Dating

In a 2013 paper, Stanford researchers Dan McFarland and Dan Jurafsky analyzed the conversations of nearly 1000 heterosexual couples during speed dating encounters to find out why some people felt a sense of connection after the meeting and others didn’t. The participants in the study were graduate students at Stanford, and wore audio recording devices during their dates. The dates lasted four minutes each, and after they were done, the participants filled out a scorecard that asked them to rate how connected they felt to each partner (“clicking”, on a scale of 0-10) and whether they would like to go on a real date with that person (“willingness”, on a yes/no basis). ...

Dr. Alexandra Solomon, professor of Northwestern University’s popular “Marriage 101” class and author of Loving Bravely, posits that the most important trait of a partner is relational self-awareness. People with this quality can talk about how past relationships shaped them, identify their feelings instead of merely acting on them, view relationship issues as a combination of “me” and “you” stuff, and listen to feedback in a healthy way. You can assess this in a date by looking at (1) their stimulus-response process in frustrating moments (do they fight, flee, freeze, or study the moment and respond in a composed way?), and (2) how they talk about past relationships — do they see events in black and white, or are they aware of the nuances of context? Is there blame and/or shame? Do they play the victim or do they take shared responsibility? Do they cast other people as villains, losers, or fools? Is there a focus on growth? The canonical financial disclaimer that “past performance may not be an indicator of future results” does hold – but how we process our past may be one of the most telling indicators of how we will function in current or future relationships.

Many of us are familiar with the political horse trading that’s part and parcel of the modern romantic relationship. We do Thankgiving with your parents, and Christmas with mine. I take the dog to the groomers, you mow the lawn this week. This kind of trading is an example of an exchange norm in a relationship. In academic papers, an exchange norm is typically contrasted with a communal norm. The exchange norm, while sometimes very convenient, may not be optimal. Indeed, much of the book 80/80 Marriage by Nate and Kaley Klemp deals with how to move away from the idea of fairness (a key requirement for a successful exchange) to a relationship defined by radical generosity and a spirit of shared success. One argument they make that it’s often impossible to draw an equivalence relationship between the things being traded – how many kitchen countertop wipe-downs are equal to one trip to the dog groomer? The subjectivity inherent in the valuations rendered by each side makes this kind of exercise fraught. ...

On her wedding day, Ruth Bader Ginsburg said that she was given this sage piece of advice by her mother-in-law: “In every good marriage, it helps sometimes to be a little deaf.” (And I would add, a little forgetful!) But no matter how deaf – or forgetful – we may be, transgressions big and small are part of any meaningful long-term relationship. And consequently, the ability to apologize for these transgressions is a vitally important skill for relational wellness.1 ...

If you’ve ever taken an economics course, you’d recall that basic economics is founded on the assumption that an individual is a fundamentally rational creature. This infallible being, homo economicus, when in possession of complete and accurate information, always chooses the option that maximizes their well-being. Of course, we all know that this is a flagrantly inaccurate assumption – people constantly act against their objective rational self-interest. In the 1970s, Israeli psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman studied and catalogued some of these irrationalties. Through meticulous and often creative experimentation, they found patterns in the way that we are sometimes at odds with rationality. Tversky and Kahneman’s research spawned a new field called behavioral economics to study these predictable irrationalities. Thus far, behavioral economists have identified over 100 of these persistent mental errors – called cognitive biases – that distort our decision-making. ...

The world of relationships is rife with hard choices – at each stage, you have to decide whether you’re in or you’re out, whether to brave that next date or relegate them to the friend zone, whether to invest more in an unsatisfying relationship or to throw in the towel and break up. Numerous are the opportunities for “agonizing, hand-wringing, the gnashing of teeth.” In times where I have to make difficult calls, I find myself coming back time and time again to Ruth Chang’s TED talk on hard choices. Chang is the Professor and Chair of Jurisprudence at the University of Oxford and a Professorial Fellow of University College, Oxford. She’s no stranger to hard choices. After graduating from college, she found herself deciding between a career in philosophy and one in law. Coming from an immigrant family, being a philosopher seemed like the “height of extravagance and frivolity”, so she went with the less risky option of becoming an attorney. After getting her JD from Harvard Law and dipping her toe into the legal world, she soon realized that this path was not for her. She went to Oxford to pursue philosophy, and has since then been studying choice, freedom, value and action. ...

The investment model1 offers an elegant explanation for why we sometimes find it very difficult to leave a relationship, even when relationship satisfaction is persistently low. This model posits we are likely to remain in a relationship to the extent that we feel dependent on that relationship. This dependence, in turn, leads to greater commitment to remaining in the relationship over time. While we do tend to feel more dependent in satisfying relationships, even in an unsatisfying relationship dependence can be present when: ...

The Netflix show Black Mirror famously portrays near-future dystopias that have some sci-fi technology twist. When the creators turned their lens to the dating world, the result was typically thought-provoking – and atypically optimistic. The episode Hang the DJ (Season 4) follows protagonists Frank and Amy in their quest to find their perfect match. They are guided by an AI called Coach that matches them up with a partner for fixed lengths of time (anything ranging from a few hours to several years), in what appears to be an idyllic dating village. Coach monitors each relationship, with the end of goal of assigning each participant a life partner on “pairing day”… with a 99.8% success rate (just slightly higher than Tinder!). ...

Relational well-being is based on two pillars: foundational virtues and functional relational skills. Firstly, you want to select a partner based on foundational virtues. These include other-oriented empathy and self-awareness. While these aren’t set in stone, a weekend training workshop will not instill these virtues and abilities. You have to choose a partner who demonstrates them already in daily practice. Second, a life partner requires functional relational skills, or the salient behaviors and strategies of good partnership. For instance, great partners consistently and skillfully offer generous listening and practice non-violent communication, they turn towards bids, and they express fondness and admiration. These are teachable skills, and can be instilled and refined through relationship workshops, counseling, and/or self-education.

I’m often asked of all the relationship books I’ve read, which one I would recommend the most. As with any recommendation, a good answer takes into account the person that’s asking – their tastes, their learning style, and where they’re at in their relational journey. So while I can’t identify the one best book for everyone, below are some of my favorites. The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work by John Gottman and Nan Silver Attached by Amir Levin and Rachel Heller Wired for Love by Stan Tatkin The 80/80 Marriage: A New Model for a Happier, Stronger Relationship by Nate and Kaley Klemp Non-Violent Communication by Marshall B. Rosenberg The All-or-Nothing Marriage by Eli J. Finkel The 80/80 marriage authors maintain an up-to-date list of resources here, which includes a high-level summary and a key takeaway from each book. ...