Quantcast
Channel: Relationships
Viewing all 3141 articles
Browse latest View live

Here's the science behind why you end up dating terrible people

$
0
0

awkward video datingPeople who score highly in the Dark Triad personality traits – narcissism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism – are vain, selfish, callous and manipulative.

They're not the kind of people you want to spend much time with. This raises the obvious question – to put it bluntly, why over evolutionary timescales haven't these people died out?

One possibility is that their traits actually confer short-term advantages in the mating game. Dark Triad people are obnoxious once you get to know them, sure, but perhaps they can be alluring at first, what with their swagger and smooth talking.

To test this, Emanuel Jauk and his colleagues had 46 women and 44 men (average age 23; all heterosexual) fill out personality questionnaires, including measures of the Dark Triad traits, and then take part in speed dating sessions, such that every man and woman in the study enjoyed a three-minute date with each other.

The participants filled out score cards for each person they met, including how attractive a prospect they found them for different relationships (friendship, one-night-stand, "friend with benefits" and long-term romance), and whether they'd like to see them again.

The findings, published recently in the European Journal of Personality, show that men who scored higher in narcissism were rated by women as more appealing for short-term trysts and longer-term commitment, but not as friends. Women were also more likely to say they'd like to see these men again. Scores in the other two Dark Triad traits did not make any difference to the men's success.

Similar to the men, women who scored higher in narcissism also attracted more favourable ratings from their dating partners, for short and long-term relationships, but not for friendships. For women (but not men) scoring higher in psychopathy also went hand-in-hand with receiving more favourable ratings as a potential one-night stand.

Intriguingly, the reasons for male and female narcissists' allure in speed dating seemed to be different.

teen dating

For men, it was entirely explained by extraversion. Male narcissists tended to score higher in extraversion, and once the appealing influence of extraversion was factored out, narcissism offered nothing more.

By contrast, for women, narcissism correlated with physical attractiveness (as rated by four judges who didn't take part in the dating), and once the appealing influence of physical attractiveness was controlled for, narcissism added nothing. Ditto for women's psychopathy – the appeal was all down to the fact that psychopathy correlated with physical attractiveness.

In short, it seems that narcissism (for men and women) and psychopathy (for women) make people more attractive in the mating game, at least in the context of speed dating among young people, which helps explain the advantage that these traits provide.

But crucially, the reasons for this are not direct, but have to do with other characteristics that correlate with narcissism and psychopathy, rather than with the traits directly.

This raises some interesting questions for future research, such as why are extraversion and narcissism linked in men, and why are attractiveness and narcissism (and psychopathy) linked in women? For instance, does a woman's attractiveness make it more likely that she'll develop narcissistic traits, or do her narcissistic traits make it more likely that she'll put more effort into her appearance?

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to see all the companies tracking you on Facebook — and block them


Psychologists discovered the best way to communicate digitally with someone you’re dating

$
0
0

Emoji texting

There are a million ways to get in touch with someone we're dating. There are texts, phone calls, Facebook messages, Skype, Tweets, Gchats, emails...the list goes on. But not all of these modes of communication are created equal.

A new study suggests calling and texting are associated with high levels of relationship satisfaction

Unlike video chatting, texting and phone calls don't reveal facial expressions and body language. This lack of nonverbal cues can boost idealization of a partner since it leaves a lot to the imagination.

"The couples that are really happy are not the ones that see their partners completely realistically. Their perceptions of the other person is a little distorted," Catalina Toma, the study's co-author, tells Tech Insider. "These couples think their partners are amazing, special, and better than average, and that's what makes them feel satisfied."

The study surveyed more than 200 college students who live in the same city as their partner. On average, participants reported using three different types of digital media to communicate daily with their partner in addition to real-life face time. By an overwhelming majority, they use texting and phone calls (98% and 84% respectively), and then a third mode (most likely Facebook or instant messaging). Participants report an hours-worth of continuous texting with their partner each day on average.

The research shows that texting and calling are linked to a greater sense of idealization, which in turn can lead to greater relationship satisfaction. These modes of communication help highlight the best version of your partner. Essentially, we relish how attentive they are when they text "good morning" or how funny they are when they text us a well-crafted joke.

It's important to note that the study only looked at young heterosexual college students, so these findings may not apply to every relationship.  

Toma predicts that we will only continue to use our phones more in relationships — and that could actually be a good thing. "Generally thinking, people will rely on digital media to maintain contact, coordinate plans, and stay in sync with one another," she says. "It helps us feel psychologically close to our partners."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Everything we know about the iPhone 7’s new features and design

Why women cheat — and what their husbands can do to prevent it

Research-backed secrets to a great relationship

$
0
0

couple autumn

What is love? (Sit down. This might take a minute.)

I've posted a lot about the science around love, including how to tell if your spouse is cheating and why high heels are sexy.

But what about the stuff we need to know to be happy. Platitudes don't cut it and though the poets are often right they're frequently vague.

Is there an expert who can give us some real answers about love: how to find it, nurture it and maybe even repair it?

You better believe there is. Arthur Aron is one of the world's top researchers on romantic love.

He is a professor at Stony Brook University and author of a number of key books on the subject of relationships including:

I gave Arthur a call and learned what makes us attractive, how to have a great first date, and the things that kill and improve relationships.

Let's get started.

So what the heck is love anyway?

Love isn't an emotion, really. When you look at fMRI studies of the brain it shows up more as a desire. A craving.

And that explains why it feels so good. As far as the ol' gray matter's concerned love's right up there with cocaine and cash.

All three activate the same area of the brain — the dopamine reward system.

Here's Arthur: "When you're in love with someone romantically, the areas of the brain that are activated when you think about them are what we call the dopamine reward system. The same system that responds to cocaine and expecting to win a lot of money. Love seems to be more of a desire than an emotion."

So, yeah, even neuroscience agrees that love is intense. But can anything that powerful last? Doesn't it eventually have to fizzle?

Not necessarily. Research shows some couples are very much in love 40 to 50 years later.

Here's Arthur: "Another thing we've learned both from that research and from surveys is passionate romantic love can exist in people that have been together 40 years, 50 years. We don't know the percentage. But people who claim to be very intensely in love that have been married and are in their 70s show the same patterns of neural response to a large extent as people who have just fallen in love."

Want your marriage to last more than 30 years? Just "being married" often isn't enough: you also need to be good friends.

Via "100 Simple Secrets of Great Relationships": "In studies of people happily married more than three decades, the quality of friendship between the partners was the single most frequently cited factor in the relationships' success. – Bachand and Caron 2001"

(For more on how to keep love alive and live happily ever after, click here.)

So what do we need to know to have a good relationship that stands the test of time? Let's start with attractiveness.

wedding couple outside

This is what makes you attractive

Looking good matters. Duh. But it's far from the only thing.

Arthur also found that we're more attracted to people who are attracted to us. So showing interest gets people interested in you.

And believing the two of you are similar is powerful (whether you're actually similar, well, is another story…).

Here's Arthur: "You are much more likely to be attracted to someone who you think will be attracted to you, or who has shown they're attracted to you. And believing the person is similar turns out to matter a lot. Their actually being similar doesn't matter so much but believing they're similar does."

Believe it or not, other research shows even having similar fighting styles is a good thing.

It was related to double digit drops in conflict and a double digit increase in satisfaction.

Via "100 Simple Secrets of Great Relationships": "While people may employ many different conflict resolution strategies in a relationship, when both partners use the same strategy they experience 12% less conflict and are 31% more likely to report their relationship is satisfying. – Pape 2001"

And while we're on the subject of attraction, how about "playing hard to get?" Does it work?

Nope. Pretending you're not interested in the other person is a terrible strategy.

However, making it look like you're picky and have high standards but that you are interested in this person, that works very well.

Here's Arthur: "Playing 'hard to get' does not help. It's good for a person you meet to think you're being hard for others to get but not hard for them to get. That's sort of the ideal partner: one that's hard for everyone else to get but is interested in you."

(For more on how to flirt — scientifically — click here.)

How many internet dates do you need to go on to end up in a relationship? Online dating data says 3.8. But what should you do on that date?

How to have a great first date

So how did Arthur become so well known as the big researcher on romantic love? He did the classic "bridge study."

It showed that if we feel something, we associate it with who is around us — even if they're not the cause.

So if our environment makes us feel excited, we can mistake it for feeling in love. Check out a video of the study here:

So what's that mean practically? Roller coasters, concerts, anything exciting with energy in the air makes for a great date.

Here's Arthur: "When in the initial stages of dating, you might want to do something physiologically arousing with the person. The classic is to go on a roller coaster ride or do something like that as long as it's not too scary."

In fact, research shows you might even be attracted to someone trying to kill you. Researchers simulated a torture scenario and found exactly that.

Via "The Heart of Social Psychology: A Backstage View of a Passionate Science": "Those in the high-fear condition did show, for example, significantly more desire to kiss my confederate (one of the key questions) and wrote more romantic and sexual content into their stories. Looking at the details of these results, I found that the situation had generated, quite specifically, romantic attraction."

Other than excitement, what else is good to do? Open up. Not too much, too fast, but start sharing. Superficial conversation is boring.

Here's Arthur: "Another thing is to try to keep the conversation from being too superficial — but you don't want to move too quickly. You can scare a person away if you right away tell them the deepest things in your life."

Research shows that talking about STD's and abortion is better than bland topics. Other studies show that discussing travel is good, but movies are bad.

But what you say isn't everything. It's also how you react to what they say. Be responsive and engaged.

Here's Arthur: "There's some wonderful work by Harry Reis and his colleagues on self-disclosure showing it's not how much is disclosed but how you respond to the other person's self-disclosure. You want to be very responsive to hear what they're saying, to show that you understand it, to show that you value what they're saying and appreciate it."

In fact, the best self-disclosure can produce a bond almost as strong as a lifetime friendship in less than an hour. Seriously.

Arthur ran this test with two graduate students, trying to produce a romantic connection. What happened? They ended up getting married.

Here's Arthur: "The very first pair we ran, which were a couple of research assistants in our lab who weren't involved in this study, they actually did fall in love and got married."

(For the list of self-disclosure questions Arthur used in that study, click here.)

So the date goes well and you're together. What makes relationships go bad? And how can you dodge that?

laughing elderly couple

The real reason why relationships fail

Think you two are badly matched? You're probably wrong. Arthur says this is a common mistake.

Who you are and what you're like has a much bigger effect than the match between you two.

If you're insecure, anxious or depressed you'll have trouble connecting with anyone.

Here's Arthur: "Most people think that how well a relationship will work has to do with the match between you whereas that only matters a little bit. Much more important is who you are, and then secondly, who the partner is. If you are insecure, anxious, or depressed, you'll have a hard time with anyone. Who you are and who the other person is matters much more than the match."

Think you two are going through difficult times but you'll come out stronger? Probably wrong again.

Difficult times don't usually strengthen a relationship — more often they destroy it.

Here's Arthur: "Long-term relationships of any kind have a very hard time when there are great stressors on people. If you live in a war zone, or you have a child die, or someone loses their job, it's really hard for a marriage to survive. When things aren't going well and we behave badly or our partner behaves badly it's common to jump to the conclusion that it's always been this way and that things will always be this way. When something stressful is happening we need to remember it's not always like this."

Other research has shown that trying to change the other person is a killer as well. Often, you need to accept your partner for who they are.

69% of a couple's problems are perpetual. These problems don't go away yet many couples keep arguing about them year after year.

Via "The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work": "Most marital arguments cannot be resolved. Couples spend year after year trying to change each other's mind – but it can't be done. This is because most of their disagreements are rooted in fundamental differences of lifestyle, personality, or values. By fighting over these differences, all they succeed in doing is wasting their time and harming their marriage."

(To learn the four things that most often kill relationships, click here.)

Okay, so maybe things aren't going so hot. Everybody thinks they know how to make it better. What does the research say really works?

couple riding motorcycle

4 things that really improve relationships

Like Arthur said above: it's not usually the match, it's usually one of the people in the relationship.

So if you have personal issues like depression, anger or insecurity, get help. Fixing you is the best step toward a better relationship.

Here's Arthur: "First, look at your own life. Are you anxious, depressed, or insecure? Did you have a really difficult childhood? If so, do something. That would be number one."

Relationships stop being fun because we stop trying to make them fun.

Early on you did cool things together but now it's just Netflix and pizza on the couch. Every. Single. Night.

What to do? Just like the recommendation for a good first date: It's about excitement.

Here's Arthur: "After a while, things are sort of settled and there isn't much excitement, so what can you do? Do things that are exciting that you associate with your partner. Reinvigorate that excitement and the main way to make them associated with the partner is to do them with your partner."

What's the third most important thing for keeping love alive? "Capitalization" is vital. (No, I don't mean using bigger letters.)

Celebrate your partner's successes. Be their biggest fan.

How a couple celebrates the good times is more important than how they deal with the bad times.

Not acting impressed by your partners achievements? Congratulations, you're killing your relationship.

Here's Arthur: "Celebrating your partner's successes turns out to be pretty important. When things go badly and you provide support, it doesn't make the relationship good, but it keeps it from getting bad. Whereas if things are going okay and your partner has something good happen and you celebrate it sincerely, you're doing something that can make a relationship even better."

The fourth thing Arthur mentioned was gratitude. And not only does it help relationships, it's one of the keys to a happy life.

What's the research say? Can't be more clear than this: "…the more a person is inclined to gratitude, the less likely he or she is to be depressed, anxious, lonely, envious, or neurotic."

(To learn the science behind how to be a good kisser, click here.)

So that's a lot of solid relationship advice. How do we pull all this together and put it to use?

Sum up

Here's what Arthur said can help you have a great relationship:

  1. According to your own brain, love is right up there with cocaine and cash. And it can last if you treat it right.
  2. Want to be attractive? Make yourself look good, emphasize similarities, and let the person know you're picky — but that you do like them.
  3. A great first date is something that creates excitement and energy. Share things about yourself and respond positively when your partner does.
  4. Relationships often fail because of individual issues, not because of a bad match. Resolve difficulties as soon as you can; they don't strengthen relationships, they cripple them.
  5. Improve your relationship by dealing with your personal issues, doing exciting things together, celebrating your partner's successes and showing gratitude.

It's easy to get lazy when things are going well. But a little effort can go a long way — and not just toward a better relationship.

The research shows love has many positive effects like increasing success,longevity, health and happiness.

Here's Arthur: "The evidence shows that relationship quality plays a huge role in longevity. The findings are that the importance of being in a good relationship versus being alone is a bigger effect than smoking or obesity on how long we live. And the quality of your relationships is also the biggest factor associated with general life happiness."

If you don't have someone special in your life, here's how to find them.

And if you do have someone, make an effort today. Celebrate any good news they have and plan something exciting to do this week.

And then show them a little gratitude. Does anything feel better than hearing how much we mean to someone else?

Join over 130,000 readers. Get a free weekly update via email here.

SEE ALSO: 45 Valuable Life Lessons For People Of Any Age

Join the conversation about this story »

A Harvard psychologist's advice on how to argue when you know you're right

$
0
0

couple arguing old 1950s

Hard as it might be, the best thing to do when you're fighting with a significant other isn't to persuade them you're right.

That just breeds negative feelings.

According to Harvard psychologist Amy Cuddy, the best thing to do when you're in a position of power is to listen.

Cuddy is the author of "Presence: Bringing Your Boldest Self to Your Biggest Challenges," a book on the subtle yet powerful ways our behaviors can influence our thoughts and emotions.

"Presence" argues, among other things, that when we feel powerful — present, in control, in the moment — we also have the ability to bestow that power onto other people, either by building them up to feel powerful or by tearing them down.

During a recent public talk with "Quiet" author Susan Cain, Cuddy admitted her biggest challenges come in her personal relationships, with her husband in particular. Confronting conflict can make her incredibly anxious, she says.

In these cases, the remedy "Presence" suggests is to fully engage with whomever you're fighting.

"When you walk into those situations that have a lot of conflict in them," Cuddy says, "the first thing to do is to be present enough to allow the other person to speak first. You're not giving power away; you're actually allowing them to feel seen and understood."

By listening to the other person's side, you're giving them the chance to become a part of the conversation. As the relationship guru John Gottman says, you're allowing the two of you to kick around the problem like a soccer ball.

If the other person is saying something objectionable, "I think you have to bite your tongue. I do. I think you have to wait," Cuddy says. "First of all, when you respond in that moment of anger you're not going to respond well. And if you let them get through it, you're going to get a little more information about what that is really about. Maybe then you do pause and say, 'I need to step away from this for a moment.'"

Even if you don't get new information relevant to the fight itself, there may still be nuggets of wisdom for how to handle later situations.

A fight about whose turn it is to clean the toilet, for example, could put one person squarely in the wrong, but that doesn't mean the person who was right doesn't stand anything to gain. Maybe there is a lesson on how chores should be divided or how the other person feels unappreciated.

Subtle insights like these can only be found once we shut our mouths and actually try to understand the other person, not crush them.

SEE ALSO: Take these 4 steps to make any argument productive

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Happy couples have these 3 things in common

There's a simple but counterintuitive way to get everyone from potential employers to dates to like you

$
0
0

aziz

When’s the last time you shied away from a probing interview question because you thought you’d be oversharing or potentially embarrassing yourself? 

Good news: Chances are, potential employers might actually see you in a more positive light if you share that info than if you withhold it, at least according to a four-part study from Harvard Business School researchers Leslie John, Kate Barasz, and Michael Norton and highlighted in a recent NPR story from science correspondent Shankar Vendantam. And their findings don’t just apply to job interviews: The research suggests that potential dates, too, prefer people who share personal information over those who try to hide it.

The study authors embarked on a journey to explore how hiding vs. revealing (even potentially embarrassing) information about ourselves in a professional or romantic context can influence how others see us.

What they found was that when others can tell we might be hiding something — or at least not telling the full truth — they tend to perceive us as less trustworthy than people who reveal more about themselves. Study authors called these people the “hiders,” while they labeled those who shared more “revealers.” 

Even when the revealers admitted things most of us would consider embarrassing or negative, like sharing that they got the lowest possible score on an exam or that they once failed to tell a partner that they had an STD, the people with whom they were sharing that information tended to choose them over the “hiders.”

For their study, the researchers actually did four variations on two experiments:

Dating

screenshot/

First, they looked at how people’s dating preferences would be affected by prospective dates' tendency to either hide or reveal personal information. They asked participants to choose between people who confirmed they’d frequently engaged in suspect behavior (“revealers”) and people who’d simply chosen not to disclose this information (“hiders”). The researchers gave participants (the people who were screening their potential dates) two completed questionnaires from fake prospects — one from a “hider” and one from a “revealer.”

In the questionnaires, the fake prospects had answered how frequently they’d engaged in each of five “unsavory” behaviors, like having a fantasy of doing something terrible to someone else using the scale: Never, once, sometimes, frequently, or choose not to answer. The revealer always answered all the questions but varied his or her responses, while the hider only answered three questions and chose not to answer two.

Overall, 79% of people chose to date the revealer when his or her answers varied from ‘never’ to ‘frequently’. Even when the revealer answered ‘frequently’ to all of the embarrassing questions, 64% of people preferred to date them over the hider. They tested several variations of this experiment by seeing how ‘revealers’ who unintentionally left questions blank would be perceived as well. Still, participants tended to choose the revealer (even if they’d accidentally failed to answer some questions) over the hider.

Interviewing for a job

The Internship

Second, they looked at how the revealer vs. hider scenario might get played out in a job interview, testing whether or not people understood that choosing not to reveal information would be seen as negative. They told fake employees to imagine they were “filling out an application for a job they really want” and were asked to respond to the question; “Have you ever done drugs?” with either: Yes, no, or choose not to answer.

Researchers also randomly assigned them to either imagine that they smoke weed “frequently” (defined as smoking regularly “and occasionally using harder drugs”) or “occasionally.” Finally, researchers asked them to choose between answering yes (revealing) or picking “choose not to answer” (hiding).

Overall, the vast majority of the participants (71%) chose to withhold information about what drugs they’d used and how often they’d used them, suggesting that most of us think revealing potentially negative information would be perceived negatively and make prospective employers less likely to hire us. But guess what? The fake employers were more interested in hiring the people who’d answered ‘yes’ compared with the people who’d opted out of answering.

Other research backs up this idea: A meta-analysis from the American Psychological Association found that people who engage in what they called "intimate disclosures" tended to be liked more than those who disclose less about themselves. The same study also found that people tend to share more personal information with people whom they initially like and, perhaps most surprisingly, that people tend like others as a result of having shared personal information with them. And a 1997 study by State University of New York psychologist Arthur Aron — which was the subject of a recent viral article in The New York Times called "Questions that can make you fall in love with a stranger"— suggested that two people who were willing to feel more connected to each other could do so, even within a short time.

For his study, Aron separated two groups of people, then paired people up within their groups and had them chat with one another for 45 minutes. While the first group of pairs spent the 45 minutes engaging in small talk, the second group got a list of questions that gradually grew more intimate.

Not surprisingly, the pairs who asked the gradually more probing questions felt closer and more connected after the 45 minutes were up. Six months later, two of the participants (a tiny fraction of the original study group) even found themselves in love — an intriguing result, though not a significant one.

READ MORE: These are the questions one writer says can make you fall in love with a stranger

SEE ALSO: Psychologists say one behavior is the 'kiss of death' for a relationship

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 5 ways to change your body language to make people like you

How much sex you should be having in a healthy relationship

$
0
0

How much do you know about your love life? We won't pry, but we will give you some statistics about how and when couples typically have the best sex.

Happify, a website and app that uses science-based interactive activities aimed at making you happier, created this graphic to keep you in the know about sex and happiness. Without further ado, here were their best recommendations and fun facts about the intimate act: (Mobile users, if you're having trouble the infographic click here!)Happify Sex and Happiness graphic

SEE ALSO: Science says couples in lasting relationships typically wait this long to start having sex

DON'T MISS: This simple technique can help you navigate stressful and uncomfortable situations

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How a 'sex schedule' could save your relationship

How Americans' views of marriage have changed over time

$
0
0

dating big bank theory

Nervous about Valentine's Day? Try a tiger roll.

First dates at a sushi restaurant are 1.7 times more likely to lead to a second, says Match.com, America's largest online dating site.

The sushi tip is just one finding from the sixth annual Singles in America survey, which asked 5,500 respondents everything from which politician they want to vote for to which politician they'd be up for dating (Joe Biden and Marco Rubio dominate with 21 percent and 20 percent, respectively). 

Match's match-making masterminds conclude that it's probably okay to talk religion, politics and money on Date 1, but keep your hands off your phone.

And if you're male, double-check those text messages: women are way less forgiving of spelling and grammar errors. 

But even as more and more Americans turn to online dating, as it loses the "desperate" reputation of its early days, the jury's still out on what, exactly, it's doing to singles' hearts and minds. At a time when more Americans are unmarried than ever before, are Tinder and OKCupid changing what Americans want in a partner, or just how they find them?

In 1995, when Match.com began the online dating scene, finding a partner online was something you might keep to yourself. Even in 2005, 29 percent of Americans called it "desperate;" by 2013, that was down to 21 percent. Today, nearly 60 million people use dating sites and apps owned by the Match Group alone, home to sites like OKCupid, Tinder, and Match.com, around 40 percent of those who are single and looking. 

Yet we're a pretty single nation: more adults are unmarried than married, in fact. But one of the biggest debates is whether it will stay that way: are youngish people just delaying marriage, or avoiding it altogether?

Part of the popularity of dating apps may come from the average age of first marriage, which has climbed up 7 years for both genders since 1960: now age 27 for women, and 29 for men. 53 percent of those who have never been married say they'd like to, according to the Pew Research Center, down from 61 percent just since 2010.

And even if they are aiming to get married, fewer singles care if their neighbors do. Two-thirds of people between 18 and 29 told Pew that "society is just as well off if people have priorities other than marriage and children."

The multitude of online dating critics often suggest that websites' endless array of potential dates helps create a non-committal culture, where even small differences don't seem worth working out, since the next partner could be just a click away, and that Tinder & Co. have brought out the worst in so-called "delayed adolescence," the stretch of singlehood many people in their 20s are enjoying, or at least enduring, far longer than their parents or grandparents did.

And there may be evidence that, for better or worse, single people do move on to new relationships faster than they used to.

Relationships Couples Love But others say the alarm about "singles nation" is overblown, or that the changing landscape of American marriages have far more to do with long-term societal changes than a couple of phone apps.

The vast majority of college-educated women, for example, are expected to get hitched at some point — one of the demographics most familiar with online dating, whether through their own experiences or their friends'. Millennials actually report having fewer sexual partners than Generation X-ers, and 59 percent of men told Match that they believe in love at first sight. (Women were slightly more skeptical: just 49 percent.)

There are a slew of reasons why Americans may be more accepting of eternal singlehood, or just delayed marriage, including contraception and women's increased independence as educational and economic opportunities improve. But a significant number of singles aren't thrilled about it, and one third of unmarried Americans between 25 and 34 say financial insecurity is holding them back from marriage.

"We have two different family systems in the US," Johns Hopkins University sociology professor Andrew Cherlin told The Christian Science Monitor last June, referring to a "marriage gap" between economic haves- and have-nots: better-educated and higher-paid Americans tend to marry each other, and stay married, at higher rates, stability they tend to pass on to their children. Those who decry "delayed adolescence" may want reroute some of the blame from swipe- and match-dating culture to the bigger economic picture.

In the meantime, a bit more advice for Valentine's Day: Gentlemen, if you haven't answered her texts for a week, Match says you've missed your chance.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch Tina Fey take on Sarah Palin's Trump endorsement speech on SNL


17 science-backed ways men can appear more attractive to women

$
0
0

george clooney

It's almost Valentine's Day, and for many, the pressure is on to find that special someone.

Whether you're simply looking for a date or hoping to find something that lasts, you could benefit from the decades of psychological research on the qualities that women find most attractive in a male partner.

We've rounded up some of the most compelling scientific insights, so you can step up your game.

SEE ALSO: 13 science-backed ways to appear more attractive

DON'T MISS: 9 things you're doing that make people dislike you immediately

Look for the universal signals of flirtation.

Rutgers University anthropologist and best-selling author Helen E. Fisher says that from the depth of the Amazons to the cafés of Paris, women signal interest with a remarkably similar sequence of expressions.

As she shared at Psychology Today, it goes like this:

First the woman smiles at her admirer and lifts her eyebrows in a swift, jerky motion as she opens her eyes wide to gaze at him. Then she drops her eyelids, tilts her head down and to the side, and looks away. Frequently she also covers her face with her hands, giggling nervously as she retreats behind her palms.

This sequential flirting gesture is so distinctive that [German ethologist Irenaus] Eibl-Eibesfeldt was convinced it is innate, a human female courtship ploy that evolved eons ago to signal sexual interest.



Look for someone "in your league."

Men — and women — are attracted to people who are as attractive as they are.

In one study, for example, researchers at the University of California at Berkeley looked at the behavior of 60 male and 60 female users on an online dating site. While the majority of users were inclined to reach out to highly attractive people, they were most likely to get a response if that person was about as attractive as they were (as judged by independent raters).

"If you go for someone roughly [equal] to you in attractiveness, it avoids two things,"Nottingham Trent University psychologist Mark Sergeant, who was not involved with the study, tells The Independent. "If they are much better-looking than you, you are worried about them going off and having affairs. If they are much less attractive, you are worried that you could do better."



Present yourself as high status.

In 1969, University of North Carolina sociologist Glen Elder found that looks and wealth tend to find one another — namely, good-looking women tended to settle down with less attractive but wealthier men

Since then, it's become a well-confirmed finding in the social sciences.

Most recently, a 2010 study found that men pictured with a Silver Bentley Continental GT were perceived as way more attractive than those pictures with a Red Ford Fiesta ST, and a 2014 study found that men pictured in a luxury apartment were rated more attractive than those in a control group. 

Why the attraction to resources? Evolutionary psychologists speculate it's because women want a mate who can provide for them.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

How to tell if someone is flirting with you

$
0
0

rtx11owp

A lingering look. A coy smile. Standing just a bit too close. An accidental brush.

Flirtation is an art. It is also a deftly employed social tool.

It marks an exploratory, transformative stage—in a first meeting or an existing relationship—when interested parties look toward a tantalizingly unknown future.

We flirt to establish a connection, and to gauge the interest of others in reciprocating that connection.

While not all flirting is done with the aim of establishing a romantic or sexual encounter, it does help us determine the social investment potential for romantic relationships.

However, flirtation is not without challenges. Communicating and determining romantic interest in social-sexual encounters are often masked by uncertainty—which is actually a key component of flirtation.

Both the message and the interpretation are intentionally vague: uncertainty serves to protect the interests and reputations of participants, and adds an element of anticipation that makes the act seem more like a game, prolonging the excitement and extending the mystery of the encounter.

Despite this uncertainty, are there universals to flirting strategies? Does a lingering glance mean the same in all social-sexual encounters? So much of flirting is dependent on non-verbal cues: a glance, a touch, a seemingly casual movement—can these actions really be interpreted differently across cultures and contexts?

Researchers have identified five distinct styles of communicating romantic interest, arguing that the ways a message is communicated is key to the way that message is interpreted (1). The styles are as follows:

  • Traditional: In this style, women can signal responsiveness, but men initiate contact and next steps, thereby maintaining gender roles. For example, men are expected to make the first verbal move (e.g., men request the date or offer to buy a drink). Men are expected to lead the interaction once engaged, and make requests for future engagements (2).

Women who are traditional flirts tend to be less likely to flirt with partners and to be flattered by flirting, and may report having trouble getting men to notice them in social-sexual settings. It is a bit of a cyclic effect: Women who are traditional flirts have a limited role in flirtatious encounters, and often have fewer options for attracting a partner (3). Men who fit this category tend to know their partners for longer periods of time before approaching them romantically. They often proceed slowly, developing non-romantic relationships before acting on desires. Overall, individuals who are traditional flirts are introverted and uncomfortable in social settings.

  • Physical: The physical style hints at sexual contact through verbal messages. This style often involves suggestive banter, and individuals are more comfortable expressing their desire and sexual interest to potential partners.

Individuals who fit this style claim to be able to detect the interest of others. They engage in private and personal conversation, which they use to establish the possibility of a relationship. Relationships generated by this style tend to develop at a faster rate, and are characterized by more sexual chemistry and emotional connection than the other styles (4).

  • Sincere: The sincere style is marked by a desire to create an emotional connection with a potential romantic partner. These individuals look to develop intimacy by eliciting self-disclosure and showing personal interest in a partner, however, this style is not an effective means of communicating sexual interest.

Sincere communicators view the emotional connection as tantamount to the relationship. They are more likely to approach potential partners, find flirting flattering, and to believe others are flirting with them.

  • Playful: These communicators view flirting as fun and not tied to relationship development. They enjoy the act itself, and will flirt even in the absence of long-term romantic prospects. Flirting is a self-esteem booster for this group.
  • Polite: Individuals who practice the polite style take a rule-governed and cautious approach, exhibiting no overtly sexual behaviors. Individuals characterized by this style are more likely to seek an emotional and sincere connection and less likely to be playful. The challenge of this style is that often the individual’s partner may not think he or she is interested in pursuing a romantic encounter.

These communicator styles provide some insights into how people flirt, but determining meaning, or decoding flirting is a bit more challenging. Flirting is really a context dependent event. Even with these handy communication style charted, researchers are quick to note that humans adopt the strategies that are best suited to their situation and desired level of engagement (5). As a result, the meaning behind flirtatious gestures is personal. For example:

A kiss does not have any primary meaning beyond what the lovers create together, even though an outside observer might ad secondarily to those meanings on the basis of empathy, social knowledge, or memory (6).

Flirtation cannot be defined in any concrete way. Meaning is derived from the sequences in the act—and every response matters. The casually draped arm along the back of the sofa can lie there meaningless until the recipient reclines into that arm. Participants have to continuously indicate interest.

Naturally, these responses may be interpreted differently in social-sexual encounters. Non-verbal cues are most effective when there is a social understanding regarding meaning, however men and women tend to interpret flirtatious behaviors differently. For example, sixty-seven percent of individuals have reported that friendly behavior on their part has been wrongly viewed as a sexual invitation, with women reporting having experienced this misperception more frequently than men (7). It seems that men, more so than women, perceive partners as being more flirtatious, more seductive, and more promiscuous. They impart greater meaning to the act of flirtation. Why?

One possible explanation may be rooted in the evolutionary history of sexual selection. It would be beneficial, and minimally costly, for a man to overestimate a woman’s sexual interest and intent. If he incorrectly deduces that she interested, he doesn’t stand to lose much. However, if he misreads her signs and misses a mating opportunity, he pays a large evolutionary price (8). I find it curious though that women don’t impart as great a meaning to flirting, however. One could argue, in counterpoint to the discussion above, that women might find meaning in flirtatious acts as frequently as men do because it could hint at greater investment from a partner in the long run.

As with so much involving socialness and relationships, there are no hard and fast rules. Flirtation cannot be defined in a permanent way—its fluidity allows partners to create combinations of variation and uncertainty that are meaningful to the context. And that is really part of the appeal:

If the essence of flirtation is being unsure if she will or she won’t then that uncertainty is itself a promise: “Come, play, and we shall see.” Thus understood, flirtation leans forward into an unknown future, not into a timeless eternity where Ideal Forms repeat themselves in endless identity (9).

If you’re a willing participant in a flirtatious exchange, regardless of where it ultimately leads, the meaning that you can surely take from the exchange is that you’re admired. Happy flirting.

Cited:
Hall, Jeffrey A., Carter, S., Cody, M., and Albright, J. (2010). The Communication of Romantic Interest: Development of the Flirting Styles Inventory Communication Quarterly, 58 (4), 365-393 : 10.1080/01463373.2010.524.874

La France, B., Henningsen, D., Oates, A., & Shaw, C. (2009). Social-Sexual Interactions? Meta-Analyses of Sex Differences in Perceptions of Flirtatiousness, Seductiveness, and Promiscuousness Communication Monographs, 76 (3), 263-285 DOI: 10.1080/03637750903074701

Perper, T. (2009). Will She or Won’t She: The Dynamics of Flirtation in Western Philosophy Sexuality & Culture, 14 (1), 33-43 DOI: 10.1007/s12119-009-9060-3

Notes:
1. Hall et. al. 2010: 366.
2. Hall, 369.
3. Hall, 385.
4. Hall, 386.
5. Hall, 367.
6. Perper 2010: 40.
7. La France et. al. 2009: 265.
8. La France, 279.
9. Perper, 39.

This article was originally published on February 14, 2013. 

SEE ALSO: There's a simple but counterintuitive way to get everyone from potential employers to dates to like you

CHECK OUT: People are starting to change the way they think about marriage in one important way

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Research reveals why men cheat — and it's not what you think

Couples in lasting relationships typically wait this long to start having sex

$
0
0

couple romantic hug

With Valentine's Day signaling an impending romantic milestone for any new couple, we wanted to get to the bottom of a tricky relationship question. 

Sure, research has given us the answers to several of our biggest sex questions, from how often couples should have sex in a relationship (it depends on your sex drive) to whether having more sex will make you happier. (It usually won't.)

But when is the optimal time to start being sexually intimate in a relationship?

Like many relationships, the answer is a little complicated: Some say wait as long as possible, others say a few months is a good benchmark, and others give it an even shorter timeframe of just a few weeks. 

One reason why it’s so hard to determine the best time in a relationship to have sex is because there haven’t been a ton of studies that address that specific question. Plus, the studies have been conducted on very specific sample groups: married heterosexual couples and college-aged men and women.

Few studies have taken a look at the health of a relationship as it relates to when the couple first had sex. And what's out there is somewhat conflicting.

Here's what we know:

Back in the early 2000s, Illinois State University communications professor Sandra Metts did a study to find out if having an emotional connection — in particular saying “I love you” before having sex — could have a positive impact on the trajectory of the relationship.

Her study of almost 300 college-aged men and women found that it did.

In fact, Metts found, couples that had sex first and said “I love you” after had a negative experience: The introduction of that conversation was often awkward and apologetic.

Though not a clear indicator of the exact timing to have sex, Mett’s study did provide a checklist of potential steps partners should take before they get physical. That emotional connection is one of the key elements of any relationship, Toni Coleman, a psychotherapist from the Washington, DC, area, told Business Insider.

Having a good level of communication and an understanding of where the relationship is also helps make sure the experience is positive, she said, referring to her professional experience working with single men and women working toward successful relationships.

Barton Goldsmith, a psychotherapist from California, agreed that being on the same page emotionally is helpful for finding the best time to start having sex.

“The most important thing is you both agree not to push,” he said. “Be clear that the person is comfortable.”

In other words, it's best to wait at least a little bit, at least until you're comfortable with one another and have a better picture of what each of you want in the relationship. But when it comes to how long you wait, that depends.

Option No. 1: Wait as long as possible

wedding coupleIn 2010, Dean Busby, the director of the school of family life at Brigham Young University, did a study which suggested that the longer you delay sex — especially if you wait until marriage — the more stable and satisfying your relationship will be.

To be fair, Brigham Young University, which funded Busby's research, is sponsored by the Church of Latter-day Saints, and they have some thoughts when it comes to sex and marriage.

Of course, all social-science studies are somewhat subjective: Many are taken with surveys and interviews, and participants may respond based on what they think the researcher wants to hear. 

Option No. 2: Give it a few months

In Coleman’s experience, and based off the findings of studies, she suggests at least three months — or when it’s clear the honeymoon phase of the relationship is over — is the best time to start having sex. The honeymoon phase is the first few months of a relationship, when everything is new, feelings of attraction are intense, and it seems like the person you're with is perfect.

“You move past that, and your feet are more on the ground,” she said. “I think that's probably the point at which [Mett's study] said, the couples who waited until that level fared a lot better than people who had sex on the first, second, or third date.”

Option No. 3: Give it a few weeks

Goldsmith disagrees. He thinks the time after the honeymoon period, or the time before a couple has children, is too late. By then, he says, the strong desire to have sex may have already subsided. A 2012 study on sexual desire found that after the beginning phase of a relationship, sexual desire drops, particularly in women.

In his experience, 36 hours spent together is all it takes. And that 36 hours doesn’t have to be consecutive, says Goldsmith. It would probably take a few weeks to add up.

RELATED: How much sex you should be having in a healthy relationship

CHECK OUT: Scientists discovered that having more sex won't make you happier, but that's not the most surprising part

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Spontaneous sex is a myth — here's how a 'sex schedule' could save your relationship

How much to spend on a gift for your partner this Valentine's Day

$
0
0

hearts valentine's day roses flowers

February can be an expensive month.

According to a recent Bankrate study, the "traditional Valentine's Day"— including "a dozen red roses, chocolates, a nice dinner for two, jewelry, and champagne" — costs an average of $512.

That seems steep, but even if you don't partake in the classic date night, Valentine's Day shoppers shell out an average of $147 for flowers, trinkets, candy, romantic dinners, and tickets to movies and shows, according to the National Retail Federation.

How much should you spend on a Valentine's Day gift?

The short answer: It depends.

"What you spend on a Valentine's Day gift is really determined by your budget, and that is an entirely personal decision," says etiquette expert Lizzie Post from The Emily Post Institute. "Some people love making sure they have a large budget for gifts for loved ones. For other people, it's candy hearts. It truly depends on your own personal choice about how you choose to manage your finances."

There's no universal dollar figure you should aim for, she emphasizes, nor should the length of your relationship affect how much money you spend.

"You might start out a relationship with a very lucrative career," she explains. "And three years in, something might change — you might be unemployed and unable to do something at the same level you were able to do it at before. It's always whatever fits your budget that dictates what your gift should be."

valentine's dayWhile the length of your relationship shouldn't affect how much you spend, it tends to affect what you spend on, Post says. More established couples are more likely to give sentimental gifts, whereas a couple that's just been together for a few weeks or months might stick with something more consumable and not as long lasting.

Before you try to keep up with the "traditional Valentine's Day" couples, review your budget and determine an amount of money you're comfortable spending. If that number happens to be $50 or less, there are plenty of great Valentine's Day gift options for that budget.

And remember — there's nothing wrong with a homemade card or hug coupons. With the right delivery, they can go just as far as chocolates, roses, and jewelry.

SEE ALSO: 5 essential money conversations to have before proposing to your partner

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We tried the ‘Elon Musk food challenge' and lived off $2 a day for a month

Why we use pet names in relationships

$
0
0

CBShimym

I have been called a little owl, a swan and even a "panda-fish." No, I'm not a supernatural, shape-shifting creature or a character in a children's storybook.

I've just been in a few relationships where cutesy, affectionate nicknames emerged as inside jokes.

These names stuck around for months, even years – to the point where hearing "Elizabeth" or "Liz" in certain contexts would suggest a truly serious situation, or that I was in trouble.

With Valentine's Day around the corner, I got to thinking about terms of endearment and about the world of interpersonal language that romantic partners develop just for themselves. I began to wonder: Is there any science behind using pet names? Is it a mark of a healthy relationship, or unhealthy? Are couples who give each other names, ranging from the generic "Honey" and "Sweetie" to the creative "Loopy Lop," more likely to stay together? And in our digital age, are these nicknames any more important?

A quick search of the literature reveals just how little these issues have been studied scientifically. The evidence that's out there is largely based on a smattering of surveys, which didn't capture an entirely representative sample of forms of love. It doesn’t seem like anyone has made any distinctions between heterosexual and homosexual couples with regard to the use of pet names—perhaps it's not relevant?—or compared how pet names are used in the United States versus other countries. But from what has been studied, and from the experience of several experts, it seems nicknames can be a good thing for a relationship – if both partners are into it.

What are pet names good for?

RTX12GIFPlenty of my friends have developed nicknames with their romantic partners.

I asked the question on Facebook and got a broad assortment of answers: There's a husband and wife called “Nerk(le) and (Milk)Dud," a dating couple called "Sweefy and Darsh," and former boyfriends who knew each other as "Tiger and Teddy."An American man who dated a Chinese woman told me he called her "Popo,"which means "wife" or "broken broken," depending on your intonation — and she called him "Benben," which he says means something like "dumb dumb," referring to his lackluster mastery of the Chinese language at the time.

There seem to be a variety of languages with pet names, too. According to the website of the popular language-learning software Rosetta Stone, the French say "Mon Petit Chou" (my little cabbage or cream puff), the Russians say "Vishenka" (cherry), the Dutch call girlfriends "Dropje" (candy) and in Brazil you can say "Meu Chuchu," where "chuchu" is a vegetable. In Spain I heard the term "Media Naranja," meaning half-orange, suggesting that the romantic partners are two halves of the whole. The BBC did its own international roundup 2013, which dug up terms like "Chang Noi" (little elephant) in Thai, "Ghazal" (gazelle) in Arabic and several inventive examples from readers.

But if you scour in the scientific literature for research on pet names and relationship happiness, you'll likely come upon one stand-out paper: ""Sweet Pea and "Pussy Cat': An Examination of Idiom Use and Marital Satisfaction Over the Life Cycle," which appeared in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships in 1993. Carol J. Bruess led this study for her master's thesis, and she's still getting inquiries about it 22 years later.

"I fell in love with the idea that I could look at the micromoments that create relationships," says Bruess, now director of family studies at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Bruess approaches pet names anthropologically. To her, a relationship is a "mini-culture" unto itself, reinforced by rituals such as nicknames and other private language. The terms of endearment are important when conflicts arise, she says, allowing a natural recourse to humor and playfulness when things get rough.

"I think it's a really human, natural behavior to take language and shape it for our own purposes," she says. "I think that's how nicknames evolve. We name things, we give things symbols, and over time we tend to naturally manipulate those symbols toward a certain outcome."

Bruess' study, co-authored by retired professor Judy C. Pearson, specifically looked at the relationship between nicknames and the satisfaction of married people. The authors used the term "idiosyncratic communication" to talk about nicknames, expressions of affection and other sorts of "insider" language used only within a specific relationship. Bruess and Pearson found that idiosyncratic communication is associated with marital satisfaction and couples in their first five years of marriage without children reported using the most idioms.

But rather than these private words and phrases dying off over time, Bruess thinks that they become so ingrained in a relationship that long-term married couples may stop recognizing them as special. "It's become part of the fabric of their relationship," she said. "It's taken for granted."

For this study students at Ohio University went out and delivered the survey to married people. All told, 154 completed surveys came back to the researchers, and they used those to divide people into categories of how long they had been married and whether or not they had children. Interestingly, the study did not use data from couples married for more than five years who had no children (there were only two examples). It also didn't look at non-married couples. So, while this study established a basis for looking at the question, it used a small sample size and didn't represent the full spectrum of romantic relationships.

Still, Bruess believes the main finding — that idiosyncratic communication, including cute nicknames, relates to marital satisfaction — is absolutely true today.

"If we can't laugh at ourselves and with each other in the relationship, we're less likely to sustain that relationship in a positive way over time," she says.

What is normal?

rtr47zhz

I wondered if anyone had done a broader survey of the nicknames issue. Pepper Schwartz, professor of sociology at the University of Washington in Seattle, co-authored a book called The Normal Bar that collected data from almost 100,000 participants through an online survey about all things related to relationship happiness, including nicknames.

The authors gathered responses several countries—including Canada, England, France, Italy, Spain, Hungary, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, and China—but only analyzed the U.S. data on nicknames, Schwartz says.

The authors found that about two-thirds of U.S. respondents said they used pet names in their relationships, and that among people who said they were in "very happy" relationships, 76 percent reported using pet names. That sounds like a high correlation, too, but gives me pause as a science writer because the survey did not use randomized sampling to find participants. (A controlled study would seem a bit inauthentic, however: Assigning some couples to use nicknames, and others not to, and then seeing who's happier after a few years.)

Nonetheless, Schwartz says she thinks pet names are important as shorthand for admiration and affection. Especially for those who feel they don't get enough affection, using pet names makes up a lack of "hearing from their partner enough good stuff about how wonderful they are," Schwartz says. "It may be easier for someone to say "Hey babe, you look great' than "I love you.'"

Sex expert Ian Kerner, author of the "Good In Bed" series of guidebooks, agrees that the use of pet names is "a great thing" as long as both partners are comfortable with the names.

"Names like honey, baby, babe, sweetheart (etc.) connote a special intimacy that's reserved for your significant other," he wrote in an e-mail. "Most couples tell me they're shocked or know something is wrong in the relationship when a partner actually calls them by their actual name and not their nickname."

You may be familiar with another group of nicknames that are reserved only for certain people: families. My parents have their own nicknames for me and my brother, and we have names for them too that we don't use in public. The names have resulted in a few awkward car rides with friends over the years, but otherwise I do see it as a largely positive extension of the bonds between us.

Helen Fisher, a biological anthropologist at Rutgers University and my go-to person for all things connected to "the science of love," thinks the process of giving a sweetheart a special name may be related to how parents and children give each other pet names, too. "It's just a human way of expressing love," she says.

Baby talk

Fisher directed me to researchers at The Kinsey Institute at Indiana University who did a study on "baby talk," or what they call "Loverese," among couples. This refers to the way that people change their voices, often using a higher pitch, when speaking to a romantic partner (or baby). This is relevant because it's another example of the special speech unique to particular couples.

The Kinsey study, which has not yet been published, had about 500 participants, all in relationships, and found that, on average, couples spend 10 minutes of every hour with each other using romantic baby talk. But this speech is negatively related to relationship length, so couples that have been together for years use it less. Participants in this study did represent a variety of age groups (18 to more than 60 years old), and study authors did not control for sexual orientation or marital status.

"Overwhelmingly, people say romantic baby talk should only be used in committed relationships. That tends to be the only relationship people said that they do use this in," says Amanda Gesselman, postdoctoral research fellow at The Kinsey Institute.

"Using baby talk seems to be a way to strengthen an emotional bond between relationship partners, which is something you would want to do with a partner you want to commit to, but probably not with partners that you don't wish to be attached to," she added.

Previous studies showed that romantic baby talk is found among speakers of many languages, according to Gesselman.

"It appears to be a normal, healthy thing for couples who are very into each other, and satisfied and passionate toward each other," she says. "When it starts to taper off, people tend to be less satisfied. It doesn't mean that being satisfied stops the baby talk (or vice versa). They both seem to be declining together."

Not for everyone

Gesselman acknowledges that while her study looked at the average among couples, there could be individual differences unaccounted for. There could be couples for which nicknames and baby talk just don't work.

One expert I spoke with advises against pet names, or at least "Honey" specifically. Maggie Arana wrote a book with Julienne Davis called Stop Calling Him Honey…and Start Having Sex! in which they argue that pet names contribute to "roommate syndrome"—when a relationship goes from being sexual to one of chaste friendship.

The book is based on the authors' personal experience and on anecdotal stories from a variety of couples, most of whom they reached through friends or friends of friends. It's a small sample, but Arana stands by the general trend it presents.

"The pet names don't necessarily kill your sex life but they definitely hurt it," she says.

According to Arana, couples can improve their sex lives by dropping pet names, and she's seen many examples of this. Just being called by your own name is special, too. "We're all ego-driven. We like hearing our names. When you don't call your spouse ever by his or her name, I think you can run into trouble," she says, adding that silly names and baby talk can put people in a non-sexy mindset. "If you're calling each other Muffin, for example, it's really hard to go from Muffin to having sex."

Others say the effect of pet names depends on the individual relationship – that if both partners like it, there's no problem. Bruess in particular cautions against judging a couple based on their pet names, which emerge and exist in their own unique relationship. Again, it's like looking at a culture from the outside.

"What might be disgusting or not sexy to us might have a whole host of meanings that serves that couple's relationship well," Bruess said.

There's also the embarrassment factor, of course, if one person lets the nickname slip in front of others (I have been chided for accidentally doing this too loudly on occasion). This is especially bad if you have a pet name that would sound infantilizing or downright ridiculous to others. Kerner himself admits that he doesn't like when his wife calls him "Peanut" or "Little Peanut."

"It infuriates me if she ever accidentally calls me that in public," he says.

Here's another can of wordy worms that pet names open: issues of gender and power. Women may often take on the names of tasty objects (such as "Muffin") while men assume more macho monikers (such as "Big Daddy Rabbit"), Bruess said. Even calling someone "baby" can suggest that the person is inferior to you.

"We would hope (pet names) are there to build intimacy and not to reinforce gender power dynamics. That's probably the slight dark side of something that's otherwise fun and cute," says Justin Garcia of The Kinsey Institute, who collaborated with Gesselman on the study of romantic baby talk.

Embracing pet names in the digital age

woman texting close up

In the digital age, when hardly anything is private anymore, couples may value their pet names all the more. Bruess, who is about to come out with a book about families and social media, hypothesizes that couples savor the privacy of their nicknames and idioms even more today because so many other aspects of their lives have become public.

Kerner agrees. "With increasingly public lives, an intimate nickname between partners is all the more important for distinguishing the false intimacy of social media from the real intimacy of direct human relationships," he says.

Whether they sound to others like gibberish or the names of Muppets, it doesn't matter. I will embrace the nicknames given to me as long as they hold positive meaning, and I'll invoke boyfriend-pet-names to reinforce emotional connection, make questions sound sweeter and break the ice when things are tense. When there's nothing left to say, at least there's that.

Even Arana, after writing a book advising against silly pet names, isn't totally immune to terms of endearment from her romantic partner.

"So you guys don't have nicknames for each other?" I asked Arana and her fiancée, Joe.

"No," said Joe, shaking his head.

"Well, every once in a while, you call me “gorgeous,'" she told him. "I don't mind "gorgeous.'"

This article was originally published on February 12, 2015.

SEE ALSO: There's a simple but counterintuitive way to get everyone from potential employers to dates to like you

CHECK OUT: The amazing benefits of a long-distance relationship and how to make it work

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A relationship expert reveals the key to a thriving relationship

People are paying over $1,000 for photographers to hide in the bushes while they propose

$
0
0

engagement proposal

If you've seen a candid engagement shot come up in your Facebook newsfeed, a single question probably springs to mind: Who took it?

The answer might be the bride-to-be's sister ... or it might be a paid photographer lurking in the proverbial (or literal) bushes, playing paparazzi to capture the moment.

In Pacific Standard, Rick Paulas examines the trend of engagement photography, writing the "super-niche industry" has been around for years, but recently exploded thanks to — you guessed it — social media.

And here's the thing about hiring a professional photographer to capture your proposal: It isn't cheap.

Of one photographer's services, Paulas writes:

The standard Proposal Photography Package ($495) comes with a pre-consultation about the logistics of where everyone needs to be, and one hour on the day-of "to capture the build up, the proposal moment, and take portraits and ring shots after you pop the question." There are bumps in cost if you want to make your friends jealous with a proposal in front of the Times Square big screen ($1,550) or on a San Francisco Cable Car ($1,360). Those aren't cheap prices, even when you're dealing with the money-to-burn, nothing's-good-enough mindset of today's wedding market.

The company, Paparazzi Proposals, captured nearly 700 of these moments in 2015.

The $1,000-plus packages on on the higher end, but on the whole, those prices aren't an anomaly.

In its 2016 Wedding Report, Thumbtack, a site that connects consumers with skilled professionals — like engagement photographers — found that nearly half of couples plan to spend $250-$500 on engagement photography. The Knot, the go-to place for all things wedding, says you can expect to pay "a few hundred" for a session in a photographer's studio, and for the trendier, candid (or "candid") location shoots, you should plan to pay "several times that much." 

Some photographers include engagement shots in their wedding photography packages, which again, don't run cheap. The Thumbtack report found 40% of couples plan to spend over $1,000 on pictures of their big day, and if you filter to include photographers who include engagement shots, the wedding photography search tool on the Knot includes packages that reach nearly $5,000. 

Take note that neither of these sites explicitly say your $1,000 photographer is willing to hide in the bushes — in these cases, it might be more of a post-engagement session than an of-the-moment snap. If you do want someone kneeling in the rhododendron, though, rest assured: You can hire someone to do it.

SEE ALSO: 7 thoughtful Valentine's Day gifts under $50

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We tried the ‘Elon Musk food challenge' and lived off $2 a day for a month

Valentine's Day is not on February 14 this year*

$
0
0

the arrangement floral

*You may think that Valentine's Day — the day you send your significant other flowers and chocolates — is Sunday, February 14.

And you'd be dead wrong.

"The impact is made when you send flowers to their work ... it's a status symbol," says Tom Sebenius, cofounder of The Arrangement Floral Design, a boutique company specializing in weddings and social events in New York City.

That means you have one day to get them sent to the right place. That's it.

Normally this time crunch would mean an emergency pop into your local Walgreens to grab some carnations and a box of whatever-chocolates so you can just barely skate through the holiday on your good looks and charm.

To that, we at Business Insider say simply, do better.

All is not lost. You can still order flowers for your special anyone that will make them think that you appreciate their attention (which is allegedly what the holiday is about).

So what do you do now that it's down to the wire?

"Get on the phone, right now, don't use the internet to order your flowers," said Sebenius. Right now you want to talk to a human — a local human — who will know where you're sending your flowers. You're going to get better service that way.

How do you choose which florist to dial? Keep two things in mind. First, now is not the time to be looking for deals. Florists are business people, too, and right now they're dealing with markups from wholesalers. If you try to find yourself a deal, you're going to get lost.

Besides, says Sebenius, "If you're paying $25 for a dozen roses, it's going to look like $25 for a dozen roses."

carnations What you should look for is a delivery minimum in the $50-$70 range. That will ensure that whoever you're buying them from is buying the good stuff.

"I always suggest orchids, evoke tropical thoughts, have a sexuality about them," said Sebenius.

Keep your card simple. "Love" and your name. Don't embarrass yourself trying to write a poem or something.

Good luck and Godspeed.

*We know February 14 is actual Valentine's Day people. But this is about the goods, not the date.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why women cheat — and what their husbands can do to prevent it


Science says these 5 things happen to couples who have been together a long time

$
0
0

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt

Being with someone for a long time changes the way you see the world.

It also changes you.

More importantly, close relationships may spark an entirely different way of thinking and acting, something Joshua Wolf Shenk, author of "Powers of Two," chalks up to having a "shared mind."

So, how do you and your significant other stack up? Check out these signs psychologists have observed in long-term couples that they say point to having such a shared mind:

SEE ALSO: Psychologists say one behavior is the 'kiss of death' for a relationship

DON'T MISS: There's a simple but counterintuitive way to get everyone from potential employers to dates to like you

1. You and your partner develop your own private language.

Ever get a text from your significant other that means absolutely nothing on its own but carries a certain significance that you can't quite explain?

This "insider" language is one of the first signs that the two of you are operating in sync, writes Shenk. According to a study from Robert Hooper, a University of Texas professor of communication, secret communication accomplishes two things: It helps deepen your bond — romantic or platonic — and establishes a unique, shared identity.

Private language can include everything from inside jokes to nicknames, writes Ohio State University psychologist Carol Bruess in a study of romantic couples. Bruess' research suggests a link between how often partners use these private words and how satisfied they are with their relationship. Bruess found that the more often couples used secret words and phrases, the happier they tended to say they were.



2. You stop self-censoring.

The way most of us speak with strangers, acquaintances, and even close friends is markedly different from how we talk when we're alone with our partner.

When we're with others, most of us "self-monitor." That is, we try to please the people around us by adapting our behavior to suit theirs.

But when we're with an intimate partner, we let go of this pattern of behavior and instead "talk fluidly and naturally," Shenk writes. In other words, we stop having to constantly check ourselves before we speak. We're more candid and open.

Many of the pairs Shenk talks to in his book have such a relationship. University of California at Berkeley psychologist Daniel Kahneman, for example, tells Shenk: "Like most people, I am somewhat cautious about exposing tentative thoughts to others." But after he'd spent a few years working with his research partner, cognitive psychologist Amos Tversky, "this caution was completely absent."



3. You start to look alike.

In his influential 1987 study, psychologist Robert Zajonc found that there's a very obvious reason that married couples start to look alike. They use the same muscles so often that, over time, they start to mirror each other.

This coordination of movement isn't accidental, says Shenk. Instead, it "reflects what psychologists call a "shared coordinative structure," which includes how we harmonize our gaze and body sway and the little mannerisms and idiosyncrasies of how we speak.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

7 ways being married influences your success

$
0
0

wedding

If you're enjoying a life of wedded bliss, congratulations on beating some impressive odds.

In the US, people are getting hitched less often than they once did, and young Americans are putting off marriage more than ever before.

In 1962, half of 21-year-olds and 90% of 30-year-olds had been married at least once. In 2014, only 8% of 21-year-olds and 55% of 30-year-olds had been married.

According to Bloomberg, married Americans are now the minority.

Relationship experts believe that American marriages are more challenging today than ever before because we expect so much more out of marriage, and when higher expectations aren't met, it can suffocate a marriage to the point of destroying it.

As a result, we tend to see more extreme manifestations of struggling and healthy marriages.

While we know that marriages come in all shapes and sizes — some are short-lived, while others are enduring; some are really happy, and some aren't — how does marriage ultimately impact the many facets of your success?

Well, there's no simple answer. But these studies will begin to unpack the question a little and help us better understand the many factors at play.

SEE ALSO: 9 scientific ways having a child influences your success

Marrying your best friend makes you really, really happy.

A recent study on marital satisfaction released by the National Bureau of Economic Research and previously reported on by Business Insider suggests that the happiest people are those who are married to their best friends.

Controlling for pre-marital happiness, the study concluded that, overall, marriage leads to increased well-being.

But while couples who saw their best friend as someone outside of the relationship were happier than single people, the study found that those who consider their spouse or partner to be their best friend get about twice as much life satisfaction from marriage as other married people. 

The authors concluded that partners can provide each other with a unique kind of social support and help each other overcome some of life's biggest challenges, and people with the most difficult lives — for example, middle-aged people, who often experience a dip in personal well-being — can benefit the most.



Married people are less social.

Your network of relationships, among other things, can help you find jobs and make you happier happier, healthier, and more open to insights. 

Unfortunately for married people, research suggests that, compared to Americans who have always been single, they are less likely to support and stay in touch with their family and less likely to help, encourage, and socialize with friends and neighbors.

 



Married people get some monetary bonuses.

According to two Atlantic writers who crunched some numbers, married women can pay as much as $1 million less than their single counterparts over a lifetime.

The writers looked at the tax penalties and bonuses, as well as living costs like health spending and housing costs.

According to the Tax Policy Center, a married couple suffers a "marriage penalty" if they pay more income tax as a married couple than they would have as two single individuals. A couple receives a "marriage bonus" if they pay less income tax as a married couple than they would have as two single individuals.

When couples combine their incomes, especially when they have similar incomes, this can push them into a higher tax bracket, which would result in a higher tax rate.

In addition to the tax break you receive from filing jointly, couples are more likely to receive a marriage bonus when spouses earn different amounts.

There are a lot of factors affecting marriage penalties and bonuses, but generally, according to the US Department of the Treasury Office of Tax Analysis, more married couples under the age of 65 filing joint tax returns on average see bonuses than penalties.

According to the BLS data the Atlantic writers looked at, couples also spent on average 6.9% of their annual income on their health, while single men spent only 3.9% and single women spent 7.9%.  

And when it came to housing, couples spent on average 23.9% of their annual income, compared to single men who spent 30.3% and single women who spend 39.8%. 

By combining resources and splitting costs, married people have the edge on all kinds of day-to-day expenses in addition to rent or mortgage: one cable bill, one utilities bill, and shared groceries can all lead to big savings.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

4 surprising psychological reasons someone might fall in love with you

Here’s the model that can predict if a relationship will last

$
0
0

couple kissing comforting

If you think our romantic relationships are based on the passions of the heart and the melding of minds — both beyond explanation or reason — then think again.

People in love might seem preoccupied, emotional and at times downright irrational, but there might just be some surprisingly logical foundations underpinning our romantic relationships.

In fact, there are some things about our intimate relationships that can be predicted by our behaviors and how we react and relate to our loved ones.

Rightly or wrongly, it’s not surprising that things such as physical attractiveness and financial resources can be important factors when first selecting a mate. But once someone is in a relationship, what happens next?

An often cited explanation for how romantic relationships play out is the “investment model," which can often predict relationship commitment. Although commitment in this context can be hard to define, it is usually considered to reflect attachment to a partner with an intention to remain with that partner in the longer term.

So what predicts relationship commitment?

A key theme of the investment model (as the name suggests) is to look at relationships a little like a balance sheet, but not in the way you might expect.

There are many rewards that can come from being in a relationship, such as having emotional, intellectual and physical needs met. There are also costs associated with a relationship: perhaps arguments or perhaps a perceived loss of independence.

But rather than just tallying up the pros and cons of being in a relationship, the investment model says that we will look at the overall outcomes of these costs and rewards. We will compare those outcomes to what we believe are appropriate for a good relationship (that is, our own personal standard).

If we expect that the good should outweigh the bad in our relationships, and our partner is very kind but can be grumpy in the morning, then our personal standard is met or even exceeded (as general kindness trumps morning grumpiness), and we will experience relationship satisfaction.

But if our personal standard is that relationships should be good all the time, and if our partner is grumpy in the mornings, then even if our partner is exceptionally kind-hearted, we will not be satisfied with the relationship.

This can explain why two couples might have very different relationships, yet still experience similar levels of relationship satisfaction.

Sounds straightforward enough: find the person who matches or exceeds your personal standards and you will have a good relationship. They must be "the one." But the investment model suggests that relationships satisfaction on its own is not enough to predict relationship commitment.

Is the grass greener?

GettyImages 458169920

The next thing we consider in relationships is the "quality of alternatives." When all other things are equal, we will evaluate the merits of other choices and if we perceive them to be "better” then we might move towards that alternative.

Fortunately, this isn't (quite) as callous as it sounds. Alternatives might refer to a new individual who we perceive to be superior to our current partner. Perhaps the superior choice is sexier, smarter or more socially mobile than your current partner (obviously, this depends on what is important to you).

Happily, this doesn't translate to mean that everyone is looking to upgrade to a supermodel or Noble Laureate; superiority is only important if your current partner doesn't match your idea of what a partner should be like.

But alternatives might also refer to an alternative situation. For example, if you experience a lot of conflict in your relationship, you might feel you would be better off alone.

This cuts both ways: if you enjoy being single, then someone will need to be pretty special if they are likely to sweep you off your feet.

Finally, the investment model considers the role of — you guessed it — investments.

These investments can be concrete (say a house you share with your partner), or less tangible, like the time and effort put into a relationship to improve it. Investments can also be indirect, such as a shared social network or a shared social status.

Whatever the nature of the investment, the more you invest, the more you risk by leaving the relationship. Consequently, research found the bigger the investment you have made in your relationship, the more likely you are to be committed to your partner.

If you are thinking all of this feels vaguely familiar from other contexts, you are right. The investment model can be used to explain a number of outcomes, such as why someone will stay in a job whether they will stay loyal to a brand as well as to predict physical activity.

Just how much can relationships be predicted to last, or to fail? Well these investment model factors contribute substantially to relationship commitment, in fact explaining around 60% of our commitment, with satisfaction being the most important component.

But whether this means that people will stay in a relationship or leave is less clear: the link between relationship commitment and relationship persistence is only small to moderate.

Many other things can also influence whether the relationship will go the long haul. For example, if you perceive that your family and friends approve of the relationship, then it was more likely to last.

Even if you do not have particularly strong emotional intimacy with your partner, but if you have close relationships with your friends and relatives your belongingness needs can still be met.

How your last relationship ended can also make a difference. Break ups that are mutual (where neither person singularly initiated the break up) tend to be related to less satisfaction and commitment in future relationships than if one person decided to end the relationship.

So this Valentine's Day, what do you need to do to make sure things are going well in your relationship and to avoid things ending in disaster?

1. Have realistic expectations about your relationship because that means you are more likely to have greater relationship satisfaction.

2. Identify the things that you and your partner value in each other and try to find opportunities to boost your emotional capital.

3. Evaluate your relationship investment portfolio because the more you put in, the more you will get out.

Happy Valentine's Day!

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

SEE ALSO: Here’s the best way to talk to your partner, according to psychologists

CHECK OUT: There's a simple but counterintuitive way to get everyone from potential employers to dates to like you

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How to use math to find the ideal spouse

Psychologist and eHarmony CEO Neil Clark Warren says these are the 5 most important factors for a lasting relationship

$
0
0

michelle and barack obama

With Valentine's Day right around the corner, many couples may be asking themselves the question: How will I know if this one's going to last?

While there's no exact formula, we sat down with the CEO of the dating website eHarmony, Neil Clark Warren, and asked him what he thinks are the most important factors in successful relationships.

Before founding eHarmony, Warren spent nearly 40 years as a psychologist specializing in marriage counseling. In his experience, whether couples stay together or split apart depends on whether they have what he calls "broad-based compatibility."

eHarmony determines whether couples have this based on 29 aspects of personality, such as character, sociability, and intellect. 

According to Warren, these are the top five things successful couples share:

1. Both partners are emotionally healthy

jennifer lawrence bradley cooper silver linings playbookOne of the most important things for a strong relationship, Warren said, is that both partners are mentally healthy, and do not have disorders such as bipolar disorder or severe depression. In a 2014 study of the spouses of 60 patients with depression and 65 patients with bipolar disorder, members of both groups reported high levels of burden. Spouses of bipolar patients reported much lower satisfaction with their sex lives, too.

2. And have what he calls "healthy characters"

Liar Liar

In addition to emotional health, it's also vital that both partners have healthy characters — and honesty is especially important, Warren said.

A 2015 study of 3,459 Korean adults that included 542 pairs of identical twins and 122 pairs of fraternal twins surveyed people about their temperament and character. They found that spouses reported character traits that were more similar to each other than to those of their children, parents, or siblings — and the similarity increased the longer they had been married.

3. They have similar levels of intelligence

good will hunting thinkingAccording to Warren, the most compatible couples tend to be within one standard deviation of each on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, one of the most commonly used tests of human intellect. If one partner is significantly smarter than the other, it tends not to work, he said.

It also turns out that in general, women are attracted to intelligent men. Psychologist Geoffrey Miller argues in "The Mating Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature" that the human brain, much like a peacock's tail, has evolved through generations of sexual selection in which women chose to have children with brainier men. But when it comes to men, research suggests they like the idea of dating a smarter woman, but don't necessarily want to in practice.

4. They share a sense of humor

Master of NoneIt may seem intuitive, but having a sense of humor is incredibly important in a relationship. Humor acts as a
"social lubricant" that keeps a couple's interactions running smoothly, Warren told Business Insider.

Studies support this, but they make an important distinction between "wit" (spontaneous jokes that are genuinely funny and require intelligence) and preplanned jokes and one-liners (which aren't very funny or intelligent).

5. They are kind to each other

as good as it gets jack nicholson with puppyThis was the number-one thing that couples report as being important for a relationship, Warren said. And there's research to back this up: A 2015 study of more than 2,000 couples in five cultures found that kindness, in addition to sex, finances, division of labor, and raising children, was a key factor in whether a marriage was successful.

Of course, many other factors contribute to a healthy, lasting relationship. But it's probably safe to say that compatibility on these five are a good starting point.

CHECK OUT: whether couples stay together or split apart depends on what he calls "broad-based compatibility,"

DON'T MISS: 7 proven ways to tell if your relationship will last

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: There's something unsettling about these photos from NASA's Curiosity Mars rover

Viewing all 3141 articles
Browse latest View live