![\"\"](\"https:\/\/content.artofmanliness.com\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Four-Horsemen-header-4.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The psychologist John Gottman famously spent decades watching couples fight in his Love Lab at the University of Washington. He’d wire them up with physiological monitors, point a camera at them, and ask them to argue about some real issue in their marriage while he and his team looked on.<\/p>\n
After observing thousands of couples, Gottman and his team identified four specific communication behaviors that reliably predicted \u2014 with 94% accuracy \u2014 whether a marriage would survive.<\/p>\n
The topic of the argument didn’t matter. A couple could be arguing about sex, money, chores, kids, or in-laws. The content of the argument didn’t make a difference in how likely a couple was to still be married over the following years.<\/p>\n
What did matter was the extent to which four communication patterns showed up.<\/p>\n
Gottman called them the Four Horsemen of the Marriage Apocalypse.<\/p>\n
Here’s what they are and what to do about them.<\/p>\n
A lot of arguments in a marriage are about things that one person in the relationship isn’t happy about. Maybe the wife spends too much money at Costco or maybe the husband leaves the toilet seat up.<\/p>\n
Gottman and his team noticed two ways couples approach these relationship frictions: complaint or criticism. Complaints are healthy. Criticisms aren\u2019t.<\/p>\n
A complaint targets a specific behavior<\/em>: “You didn’t call when you said you would.”<\/p>\n A criticism targets the person<\/em>: “You never think about anyone but yourself.\u201d \u201cYou always do this.\u201d \u201cYou are so inconsiderate.” Globalizing language \u2014 “always,” “never” \u201cyou are<\/em>\u201d\u2014 is what tips a complaint into criticism. It takes one incident and turns it into a generalized assessment of character.<\/p>\n When a conversation veers into criticism, the issue that started it tends to disappear. When you call your wife a reckless, thoughtless overspender, she won’t be thinking about her overspending. She’ll be defending her worth as a human being, which means the overspending problem isn’t going to get solved. You’ll be too busy arguing about her character. She’ll likely get defensive (more on that below) and start dredging up some negative character assessments of you.<\/p>\n Gottman’s antidote is what he calls a “Gentle Start-Up.” Say what your problem is, how it’s upsetting you, and what you’d like your spouse to do to resolve the issue.<\/p>\n “I start feeling stressed about our finances when I see how much you’re spending on Amazon. Can we take a look at our bank statements together and see if there’s a place you can cut back?”<\/p>\n Works a lot better than: “You’re a selfish spendthrift who doesn’t care about our family’s financial future.” That just kicks off a fight.<\/p>\n Gottman identifies contempt as the single strongest predictor of divorce in his research, and it’s different from the other horsemen because it isn’t really about what your spouse did. Rather, it’s a stance<\/a> you take towards her.<\/p>\n Contempt shows up as sarcasm, eye-rolling, mockery, and hostile humor. When you argue with contempt, you’re not arguing with an equal; you’re treating your wife as someone beneath you. No one likes to be treated as less-than.<\/p>\n Contempt often accumulates from resentments in a relationship that never get addressed. Basically, you\u2019ve got a beef with your wife, you haven\u2019t told her, and the more you stew on it, the more your negative feelings toward her deepen.<\/p>\n Contempt is also fed by a perception problem that Gottman’s research turned up: unhappily married couples undercount their partner’s positive behaviors by roughly 50%. Your spouse can be doing plenty of things right, but you simply don\u2019t register them. You start to spin a negative narrative about her lack of caring and investment that doesn\u2019t match reality.<\/p>\n In either case, your problem with your spouse can spread from being about a specific issue, to becoming what you feel is an indictment of their overall character. You start to have a lower and lower opinion of them. You begin to lose respect for them. A bit of disdain creeps into how you view them, and comes out in your interactions, especially your arguments.<\/p>\n So how do you stop contempt?<\/p>\n First, if you\u2019ve got a problem with your spouse, instead of stewing on it and not telling her, and thus building up your feelings of contempt, address it. Don\u2019t let things fester! As communications expert Joseph Grenny said on the podcast:<\/a> you can \u201ctell the health of any relationship by looking at one simple thing: the lag time between when people see [an issue] and when they say it, between when they feel it and when they discuss it, between when it\u2019s a concern and when it\u2019s a conversation.\u201d<\/p>\n Gottman also suggests creating a culture of appreciation in your marriage. Actively work to notice what your spouse does right and express your gratitude for it. Tell her thanks for picking up the slack with the kids while you were sick or that you appreciated how she defended you in front of her mother. Deliberately look for the qualities in her that you respect; a healthy marriage is ultimately a mutual admiration society. <\/a><\/p>\n Defensiveness is what happens when your spouse brings up an issue and it triggers your self-protection instinct. Instead of engaging with what they actually said, you deflect. The complaint doesn’t get addressed; instead, you’re managing a perceived attack on your character.<\/p>\n Defensiveness shows up in a few recognizable forms.<\/p>\n The most common is counter-complaining: your spouse brings up one issue, and you immediately bring up a grievance of your own.<\/p>\n “You never text me when you’re running late” gets met with “Well, you never tell me when your plans change.”<\/p>\n Now there are two unresolved complaints on the table instead of one, and you’re both more frustrated than when the conversation started.<\/p>\n Another version is what Gottman calls “yes-butting.” You appear to agree with your spouse\u2019s point before immediately negating it.<\/p>\n “You’re right, but if you hadn’t scheduled three things on the same night, this wouldn’t have happened.”<\/p>\n The “yes” is a feint. What follows the “but” is the real message, which is that this is actually your wife’s fault.<\/p>\n A third version is a claim to innocent victimhood \u2014 the “I can’t believe you’re treating me like this!” posture that shifts the focus from the original complaint to the injustice of being complained about at all.<\/p>\n All of these maneuvers feel justified from the inside. That’s what makes defensiveness so hard to catch when you’re doing it. Maybe your spouse does share some culpability, and maybe her complaint was delivered too harshly. But while you’re busy making that case, the original issue doesn\u2019t move toward resolution, and your wife comes away feeling like you didn’t hear a word she said \u2014 more alone than before she brought it up.<\/p>\n The antidote is taking responsibility for your piece of the problem, even if it’s small. If you genuinely think you’re 90% not at fault, even acknowledging the 10% you do own can stop the conversation from turning into a tit-for-tat exchange of recriminations.<\/p>\n “You’re right, I should have texted when I realized I was running late” doesn’t mean you’re conceding the whole argument or agreeing that your wife handled it perfectly. It means you actually heard her \u2014 which, more often than not, is all she wanted.<\/p>\n Stonewalling is when one spouse shuts down entirely during an argument or discussion \u2014 goes quiet, looks away, leaves the room, gives one-word answers, or just starts scrolling on their phone. From the outside, it reads as indifference or contempt: I don’t care enough about you or this conversation to even engage.<\/p>\n Gottman’s research found that’s usually not what’s happening at all.<\/p>\n The stonewaller is, in a way, too<\/em> engaged \u2014 they\u2019re overwhelmed. Gottman calls it flooding<\/em>, or Diffuse Physiological Arousal. When your heart rate climbs past around 100 BPM during an argument, your sympathetic nervous system \u2014 the same one that kicks in when you’re being chased \u2014 takes over. In that state, you genuinely cannot process what your spouse is saying clearly or respond to it without making things worse. If you’ve ever been in a heated argument where you felt like you literally couldn’t think straight, that’s flooding. The body has essentially gone into survival mode, which isn\u2019t a good mode for working through marital conflict.<\/p>\n Men tend to flood faster and stay flooded longer than women, which is why around 85% of stonewallers are men. Worth knowing so you can watch for it in yourself. Because from your spouse’s perspective, the stonewalling looks like you’ve checked out, which typically causes her to pursue the issue more aggressively to get some kind of response, which floods you further, which makes you withdraw more. It’s the whole “my wife is nagging me” dynamic \u2014 except what she’s actually doing is trying to get a human response from someone who has gone completely offline. The cycle tends to end with both people feeling awful and nothing resolved.<\/p>\n The antidote is to take a timeout from the argument. Literally say \u201cI need to take a timeout for a few minutes so I can think about what you said\/get my emotions under control.\u201d Then go do something else. Take a walk or do a chore. Just something to let your nervous system settle. Once you\u2019ve calmed down, come back and actually talk things through<\/p>\n It\u2019s advisable to tell your spouse you\u2019ll need to use this technique from time to time during a calm, copacetic moment, rather than in the middle of an argument; just let her know, \u201cI have a hard time responding well when things get heated, so when we\u2019re in an argument, I might need to step aside for a little bit to process things.\u201d This disclosure will likely be met with appreciative respect. But if you decide to leave an argument in the thick of it, without having given this heads up, your spouse may feel like it\u2019s just another act of uncaring avoidance, which will make them angrier.<\/p>\n The Four Horsemen show up during conflict. Now that you know what to look for, you\u2019ll be able to rein them in when you see them pop up in your next marital spat.<\/p>\n But the even better news is that you don\u2019t need to be perfect about eliminating these negative communication patterns altogether. Gottman\u2019s research shows that what happens in between arguments \u2014 even the most heated ones \u2014 has an even more profound mitigating effect on the damage they cause<\/em>.<\/p>\n When a marriage has at least five positive interactions for every negative one \u2014 giving the couple a surplus of positivity in their \u201c<\/a>relationship bank account<\/a>\u201d \u2014 it can absorb occasional blowups without it affecting the relationship\u2019s happiness and strength. But when a marriage runs a relational “deficit,\u201d every argument can feel fraught, like it\u2019s a referendum on the sustainability of the relationship, bringing it closer to dissolution and creating lingering cracks of alienation.<\/p>\n So spend less time focusing on your communication style, and more time making continual deposits in your relationship bank account (here\u2019s a list of specific ways to do that<\/a>). Prioritize daily connection \u2014 plan good times, have fun together, and offer plenty of affirmation. And start doing a weekly marriage meeting<\/a> \u2014 it will help you check off much of the above advice, from discussing issues promptly to sharing regular appreciation. <\/p>\n Keep your relationship bank account flush, and the next time you and your spouse fight, even if the Four Horsemen do show up, they\u2019ll quickly gallop away.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The psychologist John Gottman famously spent decades watching couples fight in his Love Lab at the University of Washington. He’d wire them up with physiological monitors, point a camera at them, and ask them to argue about some real issue in their marriage while he and his team looked on. After observing thousands of couples, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":193214,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":3,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[42285,42268],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-193205","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-people","category-relationships"],"featured_image_urls":{"large":"https:\/\/content.artofmanliness.com\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Four-Horsemen-header-BLANK-3-538x280.jpg","aom":"https:\/\/content.artofmanliness.com\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Four-Horsemen-header-BLANK-3-372x230.jpg","reactor-320":"https:\/\/content.artofmanliness.com\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Four-Horsemen-header-BLANK-3-320x179.jpg"},"yoast_head":"\n2. Contempt<\/h3>\n
3. Defensiveness<\/h3>\n
4. Stonewalling<\/h3>\n
What Happens Between the Arguments Is More Important<\/h3>\n