fearful-avoidant

“Sliding” Into Marriage, Small Weddings Associated with Poor Outcomes

Small Wedding

Science Daily has a report on a study of marriage happiness called “Bigger weddings, fewer partners, less ‘sliding’ linked to better marriages.”

Unfortunately this is another study showing correlations but not proving causations, so it is less useful than it might appear:

Rhoades and co-author Scott M. Stanley came to these insights by analyzing new data from the Relationship Development Study, an ongoing national study based at the University of Denver and funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Between 2007 and 2008, more than 1,000 Americans who were unmarried but in a relationship, and between the ages of 18 and 34, were recruited into the study.

Over the course of the next five years and 11 waves of data collection, 418 of those individuals got married. The authors looked closely at those 418 new marriages, examining how the history of the spouses’ relationships and their prior romantic experiences were related to the quality of their marriages.

So far so good. But what they did was select a group of single people, look specifically at the ones who got married, and then question them about the happiness of their marriage, their history and other factors that might be interesting. There are problems with drawing any conclusions: self-reporting of both relationship history and marriage quality, and alternative explanations for some correlations.

Those who have had more romantic experiences — for example, more sexual or cohabiting partners — are less likely to forge a high-quality marriage than those with a less complex romantic history, the researchers found.

Raising children from prior relationships can add stress to a marriage. For women, but not for men, having had a child in a prior relationship was associated, on average, with lower marital quality.

….More relationship experiences prior to marriage also means more experience breaking up, which may make for a more jaundiced view of love and relationships, Rhoades said. It’s also possible that some people have personality characteristics — such as liking to take risks or being harder to get along with — that both increase their odds of having many relationship experiences and decrease their odds of marital success, she added.

From the attachment type perspective, it’s easy to see from the Dating Pool Danger graph that people who have been through several relationships are far more likely to be insecure types: Dismissive-Avoidant, Fearful-Avoidant, or Anxious-Preoccupied. Each of these types would be expected to have a lower-than-typical quality of marriage. So the people who they initially selected were already skewed (since they were single) toward the insecure types, and those with a history of broken relationships were even more likely to be insecure types and thus find marriage rough.

Past studies show that couples often “slide” into living together rather than talking things out and making a decision about it. In this study, participants who lived together before marriage were asked directly if they made a considered decision about premarital cohabitation or slid into it; they indicated their degree of “sliding versus deciding” on a five-point scale. The more strongly respondents categorized the move as a decision rather than a slide, the greater their marital quality later on.

“We believe that one important obstacle to marital happiness is that many people now slide through major relationship transitions — like having sex, moving in together, getting engaged or having a child — that have potentially life-altering consequences,” said Stanley, research professor and co-director of the Center for Marital and Family Studies at the University of Denver, as well as a senior fellow for both the National Marriage Project and for the Institute for Family Studies.

That seems fairly intuitive — commitments that occur thoughtlessly, almost by default, happen when people are not strongly motivated by anything but convenience and inertia. After marriage, they may just as easily leave when it becomes inconvenient. Living together for years before marriage tends to show someone was not especially motivated to get married!

Having more guests at one’s wedding — the biggest ritual in many relationships — is associated with higher marital quality, even after controlling for income and education, which may be proxies for how much the wedding might have cost, the study found. Among couples who had weddings, the sample was divided into those who had weddings with 50 or fewer attendees, 51 to 149 attendees, or 150 or more attendees. Among each grouping, 31 percent, 37 percent, and 47 percent, respectively, reported high marital quality.

“In what might be called the ‘My Big Fat Greek Wedding’ factor, this study finds that couples who have larger wedding parties are more likely to report high-quality marriages,” said W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project and a professor of sociology at U.Va. “One possibility here is that couples with larger networks of friends and family may have more help, and encouragement, in navigating the challenges of married life. Note, however, this finding is not about spending lots of money on a wedding party. It’s about having a good number of friends and family in your corner.”

This also seems obvious — lots of friends and family at your wedding tends to mean you have lots of social support, and the larger the social network you invited, the more you probably believed in your own wedding as a real commitment!

More on Divorce, Marriage, and Mateseeking

Marriages Happening Late, Are Good for You
Monogamy and Relationship Failure; “Love Illuminated”
“Millionaire Matchmaker”
More reasons to find a good partner: lower heart disease!
“Princeton Mom” Susan Patton: “Marry Smart” not so smart
“Blue Valentine”
“All the Taken Men are Best” – why women poach married men….
“Marriage Rate Lowest in a Century”
Making Divorce Hard to Strengthen Marriages?
Student Loan Debt: Problems in Divorce
“The Upside of ‘Marrying Down’”
The High Cost of Divorce
Separate Beds Save Marriages?
Marital Discord Linked to Depression
Marriage Contracts: Give People More Legal Options
Older Couples Avoiding Marriage For Financial Reasons
Divorced Men 8 Times as Likely to Commit Suicide as Divorced Women
Vox Charts Millennial Marriage Depression
What’s the Matter with Marriage?
Life Is Unfair! The Great Chain of Dysfunction Ends With You.
Leftover Women: The Chinese Scene
Constant Arguing Can Be Deadly…
“If a fraught relationship significantly shortens your life, are you better off alone?
“Divorce in America: Who Really Wants Out and Why”
View Marriage as a Private Contract?
“It’s up there with ‘Men Are From Mars’ and ‘The Road Less Travelled’”
Free Love, eHarmony, Matchmaking Pseudoscience
Love Songs of the Secure Attachment Type
“The New ‘I Do’”
Unrealistic Expectations: Liberal Arts Woman and Amazon Men
Mark Manson’s “Six Healthy Relationship Habits”
“The Science of Happily Ever After” – Couples Communications
Free Dating Sites: Which Have Attachment Type Screening?
Dating Pool Danger: Harder to Find Good Partners After 30
Mate-Seeking: The Science of Finding Your Best Partner
Perfect Soulmates or Fellow Travelers: Being Happy Depends on Perspective
No Marriage, Please: Cohabiting Taking Over
“Marriage Markets” – Marriage Beyond Our Means?
Rules for Relationships: Realism and Empathy
Limerence vs. Love
The “Fairy Tale” Myth: Both False and Destructive
When to Break Up or Divorce? The Economic View
“Why Are Great Husbands Being Abandoned?”
Divorce and Alimony: State-By-State Reform, Massachusetts Edition
“Sliding” Into Marriage, Small Weddings Associated with Poor Outcomes
Subconscious Positivity Predicts Marriage Success…
Why We Are Attracted to Bad Partners (Who Resemble a Parent)

Avoidant: Emotions Repressed Beneath Conscious Level

Avoidant Brain

Avoidants are known to be viscerally effected by events that would normally trigger conscious emotions — such events are often reflected in a racing heart, disturbed digestion, and poor sleep even when the Dismissive-Avoidant consciously feels nothing — and will tell you he or she doesn’t really mind that their partner is gone since it’s such a great opportunity to get more work done away from the partner’s demands for attention.

This blockade on attachment-related emotions is a defense mechanism; it was necessary in childhood to survive a caregiver’s inattention or abuse. The feelings of being unloved and unwanted that might otherwise have destroyed the child’s will to live are shunted aside and never reach a conscious level; avoidants tend to have poor memories of emotional events and report unreliably when asked about their childhoods.

An interesting post on the blog StopTheStorm discusses this phenomenon:

When it comes to thinking about, describing and feeling emotions, I always have a sideline running in the background concerning my father. I think about the dismissive-avoidant insecure attachment disorder patterns as researchers are now being able to actually see them operate through visually watching the brains of such people.

Researchers can watch how some brains create in effect a firewall that leaves actual emotions as they ARE triggered in the body completely out of conscious awareness. Researchers can see the emotion being experienced in the brain AND at the same time be screened from a person so that they do not know they are even there — AT ALL. The brain is consuming massive amounts of energy during this screening process, and these ‘brain-holders’ never know it.

There are specific early caregiver-to-infant interactions that create these brains from birth to age one. These changed brains are intimately connected to the changed nervous system and body of their ‘holders’. Being cared for by unresponsive, unemotional, cold, depressed and ‘blank-faced’ caregivers are some of the ways these dismissive-avoidant brains are created in infants from the beginning.

These same infants, had they been interacted with by securely attached and appropriate-adequate early caregivers would have developed entirely different brains. My father was an unwanted infant born to an unwilling and depressed mother, raised by his teenage sister primarily who was not caring or nurturing. In the end, my father’s dismissive-avoidant insecurely attached brain worked very well on his behalf as he could NOT FEEL — did not HAVE to feel — and hence could ignore what he NEEDED to pay attention to and react to appropriately.

I have an important person I care deeply about who I believe also has a dismissive-avoidant insecure attachment disorder, and I can see how easily this pattern fits with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Very nicely indeed. The fact is that people who fit into this range can most often manage to get along just fine — but have extremely limited (if any) ability to FEEL and therefore to CARE how others feel, either. It would be easy to call them ‘intimacy disabled’.

One of the better studies of brain activation in avoidants concluded:

As a whole, these brain imaging data support but also extend the notion put forward by AT (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007) that attachment avoidance is associated with a preferential use of emotion suppression in interpersonal/social contexts. Furthermore, they reveal that reappraisal may not work for these individuals, leading to impaired down-regulation of amygdala reactivity. This pattern may help understand why avoidantly attached individuals tend to become highly emotional when their preferred regulation strategies fail or cannot be employed.

Translated, when deactivating strategies (intended to reduce the importance of an attachment relationship to the avoidant) fail to work or can’t be used, the avoidant can be overwhelmed by unprocessed feelings that are normally blocked or avoided. The avoidant strategy is to never be put into a position where deep feelings of loss might break out by distancing anyone who gets too close and minimizing the importance of attached others.

[Note: If you’re looking for information on your dismissive or fearful-avoidant spouse or lover, I’ve published a book on the topic: Avoidant: How to Love (or Leave) a Dismissive Partner.]

Anxious-Preoccupied: Stuck on the Dismissive?

Preoccupied-Dismissive Pairing: Quicksand?

The Anxious-Preoccupied are frequently attracted to the intermittent reinforcement provided by the Avoidant, especially the apparently cool and self-sufficient Dismissive variety. I go into this at some length in the book:

Anxious-preoccupied types do poorly with each other—two needy, clingy people who do manage to calm each other’s insecurities exist as couples, but it’s rare, and the resulting relationship is closer to unhealthy codependence; neither will be strengthened by the bond. A mildly Preoccupied person can last with a mildly Avoidant sort, but the relationship tends to be unhappy as the bond is based on the unmet neediness of the Preoccupied and the willingness of the Avoidant to accept the attention without providing emotional security. A preoccupied person is much better off with a Secure who can gradually calm the preoccupied person’s insecurities by steady love and support, as in this case:

The preoccupied wife who had ambivalent attachment to her parent cannot believe her husband when he says, despite their fights and mutual dissatisfactions, that he genuinely loves her and wants to stay with her. She cannot assimilate it to her worldview, her internal model. She is sure he will abandon her, either because he already wants to or because her impossible and anxious neediness will eventually drive him out. But his steadfastness over the years builds her trust. It causes her to remember her relationship with a great uncle, whose love was precious and unwavering, and to think more and more about him and how good she felt about herself around him. Gradually, she assimilates her marriage to this model, and it becomes more central. Feeling more secure, she now finds herself freer to reflect on the past.[1]

Though it appears a preoccupied person might be better off with a secure partner, some research indicates that in this case opposites attract:

A number of studies have looked into the question of whether we are attracted to people based on their attachment style or ours. Two researchers in the field of adult attachment, Paula Pietromonaco, of the University of Massachusetts, and Katherine Carnelley, of the University of Southampton in the UK, found that avoidant individuals actually prefer anxiously attached people. Another study, by Jeffry Simpson of the University of Minnesota, showed that anxious women are more likely to date avoidant men. Is it possible, then, that people who guard their independence with ferocity would seek the partners most likely to impinge on their autonomy? Or that people who seek closeness are attracted to people who want to push them away? And if so, why? Pietromonaco and Carnelley believe that these attachment styles actually complement each other in a way. Each reaffirms the other’s beliefs about themselves and about relationships. The avoidants’ defensive self-perception that they are strong and independent is confirmed, as is the belief that others want to pull them into more closeness than they are comfortable with. The anxious types find that their perception of wanting more intimacy than their partner can provide is confirmed, as is their anticipation of ultimately being let down by significant others. So, in a way, each style is drawn to reenact a familiar script over and over again.[2]

This kind of complementary dysfunction can lead to a stable relationship, but one where both partners stay in their insecure styles, with the preoccupied battling for every scrap of attention and the avoidant one only giving enough to confirm his view of attachment as a necessary evil. These attractions are based on re-enacting the dysfunctional touch and response cycles of their early childhoods, and generally these couples report they are together despite their unhappiness.

Levine and Heller point out that the slights and intermittent reinforcement of the attractive avoidant male often trigger activation of the attachment system—producing intrigue and sparks. So what if he only answers your text messages days later, if at all? He’s hot and just hard-to-get enough that you really want him! This is the terrible mistake so many make: they meet a secure guy and it’s all so drama-free that they think he’s dull:

If you are anxious, the reverse of what happens when you meet someone avoidant happens when you meet someone secure. The messages that come across from someone secure are very honest, straightforward, and consistent. Secures are not afraid of intimacy and know they are worthy of love. They don’t have to beat around the bush or play hard to get. Ambiguous messages are out of the mix, as are tension and suspense. As a result, your attachment system remains relatively calm. Because you are used to equating an activated attachment system with love, you conclude that this can’t be “the one” because no bells are going off. You associate a calm attachment system with boredom and indifference. Because of this fallacy you might let the perfect partner pass you by.[3]

So armed with foreknowledge, a wise preoccupied person will seek out a Secure and avoid the sometimes attractive but ultimately unsupportive Avoidant of both flavors, as well as other Preoccupieds, who are likely to be the worst partners of all for them.

The relationships between Anxious-Preoccupied and Avoidant partners are especially problematic, because their mutually-reinforcing insecurities can lead to a stable but unhappy partnership that does little to help them grow more secure but can go on for years.

Remember that while attachment types are relatively fixed characteristics, almost everyone can display insecurities when the situation is stressful or their partner is triggering them: as when the Avoidant are withholding responses, creating anxiety in their partner; or when the Anxious-Preoccupied are peppering their normally Secure partner with demands for response, creating a desire to distance from excessive clinginess.

The Anxious-Preoccupied are driven by their need for attachment to jump quickly into relationships and to immediately see the latest one as the solution to their problems. They feel safe when their desired partner is near and reassuring, and anxious when apart, or when messages aren’t replied to immediately. While a Secure will assume the lack of response means their partner is simply busy or away from the phone, an Anxious-Preoccupied person will start to worry and wonder if something has gone wrong with their relationship. Since they are so concerned about their relationships, they will then act — with more and increasingly demanding messages and even more obsessive worry if there is no response.

The Preoccupied think that because they put their relationships above all other priorities, and work hard to maintain contact and do things for their partner, that they are owed the same level of attention and devotion. This level of commitment would be admirable if it came after a long relationship of mutual support and knowledge, but the Preoccupied tend to rope someone into partnership and start acting as if it was eternal and perfectly intimate long before they have really come to know and understand their latest partner-victim. In other words, they use their new partner to fill the hole in their attachment security without a true knowledge and appreciation of the partner’s history and feelings. This is self-centered and shows that real empathy can only be fully exercised from a secure base.

This entitlement attitude (“I am a devoted partner so I am owed the attention I deserve!”) leads to disappointment and anger when no real person can instantly be as thoughtful and devoted as the Preoccupied would require. The Preoccupied spend much time obsessing about these unintended slights and going over every detail of interactions in their heads, making up scenarios where they lose their partner, and then being tempted to make another play for reassurance. The anxiety they feel and the demands they make without regard to their partner’s state of mind or current ability to respond ultimately can drive away partners and friends.

The increasing percentage of Dismissives in the dating pool as time goes on means that older Preoccupieds will encounter more Dismissives than any other type. The intermittent reinforcement provided by a Dismissive — sometimes they will respond reassuringly, sometimes not — means that when the attachment system of the Preoccupied goes on alert, it finds its challenging match in the Dismissive’s refusal to play along. To some Preoccupieds this partial response is what they remember from significant caregivers, most typically their father, and the familiarity of this yearning is itself attractive.

The Dismissive, on the other hand, expects partners to be too demanding and troublesome, and that too confirms their view of others. One might expect Dismissives to seek out partners who are happy to accept greater distance in partnership, but that is not how it works out in practice; it as as if the Dismissive is most comfortable exercising the balance of power in the relationship, holding their struggling partner at a distance and just providing enough attention and reassurance to keep them on the hook.

Since they are reinforcing each other’s view of others, neither will get any more secure with time; the Dismissive will accuse their partner of being clingy or needy, while the Preoccupied will accuse their partner of being too distant and uncaring. They are fulfilling each other’s basic need to have a partner, but the partnership will always be troubled by their complementary insecurities. Yet it is more likely to be stable than a Preoccupied-Preoccupied partnership.

The single Preoccupied person would be wise to resist the tendency to fall for a Dismissive. This can be avoided by noting the red flags of the avoidant: not responding reassuringly to simple in-person requests, not showing much interest and concern for your feelings, and having a history of bad or no relationships. Superficial looks and accomplishments should not be seen as indicating that your new prospect is a success in emotional or relationship spheres. Always remember when you meet someone intriguing that you know next to nothing about their personality until you have seen them in many situations over many months. Don’t try to have a Significant relationship with someone until you have enough history with that person to be able to rely on their feelings for you. Remind yourself that there are many possible partners out there, and don’t settle emotionally on someone who may not be right for you just because they have shown you a little attention. It is meaningless unless it is sustained and reliable.

[1] Karen, p. 404
[2] Levine, Amir; Heller, Rachel (2010-12-30). Attached: The New Science of Adult Attachment and How It Can Help You Find—and Keep—Love. p/ 91, Penguin Group US
[3] Levine and Heller, p. 96

[Note: if you arrived here looking for insight into a dismissive or fearful-avoidant spouse or lover, I’ve just published a book on the topic: Avoidant: How to Love (or Leave) a Dismissive Partner. Right now available only from Amazon Kindle for $3.99 (or local currency equivalent), but by Oct. 15th a paperback should also be available.]

“Bad Boyfriends” – Useful for Improving Current Relationships

Another good review at Amazon — I didn’t spend much time talking about how to improve problematic relationships between the types, but this reader at least found the general outline of couples communication and a few specific suggestions for dealing with avoidants useful:

5.0 out of 5 stars: Interesting theory!, July 13, 2014
By Amy Blake (Portland, OR USA)
Verified Purchase

I recommend this book to all of my girl friends who complain about being in bad relationships. Although analyzing yourself and your partner with attachment theory has its limitations, this guide helped me understand my own needs and communicate better with my boyfriend. He’s kind of an “avoidant,” and the techniques in the book helped to defuse our break up/make up cycles. Is this “manipulation”? Maybe, but it works!

If you haven’t picked it up yet, you can special order the print edition through any bookstore. Online, the ebooks and print versions are still at these links:

Barnes and Noble trade paperback

More on Avoidant and Bad Boyfriends:

Jeb Kinnison

Writing About Life and Love

fearful-avoidant

“Sliding” Into Marriage, Small Weddings Associated with Poor Outcomes

Like this:

Avoidant: Emotions Repressed Beneath Conscious Level

Like this:

Anxious-Preoccupied: Stuck on the Dismissive?

Like this:

“Bad Boyfriends” – Useful for Improving Current Relationships

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: