The Effects of Venting

We've all had those days, where it just seems like everything has gone wrong and the Universe is conspiring against our happiness. Or when a friend, family member or significant other has suddenly decided to be the dumbest person on the planet. In these moments, sometimes we just feel the need to let off some steam - talk to someone about what's happening and make sure we're not crazy, that these things are really happening to us! Often times we even say "I just need to vent," implying that we'll just say our piece, the negativity will escape our bodies, and we'll no longer be the pressure cooker that we were previously.

In the social sciences, depending on the manner an individual goes about the venting process, there are several names for it - none of them good. The first of these is the principle of rumination. The term rumination is derived from a cow's digestive process. They have what's called a ruminating stomach - meaning once they swallow something, they spit it back up into their mouth, chew it more, and then swallow it again. But that's not all! They keep doing it, until it's sufficiently broken down and passed through their four stomachs. Seriously.....gross. But it carries a key principle with it regarding venting. When people vent it's ok if they let off the steam, and find a solution to the problem, but continuing to regurgitate the matter only to chew on it and then swallow again... well, you can see how detrimental that can be. What we find is that people who ruminate on something that is displeasing in their life or their relationship actually have higher levels of depression, and are less likely to find solutions to their problems. 

Sometimes this is even taken to the level of bringing external individuals into the problem. This begins as co-rumination in simply discussing the event with the same person over and over again. Eventually, if it takes place long enough it can be called triangulation - bringing a third person into the matters surrounding the relationship. This becomes especially harmful in romantic relationships. Studies have shown that co-rumination and triangulation can lead to something called a coalition. This is when that third person becomes an ally and "takes sides" in an argument. 

While it may seem pretty intuitive as to why this is so harmful to relationships, the science shows us that when one relationship becomes stronger, another one must naturally become weaker. In the case of marital coalitions (one spouse gets another family member, child, or friend to be "on their side") the partnership between the co-ruminators becomes stronger, and the marital relationship becomes weakened. 

Now, some of this may sound extreme. However, the end result of venting doesn't always have to be marital dissolution and divorce. It can simply be a weakening of your relationship with your spouse or significant other. In maintaining strong relationships, it's important to resolve problems between one another, or with appropriate individuals such as mental health professionals or ecclesiastical leaders. 

Practice Makes Perfect

Back in the 80's when the U.S. legalized No Fault divorce we saw a huge jump in divorce rates - up to 50%. During that time we also saw a large up-tick in cohabitation rates. Most researchers looked at this and hypothesized that these couples would actually fare better than couples who just jumped straight into marriage - after all, practice makes perfect, right?

Turns out this isn't actually the case. As the years passed by, the same researchers started to look at the data and they started to see that couples that were living together before they were married were actually ending more frequently. Thirty years down the road we're now seeing the results in pre-marital child-births, continual divorce rates, and late age of marriage. Now some people have looked at this and assumed cohabitation to be the kiss of death for relationships. On the other hand, if we look at the data, what we find is that most of these studies are actually lumping all cohabiting couples together into one big group of data. But when we step back and look at it, it's pretty easy to see that couples that are living together don't all have the same goals.

A 2011 study published by Brian Willoughby divided cohabiting couples into several different categories based on each partner's trajectory toward marriage (within a year, or longer), whether they agreed on marital trajectory, and their relationship status (dating or engaged). What he found was that the factor that made cohabiting couples the most unhappy was their agreement on marriage trajectory.

For instance, let's say Bob and Sally have been living together for a year, they're engaged, and they have a date set for the following year. Jimmy and Julie live upstairs from Bob and Sally. They've been living together for 2 years and Julie wants to get married, preferably within the next year, while Jimmy still isn't sure about the whole marriage thing. What Jimmy and Julie have is an incongruence of marital trajectories. According the Willoughby's research, Bob and Sally are going to have an overall greater relationship satisfaction, with better perception of communication and less likely to feel like their relationship is "on the rocks" - regardless of the fact that they've been together longer.

Willoughby reports that "being in either an incongruent engaged or incongruent non-engaged cohabiting relationship was associated with generally negative outcomes compared to other types of couples." And as you read through his entire article, what the statistics start to unravel is this idea of both people being on the same timeline. While the happiest and most stable of all of the couples were those who are living together and plan to marry within the next year, it's almost no contest that the unhappiest and most unstable of all of the couples are those who - whether living together or not and engaged or not - disagree on where their relationship is going.

Is communication the root of all evil?

Normally I'm a sworn skeptic to anything proclaiming to be relationship advice on Huffington Post, but this time I was pleasantly surprised! I came across this article and I thought "This guy knows what's up!" Turns out he's a clinical psychologist who specializes in marriage and family relationships.

He discusses how the inability to communicate is often blamed as one of the primary causes of relationship break down. The point that he makes is that often times, there are things looming around that cause the bad communication in the first place, and he's totally right, but there's a piece of research done by Dr. John Gottman that I think is really important to note here called accepting influence.

Dr. Flanagan touches on it a little bit in his article, but doesn't totally tie it together. Basically couples inevitably have complaints within relationships, and when concerns are brought up, the manner in which partners respond says a lot about the relationship. This is where Flanagan's principles of shame, ego, power and empathy come in. There are three ways partners can respond to requests - they can turn away from their partner, toward them, or against them. The only one of these responses that is related to positive outcomes is turning toward a partner - seeking to understand their point of view and either changing, or working out a compromise.

This is especially important for husbands. Research shows that women tend to bring a larger amount of complaints to the table, and the more often they are met with understanding and empathy, the more likely a relationship is to survive. As Gottman explains it, responding any other way is "simply winning the battle, but losing the war."

Families are the ultimate institution to teach us selflessness and sacrifice, and as the research shows us over and over again, sacrificing our own ego and wants in a relationship to respond selflessly to a spouse are what opens up communication, and allows resolution and healing to take place in times of conflict. So yes, as Flanagan explains in his article, marital communication " like the kid who fights back on the playground...He didn't create the problem; he was reacting to the problem. But he's the one who gets caught." Next time communication seems to be in a bit of a rut, try running through another checklist:

• Ego
• Power
• Shame
• Empathy