![]() |
![]() | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page . (Learn how and when to remove these messages)
|
The interpersonal communication that occurs during a relationship deterioration/dissolution looks to explain the possible "why" behind the relationship breakup and the communication steps that a breakup seems to follow. Studies have researched on the predictors of breakups, the breakup process, the strategies employed, the impact of the breakups and finally the process to move on emotionally from the broken relationship.
Relationship dissolution "refers to the process of the breaking up of relationships (friendship, romantic, or marital relationships) by the voluntary activity of at least one partner." [1] This article examines two types of relationship dissolution, the non-marital breakup and the marital breakup. The differences are how they are experienced, how they must be studied and how they might survive. Nonmarital breakups help us understand the nature of the issues involved and the patterns of grief experienced, they are meaningful to both persons, creating crisis in intimacy, personal and social development and future commitment expectations. Surviving a nonmarital breakup provides the opportunity to self-discovery, generosity, dignity and nobility of grief, and the promise of recovery. [2] In marital breakups, more negotiation and delayed dissolution may occur because of the presence of children [3] called a barrier force. Not all breakups should be considered a "failure", because they didn't last long enough or hit yearly marks as dictated by society. Some breakups may serve a distinct, positive change for one of the partners if there is abuse or other negative factors in the relationship.
No relationship is established with the thought that it will end with heartache and grief, at least experienced by one of the couple. Why do we bother if the common belief is that at least 50% or more marriages end in divorce? Jones and Burdette state in their work that we face two daunting risks when we pursue an intimate relationship with another: rejection and betrayal. This is countered with our social need to belong which usually trumps the risks. [4] Hill, Rubin, and Peplau conducted a study in 1976 where 231 heterosexual couples agreed to complete a questionnaire about their relationship for two years. Only 128 couples survived the two years together, but it was the information gathered from the 103 couples that provided substantial information on breakup factors. [5]
Hill, Rubin & Peplau (1976) found that the peak season for a breakup is when there are changes in one's life, which may force the relationship to be examined as to whether it can be sustained over time, distance, or other change in lifestyle. Women were more likely to be the initiators of change. [5]
Steve Duck developed a topographical model of relationship disengagement and dissolution, whether married or not, in which he outlined four models of dissolution: pre-existing doom, mechanical failure, process loss and sudden death. [6]
Couples who are badly matched from the start, no matter what the initiation action involved, it could not overcome personal differences.
When things break, where communication may be poor or interactions go badly. Without communication a relationship will never survive.
Relationships that die because they do not reach their potential, albeit a slow death, because of poor productivity or communication on one or both of the members of the dyad.
New information on a partner can produce sudden death of the new relationship with a trust violation. Davis (1973) described three conditions that produce "sudden death" in a relationship: two-sided subsidence, in which both members of the couple maintain a formal relationship with no intimacy; one-sided subsidence, where one partner is dependent and hangs on, while the other actively seeks to end the relationship; and zero-sided subsidence which is an abrupt ending primarily brought on by outside factors that makes retreat or repair impossible.
There are at least fifteen strategies used to terminate relationships and are set apart by whether they are unilateral or bilateral and indirect or direct. [7] [8]
Steve Duck's four stages of relationship dissolution, each very distinctive with specific components, are moved through once one or both of the partners have crossed a cognitive threshold. [9]
Intrapsychic stage begins with one partner who is dissatisfied and secretively searches for a way to "fix" the relationship. Vaughan (1986) [ page needed ] states that uncoupling begins with a secret, and Duck asserts that the secret of unhappiness is kept that way through the intrapsychic stage.
Dyadic stage where the dissatisfied partner decides to fix the problem by confronting the other partner, thus entering into uncharted territory. This may not fix what is wrong and just continue to draw out the relationship until the unhappy partner becomes determined to depart, which will move the relationship into the next phase.
Social stage is when the partners devise their accounts of how the breakup happened and how they will present it to their social circles. If it is in fact the end, they will cross over into the final phase of relationship dissolution.
Grave-dressing stage is simply the "attempt to bury and describe the relationship" stage. Partners now create an acceptable story about their love and loss, do whatever cognitive work, including introspection, attribution, rationalization, and reassessment of self and other, which is necessary in order to get over the deceased relationship.
Stephanie Rollie and Steve Duck subsequently modified the original model after a critique of stage models that appear to suppose an orderly and relatively conscious progression through the above stages. Proposing instead five phases of breakdown, Rollie and Duck added a Resurrection Phase which was placed after "Grave Dressing" and represented the period of reconfiguration of self and preparation for new relationships. In the modified proposal, the authors articulated changes to communication patterns and topics that would typify each phase, but clarified that the result of the communication could at any time be not simply progression to the next phase of break up but reversion to an earlier state of the relationship. [10]
Harvey (1996) explains that when you experience a loss or a depletion of resources, you may need some time to sort out what you had in the first place, what was given up in the breakup, and what remains for you to rely on, cherish or use. Grief is not a passive experience but a series of active choices for the grieving person to confront and resolve in either the direction of healing or prolonged suffering. [11]
Weber (1998 , pp. 267–304) outlines the following central tasks for dealing with grief.
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.
Grief is the response to the loss of something deemed important, particularly to the death of a person or other living thing to which a bond or affection was formed. Although conventionally focused on the emotional response to loss, grief also has physical, cognitive, behavioral, social, cultural, spiritual and philosophical dimensions. While the terms are often used interchangeably, bereavement refers to the state of loss, while grief is the reaction to that loss.
Open marriage is a form of non-monogamy in which the partners of a dyadic marriage agree that each may engage in extramarital sexual or romantic relationships, without this being regarded by them as infidelity, and consider or establish an open relationship despite the implied monogamy of marriage. There are variant forms of open marriage such as swinging and polyamory, each with the partners having varying levels of input into their spouse's activities.
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.
An open relationship is an intimate relationship that is sexually or romantically non-monogamous. An open relationship generally indicates a relationship where there is a primary emotional and intimate relationship between partners, who agree to at least the possibility of sexual or emotional intimacy with other people. The term "open relationship" is sometimes used interchangeably with the term polyamory, but the two concepts are not identical.
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.
Haptic communication is nonverbal communication and interaction via the sense of touch. Touch can come in many different forms, some can promote physical and psychological well-being. A warm, loving touch can lead to positive outcomes while a violent touch can ultimately lead to a negative outcome. The sense of touch allows one to experience different sensations such as pleasure, pain, heat, or cold. One of the most significant aspects of touch is the ability to convey and enhance physical intimacy. The sense of touch is the fundamental component of haptic communication for interpersonal relationships. Touch can be categorized in many terms such as positive, playful, control, ritualistic, task-related or unintentional. It can be both sexual, and platonic. Striking, pushing, pulling, pinching, kicking, strangling and hand-to-hand fighting are forms of touch in the context of physical abuse.
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.
Lesbian bed death is the concept that lesbian couples in committed relationships have less sex than any other type of couple the longer the relationship lasts, and generally experience less sexual intimacy as a consequence. It may also be defined as a drop-off in sexual activity that occurs two years into a long-term lesbian relationship.
A cross-sex friendship is a platonic relationship between two unrelated people of differing sexes or gender. There are multiple types of cross-sex friendships, all defined by whether or not each party has a romantic attraction to each other, or perceives that the other is interested. A few theories have been developed to explain the existence of such friendships. Research has been done on why men and women initiate these relationships, how they are perceived by others, implications for children with cross-sex friendships, among others. Cross-sex friendships can also create problems for those involved if either or both have or ever had any romantic feelings for the other.
Relational dialectics is an interpersonal communication theory about close personal ties and relationships that highlights the tensions, struggles, and interplay between contrary tendencies. The theory, proposed respectively by Leslie Baxter and Barbara Montgomery in 1988, defines communication patterns between relationship partners as the result of endemic dialectical tensions. Dialectics are described as the tensions an individual feels when experiencing paradoxical desires that we need and/ or want. The theory contains four assumptions, one of them being that relationships are not one dimensional, rather, they consist of highs and lows, without moving in only one direction. The second assumption claims that change is a key element in relational life, in other words, as our lives change, our relationships change with it. Third, is the assumption that, “contradictions or tensions between opposites never go away and never cease to provide tension,” which means, we will always experience the feelings of pressure that come with our contradictory desires. The fourth assumption is that communication is essential when it comes to working through these opposing feelings. Relationships are made in dialogue and they can be complicated and dialogue with similarities and differences are necessary. Relational communication theories allow for opposing views or forces to come together in a reasonable way. When making decisions, desires and viewpoints that often contradict one another are mentioned and lead to dialectical tensions. Leslie A. Baxter and Barbara M. Montgomery exemplify these contradictory statements that arise from individuals experience dialectal tensions using common proverbs such as "opposites attract", but "birds of a feather flock together"; as well as, "two's company; three's a crowd" but "the more the merrier". This does not mean these opposing tensions are fundamentally troublesome for the relationship; on the contrary, they simply bring forward a discussion of the connection between two parties.
Knapp's relational development model portrays relationship development as a ten step process, broken into two phases. Created by and named after communication scholar Mark L. Knapp, the model suggests that all of the steps should be done one at a time, in sequence, to make sure they are effective. However, not every relationship will go through these stages of development in the same way. Compared to DeVito's six-stage model of relational development, Knapp's model is far more prescriptive and detailed, but also presupposes that the relationship will ultimately dissolve, as evident in the five "coming apart" stages that make up the second half of the model. However, Knapp himself has said that his model is also descriptive; the model describes what seems to happen, not necessarily what should happen. The model proposes that coming apart need not be seen as inherently bad, just as coming together need not be seen as inherently good.
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.
Interpersonal communication is an exchange of information between two or more people. It is also an area of research that seeks to understand how humans use verbal and nonverbal cues to accomplish several personal and relational goals. Communication includes utilizing communication skills within one's surroundings, including physical and psychological spaces. It is essential to see the visual/nonverbal and verbal cues regarding the physical spaces. In the psychological spaces, self-awareness and awareness of the emotions, cultures, and things that are not seen are also significant when communicating.
Isaac Michael "Zick" Rubin is an American social psychologist, lawyer, and author. He is "widely credited as the author of the first empirical measurement of love," for his work distinguishing feelings of like from feelings of love via Rubin's Scales of Liking and Loving. Science Progress stated, "The major breakthrough in research on love came from the pioneer psychometric work of Zick Rubin."
An on-again, off-again relationship is a form of interpersonal relationship between two people whose breakups are followed by reconciliation, perpetuating a cycle. Relationship reconciliation is defined as the process in which partners attempt to heal the hurt or wrong that was done and move on from it in order to progress forward in the relationship. This process of breaking up and getting back together can be short-term or long-term.
Steven W. Duck is a British social psychologist turned communication scholar, working as the Daniel & Amy Starch Distinguished Research Professor and Chair up to 2021, Department of Rhetoric, at the University of Iowa. He has made contributions to the scientific field of social and personal relationships.
"Conscious uncoupling" is a neologism used in the 21st century to refer to a relatively amicable breakup or marital divorce. It was popularized by Gwyneth Paltrow in 2014, when she used the phrase to describe her and her husband's then-recent separation.
Susan Anderson, LCSW is the American author of The Journey from Abandonment to Healing, a self-help book about the pain of relationship breakups. Anderson developed her ideas after her husband of eighteen years left her for another woman. Anderson was interviewed on The Early Show (CBS) on February 14, 2007 She was also interviewed on National Public Radio (NPR) Inner Visions "Overcoming Self Sabotage and Healing Abandonment" June 23, 2015.
The Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution is a relational communications theory that proposes four critically negative behaviors that lead to the breakdown of marital and romantic relationships. 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. 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.