However, it seems like it would take a quick study to recognize the cues that indicate these issues. In most cases, I wouldn’t have caught the cues if it hadn’t been for the arrows pointing them out. However, not having the arrows to do so, I might have paid closer attention to the text. What I found most interesting about the article was that the final couple, who were discussing issues that would never be resolved, were the ones that had the best chances of celebrating a happy marriage. Their issues didn’t seem to be much different from the other couples featured – couple 1 fundamentally disagreed about him talking to her more when he wanted only to be left alone and couple 3 had essentially the same problem as she wanted him to talk to her more and he wanted to leave things private – but the outcomes were very different simply by the way they discussed them and the expectations each had. Couple 1 expected the other to change, couple 3 acknowledged that they had different ways of seeing things and agree to continue trying to meet halfway.
As far as the article relates to class readings, I can see a lot of ways in which the communication styles of the couple will affect the family. The naturalistic study vows not to interfere in the relationship and thus is able to determine which communication styles are effective in helping a marriage last. There are a number of ways that the family can be examined, but all of these would be affected by poor communication. For example, there seems to be a strong bias in which the women are constantly seeking attention and validation from the men and in which the men are constantly seeking escape or silence from the women. This could be the examination of the conflict theorists or the biosocial theorists. The issues brought up in chapter three regarding poverty and the