12. What's Your Attachment Style?

In my life coaching class, the trainer pointed us to an online self-assessment site administered by UPenn's Dr. Martin Seligman, who heads their Positive Psychology Center.

There is one test that may be useful in your dating life because it gives an easy-to-understand result along with a short explanation of what it indicates.  Go to the Authentic Happiness site here, register, and then take the "Close Relationship" questionnaire -- be sure to read and follow the instructions.  The tests are free, and you can see the results right away.

If you find that your attachment style fits with how you envision a good long-term relationship for yourself, then you can be glad that your style is naturally on the right track.

If you find that your attachment style is problematic for or sabotages your vision for a good long-term relationship, don't lose heart.  Be glad to learn what you don't want in a relationship, and then you can begin to consider making some changes to counteract your natural tendency.

If you're already in a relationship, see if your partner would be willing to register and take the test with you.  If nothing else, it can spark discussions about what comes easily versus what is difficult in the relationship, and maybe lead to ideas for what you can both do differently to make things work well.

Let me know whether you find this useful!

11. From dating to the magical 5:1 ratio

I received thumbs up on Post #10 from readers (male and female alike) who are currently in happy relationships -- thanks for letting me know!  It seems that they view creating and maintaining their relationships an active, improvisational art, and they reap the rewards in overwhelmingly positive perceptions about and feelings for their partners, and a secure sense of self from feeling truly loved.

In the last post, I pointed out that researcher John Gottman, et al., found that couples expressing nonverbal cues and narratives about each other of at least 5 positives for each negative ended up staying happily together; and self-described happiest couples had a ratio of up to 20:1.

So scientific observations aside, how do two people who are just getting to know each other arrive at this magical 5:1 ratio?

One way is to follow some olden rules:  be kind to and appreciative of each other, avoid being critical, and be quick to forgive.  However, I find this set of advice simplistic and faulty because it allows a couple to ignore certain fundamental issues.

For an example, if my partner is immature, selfish, and ignores my needs regularly, my being consistently kind, non-critical, forgiving, and appreciative of her good qualities will make her very happy.  However, she may never learn why ignoring my needs will lead me to become unfulfilled or resentful.  She may even believe that everything is fine and that I'm perfectly content because I express only positivity to her.

For another example, if my partner and I both hold these rules of behavior as sacred, there is nothing to prevent us from falling into the trap of conflict- and risk-avoidance.  Over time, settling for what wouldn't rock the boat of our relationship can make individual happiness seem beside the point.  We may automatically suppress any difference of opinion, dissatisfaction with the relationship, or need for personal growth beyond what the relationship currently provide.

Without incorporating in-depth knowledge of each other's thinking, wishes and dreams, behaviors, and values, there is no way to truly appreciate each other.  Without that knowledge, you can't challenge each other to stretch and grow to become more than you currently are, or to live out that vision of your ideal future.  And without that striving and growth, how dreary and dull the rest of life will be!

While every relationship has its proverbial honeymoon period, it should not hold you back from figuring out who each other is as early as possible.  As an alternative to the old set of rules, I suggest the following communication habits to explore, stimulate, and stretch each other:

1. Learn what your date is looking for in life by regularly asking how he/she envisions the ideal future, and share your own vision.  This will give you an idea of whether you are enthusiastic for a future together, or whether a few dates will suffice.
2. Tell your date what you enjoy and value about him/her, his/her behavior, and why.  This will get you used to thinking about and appreciating what matters to you, while letting your date know you feel and what matters to you.
3. If your date behaves in a way that you feel devalues you or is incompatible with building your relationship,  point this out in a timely manner, ask for the reason, and tell why it struck you as negative.  This will get you used to tackling difficult issues, while allowing your date to reveal his/her level of self-awareness, how he/she handles conflict, and how he/she responds to challenges.  If you learn through this conversation and subsequent behavior that your date is flawed but willing to be more considerate, then you have found an excellent reason to value and praise your date.  On the other hand, if he/she ignores, dismisses, or responds aggressively to your concerns, then you have found evidence that he/she's not the right partner for you.
4. If your date brings up an issue about your behavior, be prepared to listen openly, ask why it's perceived negatively (especially if you don't know!) and seriously consider whether a change to your behavior would serve you in the long run.  This will get you used to being open to the good influences of another person.
5. Lastly, encourage your date to do the same with you so that the benefits won't be one-sided.

Over time, you will change physically and emotionally, your vision of the ideal future may change, and what you appreciate about a partner may also change.  If you and your partner practice the art of improvisational, authentic communication regularly, getting to that 5:1 ratio will become second-nature!

10. Which chemistry is the right chemistry?

Having read a number of books written by single authors sharing their experiences playing the dating field (and who continue on in their single state at the end of the books, incidentally), I find that they all have difficulty determining the type of chemistry to prioritize.

They generally give the top spot to "physical chemistry"--that excitement generated by someone's physical appearance, the feel of their touch and kiss, the quality of their voice, and/or their ability to have the great sex with you--and then are baffled when things don't work out.

Understand that I'm an enthusiastic supporter (and beneficiary) of physical chemistry.  However, while physical chemistry will make a good relationship even better, it does not create a good relationship.  In fact, a not-so-good relationship will eventually sour the best of physical chemistry.

On the other hand, as I'd discussed earlier in post #5, positive "relational chemistry" will enhance physical chemistry.  Build a solid foundation for the house first, build the house, and THEN decorate it.

To give you a simplistic summary of what constitutes relational chemistry in a new couple, I take liberty in paraphrasing John Gottman's, et al., longitudinal research on factors that predict with 87% accuracy newlyweds' trajectory toward a happy marriage, a stable but unhappy marriage, or divorce:

• Positive perceptions of each other's behaviors and qualities and the relationship, as demonstrated by how the couple talks about and interacts with each other (including display of fondness, affection, complimenting, teasing, humor, smiling, touching, turning, using "we," etc.)  For couples that are predicted to have a happy marriage, the ratio of positive versus negative interplay is 5 to 1, respectively.  For comparison, the couples most happy with their marriage have a ratio of up to 20 to 1, whereas the couples that later divorce have a ratio of 0.8 to 1. 
• In the face of negativity or in conflict situations that inevitably come up, for those predicted to have a happy marriage, one partner exercises de-escalating and "repairing" abilities that are effective in "soothing" the partner experiencing heightened (physiological) stress.  Examples of de-escalation and repairing include putting a brake on the escalating conflict, acknowledging the situation, taking responsibility, saying sorry, giving the other authentic attention, using humor, or showing other signs of care; note that as a couple gains more experience with each other, these tactics will be effective only if the relationship has a history of being perceived positively by both partners.

You can read some of the research papers (including the minor differences for same-sex couples) here, and see the 4-part video of a Gottman lecture here.

Most happy couples did not read this research or use this research as a roadmap for building their relationship--they mostly improvised.  Nonetheless, I'm sure that like me, they would wholeheartedly agree that the research tracks consistently with relationships we've observed around us:  the good and great ones, the ailing ones, and the ones that broke up.

So my advice is this:  as you're dating, rather than spend too much time getting "sexy" to keep a date interested, pay close attention to the following:

1. Perceptions expressed by you and your date, verbally and non-verbally, while
• Describing each other to someone else; or
• Describing you and your date's shared experiences to someone else.
2. How you and your date interact during a sensitive or tense discussion, or while handling a difficult/problematic situation.

Where you may find it difficult to be attentive and objective in the moment, you can ask trusted friends/family members to tell you what they observe in your interactions.

Thanks to Alma Lafler for making me aware of John Gottman and his colleagues' research--this is fascinating work.

9. Consider the quiet ones for a change

We visited friends this past week in the North Country--we'll call the place Crystal Lake--where the cell signal is so weak you might as well shut the phone off.

While enjoying the meditative state that inevitably sets in, I was drawn to the many parallels between this jewel of a place and the most overlooked type of people on the dating scene--the quiet ones.

First, here's a picture of Crystal Lake for you:  nestled in rolling hills, bounded by a pine forest, a bungalow with porch facing the clear water, with no visible neighbors except a duo of nesting loons.  It's a place with deep history, natural beauty, impossibly lazy days, and starlit night sky.  Its stewards over time have carefully guarded it to preserve the best of itself.

Now, here are the parallels with people who are quiet--those thought of as "shy" by some:

There is no advertisement.  If you didn't know to look for it, you wouldn't be able to find it.  Likewise, quiet people aren't going to speak up around those they don't know well, and are not inclined to compete for the spotlight.  Next to Sociable, Dramatic, Comedic, Tragic, Loud, or Self Important, you will not easily notice Quiet in the crowd unless your senses are attuned.

You have to go the extra mile.  Just as Crystal Lake is not easily accessible without an investment of time and effort to get there, a quiet person requires time and effort to get to know.

There is a high barrier of entry.  You will not be invited there simply by being charming or by paying dollars.  Rather, you have to earn the steward's trust.  Most quiet people I know are not likely to let just anyone into his/her trust, even if it's a friend's friend.

Competition won't be as tough.  Crystal Lake won't ever be overrun with visitors because it doesn't offer any manufactured excitement.  Same with quiet people--they tend to be overlooked by others since they don't call attention to themselves.  You won't have to jostle with a flock of preeners or squawkers to be noticed, therefore you can dispense with rehearsed pick up routines or a slick act.

Quietness should not be equated with a lack of preference or edginess.  It's easy to be lulled into believing that such an accommodating place has no expectations or challenges--that it's there to serve you.  In fact, the place rejects ATVs, speedboats, noisy gadgets, badly-behaved people and pets, and pointless chatter.  It wants melodic harmonies, unending, silly board games, delicious meals thrown together with everyone pitching in, and deep, authentic sharing.  It'll surprise one with prehistoric-looking insects, angry lightning storms, perfect luna moths, and animal jaw bones half buried in the woods.  As long as one is open-minded, these surprises add interest to its attractions.  Quiet people will reveal what make them tick and in what ways they are attractive and interesting, if you make the effort to find out.

You have to behave like a caretaker to be invited back.  Don't expect a guaranteed return ticket just because you were invited there once.  You have to continue to demonstrate your respect for the place and its character, be willing to protect and preserve its privacy, and either restore it to the state you found it or make it better in the right spirit.  With quiet people, you also have to continue to show that you care and value the person and the relationship.  If you are persistent in your care and attention, you will be rewarded with loyalty and tenacious love not easily diluted over time.

Just think what beauty, depth, and fulfilling relationship you may find if you take a chance on a quiet one.

Do you agree or disagree?  Post your comments or email me your thoughts!

8. How to get to know a stranger quickly

A couple of days ago, I had a really interesting discussion with Alma about the challenges of getting to know people in the academic classroom setting, when it's the only place where you have contact.

I think a couple of the points from our discussion are applicable to the dating scene, especially to Bunni's comment under the fourth post that it's very difficult to get to know someone's deeper qualities based on what they tell you on first or second dates.

Point #1:  It's much easier to figure out people's strengths, weaknesses, tendencies, and credibility when you are able to observe them in any activity that requires demonstration of dependability, skills, knowledge, ability and interaction with others while under the pressure to perform.

For example, Alma got to know her sailing teammates (and to a lesser extent people on other teams) in a compressed period of time through direct observation and indirect corroboration by:

• Seeing who shows up on time prepared to work out, practice and race.
• Sailing with different people on a 2-person boat at practices and regattas.
• Hearing others comment on their current and past experiences sailing with each other.
• Hearing coaches comment on how individuals and pairs performed in a variety of situations, and give critique on how they can improve.
• Observing people's behavior and communication during regattas, and when not racing.
• Seeing how people respond to wins and losses, and when receiving comments and critiques.
• On long trips to regattas, swapping stories about family and friends, and discussing/debating ideas or topics that come up.
• At social events, seeing what people's friends are like, how they interact with others.

Taken together, these are optimal opportunities within a two to three month period to observe and learn about someone's patterns of behavior in terms of self-motivation and motivation of others, resiliency, communication style, relationships, sense of humor, concern for others, appreciation of others' contributions to the team, openness to input and making improvements, problem-solving ability and style, performance under stress, and passion, commitment, and follow-through.

In summary, you can figure out whether a person is one you can rely on and learn from; with whom you can grow, have fun and spend most of your time; who will appreciate you for who you are and what you offer; and will build relationships with those you care about.

Point #2:  Assuming that you have no contact with a person outside limited settings such as the classroom (or on dates at coffee shops and restaurants), you have only their words, voice, body language, attendance and timeliness of arrival (or phone call/text messages) to observe.  You may be able to piece together bits and pieces of the authentic person, but you are seeing discrete slices of the person in a short period of time, and without any benefit of third-party confirmation.  This dilemma makes it easy for one to assume the wrong things about someone -- both good and bad.

Short of inviting yourself over for three days or joining a sports team together when dating someone, what can you do to size up and figure out a stranger quickly?

While this may take some wily planning on your part, before deciding whether to be exclusive with someone,

1. learn from him/her the activity(ies) or field(s) which is a source of enjoyment and pride, and in which he/she is an active participant.
2. Engage the help of someone from within your own circle who has expertise in (or deep knowledge of) that activity or field.
3. Create an opportunity with sufficient time allowance for the expert to thoroughly assess your date, both when you're present and when you're not, to see how his/her behavior changes.

My husband's favorite example, being a basketball player, is Michelle asking her basketball coach brother, Craig Robinson, to give Barack Obama the once over after they began dating.  Read a version of it on Esquire.  Even if you're not looking for presidential material, having someone whose judgment you trust observe your date's performance and reflect on the implications for his/her character is an invaluable way to get that reality check.

Don't despair if your immediate circle is rather homogeneous -- reach outside the circle.  In my immediate circle, I can count on people who have deep knowledge of finances, basketball, medicine, music recording and performance, veterinary medicine, small car racing, cooking, art-making, and linguistics.  If I reach outside of my immediate circle, I can also tap into the world of fundraising, poetry, triathlons, marketing, modern dancing, physics, investment banking, architecture, translation, fashion design, military history, to name a few.

Here's the point:  You don't have to figure someone out on your own based on limited information -- get a fuller picture of someone's true character by observing him/her in active pursuit of an interest or passion before you commit.  Sound reasonable?

7. The difficulty of getting beyond the superficial stuff

I remember receiving the printed “face book” the first day I arrived at college. This was before the Internet was popularized, when the equivalent of online dating was through personal ads in newspapers.

I'm sure that most of us in the class made conjectures about our classmates’ likability, coolness, and date-ability based only on the listings of name, hometown, secondary school, and 1”x1.25” b/w photo. And if someone’s photo was not printed, there was even more speculation about what that meant.

Asked directly, we would probably all have agreed that the college admissions office had vetted each person for possessing a certain level of intelligence, strength of character, and drive for learning and achievement, and that our two dimensional face book entries couldn't possibly have summed us sufficiently. However, this knowledge did not prevent most of us from making up stories and unfounded judgments about others.

In our defense, the human brain strives to create an understandable pattern using limited information interpreted through our varied upbringing and experiences. While this is not in itself a bad thing, research shows that unless we are making choices for others or are offered choices specifically in a longer-term context, our brain defaults to short-term thinking with a preference for instant gratification. You can read more about this research here.

It should come as no surprise that when asked what is desired in a mate, many single people list off attributes that fall under the instantly gratifying category: good looks, admirable physical build, profession, income level, interests and activities, etc. These surface qualities are easy to identify, but as discussed in the fourth post, can have little or no correlation to the intrinsic stuff like motivations and drivers, values, and integrity of action – the stuff that is significant for fit as a mate.

While these intrinsic qualities are revealed to others over time through shared experiences, they may be hidden to one self. I’m sure that you can think of at least one person you know well whose self-image is vastly different from the actual person.

Faced with these natural impediments to good judgment, what does one do when trawling through online profiles or meeting someone new?

Here are my suggestions, at a bird’s eye level:

1. Get to know your authentic self: Do self-assessment to get to know your own intrinsic qualities.
2. Train yourself to approach new profiles and people as if you are seeking a mate for a good friend, with a focus on detecting and learning the person’s intrinsic qualities.
3. If you feel uncertain or weak in assessing profiles or people's character, consider asking someone you know to be your dating advisor; this should be someone who:
• You trust, and
• Is objective and a good judge of people’s character; and
• if possible, have experience with happy relationships.

What do you think?

6. Happy Couple = Highest Performing Team?

This is one of my favorite subjects, hands down.

I love happy couples -- they radiate good stuff to others:  good smiles, good feelings, homes that are comfortable to others, good arguments, good stories.   Some even have well-trained pets and/or raise good kids.  You want to spend time with them because it's obvious that they enjoy each other's company, and they generously include others in their happiness.

A happy couple doesn't need an audience to show that they value and care about each other because it's their daily reality.  They don't shy away from their problems or bear pain silently because they understand that friction, difficulties, and differences of opinion won't break their relationship apart, but can make it stronger.  They don't fear exposure of their weaknesses because doing so allows them to work on bringing out the best in each other.

What makes them this way?

From my own anecdotal observations, it's because all the happy couples have these requirements:

1. Both people value the same lifestyle and share a vision for the future
2. They have very different personalities and drives, and value these differences in each other
3. They continually give to each other emotionally and physically
4. They work on and resolve individual and common problems together 

You will notice that I left off things like common interests or activities.  While they're nice to have, they actually matter much less than people think.

In the working world, the high performing team is a close parallel because it requires members that have different but complementary skills, knowledge, and abilities, and have different ways of thinking.  They must be able to communicate regularly and authentically with each other to identify and analyze problems and situations, and generate and debate new ideas and approaches to solve existing and new problems.  They must be able to figure out and appreciate what motivates others, give recognition for what each person brings to the table, learn from/mentor/teach others, and trust that each person is committed to thinking and working to strengthen each other and the team.  Individuals in the team may take on a variety of roles depending on what is needed, ranging from doing routine tasks to organizing, or researching to leading the team.  Lastly, in order for there to be a sense of shared investment in and reward from being part of the team, each person must wholeheartedly support where the team is headed and what they're trying to achieve.

Where the team parallel ends is at the emotional and sexual:  Happy couples can and do get very angry with each other, occasionally saying or doing hurtful things.  They are comfortable revealing deeply personal thoughts to each other.  Also, it's a good thing for couples to spend aimless, leisure time together, and feel romantic love and lust for each other -- kissing, hugging and having sex -- as much and whenever possible, in fact.

Why does any of this matter to you -- a single person seeking a mate?  My idea is that these basic happy couples requirements can be used to guide your search.  Below are some question that you should ask yourself, no dodging or platitudes.  After you find your own answers, pose them when you meet with your dates.  If nothing else, these questions could make for interesting date discussions.

• Lifestyle and Vision for the Future (should be the same or very similar to yours):

1. What type of lifestyle do you want?  How is it different from your life now?
2. How would you like to be able to describe the life you led when you're 80 or 90 years old?  Why?
3. Are you happy at work?  Why/Why not?

• Personalities and Drives (should be different from and complementary to yours)

1. What are you good at?  What do you need help with?
2. What do you enjoy spending time doing?  Why?
3. What do you hate doing?  Why?
4. What do your friends complement you for?  What are their complaints about you?

• Giving to others emotionally (see whether your date has meaningful relationships with others, and show appreciation for different personalities)

1. Who do you spend most of your free time with?  Why?
2. Who are the people you implicitly trust?  Why?
3. What's your family like?  Who are you close to and why?

• Self-awareness, approach to solving problems:

1. Why do you think you're driven to do the things that you like to do?
2. What are you dissatisfied with in your life?  Why?  What are you doing to change that?
3. What wouldn't you ever change in your life?  Why not?
4. Why are you dating now?  What are you hoping you'll find in a date?

If you try these questions, let me know what kind of results you get!