Couples communication guidelines: Why connection matters more than words

I trust your heart. Trust your partner’s and your own good intentions.
Gottman’s research on bids for connection shows that partners are constantly reaching out to one another in small and often subtle ways, seeking responsiveness and reassurance (Gottman & Silver, 1999). Most people continue to make these bids even in distressed relationships. When bids are repeatedly missed or rejected, partners may withdraw to protect themselves. If this withdrawal is accompanied by guilt, shame, or self-blame, attention turns inward rather than toward the relationship. This self-directed criticism reduces emotional availability and can lead to self-sabotaging behaviour that further weakens connection instead of restoring it.

I protect you; I do not attack you. No contempt, verbal, emotional, or physical abuse or aggression. Express and process anger in healthy ways.
Contempt has been identified by Gottman as the most destructive of the four horsemen because it communicates superiority and disgust, eroding emotional safety (Gottman, 2011). For this reason, it is essential to have a clear agreement that no form of violence or aggression is justified. Drawing on the work of Polly Young-Eisendrath in Love and Anger, anger itself is not the problem. Anger carries vital information about boundaries and unmet needs, and relationships suffer when it is suppressed. At the same time, when anger turns into aggression, whether passive or active, it damages the bond by shifting focus from inner experience to attacking or controlling the other.

I leave you whole; I do not make you wrong. Do not blame or give your partner a remote control over your behaviour. Stay with your observations, feelings, and needs (I-statements).
Nonviolent Communication, developed by Marshall Rosenberg, emphasises grounding communication in one’s own observations, feelings, and needs rather than blame or judgment (Rosenberg, 2003). Research and clinical experience suggest that people who are in touch with their inner world and can stand up for their needs without making their partner wrong tend to have more satisfying and resilient relationships. They are better able to remain emotionally close during difficult moments, whereas chronic people-pleasing often leads to resentment and emotional withdrawal as a form of self-protection.

I stay open and engaged; I do not turn away. No stonewalling, silent treatment, or putting the other on hold. You may take a break or reschedule, as long as you remain reachable for your partner.
Stonewalling is another of Gottman’s four horsemen and has been shown to be deeply harmful to relationship stability and trust (Gottman & Levenson, 1992). Harm in relationships is caused not only by what partners actively do, but also by what they fail to do. When a partner is ignored or emotionally shut out, they experience profound unsafety. If attempts to reconnect repeatedly fail, people often cope by numbing themselves or closing emotional doors. In some cases, emotional energy is redirected elsewhere, not out of disloyalty, but in response to unmet attachment needs (Johnson, 2008).

I want to understand; I do not defend. Do not be defensive or focus solely on explaining, justifying, or rationalising. Ask open follow-up questions about your own and your partner’s experience.
Empathy is a central ingredient of secure attachment and lasting intimacy. Authors such as Esther Perel emphasise curiosity and presence as key relational capacities that allow partners to feel seen and known (Perel, 2017). Defensiveness, identified by Gottman as another horseman, blocks empathy by prioritising self-protection over understanding (Gottman, 2011). When partners shift from defending their position to exploring each other’s inner experience, emotional safety increases and repair becomes possible.

I see your pain and help you through it; I do not use it against you. Do not give up when conflicts get heated or escalate. Recognise your partner’s panic zone and help them move out of their stress response and back into conversation.
Romantic relationships are where we experience our deepest emotions because attachment figures matter profoundly for our sense of safety (Johnson, 2008). Conflicts often activate panic responses linked to earlier wounds, fears, and unmet needs. In therapeutic work, most relationship conflicts are not about power, character flaws, or incompatibility, but about these deeper emotional layers. When partners enter a panic zone, they lose the capacity to respond and can only react, making escalation more likely. The coping stances described by Virginia Satir illustrate how people attempt to manage this intensity, often in ways that unintentionally increase disconnection (Satir et al., 1991).

I focus on our experience and the way forward; I do not turn cynical. Avoid generalisations and exaggerations. Do not use sarcasm or irony, and do not take a defeating stance. Ask yourself what could help in this situation or conflict.
Generalisations, exaggerations, and sarcasm undermine trust and goodwill over time. Repeated threats to leave the relationship during conflict destabilise the emotional bond and heighten insecurity. Research on relationship stability highlights that such patterns reduce the likelihood of repair and increase long-term dissatisfaction (Gottman, 2011).

I focus on our connection at all times; I do not focus on being right. Do not assume that establishing facts or assigning fault will resolve the issue. Ask yourself what will help you feel closer, more connected, and happier together.
Connection is the organising principle of healthy relationships. Like a pot plant, a relationship needs consistent care, attention, and nourishment. Being right may resolve a specific disagreement, but prioritising connection strengthens the bond that allows partners to navigate future challenges together (Johnson, 2008).

Summary
Healthy communication is not about perfect wording, but about protecting connection, expressing anger without aggression, staying emotionally engaged, and responding to vulnerability with care. These skills can be learned and strengthened through practice, research-based literature, and therapeutic support. Intense conflicts and strong emotions are not signs of failure, but part of building a relationship capable of holding deeper intimacy, resilience, and trust.

References

Gottman, J. M. (2011). The science of trust: Emotional attunement for couples. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

Gottman, J. M., & Levenson, R. W. (1992). Marital processes predictive of later dissolution: Behavior, physiology, and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(2), 221–233.

Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The seven principles for making marriage work. New York, NY: Crown.

Johnson, S. M. (2008). Hold me tight: Seven conversations for a lifetime of love. New York, NY: Little, Brown and Company.

Perel, E. (2017). The state of affairs: Rethinking infidelity. New York, NY: Harper.

Rosenberg, M. B. (2003). Nonviolent communication: A language of life (2nd ed.). Encinitas, CA: PuddleDancer Press.

Satir, V., Banmen, J., Gerber, J., & Gomori, M. (1991). The Satir model: Family therapy and beyond. Palo Alto, CA: Science and Behavior Books.

Young-Eisendrath, P. (1999). Love and anger: The struggle for authentic intimacy. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.