Wikia

Psychology Wiki

Open marriage relationship

Talk0
34,117pages on
this wiki
Revision as of 20:24, December 28, 2011 by Dr Joe Kiff (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social psychology: Altruism · Attribution · Attitudes · Conformity · Discrimination · Groups · Interpersonal relations · Obedience · Prejudice · Norms · Perception · Index · Outline


Close Relationships
KarenWhimseyValentineMain

Affinity
Asexuality
Attachment
Bisexuality
Bride price
Brideservice
Bonding
Boyfriend
Cohabitation
Courtship
Dowry
Divorce
Friendship
Family
Girlfriend
Ground rules
Homosexuality
Incest
Jealousy
Love
Marriage
Monogamy
Open marriage
Paedophilia
Partner
Pederasty
Platonic love
Polyamory
Polyandry
Polygamy
Polygynandry
Polygyny
Prostitution
Sexuality
Separation
Swinging
Violence
Widowhood
Zoophilia

The impact of open marriage on relationships varies across couples, yielding positive, neutral, and negative outcomes. Some couples report high levels of marital satisfaction and have long-lasting open marriages. Other couples drop out of the open marriage lifestyle and return to sexual monogamy. Still other couples experience serious problems and report that open marriage contributed to their divorces. Scientists do not yet understand why some couples respond positively to open marriage while other couples respond negatively.

Positive outcomes

Many couples have positive experiences with open marriage. This does not mean couples never experience problems with open marriage. It simply means some couples enjoy open marriages and also maintain high levels of marital satisfaction and stability.

A national study of sexuality conducted by Hunt found that relatively few people engage in swinging style open marriages. Hunt attributed the low number of people in open marriages to various social, psychological, and practical problems. Yet, some of these people "confirmed what the advocates and enthusiasts have claimed--namely, that marital swinging can provide physically intense experiences, that it can be immensely ego-gratifying and that it is a temporary release from confinement and responsibility and a brief chance to live out one's wildest fantasies." (pages 273-274) [1] Open marriages can challenge couples with various problems, but open marriages can also offer couples extremely satisfying experiences. Couples may view the satisfying experiences as well worth the efforts spent managing the problems.

Some studies show that couples in open marriages can maintain satisfying relationships. Rubin observed no differences in marital adjustment between couples in open marriages and couples in sexually monogamous marriages. [2] Rubin and Adams reported no differences in marital satisfaction between couples in open marriages and couples in sexually monogamous relationships. [3] Gilmartin likewise found no differences in marital satisfaction between sexually open and sexually monogamous couples. [4] A study by Bergstrand and Willams found couples in open marriages had higher levels of satisfaction than couples in the general population. [5]

Some couples in open marriages report high levels of satisfaction with their relationships. A study conducted by Wolf found that 76 percent of openly married couples described the quality of their relationships as "better than average" or "outstanding." [6] Dixon found similarly high levels of marital satisfaction in a study of 100 bisexual and heterosexual husbands in open marriages. [7] In another study, Dixon observed that 80 percent of wives in open marriages rated their marital compatibility as "excellent" or "good," and 76 percent of the wives rated their sexual satisfaction as "excellent" or "good." [8] Buunk has also reported high levels of satisfaction in openly married couples. [9]

Some couples feel open marriage has increased their marital satisfaction. Bergstrand and Williams collected online questionnaires from 1092 people involved in swinging style open marriages. [5] Among those people who said they were "somewhat unhappy" or "unhappy" with their marriages before swinging, around 80-90 percent said they were happier with their marriages after they started swinging. Nearly half of people who said they were "very happy" with their marriages before swinging claimed to be even happier with their marriages after swinging. Open marriage can in some cases increase marital satisfaction.

Thus, open marriage can have a positive impact on many couples. These couples are able to enjoy open marriage while maintaining satisfying and stable relationships with one another. Levels of marital satisfaction for these couples are often quite high. Some couples even feel open marriage has improved their relationships.

Neutral outcomes

Couples sometimes drop out of the open marriage lifestyle and return to sexual monogamy. In a 5 year study of bisexuals, 80 percent of whom initially had open relationships, Weinberg, Williams, and Pryor observed a definite shift towards sexual monogamy over time. [10] When first interviewed, a majority of these bisexuals preferred sexual non-monogamy as their ideal form of romantic relationships. Five years later, around 60 percent had changed their views, and most of those who changed their views said sexual monogamy was their new ideal. Some of these changes were motivated by the emergence of the AIDS epidemic. Monogamy was seen as a way to avoid getting HIV/AIDS. But, for many, the shift to monogamy was due to a genuine change in what they sought in relationships. Their desire to be sexually monogamous had nothing to do with the AIDS epidemic.

Couples who try open marriages and decide to return to sexually monogamous marriages may be left with different feelings about open marriage. Some may have negative feelings about their open marriage experiences. [11] Others may continue to "see nonmonogamy as possibly good for others but not for themselves." [10] Overall, open marriage has a relatively neutral impact on these couples.

Negative outcomes

Some couples report serious problems with open marriage. A number of these couples may even divorce as a consequence of open marriage.

Couples in open marriages expose themselves to the potential for conflicts caused by jealousy. Couples in open marriages appear to experience jealousy more frequently than people in sexually monogamous marriages. [12] [13] Studies have shown that 80 percent or more of couples in open marriages experience jealousy over their extramarital relationships. [14] [15] Jealousy with its roots in open marriage can lead to serious conflicts. For example, attempting to interfere with a rival relationship may make a partner angry. Insulting or berating a partner may provoke retaliatory responses. Demanding greater commitment may ignite arguments. Indeed, many studies have reported that conflict occurs during episodes of jealousy. [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] The conflicts caused by jealousy can seem overwhelming and damage relationships.

Even when jealousy is not an overwhelming problem, open marriage may cause other complications. For example, a five year study of bisexuals observed a shift from open relationships to sexually monogamous relationships in many participants because they "felt that nonmonogamy was too time consuming, took too much energy, or was too complicated. They also thought that it got in the way of developing love, trust, and more intimate relationships with a partner." (Weinberg, Williams, & Pryor, 1995, page 262) [10] Numerous authors have argued that open marriages disrupt relationships by interfering with intimacy and provoking insecurities. [1] [22] [23] [24] [25]

Some couples report that open marriage contributed to their divorces. Janus and Janus asked divorced people to list the one primary reason for their divorces. [26] Approximately 1 percent of men and 2 percent of women listed open marriage as the primary reason for their divorce. This seems like a small percentage. But keep in mind that only 1 to 6 percent of the population have open marriages. [1] [27] [28] [29] Open marriage is perceived as a primary cause of divorce in a substantial minority of the 1 to 6 percent of people who have open marriages.

The extent to which open marriage actually contributes to divorce remains uncertain. Blumstein and Schwartz note a slightly higher risk of divorce among couples who engage in extramarital sex, even if the couples agree to allow extramarital sex. [30] However, Rubin and Adams did not observe any difference in the risk of divorce for couples in open marriages and couples in sexually monogamous marriages. [3] Open marriage may contribute to divorce for some, but not all, couples.

Open marriage can thus have a negative impact on some couples. It can cause serious problems with jealousy, and it can interfere with intimacy and security between partners. Some people report that open marriage contributed to their divorces, though the extent to which open marriage actually causes divorce remains unclear.

Maintenance behaviors


Scientists cannot yet explain why some couples respond positively to open marriage while other couples respond negatively. Nor can they predict which couples will respond positively or negatively. Consequently, all couples involved in open marriages may want to pay attention to their relationship maintenance behaviors.

The topic of relationship maintenance behaviors is far too broad to cover in a single article. The strategies for maintaining relationships described below are simply a few examples. Readers should be aware there are many strategies for maintaining healthy and happy relationships other than the ones mentioned here.

Markman, Stanley, and Blumberg list six ground rules for managing conflict and maintaining good marital relationships: [31]

  • When conflict is escalating, we will call a Time Out or Stop Action and either (a) try it again, using the Speaker-Listener technique or (b) agree to talk about the issue later, at a specified time, using the Speaker-Listener technique.
  • When we're having trouble communicating, we will use the Speaker-Listener technique.
  • When we're using the Speaker-Listener technique, we will completely separate problem discussion from problem solution (i.e., we will discuss the nature of the problem before jumping too quickly to finding solutions).
  • We can bring up issues at any time, but a partner can say: "This is not a good time." If a partner doesn't want to talk at that time, he or she takes responsibility for setting up a time to talk in the near future.
  • We will have weekly "couple's meetings."
  • We will make time for the great things: fun, friendship, and sensuality. We will agree to protect these times from conflict and the need to deal with issues.

The Speaker-Listener technique is a strategy for making communication more emotionally safe. It consists of three sets of rules. Rules that apply to both the Speaker and the Listener are:

  • The speaker has the floor.
  • Share the floor (i.e., take turns being Speaker).
  • No problem solving.

The next set of rules apply to the Speaker:

  • Speak for yourself.
  • Don't go on and on.
  • Stop and let the listener paraphrase.

The final set of rules apply to the Listener:

  • Paraphrase what you hear.
  • Focus on the speaker's message.
  • Don't rebut the speaker.

Using the Speaker-Listener technique in the context of the six ground rules can help couples maintain happier and longer-lasting relationships.

Gottman and colleagues have discovered the ratio of positive interactions to negative interactions strongly predicts divorce. [32] [33] Couples who maintain a ratio of 5 positive interactions for every 1 negative interaction are likely to remain together. Couples who do not maintain this 5:1 ratio are likely to get divorced. Moreover, couples are more likely to stay together if they follow certain patterns of communication during conflict:

"We conclude that the marriages that wound up happy and stable had a softened start-up by the wife, that the husband accepted influence from her, that he de-escalated low-intensity negative affect, that she was likely to use humor to effectively soothe him, and that he was likely to use positive affect and de-escalation to effectively soothe himself. The alternative to the active listening model suggested by these analyses is a model of gentleness, soothing, and de-escalation of negativity (negativity by one spouse is followed by the partner's neutral affect)." (Gottman, Coan, Carrere, & Swanson, 1988, page 00) [33]
These patterns of communication differ from the Speaker-Listener technique, but the goals are the same: stop the escalation of negativity during conflict and take steps to make a safe space for open and honest discussion.

Gottman has also identified a particularly harmful pattern of communication that begins with criticism and ends with stonewalling. [32] The steps of the pattern include:

  • Criticism - Criticism is attacking a partner's personality or character, usually attributing fault or blame, rather than complaining about a behavior. One can imply character faults in a partner by listing complaints about the partner's past behaviors.
  • Contempt - Contempt is criticism intended to insult and psychologically abuse a partner. Contempt reflects very negative views about one's partner.
  • Defensiveness - Defensiveness is a way of avoiding taking responsibility for setting things right by denying responsibility, making excuses, attributing negative thoughts to a partner, countering a partner's complaints with one's own complaints, and repeating oneself.
  • Stonewalling - Stonewalling is a break down of communication. The partners turn into "stone walls" and stop responding to each other.

These steps occur in a cascade. Criticism leads to contempt; contempt leads to defensiveness; and defensiveness leads to stonewalling. Couples who go through this cascade of destructive communication usually get divorced.

The main message of these strategies for maintaining relationships is to take time to enjoy positive interactions and fun activities with each other and, when conflicts or issues do arise, take steps to prevent negative interactions from spiralling out of control. Couples in open marriages may want to use these and various other strategies for maintaining satisfying relationships with one another.

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual Behavior in the 1970s. Chicago: Playboy Press.
  2. Rubin A. M. (1982). Sexually open versus sexually exclusive marriage: A comparison of dyadic adjustment. Alternative Lifestyles, 5, 101-108.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Rubin A. M., & Adams J. R. (1986). Outcomes of sexually open marriages. Journal of Sex Research, 22, 311-319.
  4. Gilmartin, B.G. (1978). The Gilmartin Report. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Bergstrand, C., & Williams, J.B. (2000). Today's alternative marriage styles: The case of swingers. Electronic Journal of Human Sexuality, Volume 3, Oct. 10, 2000. Retrieved July 26, 2006 from http://www.ejhs.org/volume3/swing/body.htm.
  6. Wolf, T.J. (1985). Marriages of Bisexual Men. In F. Klein and T.J. Wolf (Eds.), Bisexualities: Theory and Research (pp. 135-148). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
  7. Dixon, D. (1985). Perceived sexual satisfaction and marital happiness of bisexual and heterosexual swinging husbands. In F. Klein and T.J. Wolf (Eds.), Bisexualities: Theory and Research (pp. 209-222). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
  8. Dixon, J.K. (1985). Sexuality and relationship changes in married females following the commencement of bisexual activity. In F. Klein and T.J. Wolf (Eds.), Bisexualities: Theory and Research (pp. 115-133). New York, NY: Haworth Press.
  9. Buunk B. (1980). Extramarital sex in the Netherlands: Motivations in social and marital context. Alternative Lifestyles, 3, 11-39.
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 Weinberg, M.S., Williams, C.J., & Pryor, D.W. (1995). Dual Attraction: Understanding Bisexuality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  11. Gates, J. (2002). Survivors of an Open Marriage. KiwE Publishing, Ltd.
  12. Trost, M. R., Brown, S., & Morrison, M. (1994). Jealousy as an adaptive communication strategy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
  13. Pines, A., & Aronson, E. (1983). Antecedents, correlates, and consequences, of sexual jealousy. Journal of Personality, 51, 108–136.
  14. Buunk B. (1981). Jealousy in sexually open marriages. Alternative Lifestyles, 4, 357-372.
  15. Ramey J. W. (1975). Intimate groups and networks: Frequent consequences of sexually open marriage. Family Coordinator, 24, 515-530.
  16. White, G.L & Mullen, P.E. (1989). Jealousy. Theory, research and clinical strategies. New York: The Guilford Press.
  17. Bryson J. B. (1991). Modes of responses to jealousy-evoking situations. In P. Salovey (Ed.). The psychology of envy and jealousy (pp. 1-45). New York: Guilford.
  18. Buunk B. P ( 1991). Jealousy in close relationships: An exchange-theoretical perspective. In P. Salovey (Ed.), The psychology of jealousy and envy (pp. 148-177). New York: Guilford.
  19. Guerrero, L.K., & Andersen, P.A. (1998). The dark side of jealousy and envy: desire, delusion, desperation, and destructive communication. In W.R. Cupach and B.H. Spitzberg (Eds.) The Dark Side of Close Relationships. (pp. 33-70 ) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  20. Hansen G. L. (1991). "Jealousy: Its conceptualization, measurement, and integration with family stress theory". In P. Salovey (Ed.), The psychology of jealousy and envy (pp. 211-230). New York: Guilford.
  21. Schaap C., Buunk B., & Kerkstra A. ( 1988). "Marital conflict resolution". In P. Noller & M. A. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Perspectives on marital interaction (pp. 203-244). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
  22. Levinger, G. (1979). A social psychological perspective on marital dissolution. In G. Levinger and O.C. Moles (Eds.), Divorce and Separation: Context, Causes, and Consequences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
  23. Bancroft, J. (1989). Human Sexuality and its Problems. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
  24. Turner, J.S. (1996). Encyclopedia of Relationships across the Lifespan. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
  25. Olds, J. & Schwartz, R.S. (2000). Marriage in Motion: The Natural Ebb and Flow of Lasting Relationships. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
  26. Janus, S.S, & Janus, C.L. (1993). The Janus Report on Sexual Behavior. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
  27. Jenks, R.J. (1998). Swinging: A review of the literature. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 507-521.
  28. Bartell, G.D. (1971). Group Sex. New York, NY: New American Library.
  29. Spanier G.B., & Cole C.L. (1975). Mate swapping: Perceptions, value orientations, and participation in a midwestern community. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 4, 143-159.
  30. Blumstein, , & Schwartz, P. (1983). American Couples: Money, Work, Sex. New York, NY: William Morrow and Company.
  31. Markman,, H., Stanley, S., & Blumberg, S.L. (1994). Fighting For Your Marriage. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass Publishers.
  32. 32.0 32.1 Gottman, J.M. (1994). Why marriages succeed or fail and how you can make your last. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
  33. 33.0 33.1 Gottman, J.M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., Swanson, C. (1988). Predicting marital happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 60, 5-22.

See also

Related articles

Advertisement | Your ad here

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki