WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO01 / 01
The finding
A small response. A big difference.
86%
Still married
33%
Later divorced
Responses to attempts to connect. Marital outcome checked six years later.
01 / The response
Original row 1 · three complete alternativesA / The finding first
Lead with the evidence. Large figures, clear comparisons, warm cream and raspberry.WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO01 / 02
The everyday behaviour
A partner tries to connect.
- 01Sharing something funny.
- 02Asking how your day went.
- 03Reaching for your hand.
Researchers call these “bids” for connection.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO01 / 03
The follow-up
The outcome came six years later.
0 years
Observe newlyweds6 years
Check marital outcomeObservation → follow-up
Researchers compared the earlier responses of couples who stayed married and divorced.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO01 / 04
The pattern
Couples who stayed married responded more often.
86%
Still married
33%
Later divorced
That difference showed up in ordinary moments.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO01 / 05
The research
Small moments. Six years of follow-up.
0 years
Observe newlyweds6 years
Check marital outcomeObservation → follow-up
The Gottman Institute · Newlywed follow-up
86% and 33% describe responses to attempts to connect, grouped by marital outcome six years later.
A group finding. Not a prediction for one couple.
gottman.com / research notesB / The question first
Open a question, then reveal the finding. Bold plum, generous type and a deliberate colour change.BEFORE THE SPLIT01 / 01
Before the split · 01
Your partner tries to get your attention. Do you respond?
An attempt to connect
A response?
The exchange researchers observed.BEFORE THE SPLIT01 / 02
What counts?
The ordinary attempts to connect.
- 01A question.
- 02A shared observation.
- 03A request for help.
Small moments gave researchers something to observe.
BEFORE THE SPLIT01 / 03
Six years later
The couples had responded differently.
86%
Still married
33%
Later divorced
Responses to attempts to connect, by later marital outcome.
BEFORE THE SPLIT01 / 04
The takeaway
The difference was in the everyday responses.
Couples who stayed married had responded more often.
BEFORE THE SPLIT01 / 05
Behind the finding
The small response was worth studying.
0 years
Observe newlyweds6 years
Check marital outcomeObservation → follow-up
The Gottman Institute · Newlywed follow-up
86% and 33% describe responses to attempts to connect, grouped by marital outcome six years later.
A group finding. Not a prediction for one couple.
gottman.com / research notesC / Inside the study
Follow the investigation: observe, compare, understand. An editorial research journal in cream and ink.THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES01 / 01
The relationship studies · 01
Watch the little interactions. Follow up years later.
0 years
Observe newlyweds6 years
Check marital outcomeObservation → follow-up
A newlywed study of attention and connection.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES01 / 02
01 / Observe
One partner reaches for connection.
They make a bid.
The other partner responds—or doesn’t.
The study observed that exchange.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES01 / 03
02 / Compare
Still married. Later divorced.
86%
Still married
33%
Later divorced
Earlier response rates, grouped by the six-year outcome.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES01 / 04
03 / Understand
Everyday attention was linked to staying together.
A repeated pattern across couples. Not a test of one missed moment.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES01 / 05
Study notes / 01
The evidence behind the comparison.
0 years
Observe newlyweds6 years
Check marital outcomeObservation → follow-up
The Gottman Institute · Newlywed follow-up
86% and 33% describe responses to attempts to connect, grouped by marital outcome six years later.
A group finding. Not a prediction for one couple.
gottman.com / research notes02 / Inside the argument
Original row 3 · three complete alternativesA / The finding first
Lead with the evidence. Large figures, clear comparisons, warm cream and raspberry.WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO02 / 01
The finding
Even in an argument, warmth showed up.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
Positive to negative interactions in stable, happy couples.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO02 / 02
Inside the disagreement
They could disagree and still connect.
- 01Showing understanding.
- 02Finding a point of agreement.
- 03Expressing affection.
These moments happened during conflict.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO02 / 03
The observation
A real disagreement. Fifteen minutes.
15minutes of disagreement
Researchers observed conflict discussions, then followed the couples over time.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO02 / 04
The pattern
Look for warmth within the argument.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
The positive moments happened while the couple disagreed.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO02 / 05
The research
The balance inside conflict.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
The Gottman Institute · Conflict research
The Institute summarises stable, happy couples’ conflict interactions as at least five positive for each negative.
A research summary. Not a daily scorecard or a guarantee.
gottman.com / research notesB / The question first
Open a question, then reveal the finding. Bold plum, generous type and a deliberate colour change.BEFORE THE SPLIT02 / 01
Before the split · 02
What can you hear in a lasting couple’s argument?
?:?
Positive / negative interactions
BEFORE THE SPLIT02 / 02
What researchers describe
Signs of connection are still there.
- 01An effort to understand.
- 02Some shared humour.
- 03A moment of affection.
The disagreement can continue around them.
BEFORE THE SPLIT02 / 03
The reveal
Five positive. One negative.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
The Institute’s summary for stable, happy couples during conflict.
BEFORE THE SPLIT02 / 04
The takeaway
An argument can still contain care.
Understanding and affection showed up within the disagreement.
BEFORE THE SPLIT02 / 05
Behind the finding
What happens while you disagree?
15minutes of disagreement
The Gottman Institute · Conflict research
The Institute summarises stable, happy couples’ conflict interactions as at least five positive for each negative.
A research summary. Not a daily scorecard or a guarantee.
gottman.com / research notesC / Inside the study
Follow the investigation: observe, compare, understand. An editorial research journal in cream and ink.THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES02 / 01
The relationship studies · 02
Give couples 15 minutes to disagree.
15minutes of disagreement
Then follow their relationships over time.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES02 / 02
01 / Observe
Look at the interactions.
Understanding. Affection. Agreement.
Criticism. Dismissal. Contempt.
The balance within conflict was part of the finding.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES02 / 03
02 / Compare
The 5:1 pattern.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
At least five positive interactions for each negative, in stable, happy couples.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES02 / 04
03 / Understand
The way couples argued mattered.
Warmth and disagreement could exist in the same conversation.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES02 / 05
Study notes / 02
A finding about conflict, not a formula.
5:1
Positive interactionsNegative interaction
The Gottman Institute · Conflict research
The Institute summarises stable, happy couples’ conflict interactions as at least five positive for each negative.
A research summary. Not a daily scorecard or a guarantee.
gottman.com / research notes03 / What faded
Original row 8 · three complete alternativesA / The finding first
Lead with the evidence. Large figures, clear comparisons, warm cream and raspberry.WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO03 / 01
The finding
Affection faded early in marriages that later ended.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
A study followed marriages for 13 years.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO03 / 02
The early changes
Closeness faded in the early years.
- 01Less affection.
- 02Less love.
- 03More mixed feelings.
These changes helped distinguish later divorce from a stable marriage.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO03 / 03
The timeline
Early changes. Later outcomes.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
Changes in the first two years were linked to marital outcomes after thirteen.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO03 / 04
The pattern
Pay attention to what changes over time.
In this study, fading affection was part of the difference.
WHAT LASTING COUPLES DO03 / 05
The research
The early years held clues.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
Huston, Caughlin, Houts, Smith & George · 2001
The Connubial Crucible tracked early marital changes and outcomes after 13 years. Declining love and affection helped distinguish couples who later divorced.
An association across couples. It does not establish that one change caused divorce.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov / 11220443B / The question first
Open a question, then reveal the finding. Bold plum, generous type and a deliberate colour change.BEFORE THE SPLIT03 / 01
Before the split · 03
What changed before the marriage ended?
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
BEFORE THE SPLIT03 / 02
One pattern they found
Some of the closeness faded.
- 01Love declined.
- 02Affection declined.
- 03Doubts increased.
The paper describes this as disillusionment.
BEFORE THE SPLIT03 / 03
The reveal
The early decline was linked to later divorce.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
The study looked at outcomes after 13 years.
BEFORE THE SPLIT03 / 04
The takeaway
How close you feel can change. That change matters.
The research followed a pattern over years, not one distant evening.
BEFORE THE SPLIT03 / 05
Behind the finding
A long view of growing apart.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
Huston, Caughlin, Houts, Smith & George · 2001
The Connubial Crucible tracked early marital changes and outcomes after 13 years. Declining love and affection helped distinguish couples who later divorced.
An association across couples. It does not establish that one change caused divorce.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov / 11220443C / Inside the study
Follow the investigation: observe, compare, understand. An editorial research journal in cream and ink.THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES03 / 01
The relationship studies · 03
Study the first two years. Look ahead thirteen.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
What could early changes reveal?
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES03 / 02
01 / Observe
Follow the feelings as they change.
- 01Love and affection.
- 02Feeling understood.
- 03Mixed feelings about the marriage.
The study tracked more than arguments.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES03 / 03
02 / Compare
Early loss of closeness was linked to later divorce.
Early decline in closeness
Marital outcome years later
These were linked in the study.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES03 / 04
03 / Understand
The early changes held clues to later divorce.
The early change in affection was part of the evidence.
THE RELATIONSHIP STUDIES03 / 05
Study notes / 03
The Connubial Crucible.
0–2 years
Track early changes13 years
Look at marital outcomesEarly marriage → long-term follow-up
Huston, Caughlin, Houts, Smith & George · 2001
The Connubial Crucible tracked early marital changes and outcomes after 13 years. Declining love and affection helped distinguish couples who later divorced.
An association across couples. It does not establish that one change caused divorce.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov / 11220443