selection of participants, not controlling for cultural impacts, and flaws in physiological impact analysis.<ref name=":8" /> Concerns were also raised about the methods for observational data collection and the ambiguity of statistics tests used.<ref name=":8" /> Stanley's findings indicate that, while Gottman's findings are interesting, there are too many unexplained methods and that additional research is needed before the overhauling Gottman's suggested.<ref name=":8" />
▲== References: ==
▲<references group=""></references><br />
| |||