Couples counseling, between Gottman and IMAGO
- Sam Nabil
- Nov 16, 2015
- 5 min read
Updated: Nov 26, 2020
The proposition that one couples therapy perspective completely and fully fits all personalities and all couples’ problems is a difficult proposition for me to swallow.
There are different theories and practices guiding the therapy of couples, and I almost inevitably find myself - whole heartedly - accepting some of the fundamental premises each approach is coming from, and simultaneously having doubts and more questions than answers, when it comes to some other premises or application of a specific approach.
The Gottman Approach
For example, I find myself very drawn to some of Gottman’s ideas stipulated in his book the marriage clinic.
“In marriage, we look at the balance of positivity to negativity in the couples interactions.
Our theory assumes that every relationship is a system that develops its own balance or stable steady states, with respect to the ratio of positivity and negativity in behavior, perception, and physiology. The stable steady states are a way of quantifying the old idea of homeostasis in general systems theory”[1]
Far more than merely common sense, Gottman’s research suggesting that successful couples have a much higher ration of positive to negative interactions is also quite a “ scientific “ breakthrough in mind, as it guides my conception of the kinds of “ research proven “ interventions all couples’ counselors must consider while doing couples therapy.
I also find particularly appealing his concept of the four horsemen of the apocalypse (criticism, defensiveness, contempt, and stone walling).
Not only do I find these to be strongly valid between couples, but in any human interaction in general.
On the other hand, I find myself struggling with some of Gottman’s suggestions. For example, Gottman suggests that accepting your partner’s influence is a crucial aspect of creating a sound marital house.
He further suggests that compromising and “solving the solvable problems” is a crucial skill to master.
I do not necessarily contend that these suggestions are irrelevant, invalid, or even false in and of themselves. I do however find myself leaning to agreeing with Schnarsh in this regards, that compromising and accepting your partner’s influence as a “skill “that you learn and implement is more harmful than productive in the long term.
I contend that because if the individual practicing these skills is not “differentiated “doesn’t have a very well established and strong sense of self, it can lead to resentment and pulling away from interactions with the significant other.
The Schnarsh Approach
I find myself agreeing with Schanrsh that compromising and “coerced acceptance of influence “- if I may call it that for all intents and purposes of my argument- is settling to the lowest common denominator , and would be detrimental to the passion and level of excitement partner’s find in each other’s presence, and as such detrimental to the relationship itself.
I can’t pretend to have any conclusive opinions in this regard, It is something I would very much like to research and study more, but I am inclined to believe that a well “ differentiated “ person would practice these skills ( compromising and accepting influence ) , without seeing them ( and more importantly feeling them) as such.
Adding to my difficulty in picking one approach is that, – unsurprisingly so – I keep seeing concepts and ideas repeating themselves in the different approaches, but being described in different language or interpreted differently.
Take for example Gottman’s explanation of the diffuse physiological arousal (DPA) “ When danger is perceived, series of alterations is immediately initiated , ………When the heart speeds up beyond 100 beats per minute….the body starts secreting epinephrine…..the limbic system particularly the amygdala, hypothalamus, cigulategyrus, hippocampus, and prefrontal lobes, has been activated….Fight or flight reactions become more likely as the cortex is engaged to evaluate the stimulus conditions….The attentional system becomes an vigilance system detecting only cues of danger, and s severely limited in its ability to process information…..all these extreme physiological alterations happen in marital conflict….that is why fight or flight responses become more accessible, and creative problem solving goes out the window” [2]
The IMAGO Approach
Contrast that with IMAGO’s concept of the old or reptilian brain “it is where our survival mechanisms are located, which explains why - when danger strikes – we fight, flight, flee, freeze, hide, or submit. The reptilian brain is also concerned with safety…”[3]
Clearly, both approaches then see the body’s natural defense mechanisms as playing a significant role in both marital conflict, and therapy, but where IMAGO sees it as an important “educational “concept that needs to be explained to couples to help them understand their conflicts better, Gottman sees It as part of what he calls the “triad of balance” along with interactive behavior and perception.
So although the 2 theories recognize and integrate this concept (as one example) into their prospective approach, both do that in seemingly very different and unrelated ways. Personally I find that I accept the concept and its validity as well, but find myself unsure on which approach seems to be putting it into better use…
It occurs to me that all approaches have elements of truth into them, but that none are comprehensive enough to entice me to adopt them without alterations.
In the following section of the paper, I try to expand on the elements of the different approaches that I am inclined to believe would make sense to amalgamate together to build on the strengths of the different approaches to create – hopefully - a comprehensive approach
[1] The marriage clinic, Gottman, p 33
[2] The marriage clinic, Gottman, p 75
[3] Short term couples therapy, loquat, p 18
Worried About your relationship & have no time to go to Counseling?
Take Our "Relationship Map" test . The Best Relationship Test online for Couples and Individuals.
Sam Nabil is the founder of Naya Clinics and is a Boston therapist and a Boston Marriage Counselor.
Sam offers therapy in Boston and Boston Marriage Counseling for adults suffering from relationship challenges, life transitions and anxiety.
Sam Nabil was featured in many prestigious publications. Check out his interview with Aljazeera English, The Washington post, The Boston Globe, Fatherly magazine, Women's health magazine, Cornell university , Yahoo News, USA Today, Marriage.com
Naya Clinics is a top-rated Marriage Counseling, therapy and Life coaching practice.
Naya Clinics offers Marriage Counselors near me, individual therapy near me, and life coaching near me in various locations across the USA and the world.
Naya Clinics also offers Online marriage counseling, online therapy, and online life coaching.
Vomero 5 適合鍛鍊嗎？
Vomero 5 是否適合鍛鍊，取決於運動類型與強度。這款鞋搭載全掌 Zoom Air 緩震系統，提供出色的吸震與回彈效果，使其非常適合低至中等強度的日常訓練。對於快走、輕量有氧或健身房內的綜合訓練，Nike Zoom Vomero 5 運動鞋能有效支撐腳部，減少長時間活動帶來的疲勞感，是理想的運動夥伴。
針對力量訓練或功能性訓練，Nike Zoom Vomero 5 的穩定寬楦設計與平坦外底，提供良好地面接觸感，有助於深蹲、弓步等動作的平衡。其厚實中底雖不如專用訓練鞋輕薄，但能兼顧緩震與支撐，特別適合希望一雙鞋應付多種場景的使用者。而Zoom Vomero 5 的包覆性也讓動態動作更安心。
在性別適配方面，nike zoom vomero 5 運動鞋 men 與專為女性設計的 vomero 5 女 版本皆延續相同性能架構，無論男女都能在鍛鍊中獲得穩定腳感。尤其女性用戶回饋其舒適度高，適合長時間課程如瑜珈或飛輪後的步行移動。
限量款式如 Bowerman Series Vomero 5 或細節升級的 Nike Vomero 5 sp，雖主打潮流外觀，但核心結構未變，仍保有鍛鍊所需的支撐力。即使搭配時尚造型，也能輕鬆轉場至輕運動場景。在亞洲市場，Nike Vomero 5 ราคา（泰國售價）反映其高性價比，讓更多人能以合理價格獲得兼具功能與風格的鍛鍊鞋。總體而言，Vomero 5 雖非高強度競技專用鞋，但作為日常健身、體能訓練或綜合活動的選擇，Nike Vomero 5 在舒適性與實用性上表現出色，值得推薦。
加熱菸的吸菸體驗與健康解析
隨著加熱菸的興起，許多使用者好奇「加熱菸抽起來怎麼樣？」加熱菸的原理與傳統紙菸不同，但本質仍含菸草成分。加熱菸利用專用裝置將菸草柱加熱，而不是燃燒，讓菸草中的尼古丁與其他化學物質隨煙霧釋出。加熱式電子菸降低了部分燃燒過程中產生的菸灰與煙味，但仍會釋放焦油與有害物質。
與電子菸相比，加熱菸仍保留了尼古丁的刺激感與一定的菸草口感，因此吸菸體驗更接近傳統紙菸。對於習慣傳統吸菸的使用者，加熱非燃燒菸草製品提供了較順暢的口感與氣味，使用上更加方便，無需點燃，也減少了明火的風險。
健康角度來看，加熱式香菸雖然在加熱過程中減少了一些燃燒副產物，但仍不可避免地釋放致癌物質與其他有害化合物。這意味著，即使選擇加熱菸，也仍需謹慎使用，避免長期、大量吸菸對身體造成影響。推薦閱讀：TEREA煙彈口味推薦
總結而言，加熱菸口味提供接近傳統紙菸的吸菸感受，口感順暢、使用便利，但並非無害。使用者在享受加熱菸的便利與口感時，也應充分了解其中的尼古丁依賴與健康風險，理性使用是最安全的方式。
Download Null’s Brawl for iOS and unlock a whole new way to play Brawl Stars on your iPhone or iPad. Enjoy unlimited resources, exclusive content, and fast installation without needing to jailbreak your device.
前言
SP2s電子煙主機作為一款備受矚目的產品，憑借其獨特的設計和出色的性能，吸引了眾多使用者。然而，任何產品都有其優缺點，瞭解這些特點有助於消費者做出更明智的選擇。本文將從設計、性能、使用體驗等方面，對 SP2s 電子煙主機進行全面的優缺點分析。
外觀設計與便攜性
優點：SP2s 電子煙主機採用時尚簡約的設計，機身線條流暢，握感舒適。其輕巧的設計使其非常便於攜帶，無論是日常通勤還是外出旅行都能輕鬆應對。此外，SP2s 的外觀設計還融入了多種顏色選擇，滿足不同用戶的個性化需求。
缺點：對於一些追求極致小巧的用戶來說，SP2s 的尺寸可能稍顯大了一些，但這對大多數用戶來說並不是問題。
性能表現
優點：SP2s電子煙配備了高效的電池和先進的加熱技術，確保了煙油的均勻蒸發和持久的電池壽命。其電池續航能力出色，單次充電即可滿足一整天的使用需求，快速充電功能也讓設備能在短時間內迅速恢復使用狀態。此外，SP2s 的霧化技術使得煙霧量充足且濃密，擊喉感較為明顯，能夠提供類似於傳統香煙的使用體驗。
缺點：由於霧化效果較好，煙彈的消耗速度可能會比預期快，特別是對於頻繁使用的用戶。
使用體驗
優點：SP2s 的操作非常簡單，無按鈕設計和自動吸啟功能，使得使用過程極為簡便，用戶只需將煙彈插入主機，即可開始使用。此外，SP2s 還提供了多種口味的煙彈選擇，從經典的煙草味到清新果味，應有盡有，滿足不同用戶的口味偏好。
缺點：部分用戶反映，SP2s 的煙彈在使用過程中可能會出現漏油的情況，但這並非普遍現象。
健康考量
優點：SP2s主機使用了無煙草配方的煙油，這些煙油不含有害的焦油和一氧化碳，相對傳統香煙來說，對健康的危害較小。此外，SP2s 還提供了多種尼古丁濃度的煙彈選擇，讓用戶可以逐步減少尼古丁攝取量，幫助他們逐步戒煙。
缺點：儘管如此，電子煙仍然含有尼古丁，對健康仍有潛在風險，因此並不適合所有人使用。
價格與性價比
優點：SP2s 的價格相對合理，使其成為大多數消費者都能負擔得起的選擇。網購平臺經常會有優惠和促銷活動，使得購買 SP2s 變得更加劃算。
缺點：與一些廉價的電子煙產品相比，SP2s 的價格稍高，可能會對預算有限的用戶帶來一定壓力。
總結
綜合來看，SP2s 電子煙主機是一款設計時尚、性能出色、使用體驗良好的產品。其優點在於便攜性強、電池續航能力出色、霧化效果好以及健康考量周全。台灣SP2s官網線上店鋪提供正品Sp2s煙彈，多種口味可供選擇，現貨發貨迅速，讓您輕鬆購買到自己喜歡的煙彈。我們承諾所有產品均為原裝正品，質量保證！
If you love downloading music for offline listening, then Tubidy is just what you need. It offers a wide collection of MP3 songs and MP4 videos from different artists, both local and international. You can search and download with ease using any mobile phone, tablet, or computer without paying anything.