The Love Prescription: Seven Days to More Intimacy, Connection, and Joy

The Gottmans, especially John, with his background in mathematics and statistics, are unapologetically scientific in their approach to love, arguing that it can be modeled alongside other biological phenomena, such as pandemics, tumors, and evolution. They note that number crunching and empirical observation might superficially seem overly rational and cold, contrary to popular notions of love. In the Western popular imagination, love is an instinctive feeling rather than an action, uncontrollable and too individual to be mapped. They contend that such a view of love is not innate but rather a result of social conditioning from our families of origin, movies, and other cultural artifacts that mostly focus on the beginning of love, or on steamy, extramarital affairs, but lose interest in the day-to-day functioning of relationships. A marriage or long-term relationship, however, must work alongside daily responsibilities, and popular culture gives us few clues as to how to thrive in this context. The Gottmans maintain that data about a wide sample of real-life couples can fill in the gap in our knowledge. Their scientific approach, which looks at broad trends and makes generalized conclusions, faces criticism in light of the contemporary focus on identity politics and the recognition that demographics—such as race, sexuality, and social class—impact how we experience the same things. Thus, the idea of one-size-fits-all advice when it comes to romantic relationships might come under fire. However, the Gottmans have made it their policy to test their theories across demographics and are confident in declaring the universals that determine whether relationships of all kinds will succeed or fail.

The Gottmans show that their observation of minority groups—for example, of couples experiencing poverty in which both partners display violent tendencies—can provide insights that benefit relationships outside of this demographic. They studied this particular group using physiological data in the form of a biofeedback device that monitored physical and mental changes as subjects oscillated from the “red zone” of high arousal that precipitates violent outbursts and the “green zone” in which they are calm and in control of their behavior (50). The data showed that when these couples actively focused on what they appreciated about their partners, they could get into the green zone more quickly and diminish the stress that caused them to become hostile to each other. In the long term, after 20 weeks of the study, and even 18 months later, this practice not only enabled the partners to become less violent but facilitated the romantic side of their relationship too. While not all couples face the same challenge of domestic violence, the finding of the physiological impact of gratitude on one’s mind-body nexus is helpful in dispelling the stressful impact of the criticism and contempt that are widespread in marriages in general.

Although the Gottmans confidently recite statistics and figures as precise as the number of seconds needed to allow for sufficient oxytocin production from a hug, one area in which they refuse to provide a number is concerning the amount of sex that couples should have. Instead, they insist that couples are extremely individual in their sexual needs and make up for the lack of statistics here by reemphasizing the importance of touch to a close and sensual bond. They argue that by increasing the instances of touch during the day, couples are opening themselves up to numerous benefits, including potentially that of having more sex. However, more sex should happen organically, as the result of increased touch, rather than being sought as an end goal in itself.

In the final chapters, the Gottmans encourage readers to use their scientific methods of experimentation, observation, reflection, and adjustment of variables to customize an approach that will improve their individual relationship. They acknowledge that while the tools they have offered are useful general principles, each couple will need to strike a balance that suits them. In the concluding case studies of the new young gay couple and the older, long-married straight couple, the Gottmans show how both parties figure out what is right for them through trial and error. While the young gay couple, who came of age at a time of increased individuality, can be open about wanting to pursue some goals and dreams independently, the older straight couple had to learn to actively share their concerns and make space for fun times together when their lives had become duty bound. In both cases, these are shown to be positive types of relationship, as the partners are willing to observe, reflect, and try new things in relation to their findings. Thus, overall, the Gottmans show that when it comes to long-term relationships, the scientific method of constant attention and adjustment produces far more romantic and lasting results than Hollywood’s formula of roller-coaster feelings and grand gestures.