#turningtoward

Imagine three different scenarios, each one starting the same way--

Bill and Susan are sitting together at the breakfast table. Bill’s looking at his iPad; Susan’s looking over some documents on her laptop in preparation for a meeting; and the radio’s on in the background.  Susan says, as she listens to the morning’s traffic report on the radio, “Ugh, sounds like a lousy morning’s commute.”

In scenario number one, Bill responds with, “Yuck, you’re going to have a rough start to your morning.”

In scenario number two, Bill makes no response at all, simply continuing to read his iPad and drink his coffee.

In scenario number three, Bill snaps, “Hey, I’m trying to read here.”

The three scenarios not only are different in nature, but they’re also different in effect and outcome. Number one is what we’ll call “turning toward”. Number two is “turning away.” And number three is “turning against.” (These terms are adapted from John Gottman’s, The Marriage Clinic.)

When one partner turns toward the other, as in #1, the marital bond is strengthened. There is a feeling of connectedness that nourishes the relationship experience. No matter how small the manifest content of the exchange, the fact that one partner responded to the other in a positive way (in this case, sympathetic) carries all the value of a positive interpersonal event.

When one partner turns away from the other, as in #2, a disconnection occurs. Even though there was no outright hostility in the turning away, there was essentially a rejection of one partner by the other. Bill’s failure to respond to Susan’s comment was, at the very least, an opportunity missed. Here was a chance to make a connection and the opportunity was lost. Worse, Susan might experience the lack of response as disinterest on Bill’s part. Since there was an absence of response from Bill, Susan could read pretty much anything into the event, dependent solely on her own history of having interpersonal overtures ignored.

When one partner turns against the other, as in #3, the effects can be significantly negative, even if the rejecting partner is simply momentarily testy or distracted. The rejection can feel like a rejection of the partner rather than a rejection of this particular conversation or its timing. The result can be hurt, anger, even fear.

The longer term effects of the three different events can be surprisingly substantial, especially when any one of them is part of a pattern between the partners.

“Turning toward” creates an expectation that the partner will be responsive, that communication will be a rewarding experience that brings two people closer together. As with any behavior that is reinforced, it is likely to occur more often. Consequently, there are regular opportunities for closeness and connection, leading to more and stronger bonds between partners. The stronger bonds are more resilient and more capable of withstanding challenges or stress.

“Turning away” creates the expectation that overtures will be unrewarding and do nothing to carry a relationship forward. As with any behavior that is not reinforced, it tends to become less frequent. As fewer overtures are made, fewer opportunities for connection occur. The bonds of the relationship are less frequently nourished, and therefore become more fragile. Smaller things cause greater damage. Partners may not even recognize the slow, corrosive process that is occurring and simply find themselves surprised at their own growing indifference or loneliness.

“Turning against” creates an experience that is punitive. Punishment, if sufficiently unpleasant, means that the provoking behavior (an interpersonal overture) will be actively avoided in order to avoid the highly negative consequence. The likelihood that such a provocation (communication) will recur plummets, effectively eliminating opportunities for connection. The marital bond is now in a state of starvation. Avoidance is more powerful here than approach or attraction and will, sooner or later, contribute to a terminal condition for the relationship.

We are all continuously in a situation of teaching people what to expect of us. If we teach our partners that we are sources of positive experience, good things will predictably follow. If we teach our partners that we are sources of emptiness or rejection, then our partners will learn that and will modify their behavior accordingly.

—   nearly passive (nodding)

—   low energy (“okay” “sure”)

—   attentive (validation, opinions, thoughts, feelings, questions)

—   high energy (full focus, enthusiasm, empathy)

This has the most positive results because it tells the other person you hear them, are interested in and understand them (or would like to), they are on your side, would like to help you (whether they can or not), be with you (whether they can or not), and accept you (even if they don’t accept all your behavior)