Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution

Last updated

The Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution (also known as Gottman's Four Horsemen) is a relational communications theory that proposes four critically negative behaviors that lead to the breakdown of marital and romantic relationships. [1] The model is the work of psychological researcher John Gottman, a professor at the University of Washington and founder of The Gottman Institute, and his research partner, Robert W. Levenson. [2] This theory focuses on the negative influence of verbal and nonverbal communication habits on marriages and other relationships. Gottman's model uses a metaphor that compares the four negative communication styles that lead to a relationship's breakdown to the biblical Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, wherein each behavior, or horseman, compounds the problems of the previous one, leading to total breakdown of communication. [1]

Contents

Background

Gottman's and Levenson's research focuses on differentiating failed and successful marriages and notes that nonverbal emotional displays progress in a linear pattern, creating an emotional and physical response that leads to withdrawal. [1] Until the development of the model (1992-1994), little research had been conducted on specific interactive behaviors and processes that result in marital dissatisfaction, separation, and divorce. [3] [4] Gottman's and Levenson's research indicated that not all negative interactions, like anger, are predictive of relational separation and divorce. [3] But it shows a strong correlation between the presence of contempt in a marriage and the couple's likelihood of divorce.

Gottman's and Levenson's research notes that the "cascade toward relational dissolution" can be predicted by the regulation of couples' positive and negative interactions, with couples that regulate their positive-to-negative interactions significantly less likely to experience the cascade. [3] This research has been furthered by looking at ways to intervene in the cascade, and its application to other types and models of relationships. [5]

Four Horsemen of Relational Apocalypse

Gottman's and Levenson's Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse theory centers around the concept that the behaviors below work in a cascade model, in which one leads to the other, creating a continued environment of negativity and hostility. This creates marital dissatisfaction, leading to considerations of marital dissolution, separation, and permanent dissolution. [6] [4] [3] [1]

Horseman One: criticism

Criticism is the first indication of the Cascade Model and is an attack on the partner's character. [3] [7] Gottman defines criticism as a type of complaint that blames or attacks a partner's personality or character. [6] Critical comments often materialize in chained comments and are communicated in broad, absolute statements like "‘you never’" or "you always."’ Research indicates that non-regulated couples, or couples whose interaction trended more negative, engaged more frequently in criticism and were more likely to begin the Cascade of Dissolution. [4] Gottman's and Levenson's research found that wives' criticism correlated to separation and possible dissolution, but this was not so with husbands. [3]

One possible solution to avoiding criticism is to grow the culture in a marriage to include a well-held vulnerability. This means that those in the marriage should feel safe enough to express their opinions and frustrations without fear of rejection. Criticism does not allow partners to be vulnerable with each other, and their relationship can quickly deteriorate as a result. One may consider using more "I" statements and expressive language in order to overcome criticism. An example of an "I" statement is: "When I am feeling frustrated, I tend to become more irritable and begin to hyper-focus on your flaws to blame someone for my negative feelings." "I" statements allow a spouse to take responsibility for their feelings rather than blaming the other spouse for their perspective and emotional reactions. They build emotional intelligence, self-reflection, and help prevent cycles of criticism and defensiveness. [8]

Horseman Two: defensiveness

Defensiveness is a reaction to pervasive criticism that often results in responding to criticism with more criticism, and sometimes contempt, and the second level of the Cascade Model. [3] [7] Defensiveness is a protective behavior and is indicated by shifting blame and avoiding responsibility, often in an attempt to defend against the first two horsemen. [7] Defensiveness stems from an internal response to protect one's pride and self-worth. The body may go into fight-or-flight mode to protect against a perceived threat in the defensive stage. Fowler and Dillow also characterize defensiveness as using counterattack behaviors such as whining, making negative assumptions about the other's feelings, and denials of responsibility. [6] Gottman's and Levenson's research found defensiveness to be strongest among men. [4] [3]

Horseman Three: contempt

Contempt is the result of repetitive criticism and is driven by a lack of admiration and respect. [3] [7] [6] It is the third level of the Cascade Model. Contempt is expressed verbally through mocking, sarcasm, and indignation, with an attempt to claim moral superiority over one's partner. [7] It can also be indicated nonverbally, as with eye-rolling and scoffing. [6] Gottman's and Levenson's research found contempt to be the strongest predictor of relational dissolution, and the strongest overall predictor for women. [4] [3]

Horseman Four: stonewalling

Stonewalling is the final phase of the model and is a reaction to the previous three behaviors. Stonewalling occurs when parties create mental and physical distance to avoid conflict by appearing busy, responding in grunts, and disengaging from the communication process. [7] [6] Gottman's and Levenson's research found it to be most common among men and a very challenging behavior to redirect once it becomes habitual. [4] [3]

Gottman's research in predicting divorce

Predicting divorce / couple separation and how divorce can be avoided

Gottman and his team did more extensive research in follow-up to this study, testing whether or not couples who exhibited these “horseman” were more or less likely to divorce. In a longitudinal study, Gottman and his team were able to predict with 93% accuracy [9] [10] how many couples would divorce from their observations.

They found that those couples who ended up separating had the following attributes [11] [12] in their marriage:

Methodology and regulated vs. non-regulated couples

Behavioral coding systems methodology

Gottman and Levenson's primary research for this model, published in the 1990s, centered around utilizing a variety of measures, in combination, to study the conflict interactions amongst married couples. [3] [4] Gottman and Levenson physiological information garnered by polygraphs, EKGs, and pulse monitoring and behavioral information collected via survey and video recording. [4] Information collected by video was coded using the Rapid Couples Interaction Scoring System (RCISS), the Special Affect Coding System (SPAFF), and the Marital Coding Information System (MCIS). [4] RCISS consists of a thirteen-point speaker behavior and a nine-point listener checklist, which can be broken down into five positive and eight negative codes. [4] The SPAFF is "a cultural informant coding system" which considers: verbal content, tone, and context; facial expression, movement, and gestures; and body movement. [4] MCIS is the oldest and most widely used affect coding system, but is not as specific as others and is generally used in addition to other methods. [4]

Regulated and nonregulated couples

Information obtained from the RCISS and SPAFF analysis lead to the formation of the idea of regulated and non-regulated couples. Gottman and Levenson defined nonregulated couples as more prone to conflict engaging behaviors, while regulated couples tend to engage in more constructive, positive communicative behaviors. [3] [4] It is noted that not all nonregulated couples exhibit all negative affective behaviors, nor do all regulated couples exhibit all positively affected behaviors. [6] [3] [4] Gottman and Levenson proposed that maintaining marriage stability is not about the exclusion of negative behavior, but about maintaining a positive-to-negative comment ratio of around 5:1. [6] [4]

The marital typology

Gottman's research indicates that there are five types of marriages: three of which are stable and avoid entering the Cascade Model, and two that are volatile. [15] [3] All of the three stable couple types achieve a similar balance between positive and negative affect; however, this does not mean that negative interactions or communication is eliminated. [15]

Stable couple typologies

Validators

This couple mixes moderate amounts of positive and negative affect. [15] This model is the preferred model of marital counselors and is a more intimate approach focused on shared experiences; however, romance may disappear over time. [15] These couples engage in reduced persuasion attempts and do not attempt to persuade until a third of the conflict has elapsed. [15]

Volatiles

This couple type mixes high amounts of positive and negative affect. [15] These marriages tend to be quite "romantic and passionate, but [have] the risk of dissolving into endless bickering." [15] These couples engage in high levels of persuasion from the beginning of a conflict. [15]

Avoiders

This couple type mixes small amounts of positive and negative affect. [15] This type of marriage avoids the pain associated with conflict, but risks loneliness and emotional distance. [15] These couples make very few, if any, attempts to persuade each other. [15]

Volatile couple typologies

Hostile

Hostile marriages often see the husband influence both positively and negatively, but the wife only influences by being positive. [15] In general, "the wife is likely to seem quite aloof and detached to the husband, whereas he is likely to seem quite negative and excessively conflictual to her." [15]

Hostile-detached

These relationships tend to display a significantly higher rate of contempt and defensiveness. [15] Hostile-detached marriages see the husband influence both positively and negatively, but the wife only influences by being negative. [15] In these cases, "the husband is likely to seem quite aloof and detached to the wife, whereas she is likely to seem quite negative and excessively conflictual to him." [15]

Mismatch theory

This theory proposes that "hostile and hostile-detached couples simply fail to create a stable adaptation to marriage that is either volatile, validating, or avoiding." [15] The belief is that marital instability arises from a couples inability to accommodate one-another's preferences and create one of the three types of marriage. [15]

Interventions and therapeutic strategies

Proximal change interventions

Gottman and Tabres research on proximal change interventions attempts to interrupt the negative communications process by creating chances for positive influence to help alter relational dynamics and alter or repair damage done by the cascade. [16] Two interventions were implemented, a "compliments intervention" and a "criticize intervention" design to increase positivity and negativity respectively. [16] Groups were randomly assigned one of the two intervention conditions or a control group.

There was no main effect in affect from the pretest conflict discussion to the posttest conflict discussion between the interventions or control group. However, a manipulation check on how couples acted during either intervention produced a significant interaction effect. [16]

The research indicated that couples determined the effectiveness of the interventions, as many non-regulated couples who have entered the Cascade Model will "construe" interventions by coding them into criticisms and/or by communicating with contempt. [16] The effectiveness of these interventions is contingent on the continued facilitation and monitoring of interventions by therapists. [16]

Avoidance and anxiety attachment

Researchers Fowler and Dillow note that avoidance attachment can be predictive of defensiveness and stonewalling whereby an individual is reluctant to depend on others. [6] Those with avoidance attachment may also struggle to regulate negative emotions and be prone to lashing out at partners. [6] Fowler and Dillow hypothesized that avoidance attachment can be predictive through self-reports of criticism, contempt and defensiveness; however, research finding indicated that avoidance attachment was only predictive of stonewalling. [6]

Fowler and Dillow noted that anxiety attachment, characterized by over-dependence, flooding, and fear of rejection, will also predict criticism, contempt, and defensiveness as those who exhibit anxiety attachment tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies. [6]

Flooding

Flooding occurs when strong negative emotions are present within exchanges between individuals. It causes individuals to feel overwhelmed and can lead to destructive communication such as name calling and criticism. Oftentimes, individuals express that their partner's negative emotions come out of nowhere and therefore they will do what they feel is necessary to retreat from the negativity.

Individuals may begin to adopt behaviors that discourage effective communication such as becoming defensive and generating negative qualities for their partner's behavior. Further, marital satisfaction has been shown to decrease over time as couples are more aroused during conflict. This in turn causes a destructive loop of higher frequencies of flooding as well as an increase in self-isolation and destructive communication patterns.

To combat flooding, couples could try to take breaks during conflict. Doing this has proved to reduce heart rates, which in turn, reduces negative behaviors. Another way to reduce flooding is to resolve conflicts through text-based or voice communication instead of face to face. This may allow individuals to regulate their emotions with more control. [17]

Gottman method couples therapy

Research into Gottman method couples therapy has been of poor quality and is insufficient to consider the therapy as evidence-based, despite its popularity. [18]

Criticisms

Gottman has been criticized for claiming that his Cascade Model can predict divorce with over a 90% accuracy. [19] Additionally, researcher Stanley Scott and his colleagues noted that Gottman's highly publicized research findings from 1998, which recommended significant shifts in focus and application for marital educators and therapists, including the de-emphasis of anger management and active listening, has several flaws. [19] Among the concerns raised, the most significant are methodological, including Gottman and his fellow researchers not providing justification for the nonrandom selection of participants, not controlling for cultural impacts, and flaws in physiological impact analysis. [19] Concerns were also raised about the methods for observational data collection and the ambiguity of statistics tests used. [19] Stanley's findings indicate that, while Gottman's findings are interesting, there are too many unexplained methods and that additional research is needed before the overhauling Gottman's suggested. [19]

Related Research Articles

In social psychology, an interpersonal relation describes a social association, connection, or affiliation between two or more persons. It overlaps significantly with the concept of social relations, which are the fundamental unit of analysis within the social sciences. Relations vary in degrees of intimacy, self-disclosure, duration, reciprocity, and power distribution. The main themes or trends of the interpersonal relations are: family, kinship, friendship, love, marriage, business, employment, clubs, neighborhoods, ethical values, support and solidarity. Interpersonal relations may be regulated by law, custom, or mutual agreement, and form the basis of social groups and societies. They appear when people communicate or act with each other within specific social contexts, and they thrive on equitable and reciprocal compromises.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Romance (love)</span> Type of love that focuses on feelings

Romance or romantic love is a feeling of love for, or a strong attraction towards another person, and the courtship behaviors undertaken by an individual to express those overall feelings and resultant emotions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Breakup</span> Termination of an intimate relationship

A relationship breakup, breakup, or break-up is the ending of a relationship. The act is commonly termed "dumping [someone]" in slang when it is initiated by one partner. The term is less likely to be applied to a married couple, where a breakup is typically called a separation or divorce. When a couple engaged to be married breaks up, it is typically called a "broken engagement". People commonly think of breakups in a romantic aspect, however, there are also non-romantic and platonic breakups, and this type of relationship dissolution is usually caused by failure to maintain a friendship.

Assertiveness is the quality of being self-assured and confident without being aggressive to defend a right point of view or a relevant statement. In the field of psychology and psychotherapy, it is a skill that can be learned and a mode of communication. Dorland's Medical Dictionary defines assertiveness as:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Contempt</span> Disgust and anger towards something or someone

In colloquial usage, contempt usually refers to either the act of despising, or having a general lack of respect for something. This set of emotions generally produces maladaptive behaviour. Other authors define contempt as a negative emotion rather than the constellation of mentality and feelings that produce an attitude. Paul Ekman categorises contempt as the seventh basic emotion, along with anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness and surprise. Robert C. Solomon places contempt on the same emotional continuum as resentment and anger, and he argues that the differences between the three are that resentment is anger directed towards a higher-status individual; anger is directed towards an equal-status individual; and contempt is anger directed towards a lower-status individual.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intimate relationship</span> Physical or emotional intimacy

An intimate relationship is an interpersonal relationship that involves emotional or physical closeness between people and may include sexual intimacy and feelings of romance or love. Intimate relationships are interdependent, and the members of the relationship mutually influence each other. The quality and nature of the relationship depends on the interactions between individuals, and is derived from the unique context and history that builds between people over time. Social and legal institutions such as marriage acknowledge and uphold intimate relationships between people. However, intimate relationships are not necessarily monogamous or sexual, and there is wide social and cultural variability in the norms and practices of intimacy between people.

Couples therapy attempts to improve romantic relationships and resolve interpersonal conflicts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Gottman</span> American psychologist (born 1942)

John Mordecai Gottman is an American psychologist and professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Washington. His research focuses on divorce prediction and marital stability through relationship analyses. Insights from Gottman's work have significantly impacted the field of relationship counseling, aiming to enhance relationship functioning and mitigate behaviors detrimental to human relationships. Gottman's work has also influenced the development of important concepts on social sequence analysis.

Behavior modification is a treatment approach that uses respondent and operant conditioning to change behavior. Based on methodological behaviorism, overt behavior is modified with (antecedent) stimulus control and consequences, including positive and negative reinforcement contingencies to increase desirable behavior, as well as positive and negative punishment, and extinction to reduce problematic behavior.

Emotional dysregulation is characterized by an inability to flexibly respond to and manage emotional states, resulting in intense and prolonged emotional reactions that deviate from social norms, given the nature of the environmental stimuli encountered. Such reactions not only deviate from accepted social norms but also surpass what is informally deemed appropriate or proportional to the encountered stimuli.

In psychology, the theory of attachment can be applied to adult relationships including friendships, emotional affairs, adult romantic and carnal relationships and, in some cases, relationships with inanimate objects. Attachment theory, initially studied in the 1960s and 1970s primarily in the context of children and parents, was extended to adult relationships in the late 1980s. The working models of children found in Bowlby's attachment theory form a pattern of interaction that is likely to continue influencing adult relationships.

Meta-emotion is "an organized and structured set of emotions and cognitions about the emotions, both one's own emotions and the emotions of others". This broad definition of meta-emotion sparked psychologists' interest in the topic, particularly regarding parental meta-emotion philosophy.

Stonewalling is a refusal to communicate or cooperate. Such behaviour occurs in situations such as marriage counselling, diplomatic negotiations, politics and legal cases. Body language may indicate and reinforce this by avoiding contact and engagement with the other party. People use deflection in a conversation in order to render a conversation pointless and insignificant. Tactics in stonewalling include giving sparse, vague responses; refusing to answer questions; and responding to questions with additional questions. Stonewalling can be used as a stalling tactic rather than an avoidance tactic.

In interpersonal communication, an I-message or I-statement is an assertion about the feelings, beliefs, values, etc. of the person speaking, generally expressed as a sentence beginning with the word I, and is contrasted with a "you-message" or "you-statement", which often begins with the word you and focuses on the person spoken to. Thomas Gordon coined the term "I message" in the 1960s while doing play therapy with children. He added the concept to his book for parents, P.E.T.: Parent Effectiveness Training (1970). Not every message that begins with the word I is an I-message; some are statements about the speaker's perceptions, observations, assumptions, or criticisms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Donald H. Baucom</span> American psychologist

Donald H. Baucom, is a clinical psychology faculty member at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. He is recognized for founding the field of Cognitive-Behavioral Couples Therapy. Baucom is also recognized as one of the top marital therapists and most prolific researchers in this field. Currently, Baucom's National Cancer Institute funded study, CanThrive, has the largest observationally coded sample of any couples study to date.

Behavioral marital therapy, sometimes called behavioral couples therapy, has its origins in behaviorism and is a form of behavior therapy. The theory is rooted in social learning theory and behavior analysis. As a model, it is constantly being revised as new research presents.

The Building Strong Families Program (BSF) is part of the Healthy Marriage Initiative funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, "to learn whether well-designed interventions can help couples fulfill their aspirations for a healthy relationship, marriage, and a strong family."

Marriage and health are closely related. Married people experience lower morbidity and mortality across such diverse health threats as cancer, heart attacks, and surgery. There are gender differences in these effects which may be partially due to men's and women's relative status. Most research on marriage and health has focused on heterosexual couples, and more work is needed to clarify the health effects on same-sex marriage. Simply being married, as well as the quality of one's marriage, has been linked to diverse measures of health. Research has examined the social-cognitive, emotional, behavioral and biological processes involved in these links.

The Vulnerability-Stress-Adaptation (VSA) Model is a framework for conceptualizing the dynamic processes of marriage, created by Benjamin Karney and Thomas Bradbury. The VSA Model emphasizes the consideration of multiple dimensions of functioning, including couple members’ enduring vulnerabilities, experiences of stressful events, and adaptive processes, to account for variations in marital quality and stability over time. The VSA model was a departure from past research considering any one of these themes separately as a contributor to marital outcomes, and integrated these separate factors into a single, cohesive framework in order to best explain how and why marriages change over time. In adherence with the VSA model, in order to achieve a complete understanding of marital phenomenon, research must consider all dimensions of marital functioning, including enduring vulnerabilities, stress, and adaptive processes simultaneously.

<i>The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work</i> 1999 book by John Gottman

The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work is a 1999 book by John Gottman, which details seven principles for couples to improve their marriage and the "Four Horseman" to watch out for, that usually herald the end of a marriage. The book was based on Gottman's research in his Family Research Lab, known as the "Love Lab", where he observed more than 650 couples over 14 years.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Knapp, M.L., Daly, John A. (2002). Handbook of interpersonal communication. SAGE Publications. p. 270. ISBN   0-7619-2160-5.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. ↑ "Overview - Research". The Gottman Institute. Retrieved 2019-02-06.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Gottman, John M. (1993). "A theory of marital dissolution and stability". Journal of Family Psychology. 7 (1): 57–75. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.7.1.57. ISSN   0893-3200.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Gottman, John M.; Levenson, Robert W. (1992). "Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 63 (2): 221–233. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.221. ISSN   0022-3514. PMID   1403613. S2CID   6449722.
  5. ↑ Garanzini, Salvatore; Yee, Alapaki; Gottman, John; Gottman, Julie; Cole, Carrie; Preciado, Marisa; Jasculca, Carolyn (October 2017). "Results of Gottman Method Couples Therapy with Gay and Lesbian Couples". Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 43 (4): 674–684. doi:10.1111/jmft.12276. PMID   28940625.
  6. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Fowler, Craig; Dillow, Megan R. (2011-02-02). "Attachment Dimensions and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse". Communication Research Reports. 28 (1): 16–26. doi:10.1080/08824096.2010.518910. ISSN   0882-4096. S2CID   143729646.
  7. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "The Four Horsemen: Criticism, Contempt, Defensiveness, and Stonewalling". The Gottman Institute. 2013-04-24. Retrieved 2019-02-07.
  8. ↑ "Types of Criticism: Expressing Concern or Complaint without Harm". 3 March 2022.
  9. ↑ "How Dr. Gottman Can Predict Divorce with 94% Accuracy". Real Life Counseling. 2017-08-23. Retrieved 2020-12-09.
  10. ↑ Gottman, John M (2000). "The Timing of Divorce: Predicting When a Couple Will Divorce Over a 14-Year Period" (PDF). Journal of Marriage and Family. 62 (3): 737–745. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00737.x. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2021-07-25. Retrieved 2020-12-09.
  11. ↑ Thornton, Jesse (2017-08-29). "Why Couples Divorce: Six Predictors". Foundations Family Counseling. Archived from the original on 2021-05-16. Retrieved 2020-12-09.
  12. ↑ "6 Predictors of Divorce". Centre for Fathering Ltd. 2018-12-09. Retrieved 2020-12-09.
  13. ↑ "Marriage and Couples - Research". The Gottman Institute. Retrieved 2020-12-09.
  14. ↑ PhD, John Gottman; Silver, Nan (5 May 2015). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work: A Practical Guide from the Country's Foremost Relationship Expert. New York. ISBN   9780553447712.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Cook, Julian; Tyson, Rebecca; White, Jane; Rushe, Regina; et al. (1995). "Mathematics of marital conflict: Qualitative dynamic mathematical modeling of marital interaction". Journal of Family Psychology. 9 (2): 110–130. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.9.2.110. ISSN   0893-3200. S2CID   122029386.
  16. 1 2 3 4 5 Gottman, John M.; Tabares, Amber (2017). "The Effects of Briefly Interrupting Marital Conflict". Journal of Marital and Family Therapy. 44 (1): 61–72. doi:10.1111/jmft.12243. PMID   28656613.
  17. ↑ Kashian, Nicole (2019-11-24). "The Influence of Channel, Flooding, and Repair on Effective Couple Conflict Communication". International Journal of Communication. 13: 20. ISSN   1932-8036.
  18. ↑ Alexander EF, Johnson MD (2023). "Chapter 20: Couples Discord". In Hupp S, Santa Maria CL (eds.). Pseudoscience in Therapy: A Skeptical Field Guide. Cambridge University Press. pp. 332–333. doi:10.1017/9781009000611.021. ISBN   9781009000611.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5 Stanley, Scott M.; Bradbury, Thomas N.; Markman, Howard J. (February 2000). "Structural Flaws in the Bridge From Basic Research on Marriage to Interventions for Couples". Journal of Marriage and Family. 62 (1): 256–264. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00256.x . ISSN   0022-2445.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.