Health & Science
The Healthiest Way To Fight With Your Husband
Use analytical language in the heat of the moment.
Stress researchers have proven that hostile relationships wreck our health. A report earlier this year found that women in bad marriages are especially at risk for depression and heart disease. But few researchers have focused on practical ways people can stay well during relationship rough patches. A new study of married couples, however, has found physiological evidence for one technique to diffuse tension: choosing the right fighting words.
Couples who used analytical language, such as “think,” “understand,” “because,” or “reason,” during heated arguments were able to keep important stress-related chemicals in check, according to research published in the latest issue of the journal Health Psychology. Cytokines are inflammatory chemicals that spike during periods of prolonged tension and can lower your immunity and lead to early frailty, Type 2 diabetes, arthritis, and some cancers. The authors noted a curious gender twist in their results. Husbands benefitted from their wives’ measured language, but a man’s carefully chosen words had little effect on a woman’s cytokine balance.
Researchers measured cytokines before and after discussions with 42 married heterosexual couples. In the first session, couples chatted about a neutral topic. In the second, an interviewer gathered a couple’s history and then deliberately provoked a fight by asking them to hash out their hardest issues, saying to a husband and wife something like, “You hate the way her mother always comes over, and you feel like he controls all the money. Discuss,” explains Jennifer Graham, lead author and assistant professor of bio-behavioral health at Penn State. Each person had equal time to talk during the recorded 30-minute sessions, and researchers used language software to count how many “cognitive” words each person used. During the first dispassionate discussion, such conflict-resolution-speak had no effect on the participants’ cytokines, but in the second, more stressful session, those who used more analytical language showed smaller chemical increases.
The study is significant because it’s one of the first to link language with biological markers and show what kinds of words help sparring couples rather than just recommending they “communicate more,” explains James Pennebaker, chair of the department of psychology at the University of Texas-Austin, who has studied the role of language on relationships. Cognitive words are powerful because their use suggests people are working through a problem and trying to acknowledge a partner’s perspective. This jibes with the common wisdom given by couples’ therapists, who suggest that bickering duos tell each other, “What I understand you’re saying is …”
But why aren’t husbands and wives helped equally by measured language? Pennebaker speculates that since participants are listening to each other’s stories and trying to come to terms with them, a woman’s articulation might help a man see complexities so that he feels less stressed. But since women generally spend more time than men analyzing relationships—and talking to others about them—they may have already sorted through the angles on their own. “He might be at square one, and she’s saying, ‘Duh! I knew this all along,’ ” offers Pennebaker. Thus, his cognitive contribution didn’t create enough of an emotional response to disrupt her cytokine levels.
It’s a disconcerting commentary on men’s role in relationship talks, but her chemical nonreaction doesn’t necessarily mean she’s not taking him seriously. Many women place a high value on such discussions and might be more focused on the fact that one is taking place rather than the particular language used, explains Deborah Tannen, professor of linguistics at Georgetown and author of You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. In other words, she cares that he’s in the chair tackling their problems; how many conflict-resolution words he uttered during a session wouldn’t matter enough to alter her body chemistry.
Sarah Elizabeth Richards is the author of Motherhood Rescheduled: Five Women, Five Quests to Stop the Biological Clock to be published in summer 2010. Get the latest by joining the mailing list at www.motherhoodrescheduled.com.
SNL: Equal Opportunity Objectifiers
Jon Hamm spent most of the Saturday Night Live episode he hosted last night shirtless.
Confessions of a Woman Comedy Writer
Allison Silverman accepts one from New York Women in Film & Television (and tells us why it's rare).
Comments
Straight men need to learn
By: musa | Sun, 01/03/2010 - 00:52
Straight men need to learn how to accept being inferior and submissive to women and gay men. I think its wonderful that women are learning how to dominate men. Facesitting and masochism are just the beginning.
Circular Reasoning
By: Mr. Magoo | Fri, 11/27/2009 - 13:09
Reminds me of an article I read where researchers at Smith College determined that female humor is a higher form of humor than men's. The reason: men tended to enjoy physical humor more than women, and as physical humor was a "lower" form of humor than other types (Really? You mean like Lucille Ball?), ergo women's humor was superior.
As many others have pointed out, this small study, while intriguing in its own right, has nothing to do with the author's conclusions.
Odd conclusions.
By: Mark | Wed, 11/25/2009 - 12:10
"But since women generally spend more time than men analyzing relationships—and talking to others about them—they may have already sorted through the angles on their own. “He might be at square one, and she’s saying, ‘Duh! I knew this all along,’ ” offers Pennebaker. Thus, his cognitive contribution didn’t create enough of an emotional response to disrupt her cytokine levels."
This seems like an illogical leap. The amount of time spent analyzing a relationship is mostly meaningless given that we operate with imperfect information. If one presumes to fully understand the motives of their partner, one is essentially projecting their own assumptions onto the other without actually establishing any kind of validity. There is no evidence that the women are offering any real "cognitive contribution" that is greater than their male partners, no matter how much time they spend on an issue. I have been in many relationships with women in which they believed they fully understood my own views, opinions, and thoughts when, in reality, they were building their cases on a figurative house of cards.
Perhaps if the study explicitly asked both parties to make note of their understanding of an issue and their understanding of their partner’s perspectives, we could start drawing some limited conclusions…
I have always used so-called "cognitive" words in my fights, though I tend to view them as qualifying words; I want to let my SO understand that anything I say is framed within "my" viewpoints and are not meant to be the concrete truth or to discredit her own view.
The issue I have always found is that my females partners have become upset when I acknowledge and accept what they're saying, but recognize that it only their own personal beliefs and opinions, just as my statements are also simply my own opinions and views. There is some kind of general rejection that multiple viewpoints can exist on various subjects, that recollections can differ, or that the emotional values and expectations that one partner holds are not always shared or found with the other partner.
There really is nothing in the article that would lead to any real conclusions that aren’t loaded with personal bias. We might as well just assume that the men are simply happier when a woman uses more finessed, qualified language that doesn’t make them feel “henpecked”, but that women see no reduced cytokine levels because they are still frustrated over their partner’s unwillingness to accede to their views.
Study Proves the Opposite
By: Nurnen | Wed, 11/25/2009 - 05:29
This study does NOT poke holes in the theory that women are prone to irrationality. In fact in ENFORCES them. Consider that it is RATIONAL an argument would be less stressful when using these cognitive words. If used constructively, they would lead to logical statements, cause and effect observations, and personal reflection. The fact that these cognitive words had no effect on a woman reenforces the sterotype that women are less logical in a stressful situation and prone to irrationality that does not lead to conflict resolution. The fact that the author draws any other conclusion proves she's a woman. Sheesh!
Re: Angst Dumpster (Ian Blokesworth)
By: grackle | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 18:44
Ian, I identify completely with your idea of the Angst Dumpster. From what I've heard, it isn't always the man who is the Angst Dumpster, but I have observed that many relationships, mine included, have a designated Angst Dumpster whose fate is to sympathize, conciliate, and absorb negative emotions. It ought to be context-sensitive, with comfort doled out by either partner as the situation requires, but it isn't. I found that out when I got food poisoning and had to sympathize from my bed while my girlfriend vented angrily about how it was screwing up our plans for the weekend. I made the mistake of yelling (as best I could) "How do you think I feel!? I just threw up on the carpet and I'm shaking with chills under three blankets..." yadda yadda yadda. The retaliatory outpouring of anger and hurt feelings was swift and overwhelming and I will NEVER think of doing such a thing again. She wins. I'm the Angst Dumpster. I calmed her down and apologized.
Funny how a person can seem completely nice and normal 95% of the time but turn out to be so selfish about that one particular thing. I can still count on her to help me out when I need it on anything else, but emotional support is my job, never hers.
Pokes holes or confirms?
By: Jiggs | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 18:36
"The takeaway? The study nicely pokes holes in the stereotype that women are prone to emotional irrationality"
Really? That isn't what I took away from it. It seems to me that the study CONFIRMED that women can be prone to emotional irrationality. How else to explain the fact that using facts and analytical terms had NO EFFECT on them? They had already made up their minds that they are right and know everything there is to know therefore nothing their husbands say has any impact on them! I know that sounds extreme but it is what the study says.
Men are literal-minded when it comes to relationships
By: grackle | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:51
My two cents: the "cognitive" words make the discussion more literal, which is easier for men to follow. For example, a woman might communicate that a man has damaged her trust by accusing the man of not loving her or sleeping with her friends. From the woman's perspective, she is clearly communicating that the man's actions have left her angry and distrustful. To the man, it seems like she actually believes the literal statements she is making. He is extremely distressed by the accusations and feels helpless to respond. When asked to use cognitive words to say what she thinks or feels, the woman will revert to a literal mode of communication and explain that because the man said or did a particular thing, she feels angry and distrustful.
This is the same reason men are baffled by the question, "What is this really about?" When a man gets upset by something a woman thinks is unimportant, the simplest explanation to her is that he's actually upset about something else and using an arbitrarily chosen dispute to communicate his emotions. The man has an uphill battle to convince her that he actually cares enough about the topic at hand to be upset about it.
not all women have husbands
By: jevs | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:19
us married lesbians couples fight too! i wish relationship research was done on other sorts of relationships, too.
seriously?
By: Annie K | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 17:14
As a woman who is patently insensitive, I find this kind of article to be malarkey. Being able to fight constructively has to do with intent, your own ability to check your ego, and yes, word choice. But saying that women are somehow more or less rational based on their word choice is silly. First off, "emotional irrationality" is a perception from the Alpha Male camp. The fact is, men get angry all the time, and are rude to people, but other men and women "just deal with it" because "he's just being a guy." Emotions are irrational by nature. The way we deal with those "irrational" feelings varies from person to person. There are plenty of cry-baby/screaming fit guys out there. I know, I used to date them. I stopped dating them when I dealt with my own issues and instituted a "no crazies rule." Because we attract only what we're capable of giving ourselves.
My boyfriend and I don't fight often, maybe a few times a year, but when we do, we have a pattern: Each person explains their side, then each person rehashes what they understand the other person's argument was, and clarifies their points. Then a separation where both parties distract themselves, the funnier the better. Share the funny, share a laugh, apologize, fight over.
Not that hard. Unless your ego is the size of the house, you're already emotionally damaged, or you're out to make the other person suffer. All these studies are essentially worthless. The thesis should be: Most people are seriously messed up and it's a wonder anyone manages to get married, let alone have babies and stay together without our homicide rate being higher than it is. The cure could be therapy, or realizing that you are not a perfect, entitled being and that a relationship is a partnership not a war. But the answer is not in using words to try to make your husband calmer so you can win the argument. Or saying your wife is "irrational" and should be ignored.
nails wrote "Perhaps the
By: Ian Blokesworth | Tue, 11/24/2009 - 16:24
nails wrote "Perhaps the women aren't actually listening to those words."
These arguments are about the time required to allow for the bio-chemical build-up and let down. For men, this build-up, let down is compressed while for women this can last up to four hours and sometimes days. The smell of burnt hair lingers.