We’ve been talking about it for a couple of years and now the pilot study is out! A summary by Advanced Gottman Clinical Trainer - Trish Purnell-Webb

A summary by Advanced Gottman Clinical Trainer - Trish Purnell-Webb

Irvine, T., Peluso P., Benson, K., Cole, C., Cole, D., Gottman, J., & Schwartz Gottman, J. (2023). A Pilot Study Examining the Effectiveness of Gottman Method Couples Therapy Over Treatment-as-Usual Approaches for Treating Couples Dealing with Infidelity. The Family Journal: Counseling and Therapy for Couples and Families, 1-14.

Here are the highlights.

The participants:
• The study involved 49 couples seeking therapy for infidelity, with 19 couples (38 individuals) completing assessments.
• Participants had a median age of 43.9 years, predominantly identified as Non-Hispanic White (n = 35), and 89.5% were married.
• Therapist participants included 17 certified Gottman therapists (CGT) and 15 therapists from various theoretical orientations, termed ‘treatment as usual’ (TAU) therapists receiving training as compensation.
• The sample primarily consisted of individuals with an income of less than $50,000 (36.7%) and a majority identifying as Christian (65.8%).
• Couples were excluded from the study if they had active addictions, language barriers, or characterological intimate partner violence.

Method

The study employed a randomized control trial (RCT) design to compare the effectiveness of Gottman Method Couples Therapy (GMCT) with treatment-as-usual (TAU) approaches for couples recovering from infidelity. Below are the key elements of the method:

Recruitment and Screening

• Couples were screened to exclude those with active addiction, language barriers, or intimate partner violence.
• Therapists were selected based on their experience and certification in GMCT or TAU approaches.

Treatment Procedure

• Couples were randomly assigned to either the GMCT group or the TAU group.
• Therapy consisted of an average of 32 sessions.
• GMCT couples followed the Trust Revival Method (TRM), which includes three phases: Atonement, Attunement, and Attachment.
• TAU therapists used various approaches but did not follow a specific infidelity-focused protocol.

Assessment Tools

1. Gottman Connect (GC) Assessment Tool:
   • A 480-question online measure assessing relationship functioning. ​
   • Administered at pre-treatment and post-treatment.
2. Conflict Discussion:
   • Couples engaged in a 10-15 minute conflict discussion (excluding the affair topic), which was video-recorded and analyzed using the Specific Affect Coding System (SPAFF).
3. SPAFF Coding:
   • Emotional behaviors during conflict discussions were coded using 20 affect categories (e.g., positive, negative, neutral).

Outcome Measures

• Relationship satisfaction (e.g., Locke-Wallace Relationship Adjustment Test, Gottman Relationship Satisfaction Inventory).
• Trust, repair attempts, emotional reactivity, and sexual relationship quality.
• SPAFF coding for emotional behaviors during conflict discussions.

This multimodal approach allowed researchers to evaluate the effectiveness of GMCT The study employed a randomized control trial (RCT) design to compare the effectiveness of Gottman Method Couples Therapy (GMCT) with treatment-as-usual (TAU) approaches for couples recovering from infidelity.  Below are the key elements of the method:

Outcomes

1. Overall Effectiveness: GMCT was globally more effective than TAU in facilitating affair recovery, particularly in areas such as trust, conflict management, relational satisfaction, and quality of sex.
2. Relationship Satisfaction:
   • GMCT significantly improved relationship satisfaction for involved partners (IPs) and uninvolved partners (UPs).
   • IPs in the GMCT group showed increased scores on the Gottman Relationship Satisfaction Inventory (GRS), while UPs showed reduced separation-proneness (as measured by the Weiss-Cerreto Relationship Status Inventory).
3. Trust and Repair:
   • Trust scores improved significantly for both IPs and UPs in the GMCT group.
   • Repair attempts were more effective in the GMCT group, indicating better apologies and conflict resolution.
4. Conflict Management:
   • UPs in the GMCT group showed significant decreases in behaviors associated with the "Four Horsemen" (contempt, stonewalling, defensiveness, and criticism).
   • Stonewalling behavior decreased significantly among UPs in the GMCT group.
5. Emotional and Sexual Affairs:
   • Scores related to emotional and sexual affairs decreased significantly for both IPs and UPs in the GMCT group, indicating reduced likelihood of future betrayals. ​
6. Quality of Sex:
   • UPs in the GMCT group reported significant improvements in the quality of their sexual relationship.
7. Positive Affect:
   • Positive affect during conflict discussions doubled for IPs in the GMCT group, indicating improved emotional connection and cherishing behaviors.
8. Emotional Reactivity:
   • UPs in the GMCT group showed reduced anger and hostility, while IPs demonstrated decreased emotional disengagement and jealousy.
9. Spirituality and Shared Meaning:
   • UPs in the GMCT group reported decreased spiritual, religious, and ethical conflicts, highlighting improved shared meaning and commitment.

Overall, the study validated GMCT as a more effective evidence-based approach for affair recovery compared to TAU, emphasizing its structured phases of atonement, attunement, and attachment.

If you would like to read the full article you can get it here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VjcprBD7YKzp9pl2O78bXb3F65ptlKwJ/view?usp=drive_link

If you want to learn more about the Trust Revival Model join us at our Gottman Level 2 training or our Let’s Talk Betrayal workshop.  Click on the link or see below for training dates.