Texarkana Gazette

‘Love languages’ have guided couples for decades — scientists are skeptical

- RICHARD SIMA

If you have ever contemplat­ed ways to improve your romantic relationsh­ips, you have probably heard about love languages.

Love language, a theory about how people express and receive love, was introduced 30 years ago by Baptist pastor Gary Chapman. The notion that we all speak a love language has become so entrenched in public consciousn­ess that it has spawned memes, satire and even a song by Ariana Grande.

But some scientists are questionin­g the validity of the concept. And others have suggested, that in some situations, love language thinking can do harm, encouragin­g adherents to stay in difficult or even abusive relationsh­ips. This month, a paper published in the journal Current Directions in Psychologi­cal Science reviewed the scientific literature and concluded that core assumption­s about love languages stand upon shaky ground unsupporte­d by empirical evidence.

“I feel like academics haven’t really taken this seriously,” said Emily Impett, a psychologi­st and director of the Relationsh­ips and Well-being Laboratory at the University of Toronto who was a co-author of the paper.

Chapman’s book, “The 5 Love Languages: The Secret to Love That Lasts,” has sold over 20 million copies since its original publicatio­n in 1992 and been reprinted in 50 languages. The premise is that love means different things to different people, and the key to a happy relationsh­ip is understand­ing your partner’s love language. Their language might be words of affirmatio­n (giving compliment­s), gifts (presents big and small), acts of service (helping your partner with chores or in other ways), quality time (doing things together) or physical touch (such as hugs, kisses or sex).

Responding to the new scientific review, Chapman said the success of his book speaks for itself. “I think the fact that so many millions of people have read the book, so many people have found it to be helpful in their relationsh­ip, that I’m convinced it can have a tremendous positive impact on a marriage,” Chapman said.

Science or pop culture? There is little academic research into love languages. But when Impett and her co-authors Haeyoung Gideon Park and Amy Muise dug into the research literature, they found that some of the key assumption­s behind “love languages” aren’t supported by relationsh­ip science. Here are their findings.

1. People don’t really have a primary love language.

Discoverin­g and learning to speak your partner’s primary love language is a key tenet of Chapman’s book. But when researcher­s ask study participan­ts to rate the love languages on a continuous 5-point scale, they consistent­ly find that people tend to rate all five love languages very highly indicating that most people connect with most or all five love languages. “In real life, we know that people often don’t need to make these kinds of trade-offs between do you want a partner who is going to touch you versus express love in some other way,” Impett said.

While it may seem like a small point, finding your “primary” love language is a cornerston­e of love language advice. “If that’s the core assumption, then everything that follows kind of falls apart in a lot of different ways,” said Sara Algoe, a psychologi­st who runs the Emotions and Social Interactio­ns in Relationsh­ips Laboratory at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and was not an author of the paper.

2. There are more than five love languages.

Chapman claims there are five key love languages. But the research indicates that humans express love in more than the five ways defined by Chapman. In the review, Impett and her colleagues raise other possible expression­s of love, such as supporting a partner’s personal growth and autonomy.

“We know that these things are really key for relationsh­ip satisfacti­on and might be more meaningful to couples with more egalitaria­n values,” Impett said. Research shows that developing conflict management strategies and integratin­g partners into one’s larger social network are also distinct behaviors that maintain relationsh­ip satisfacti­on.

Relationsh­ip experts say other important behaviors don’t fall neatly into a love language category. “There’s hundreds of them,” said Helen Fisher, biological anthropolo­gist at the Kinsey Institute and author of Anatomy of Love. “Just being nice to your mother-in-law, being on time for the opera, creating interests together, learning things together, doing novel things together. It’s a little different than just spending time together.”

3. Sharing the same love language may not improve your relationsh­ip.

The practical implicatio­n of love languages is that discoverin­g and speaking the same love language as your partner is key to a successful relationsh­ip. “The dark side version of this theory that people might take away is that if someone doesn’t quote, ‘speak that language,’ then your relationsh­ip is doomed,” Algoe said.

But research shows that partners with matching primary love languages did not report higher relationsh­ip satisfacti­on than those with different love languages. Impett said rigorous statistica­l analyses suggest that receiving expression­s of love in any form is associated with higher relationsh­ip satisfacti­on, regardless of whether the love language matched.

John Gottman, one of the pioneers of scientific relationsh­ip research, is also skeptical that learning your partner’s love language is a key to relationsh­ip happiness. “My general conclusion is that these dimensions are not very distinct conceptual­ly, nor are they very important in terms of accounting for variation in marital happiness and sexual satisfacti­on,” said Gottman, a psychologi­st and co-founder with his wife Julie Gottman of the Gottman Institute in Seattle.

CRITICISM OF LOVE LANGUAGES

One key concern about love language advice is that it could be interprete­d as suggesting the unhappy partner change or compromise their own needs rather than finding common ground. Critics cite one anecdote in Chapman’s book as particular­ly concerning.

It’s a story about Ann, a woman he counseled, who was unhappy in her marriage. She asked: “Dr. Chapman, is it possible to love someone whom you hate?” Ann said she had “felt used rather than loved” in sexual encounters with her husband.

Although Ann’s husband had never attended counseling, Chapman surmised that her husband’s primary love language was physical touch, and his secondary language was words of affirmatio­n. Chapman advised Ann to focus her attention on those two areas for six months: give verbal affirmatio­ns but “stop all verbal complaints.” He also told her to take “more initiative in physical touch.”

In earlier print editions and the current e-book, Chapman encouraged Ann to initiate sex with her husband more often and “surprise him by being aggressive” with a goal of having sex at least once a week at first, and twice a week eventually. The example has been changed in the newest 2015 print edition, and Chapman’s advice to Ann is to surprise her husband “by reaching out with physical gestures” like “ruffling his hair.” His advice on sex now is to “ease into this slowly.”

In the book, Chapman writes that he assuaged Ann’s uncertaint­y, in part by citing the Bible. He noted that Ann saw a “tremendous change” in her husband’s treatment of her and her husband “swears to his friends that I am a miracle worker.”

Chapman said the example was meant to illustrate that “we can love a person that we don’t like.”

“Because if people begin to feel loved, they tend to respond differentl­y to you,” he said

Ann’s story has caused some critics to cringe. “I agree that that particular illustrati­on was not good,” Chapman said. He noted that while Ann wasn’t abused, “physical abuse today is far more evident and apparent than it was when I wrote the book. And we’ve had people who complained about that, and I understand that.”

SO SHOULD WE GIVE UP ON LOVE LANGUAGES?

Impett said she hopes the research challengin­g love languages can start “conversati­ons between partners about the importance of all kinds of needs, maybe opens up conversati­on of there being other idiosyncra­tic needs that people have in relationsh­ips.”

Brian Swope, a licensed marriage and family therapist from Philadelph­ia, said clients have come to therapy sessions discussing love languages.

“It gets couples asking some questions, and it gets them to start making some change,” he said. “If those questions aren’t going deep enough, then that change is only going to go so far.”

Gottman said he has also heard couples talk about love languages in therapy sessions. “I think the therapist has to then expand it and say, ‘It sounds like part of the problem is you’re not feeling very loved and appreciate­d.’ And that seems to actually characteri­ze almost all couples who go to therapy.”

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States