Approaches to the Study of Power in Violent and Nonviolent Marriages, and in Gay Male and Lesbian Cohabiting Relationships

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511500077.017

12 - Approaches to the Study of Power in Violent and Nonviolent Marriages, and in Gay Male and Lesbian Cohabiting Relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 July 2009

John M. Gottman ,

Janice Driver ,

Dan Yoshimoto and

Regina Rushe

Edited by

Patricia Noller and

Judith A. Feeney

Show author details

John M. Gottman: Affiliation:
University of Washington
Janice Driver: Affiliation:
University of Washington
Dan Yoshimoto: Affiliation:
University of Washington
Regina Rushe: Affiliation:
University of Washington
Patricia Noller: Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Judith A. Feeney: Affiliation:
University of Queensland

Book contents

Get access

Summary

To the outsider, mathematics is a strange, abstract world of horrendous technicality, full of symbols and complicated procedures, an impenetrable language and a black art. To the scientist, mathematics is the guarantor of precision and objectivity. It is also, astonishingly, the language of nature itself. No one who is closed off from mathematics can ever grasp the full significance of the natural order that is woven so deeply into the fabric of physical reality.

—Paul Davies, The Mind of God, 1992, p. 93

THE STUDY OF POWER

In the 1950s Fred Strodtbeck's research on marriages in three cultures made the study of power look easy (Strodtbeck, 1951). He drove a van through the Western United States and asked Mormon (patriarchal), Navajo (matriarchal), and Anglo Texan (supposedly egalitarian) married couples to go into the back of his van, and gossip about families the couple thought were raising their kids poorly or well (something that couples in all three cultures found it easy and natural to discuss) and have some structured marital disputes. The marital disputes involved having each spouse fill out a questionnaire indicating personal preferences (like what kind of car to buy, what to order for dinner), and then the couple doing this task again by discussion. The more powerful person was defined as the person who was closer to the joint decision on his or her personal preferences.

Type: Chapter
Information: Understanding Marriage
Developments in the Study of Couple Interaction
, pp. 323 - 347

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511500077.017 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Babcock, J. C., Waltz, J., Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (1993). Power and violence: The relation between communication patterns power discrepancies and domestic violence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 40–50CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Bales, R. F. (1950). Interaction process analysis: A method for the study of small groups. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley Press

Ball, F. L. J., Cowan, P., & Cowan, C. P. (1995). Who's got the power? Gender differences in partner's perception of influence during marital problem-solving discussions. Family Process, 34, 303–321CrossRef Google Scholar

Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. (1956). Toward a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioural Science, 1, 251–264CrossRef Google Scholar

Bertalanffy, L. von (1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller

Blumstein, P., & Schwartz, P. (1983). American couples: Money, work, sex. New York: William Morrow and Co

Brazelton, T. B., Koslowski, B., & Main, M. (1974). The origins of reciprocity: The early mother-infant interaction. In M. Lewis & L. Rosenbum (Eds.), The effect of the infant on its caregiver (pp. 49–76). New York: Wiley

Broderick, C. (1993). Understanding family process: Basics of family systems theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Brown, P. C., & Smith, T. W. (1992). Social influence, marriage, and the heart: Cardiovascular consequences of interpersonal control in husbands and wives. Health Psychology, 11, 88–96CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1990). Gender and social structure in the demand&withdraw pattern of marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 73–81CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Coan, J., Gottman, J. M., Babcock, J., & Jacobson, N. S. (1997). Battering and the male rejection of influence from women. Aggressive Behavior, 23, 375–3883.0.CO;2-H>CrossRef Google Scholar

Cook, J., Tyson, R., White, J., Rushe, R., Gottman, J. M., & Murray, J. (1995). Mathematics of marital conflict: Qualitative dynamic modeling of marital interaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 9, 110–130CrossRef Google Scholar

Cowan, C. P., Cowan, P. A., Coie, L., & Coie, J. D. (1978). Becoming a family: The impact of the first child's birth on the couple's relationship. In W. B. Miller & L. F. Newman (Eds.), The first child and family formation. Chapel Hill, NC: Carolina Population Center

Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (l978). Facial action coding system. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press

Fitzpatrick, M. A. (1988). Between husbands and wives. Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Gianino, A., & Tronick, E. Z. (1988). The mutual regulation model: The infant's self and interactive regulation and coping and defensive capacities. In T. M. Field, P. M. McCabe, & N. Schneiderman (Eds.), Stress and coping across development (pp. 47–70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Gottman, J. (1979). Marital interaction: Experimental investigations. New York: Academic Press

Gottman, J., Murray, J., Swanson, C., Tyson, R., & Swanson, K. (in press). The mathematics of marriage: Formal models. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Gottman, J. M. (1993). The roles of conflict engagement, escalation, or avoidance in marital interaction: A longitudinal view of five types of couples. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 61, 6–15CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gottman, J. M. (1994). What predicts divorce: The relationship between marital processes and marital outcomes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Gottman, J. M. (Ed.). (1996). What predicts divorce: The measures. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, issociates

Gottman, J. M. (1999). The marriage clinic. New York: W. W. Norton

Gottman, J. M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., & Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting marital happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 5–22CrossRef Google Scholar

Gottman, J. M., Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 221–233CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Gottman, J. M., McCoy, K., Coan, J., & Collier, H. (1996). The specific affect coding system (SPAFF) for observing emotional communication in marital and family interaction. In J. M. Gottman (Ed.), What predicts divorce? The measures. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates

Gottman, J. M., Swanson, C., & Murray, J. (1999). The mathematics of marital conflict: Dynamic mathematical nonlinear modeling of newlywed marital interaction. Journal of Family Psychology, 13, 3–19CrossRef Google Scholar

Gray-Little, B. (1982). Marital quality and power processes among black couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 44, 633–646CrossRef Google Scholar

Gray-Little, B., Baucom, D. H., & Hamby, S. L. (1996). Marital power, marital adjustment, and therapy outcome. Journal of Family Psychology, 10, 292–303CrossRef Google Scholar

Gray-Little, B., & Burks, N. (1983). Power and satisfaction in marriage: A review and critique. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 513–538CrossRef Google Scholar

Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Stuart, G. L., Sandin, E., Smutzler, N., & McLaughlin, W. (1997). Comparing the social support behaviors of violent and non-violent husbands during discussions of wife personal problems. Personal Relationships, 4, 395–412CrossRef Google Scholar

Jacobson, N. S., & Gottman, J. M. (1998). When men batter women. New York: Simon & Schuster

Jacobson, N. S., Gottman, J. M., Gortner, E., Berns, S., & Shortt, J. W. (1996). Psychological factors in the longitudinal course of battering: When do the couples split up? When does the abuse decrease? Violence and Victims, 11, 371–392Google Scholar PubMed

Krokoff, L. J., Gottman, J. M., & Haas, S. D. (1989). Validation of a rapid couples interaction scoring system. Behavioral Assessment, 11, 65–79Google Scholar

Kurdek, L. A. (1992). Relationship stability and relationship satisfaction in cohabiting gay and lesbian couples: A prospective longitudinal test of the contextual and interdependence models. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 9, 125–142CrossRef Google Scholar

Kurdek, L. A. (1998). Relationship outcomes and their predictors: Longitudinal evidence from heterosexual married, gay cohabiting, and lesbian cohabiting couples. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 553–568CrossRef Google Scholar

Locke, H. J., & Wallace, K. M. (1959). Short marital adjustment and prediction tests: Their reliability and validity. Marriage and Family Living, 21, 251–255CrossRef Google Scholar

Meehan, J. C., Holtzworth-Munoroe, A., & Herron, K. (2001). Maritally violent men's heart rate reactivity to marital interactions: A failure to replicate the Gottman et al. (1995) typology. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 394–408CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Murray, J. D. (1989). Mathematical biology. Berlin: Springer-Verlag

Oggins, J., Veroff, J., & Leber, D. (1993). Perceptions of marital interactions among black and white newlyweds. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 494–511CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Olson, D. H., & Ryder, R. G. (1970). Inventory of marital conflicts (IMC): And experimental interaction procedure. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 32, 443–448CrossRef Google Scholar

Pasch, L. A., & Bradbury, T. N. (1998). Social support, conflict, and the development of marital dysfunction. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 219–230CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Rapoport, A. (1960). Fights, games, and debates. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press

Rapoport, A. (1972). The uses of mathematical isomorphism in general systems theory. In G. J. Klir (Ed.), Trends in general systems theory (pp. 42–77). New York: Wiley Interscience

Raush, H. L., Barry, W. A., Hertel, R. K., & Swain, M. A. (1974). Communication, conflict, and marriage. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Raven, B. (1992) A power&interactional model of interpersonal influence: French and Raven thirty years later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7, 217–244Google Scholar

Robinson, E. A., & Price, M. G. (1980). Pleasurable behavior in marital interaction: An observational study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 117–118CrossRef Google Scholar

Rosenblatt, P. C. (1994). Metaphors of family systems theory. New York: Guilford

Rushe, R. H. (1995). Tactics of power and influence in violent marriages. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington

Straus, M. (1979). Measuring interfamily conflict and violence: The Conflict Tactics (CT) Scales. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 41, 75–88CrossRef Google Scholar

Straus, M., & Tallman, I. (1971). SIMFAM: A technique for observational measurement and experimental study of families. In J. Aldous, T. Condon, R. Hill, M. Straus, & I. Tallman (Eds.), Family problem solving (pp. 379–438). Himsdale, IL: Dryden

Strodtbeck, F. L. (1951). Husband-wife interaction over revealed differences. American Sociological Review, 16, 468–473CrossRef Google Scholar

Szinovacz, M. E. (1987). Family power. In M. B. Sussman & S. K. Steinmetz (Eds.), Handbook of marriage and the family (pp. 651–694). New York: PlenumCrossRef

Waite, L. (2000). The case for marriage. New York: Doubleday

Weiss, R. L., Hops, H., & Patterson, G. R. (1973). A framework for conceptualizing marital conflict. In L. A. Hamerlynck, L. C. Handy, & E. J. Marsh (Eds.), Behavior change: Methodology, concepts, and practice (pp. 309–342). Champaign, IL: Research Press

White, B. B. (1989). Gender differences in marital communication patterns. Family Process, 28, 89–106CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed