Damon Ashworth Psychology

Tag: relationships

  • How Do You Deal With Your Problems?

    How Do You Deal With Your Problems?

    Throughout my schooling years, I was a horrible procrastinator. I would leave everything to the last minute, sometimes even having to take a day off high school to finish an assignment that was meant to be due that day.

    Once I got to university, I couldn’t do this anymore, as the due date remained the same whether I went to classes or not. So I would instead consume a lot of energy drinks the night before an assignment was due and generally do the majority of the assignment in an anxious, tense and sleep-deprived state, printing it out and submitting it 20 minutes before the deadline.

    Exams were the same. I’d miss classes, not pay attention when I was there, and then try to cram an entire semester’s contents into the last 4 days before an exam. I would lock myself in my room and study up to 12 hours a day, only leaving for toilet breaks and something to eat until I was utterly exhausted. Luckily, I have a knack for remembering vast amounts of information in short periods of time, so I always passed, but it wasn’t easy or fun.

    I sometimes tried to start early but never found this effective, as the negative consequences seemed far away. So eventually, I figured I would follow the mantra, “if you leave everything to the last minute, it only takes a minute”. This mantra actually helped me fit a lot of things into my life by being more efficient, but it did have its limitations.

    Once I got to my Doctorate of Clinical Psychology degree at Monash University, I was suddenly faced with the prospect of having to do a 70,000-word thesis that was meant to take 3.5 years to do. How could I possibly cram something so big, especially when it consisted of making a research proposal, ethics application, recruiting participants, conducting a clinical trial, collating all the results, running data analysis and writing up the thesis and journal articles? It turns out I couldn’t.

    The thesis ended up taking me 4 years to complete, and there wasn’t too much of it that I enjoyed. Moreover, it required a direct challenge of my usual defence mechanisms, which was no easy feat, especially because I didn’t know what they were. I knew that I had always procrastinated with my studies, but I was never entirely sure why.

    What Are Your Defence Mechanisms?

    Fortunately, a fun test over at personalityassessor.com on coping styles’ titled ‘How Do You Deal?’ helped me identify which defence mechanisms I typically used. So if you are interested in knowing what yours are, I definitely recommend taking it.

    It is a bit time-consuming as there are 2 parts and over 200 questions, but I like this questionnaire so much because it is tough to fudge the test to get desirable results. This is because the survey doesn’t have face validity, and therefore doesn’t appear to measure how much someone engages in a particular defence mechanism. Two examples of questions are:

    “I am bothered by stomach acid several times per week” or

    “It is annoying to listen to a lecturer who cannot seem to make up his mind as to what he really believes”.

    I’m not sure which defence mechanisms these questions are tapping into or if the correct answer is true or false. However, previous research has shown that specific patterns of responses on the questionnaire are quite good at identifying people who regularly use 10 common defence mechanisms, including repression, displacement, denial, regression, projection, reaction formation, intellectualisation, rationalisation, isolation and doubt. My results were astonishing to me.

    My Defence Mechanisms

    I first took the ‘How Do You Deal?’ questionnaire in February 2013. I had just finished a year-long practical internship at Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, and I found supporting individuals with cancer really rewarding and meaningful, but also quite challenging as I had lost a dear friend to cancer when I was 21. In addition, I wanted to finish my thesis by July but was falling way behind, and I was also a month away from getting married and moving in with my then fiancé. So I had many big changes coming up, and I was both stressed and scared about how everything would go.

    Here are my February 2013 results, alongside the descriptions of these defence mechanisms given by the personality assessor website:

    1. Denial — 94th percentile — extremely high

    Denial is a defense mechanism where people avoid thinking about problems, or even pretend like their problems don’t exist. For example, someone might deny that they have a drug problem. Or someone might deny that they’re currently having conflict in their romantic relationship.

    Since denial can be subconscious, people who use denial might honestly believe that their problems don’t exist!

    2. Isolation — 91st percentile — extremely high

    Isolation is a defense mechanism where people compartmentalize their thoughts and feelings so that their thoughts don’t affect their feelings.

    Isolation differs from denial. Using denial, a person with a drug problem might refuse to even see that they have a drug problem. Using isolation, a person with a drug problem would acknowledge they have a problem, but would not let the fact they have a problem affect their feelings. If intellectualization is all about staying in your head to avoid your heart, isolation is about keeping your head and your heart separate.

    3. Displacement — 81st percentile — very high

    Displacement occurs when we “take out” our frustrations on someone/something else. For example, imagine that you hate your boss. It might have dire consequences if you expressed your hate toward your boss. So, if you displaced those feelings, you might go home and yell at your family.

    This is different than projection. In projection, we don’t see our own feelings — we see them in other people (e.g., I am not angry, my boss is). In displacement, however, we still “own” our feelings (e.g., I am angry) but we “take out” those feelings on the wrong target (e.g., angry at boss, but kick dog instead of boss).

    4. Regression — 73rd percentile — high

    Regression is a defense mechanism where people essentially start acting or thinking like a child. The idea is that when life feels too overwhelming or our problems feel too big, that we regress to an earlier, easier time when other people (our parents) used to take care of us. As such, regression can include:

    * desiring for other people to take care of your problems for you

    * acting dependent on other people

    * acting like a child (e.g., temper tantrums)

    * refusing to take responsibility for your actions

    5. Doubt — 72nd percentile — high

    The defense mechanism of doubt occurs when people doubt their senses or thought processes when they encounter problems. For example, imagine a good friend tells you they don’t really like you. You might utilize the defense mechanism of doubt by thinking “I must have misunderstood what they meant.”

    Doubt is kind of like a mixture of denial, intellectualization, and rationalization. Doubt lets us deny that our problems are real (or avoid making big decisions we’re afraid of) by questioning our ability to accurately see the world and make good decisions. In contrast to denial, when people use doubt, they are aware of their problems on some level.

    6. Rationalization — 68th percentile — high

    Rationalization is when people excuse their actions with usually irrational false explanations. For example, if someone binges and eats an entire large pizza, they might think “Well, the food was going to waste anyway! I might as well have eaten it.”

    Rationalization is kind of like a mixture of denial and intellectualization. Essentially, rationalization allows people to “explain away” their problems (usually bad habits, personal flaws, etc.) with a superficially valid explanation. The biggest difference between rationalization and intellectualization is that intellectualization is used to avoid feelings, whereas rationalization is used to avoid seeing our own personal flaws.

    7. Intellectualisation — 64th percentile — high

    Intellectualization occurs when people avoid painful feelings by thinking oftentimes inappropriate impersonal thoughts. For example, if someone’s pet dies, they might think, “Pets die every day. Why should I be upset?”

    Basically, the idea is that people who use intellectualization minimize their problems — or at least their feelings — and avoid the pain in their hearts by staying lodged solidly in their heads.

    8. Projection — 47th percentile — about average

    Projection occurs when we project our own thoughts and feelings onto other people. For example, you might really hate your boss. If you used the defense mechanism of projection, you might be unaware of your own feelings toward your boss, but instead think your boss hated you. This defense mechanism would allow you to deny your feelings and, in turn, believe that any conflict between you and your boss is your boss’s fault (not yours).

    Projection basically lets us believe that are problems aren’t really ours — they’re someone else’s!

    9. Repression — 37th percentile — low

    Repression occurs when people push down or block-out memories or desires that they feel are threatening. For example, someone might repress painful childhood memories and try to not think about them. As another example, someone might repress their attraction to a friend that they fear wouldn’t reciprocate their interest.

    Repression is similar to denial, but slightly different. Denial is about convincing yourself that your problems don’t exist. Repression is about blocking out part of yourself — memories or desires, usually — perhaps to avoid creating a problem!

    10. Reaction formation — 15th percentile — very low

    Reaction formation is a fascinating defense mechanism where we do the opposite of what we really want to do. For example, imagine you are very attracted to another person. If, for some reason that attraction is a problem (e.g., you are married, they are married, etc.), you might start to feel the opposite toward them — you may think they are disgusting and/or actively dislike them.

    Reaction formation allows you to avoid your problems — and also creates a buffer to ensure you avoid your problems. In the example above, you’re not merely repressing your attraction toward the other person — you’re actually feeling negative feelings toward them. These negative feelings will ensure the attraction doesn’t resurface.

    Seeing that my marriage ended up being far worse than I had predicted, I maybe should have paid attention to these results a bit more, especially my denial and doubt scores.

    It did help with the writing up of my thesis. I stopped trying to avoid the problem, started coming into the lab from 9 am — 5 pm every weekday regardless of how I felt and began making some real and consistent progress without cramming for the first time in my life. I finished a full draft of my thesis by September 2013, started working as a Psychologist in private practice shortly after that, and submitted the final copy of my thesis for examination in February 2014.

    Have My Defence Mechanisms Improved?

    I retook the ‘How Do You Deal?’ questionnaire at the end of April 2017. I now live a life that is much more consistent with the experiences I want to have rather than what society says that I should be doing. I believe that I am a lot happier and in the best place that I have ever been psychologically. But have my defence mechanisms actually changed?

    Defence Mechanisms 2013 2017
    Denial 94th percentile 75th percentile
    Isolation 91st percentile 92nd percentile
    Displacement 81st percentile 77th percentile
    Regression  73rd percentile 68th percentile
    Doubt 72nd percentile 64th percentile
    Rationalisation 68th percentile 53rd percentile
    Intellectualisation 64th percentile 18th percentile
    Projection 47th percentile 56th percentile
    Repression 37th percentile 20th percentile
    Reaction formation 15th percentile 9th percentile

    As you can see, eight of my results had improved, with denial dropping 19 percentile points and losing its position as my most used defence mechanism. This is great, as I am now more aware of my issues and can actually do something about them.

    My most noticeable improvement was my reduction in intellectualising things, but I also repress things much less than I used to, rationalise my actions less, and doubt myself less too. This means that I am now turning into what I feel and need more, not just remaining in my head. By understanding and accepting my emotions rather than avoiding them or explaining them away, it really does make it easier to know what action I need to take. Regular journaling, mindfulness and therapy have definitely helped me to create these changes. So has being more honest and authentic with others.

    The two defence mechanism scores that have increased are projection and isolation. The increase in projection isn’t helpful, as this means I could be externalising some problems rather than taking responsibility for my role in creating them. The high isolation score isn’t so bad, though, as separating my head and heart is something that I have worked on to make sure that I am making decisions in line with my values and not my fears going forward. If this never changes, that will be fine by me.

    Can We Change How We Deal With Problems?

    It’s not possible to completely avoid engaging in defence mechanisms. We all have different coping methods, and many of these coping styles are developed in childhood and modelled on what everyone else in our family did.

    However, some defence mechanisms are more helpful than others, and they can change in time with deliberate practice. Head researcher of the Grant longitudinal study, George Vaillant, has separated defence mechanisms into immature, intermediate and mature defences. Acting out, projection, passive-aggressive behaviour, and denial are considered immature. Reaction formation, repression and displacement are intermediate defences. Mature defences include:

    1. humour: seeing the funny side of things,
    2. sublimation: channelling difficult emotions into something prosocial and constructive,
    3. anticipation: planning for upcoming situations that might be challenging,
    4. suppression: not reacting to your feelings or letting them show if this would interfere with you achieving your goals, and
    5. altruism: deriving pleasure from helping others.

    A 2013 study by Malone and colleagues found that men who used more mature defence mechanisms between 47 and 63 years of age had better health between 70 and 80. This was mostly because the people who regularly engaged in more mature defence mechanisms had better social support and stronger interpersonal connections than individuals who used immature defence mechanisms (Malone et al., 2013).

    If you want to build up healthier coping strategies, understanding which defences you currently use is a great place to start. The best way to do this apart from taking the ‘How Do You Deal?’ questionnaire is consulting with a therapist, especially a psychologist or a psychiatrist trained in psychoanalysis or psychodynamic psychotherapy. Friends and family might be able to point out some potential defence mechanisms that you use, but I think it is better to get this feedback from professionally trained and impartial. They can then help you replace these defences with more mature and adaptive coping strategies to have more supportive relationships and better long-term health and well-being.

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist

  • The 10 Best Laws of Power

    The 10 Best Laws of Power

    A fascinating book that I read towards the end of 2017 was ‘The 48 Laws of Power’ by Robert Greene.

    Since the book was first released in 1998, it has sold over 2 million copies worldwide and has influenced many successful people, from Will Smith to Kanye West, Jay-Z and 50 Cent, who later co-wrote a New York Times’ bestseller with Greene.

    It is also the most highly requested book in U.S. prisons due to the synthesis of Machiavelli, Sun Tzu and other famous writers’ key prescriptions for effectively managing power struggles in difficult environments.

    Some of the 48 laws do seem contradictory, and others seem a little repetitive. Still, there are some truly great bits of advice for effectively managing situations where power may play a role. This might be a corporate environment, a difficult but smaller workplace, a large social group, to really anywhere where there is a power imbalance between people or a formal or informal hierarchy.

    Here are my 10 favourite laws, including a description of each law from the following website. The parts that I especially like are bolded. Enjoy!

    Law 4: Always Say Less than Necessary

    When you are trying to impress people with words, the more you say, the more common you appear, and the less in control… Powerful people impress by saying less. The more you say, the more likely you are to say something foolish.

    Like the Danish proverb that says, “deep rivers move with silent majesty, shallow brooks are noisy”, law 4 reminds me only to say things that I believe will be of value. It also helps me stay within my circle of competence and not give advice on things that I do not know much about.

    Law 9: Win through your Actions, Never through Argument

    Any momentary triumph you think gained through argument is really a Pyrrhic victory: The resentment and ill will you stir up is stronger and lasts longer than any momentary change of opinion. It is much more powerful to get others to agree with you through your actions, without saying a word. Demonstrate, do not explicate.

    A parent who smokes but tells their children not to is unlikely to be successful at persuading their children because “actions speak louder than words”. The better option is not to smoke or quit if you want to set a good example. As Mahatma Gandhi said, “you must be the change you wish to see in the world”.

    Law 13: When Asking for Help, Appeal to People’s Self-Interest, Never to their Mercy or Gratitude

    If you need to turn to an ally for help, do not bother to remind him of your past assistance and good deeds. He will find a way to ignore you. Instead, uncover something in your request, or in your alliance with him, that will benefit him, and emphasise it… He will respond enthusiastically when he sees something to be gained for himself.

    As sad as this may appear, most people are self-motivated and want to do the right thing if it makes them look good. For example, a hybrid car such as a Toyota Prius sells well because it is known as a hybrid car. It screams out, “I care about the environment,” in a way that the Toyota Camry Hybrid does not because the hybrid version of the Camry looks almost identical to the regular Camry. The 2014 sales in the US of each car highlights this point: Prius = 194,000; Toyota Camry Hybrid = 39,500; Toyota Camry (non-hybrid) = 428,600. Figure out how what you want will benefit the other person or help them look good before you ask for a favour, and you are much more likely to get them on board.

    Law 18: Do Not Build Fortresses to Protect Yourself — Isolation is Dangerous

    The world is dangerous and enemies are everywhere — everyone has to protect themselves. A fortress seems the safest. But isolation exposes you to more dangers than it protects you from — it cuts you off from valuable information, it makes you conspicuous and an easy target. Better to circulate among people, find allies, mingle.

    Many people that I see try to protect themselves at the cost of a real sense of connection and belonging with others. This law helps by reminding me of the dangers and costs of not opening up to honest people you can trust.

    Law 23:Concentrate Your Forces

    Conserve your forces and energies by keeping them concentrated at their strongest point. You gain more by finding a rich mine and mining it deeper, than by flitting from one shallow mine to another — intensity defeats extensiveness every time.

    This reminds me of the saying, “jack of all trades; master of none”. If you want to make progress in anything, it is important to prioritise and put your energy into the activities and thought patterns that will give you the best results. Law 23 also helps me to build upon my strengths rather than worrying too much about my weaknesses.

    Law 25:Re-Create Yourself

    Do not accept the roles that society foists on you. Re-create yourself by forging a new identity, one that commands attention and never bores the audience. Be the master of your own image rather than letting others define it for you.

    I often encourage my clients to clarify their most important values and see how these differ from what their family, friends, culture, or society may want. The idea of working hard and not enjoying life until retirement is not a role that I want to accept, even though this is considered normal in many respects by society. It’s much better to create and live a sustainable life for myself, whatever that may look like. Then it won’t matter if and when I retire, especially if I keep loving what I do for work.

    Law 28: Enter Action with Boldness

    If you are unsure of a course of action, do not attempt it. Your doubts and hesitations will infect your execution. Timidity is dangerous: Better to enter with boldness. Any mistakes you commit through audacity are easily corrected with more audacity. Everyone admires the bold; no one honours the timid.

    Law 28 reminds me not to doubt myself once I have settled on a course of action and fully commit myself to it for a set period of time instead of remaining uncertain or indecisive. Once a decision is made, it is much better to give it 100% until the next decision needs to be made. Uncertainty only leads to more stress and anxiety and less satisfaction in the long run.

    Law 29: Plan All the Way to the End

    The ending is everything. Plan all the way to it, taking into account all the possible consequences, obstacles, and twists of fortune that might reverse your hard work… By planning to the end you will not be overwhelmed by circumstances and you will know when to stop. Gently guide fortune and help determine the future by thinking far ahead.

    This reminds me of the benefits of thinking into the future and clarifying how I would want my life to look. For example, if I had a 50th birthday and someone close to me stood up and spoke about the person I had been for the past 18 years, what would I want to hear them say? Based on my response to this, it is then important to see if my 1-, 5- or 10-year plan is helping me to head in that direction. If not, more planning and some big changes may be required, as long as my plans are flexible enough to change as I continue to grow with time.

    Law 35: Master the Art of Timing

    Never be in a hurry — hurrying betrays a lack of control over yourself, and over time. Always (be) patient, as if you know that everything will come to you eventually. Become a detective of the right moment; sniff out the spirit of the times, the trends that will carry you to power. Learn to stand back when the time is not yet ripe, and to strike fiercely when it has reached fruition.

    Patience is a massively underrated value, especially in today’s society. How often do you see people multitasking or telling you how busy they are? I know I sometimes do. But slowing things down and really making sure that my attention is 100% on what is most important in any given moment is a great recipe for long-term happiness and well-being. While it is important to “strike while the iron is hot”, I think it is also important not to be too reactive and make sure that the decisions you make are really consistent with your values and long-term plans. Knowing how to say no to the wrong things in life is also a crucial element of success.

    Law 45: Preach the Need for Change, but Never Reform too much at Once

    Everyone understands the need for change in the abstract, but on the day-to-day level people are creatures of habit. Too much innovation is traumatic, and will lead to revolt. If you are new to a position of power, or an outsider trying to build a power base, make a show of respecting the old way of doing things. If change is necessary, make it a gentle improvement on the past.

    Trying to change my eating habits has taught me this law better than anything else recently. As soon as I try to be too restrictive, I rebel against any prescriptions. Long-term sustainable changes are again much better than short-term dramatic changes. The 20-minute walk that you manage to do is better than the 10km run you do not, so start small and try to build up slowly. If you can do this, changes are much more likely to stick.

    If you want to see the remaining 38 laws, please click here or purchase the book. Some of the laws seem pretty ruthless, but pretending that they don’t exist in power dynamics is much more dangerous than learning how they work.

    I also recommend checking out my dealing with toxic people article for more information on successfully managing and surviving difficult interactions.

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist

  • 10 Things You Need to Know About Adverse Childhood Experiences

    10 Things You Need to Know About Adverse Childhood Experiences

    1. There are 10 categories of experience that are considered to have adverse consequences on the later development of children

    These include:

    • Abuse:
    • Emotional
    • Physical
    • Sexual
    • Neglect:
    • Emotional
    • Physical
    • Household Dysfunction:
    • Domestic Violence
    • Substance Abuse
    • Mental Illness
    • Parental Separation/Divorce
    • Crime

    2. It is possible to determine your own Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) score

    The ACE score is a measure that has been designed to measure the cumulative nature of childhood distress.

    If you are interested in finding out your ACE score, please answer the following questionnaire from acestudy.org:

    While you were growing up, during your first 18 years of life:

    1. Did a parent or other adult in the household often or very often…

    • Swear at you, insult you, put you down, or humiliate you? or
    • Act in a way that made you afraid that you might be physically hurt?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 _____________

    2. Did a parent or other adult in the household often or very often…

    • Push, grab, slap, or throw something at you? or
    • Ever strike you that you had marks or were injured?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 _____________

    3. Did an adult or person at least 5 years older than you ever…

    • Touch or fondle you, or have you sexually touch their body? or
    • Attempt or actually have oral, anal, or vaginal intercourse with you?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ____________

    4. Did you often or very often feel that…

    • No one in your family loved you or thought you were important or special? or
    • Your family didn’t look out for each other, feel close to each other, or support each other?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ___________

    5. Did you often or very often feel that…

    • You didn’t have enough to eat, had to wear dirty clothes, and had no one to protect you? or
    • Your parents were too drunk or high to take care of you or take you to the doctor if you needed it?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ___________

    6. Were your parents ever separated or divorced?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ___________

    7. Was your mother or stepmother:

    • Often or very often pushed, grabbed, slapped, or had something thrown at her? or
    • Sometimes, often, or very often kicked, bitten, hit with a fist, or hit with something hard? or
    • Ever repeatedly hit at least a few minutes or threatened with a gun or knife

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ___________

    8. Did you live with anyone who was a problem drinker or alcoholic or who used street drugs?

    Yes? No? If yes, enter 1 ___________

    9. Was a household member depressed or mentally ill, or did a household member attempt suicide?

    Yes? No? If yes enter 1 ___________

    10. Did a household member go to prison?

    Yes? No? If yes enter 1 __________

    Now add up your “Yes” answers: __________ This is your ACE Score.

    3. Adverse childhood experiences are common

    Of the 17,337 individuals surveyed, here is the prevalence of each possible adverse experience, from most to least, represented as a percentage:

    • Physical abuse towards the child — 28.3%
    • Substance abuse in the household — 26.9%
    • Parental separation/divorce — 23.3%
    • Sexual abuse toward the child — 20.7%
    • Mental Illness in the household — 19.4%
    • Emotional neglect towards the child — 14.8%
    • Domestic violence in the household — 12.7%
    • Emotional abuse towards the child — 10.6%
    • Physical neglect towards the child — 9.9%
    • Imprisoned household member — 4.7%

    This graph from acestoohigh.com presents these percentages visually:

    4. It is more common to have an adverse childhood experience than not to have any

    As shown in the graph from cdc.gov, 64% of the population surveyed experienced at least one adverse childhood experience(ACE), with the majority of those reporting at least one ACE reporting multiple ACEs.

    Beyond the ACEs study, at least one in four children will suffer from physical, emotional or sexual abuse at some point during their childhoods, with one-in-seven children experiencing abuse or neglect in the past 12 months (Finklehor, Turner, Shattuck & Hamby, 2015).

    5. Adverse childhood experiences are linked with a higher risk of many things in later life

    This includes:

    • Alcohol abuse and dependence
    • Early smoking initiation and current smoking status
    • Illicit drug use
    • IV drug abuse
    • Obesity
    • Suicide attempts
    • Depression
    • Anxiety
    • Hyperactivity
    • Sleep Disturbances
    • Hallucinations
    • Eating disorders
    • Suicide attempts
    • Post-traumatic stress disorder
    • Conduct disorder
    • Teen or unintended pregnancies
    • Intimate partner violence
    • Improper brain development
    • Impaired learning ability and general cognitive difficulties
    • Attention and memory difficulties
    • Visual and/or motor impairment
    • Lower language development
    • Impaired social and emotional skills
    • Poorer quality of life

    Another long-term study indicated that approximately 80% of young adults who had previously been abused qualified for at least one psychiatric diagnosis at 21 (Silverman, Reinherz & Gianconia, 1996). Neglected or abused children are also 59% more likely to be arrested during childhood, 28% more likely to engage in criminal behaviour as adults, and 30% more likely to engage in violent crime as an adult (Widom & Maxfield, 2001).

    The graph below from vetoviolence.cdc.gov shows the increased risk of many conditions in individuals who have previously had adverse childhood experiences:

    As you can see, there is a higher risk of experiencing these difficulties for individuals with ACEs. However, the prevalence rate is NOT 100% for any of the factors. The importance of this should not be understated…

    Individuals who have had negative experiences during their childhood can still grow and flourish as adults and can also be more resilient due to learning how to overcome significant challenges when they are younger.

    A major longitudinal study even found that what goes right during childhood is often more important than what goes wrong. Having even one safe, stable and nurturing figure in a child’s life can reduce the later risk of psychological and physical health problems (Vaillant, 2015).

    6. Adverse childhood experiences are linked with a higher risk of later disease and early mortality

    This includes:

    • High Blood Pressure
    • High Cholesterol
    • Obesity
    • Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD)
    • Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD)
    • Liver Disease
    • Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs)
    • Lung Cancer
    • Death Before Age 65

    As you can see in the table below from acestoohigh.com, individuals with an ACE score of 4 or more are at a significantly higher risk of developing later physical health conditions:

    Abuse and neglect during childhood can also negatively impact the ability of individuals to efficiently establish and maintain healthy romantic adult relationships (Colman & Widom, 2004). As relationship warmth and social connection are vital protective factors for long-term health and happiness, many of these more significant risks could at least be partially explained by the higher risk of interpersonal conflict, disconnection and isolation.

    7. The more adverse childhood experiences one has, the more significant likelihood they have of experiencing difficulties with their mental and physical health and overall well-being later in life

    A “dose-response reaction” exists with most risk factors and following conditions, in that the more adverse childhood experiences one has, the higher their risk is for adverse outcomes later in life, as shown in the above graphic from cdc.gov.

    8. It is possible to conceptualise how these adverse childhood experiences lead to an early death

    The ACE Pyramid from cdc.gov suggests that adverse childhood experiences contribute to premature death via four intermediate processes that develop in a sequential nature:

    9. Reducing adverse experiences of childhood will significantly improve public health and reduce the burden that these issues have on individuals and the society

    Childhood abuse and neglect are not just damaging to the individual. They also place a substantial financial strain on society, with an estimated total lifetime economic burden of approximately $124 billion (2010 dollars) in the US in 2008 (Fang, Brown, Florence & Mercy, 2012). This is similar to the financial burden of other public health issues, such as diabetes and stroke.

    The main reasons for the increased economic burden are lost productivity, followed by increased medical costs, special education, child welfare and criminal justice costs (Fang, Brown, Florence & Mercy, 2012).

    Even though it may be expensive to develop and implement programs that aim to prevent child neglect and abuse, the benefits of these programs, if valid, are very likely to outweigh the costs in the long run.

    10. We need to do something to address and lower the prevalence of ACEs in future generations

    Creating safe, stable and nurturing environments (SSNREs) is the key to positively impacting reducing ACEs from now on.

    The five best practices to do this is shown in the graph below:

    The US Centers For Disease Control (CDC) also suggests:

    • Greater treatment for mental illness and substance abuse
    • More high-quality child care, and
    • More financial support for low-income families.

    Conclusion

    Please help to get this information out there to as many people as possible. Also, if you found something of value in this article, please share it or pass it onto whoever else may benefit too!

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist

  • Are You Asking the Right Questions In Your Search For a Therapist?

    Are You Asking the Right Questions In Your Search For a Therapist?

    If you were searching the web as a consumer, looking for the best Psychologist, would you know what to search for?

    If you said that you would look for someone experienced, it is a good guess, but years of experience don’t seem to make too much of a difference in improving therapeutic outcomes (Minami et al., 2009).

    What may be necessary is that they are a Psychologist and not a Counsellor. In Australia, anyone can call themselves a Counsellor and open up a practice, even without training. However, if they are a Psychologist, they have to have completed at least four years of undergraduate training, plus a post-graduate degree or at least two years of formal supervision. Psychologists are also obliged to abide by the Australian Psychological Society’s (APS) code of ethics, whereas Counsellors are not.

    If you said the company they worked for or how much they charged, these are both good guesses. However, private practice Psychologists are self-employed and set their price for their service, or a company employs and sets their price for them. Therefore, it is unlikely that all Psychologists within the same practice are equally effective, even if they are charging the same amount.

    The current recommended rate for a 45–60 minute Psychological consultation in Australia is set at $238.00 by the APS, but all Psychologists have the discretion to vary this fee. For example, services in more affluent locations often charge more, whereas services in poorer areas often charge less.

    More expensive Psychologists may believe themselves to be better Psychologists too, but this doesn’t mean that they are. The self-evaluations of therapists are often not very accurate, with a largely positive bias suggesting overconfidence in their general abilities. In a 2012 study by Walfish, McAllister, O’Donnell, and Lambert (2012), they found that out of the 129 therapists surveyed, 25% estimated that their therapy results were in the top 10% compared to the other therapists. Not a single therapist believed that they were worse than the average. If this sample represents the general population, this means that at least 50% of Psychologists don’t realise how bad they are and may therefore not be aware of what they are doing wrong and what they need to do to improve.

    What is known is that some Psychologist’s do consistently outperform other Psychologists (Wampold & Brown, 2005). In a 2015 study by Brown, Simon and Minami (2015), they looked at 2,820 therapists, with a combined sample size of 162,168 cases. The researchers found that the lowest-performing therapists required three times more sessions to produce successful outcomes than the average therapist. They also needed as much as seven times the number of sessions as the highest-performing therapists. So choosing the right Psychologist is a crucial task. But,

    What characteristics do the best Psychologist’s have, and what do they do that makes them so successful?

    1. They practice a specific model of treatment that is most recommended for your condition or is a good fit for the type of therapy you are interested in

    (Model of Treatment = 15% of overall outcome variance)

    There are many different schools of Psychotherapy, such as CBT, ACT, DBT, Positive Psychology or Psychodynamic Psychotherapy. They will all have research supporting their treatments as effective, especially with specific conditions (such as DBT for Borderline Personality Disorder or CBT for Panic Disorder).

    What they won’t often advertise is that no matter what school of therapy it is:

    • None of them will help every client
    • The drop out rates can be pretty high
    • Clients who do drop out prematurely tend to fare worse than clients who can complete treatment, and
    • Other psychotherapy schools tend to produce similar results.

    So yes, therapy helps, sometimes, and for some people. However, it is perplexing to think how the research findings are all so similar in the different schools of psychotherapy (Wampold, 2001) until it is made clear that non-specific treatment factors are shared across the various schools of psychotherapy. These non-specific factors are described below and together contribute 85% of the overall outcome variance in psychotherapeutic studies (Hubble and Miller, 2004).

    Whilst one mode of therapy may not generally be more effective than another, the goodness of fit does seem to be necessary. So try to choose a Psychologist who has experience in treating your particular concern, as well as an approach or therapy model that seems to make sense or appeal to you.

    2. They help you to hope, expect and believe that you can improve

    (Expectancy of Treatment Effects = 15% of overall outcome variance)

    An individuals’ belief that they can improve has a powerful impact on their actual improvement (Bergsma, 2008). More considerable reductions in symptom severity occur post-treatment in those with higher expectations of benefit at pre-treatment (Ogles, Lambert, & Craig, 1991; Rutherford, Sneed, Devanand, Eisenstadt, & Roose, 2010).

    Greater expectations can improve hope and increase goal-directed determination, which has been shown to predict treatment completion (Geraghty, Wood, & Hyland, 2010).

    Greater expectations of treatment outcomes can also improve distress tolerance. These skills can reduce distress and depression severity across treatment (Williams, Thompson, & Andrews, 2013).

    Essentially, the more you expect that a Psychologist can help you, the more likely it is that you will have hope, persist with treatment, and get better.

    3. They develop a warm, caring and trustworthy environment where you feel safe to explore and grow

    (Therapeutic Alliance = 30% of overall outcome variance)

    Another critical issue influencing treatment outcomes is adherence to the treatment interventions, recommendations and strategies. A positive therapeutic alliance can improve compliance with treatment recommendations, which plays a vital role in the overall success of a psychotherapy treatment (Wampold, 2001).

    A positive therapeutic alliance improves outcomes by providing professional input and ensuring effective implementation of the strategies. In addition, if a therapeutic alliance can be established, developed and maintained (Cahill et al., 2008), patients are less likely to drop out of treatment and more likely to achieve clinically significant improvements (Miller, Hubble, & Duncan, 2008).

    Regardless of the theoretical orientation or the therapist’s experience, the best outcomes happen when therapists are flexible to the needs of the patient and responsive to the feedback that patients provide. They also repair any ruptures in the therapeutic alliance as quickly as possible (Cahill et al., 2008; Miller et al., 2008).

    Other research suggests that it is crucial to meet relatedness needs, dependent upon the therapist displaying warmth and genuine involvement in the treatment. As a result, the client feels a sense of caring and connection in the relationship (Ryan & Deci, 2008).

    Essentially, the more you can relate to the Psychologist and feel that you are allies working towards a common objective, the more likely you are to improve.

    4. They make sure that therapy is the right step for you at the moment and help you to develop the skills, knowledge and motivation needed to improve successfully

    (Client’s Life-Circumstances, Personal Resources and Readiness to Change = 40% of outcome variance)

    The client is the most significant factor in determining whether or not treatment will be successful, which may be surprising to some people. However, suppose their current life circumstances are unstable, unpredictable, and emotionally or physically unsafe. In that case, it will be difficult for the one hour of therapy every week or two to be sufficient to overcome all of the adverse events that are taking place between sessions.

    Not everyone is a good candidate for therapy, and therapy isn’t everybody’s cup of tea. For example, suppose a client prefers not to question things, has significant cognitive disabilities or memory difficulties, is currently manic or severely delusional or psychotic, or is too emotionally labile or reactive in close interpersonal settings. In that case, therapy can have no effect or be potentially harmful.

    Lastly, if a client does not believe that they have a problem, then there is not too much that can be done by a Psychologist to help them, even if their family or friends or partner or the legal system believes that a problem exists. Unless the client can create intrinsic motivation for change, positive change is unlikely to occur.

    Before seeing a Psychologist, you need to be sure that:

    • You want to change or improve something about yourself
    • You are willing to put in the time and effort that it requires
    • You are eager to explore things to develop and grow, and
    • Now is a good time for you to begin the amount of treatment (both frequency and duration) recommended for you.

    If you follow these recommendations when seeking out a Psychologist, it will not guarantee a successful outcome, but it will help. I wish you the best of luck with your search and therapeutic experience!

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist

  • The Top 20 Movies of My Lifetime (20-11)

    The Top 20 Movies of My Lifetime (20-11)

    A list like this will always be subjective, and I don’t expect others to agree with it. However, I still think it is worth highlighting the movies that have significantly impacted my life and why this is the case. If you believe something amazing is missing from the list, please let me know in the comments section below.

    I was born in 1985, so the movies on the list have been released in 1985 or later. All films on the list also have to be movies:

    • that I have personally watched,
    • that I have personally enjoyed, and
    • that have emotionally impacted me in some way.

    WHY MOVIES ARE IMPORTANT

    Unfortunately, the longer I practise psychotherapy, the more I can see its limitations. Over time, it has become easier for me to look at the traps that people consistently fall into and the logical steps people need to overcome these difficulties.

    However, people are not just logical creatures. They have emotional reactions to things based on their past experiences and beliefs. Therefore, for long-term change to occur, we need to connect and bring about change emotionally.

    This is where stories become relevant. Whether through a good fiction book or a great movie, stories can connect with us emotionally and move us more than a rational argument ever could. Without further ado, here is my list, ranked based on their IMDb star rating:

    # 20: The Conjuring (2013) — IMDb star rating: 7.5/10

    Quite simply, I have never been more scared watching a horror movie in the cinema than this one. I locked my arms between the armrests so that I didn’t jump too much, and the amount of sweat I produced by the end of the movie was intense. The sequel is almost as good, but the scene where the mother wakes up and thinks that her kids are playing a clap-clap version of hide and seek is genuinely terrifying. James Wan is a master of his craft, and his supernatural stuff is much better than the Saw series.

    I was tempted to include ‘Wake in Fright’, the Australian outback horror, instead of this as it has a higher IMDb rating and was an uncomfortable watch. However, the success of a scary movie needs to be about how scary it is, and therefore ‘The Conjuring’ is the perfect way to kickstart the list.

    # 19: The Castle (1997) — IMDb star rating: 7.7/10

    My only Australian movie on the list. I was thinking about my most quoted movie of all time, and this is a close battle with ‘Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy’ and ‘Happy Gilmore’, however ‘The Castle’ has a higher star rating and gets the nod for being an Aussie film. From “tell ’em to get stuffed” to “the vibe” to “the serenity” to “he’s an ideas man” to “we could talk for hours” and “I dug another hole”, The Castle is a truly classic Australian film. For anyone who hasn’t seen it yet, please do yourself a favour and check it out. Truly knee-slapping fun.

    # 18: Midnight in Paris (2011) — IMDb star rating: 7.7/10

    It is the best Woody Allen film by far, in my opinion. Many people might say ‘Manhattan’ or ‘Annie Hall’ or even ‘Hannah and Her Sisters’ may be better, but I tend to prefer the movies that Woody actually doesn’t appear in himself. When Owen Wilson’s character gets to go back in time and meet F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway and Salvador Dali and Pablo Picasso, this is movie magic at its finest. Plus, Marion Cotillard as Adriana is magical too. I’d escape Rachel McAdams as Inez for her any day.

    # 17: Groundhog Day (1993) — IMDb star rating: 8.0/10

    Just brilliant, in my opinion, and the best Bill Murray film by far. What would you do if you were stuck living the same day over and over again in a town that you didn’t want to be in? The main character, Phil, first tries to take advantage of others. He then commits crimes, tries to kill himself, learns skills, helps others and finally finds true love. Another great example of movies teaching us something using a method that couldn’t possibly happen in real life.

    # 16: Donnie Darko (2001) — IMDb star rating: 8.1/10

    This is an example of the right movie at the right time. I was experiencing a lot of suicidal ideation when this movie came out in 2001, and the main song from the movie ‘Mad World’ by Gary Jules connected with me in a way that not much else did. It seems to be the closest depiction I’ve seen of ‘The Catcher in the Rye’, my favourite novel at the time by the author J.D. Salinger. It was a dark time for me, and Donnie Darko really helped me to feel that I wasn’t alone in my struggle. It looked to be the start of a promising career by director Richard Kelly, but he doesn’t seem to have done much since 2009’s ‘The Box’.

    # 15: Before Sunrise (1995) — IMDb star rating: 8.1/10

    I enjoyed all three films in this trilogy, but the first one was my favourite by far. Two strangers, randomly meeting each other on a train in a foreign land, spending the night together wandering around the streets of Vienna and developing a powerful connection in the process. I also really liked ‘Boyhood’ and ‘Dazed and Confused’ from Linklater, but ‘Before Sunrise’ takes the cake for why I love travelling and meeting new people and saying yes to spontaneous experiences.

    # 14: The Truman Show (1998) — IMDb star rating: 8.1/10

    This and ‘EdTV’ were really at the forefront of the reality TV movement that has taken over commercial TV these days. ‘The Truman Show’ is a much better movie, however. Who hasn’t imagined themselves as the main character in a story? I know I have. What if everything was just a set-up to create conflict and tension for the millions of viewers out there? Would you like this, knowing that you are likely to be safe and cared about for the rest of your life? Or would you rather break free and experience an authentic and genuine life experience and give yourself a chance of finding real love and happiness? We all have a choice between what is expected of us and what we would really like to do.

    # 13: The Sixth Sense (1999) — IMDb star rating: 8.1/10

    Unfortunately, one of my friends spoiled the twist at the end of this movie before I saw it, so I’ll never get to experience watching it without knowing what was actually happening. However, I still loved it, which is a true credit to how great the movie is. Early on, I would have listed M. Night Shyamalan as one of my favourite directors. How far his and Haley Joel Osment’s career fell after this gives you an indication of how fickle Hollywood can be, but it was nice to see the director return to some form with the recent ‘Split’. Hopefully, his upcoming sequel to ‘Unbreakable’ will be good too. At its essence, ‘The Sixth Sense’ is an exploration of the topic of grief. I wonder what mediums think of this movie and its most famous quote, “I see dead people”?

    # 12: Inglourious Basterds (2009) — IMDb star rating: 8.3/10

    The best Tarantino movie, in my opinion. The tension he can create through dialogue is amazing, especially with the extended scene at the beginning of the film and the even more extended scene in the basement bar. Tarantino is a movie nerd through and through, and many people will say that ‘Pulp Fiction’ is his masterpiece, but this is better than that in many ways for me. Christoph Waltz was amazing, and getting to revise history in a way that leads to Hitler being shot in the face by a machine gun would have no doubt be satisfying to many. However, it also shows that big budgets and lots of action can never make up for poor dialogue when building up suspense. It’s a pity ‘The Hateful Eight’ was so bad. Here’s hoping that Mr Tarantino makes a return to form with his next film.

    # 11: Good Will Hunting (1997) — IMDb star rating: 8.3/10

    My favourite movie on therapy and the benefits that it can bring. It’s great to see Robin Williams in some of his more serious roles, too, including this one, ‘What Dreams May Come’ and ‘Dead Poets Society’. The scene where Robin Williams character Sean says to Matt Damon’s character Will that it’s not his fault for the prior abuses that have taken place in his life is compelling, as it finally leads to a breaking down of the barriers that Will puts up to defend himself. This is all too obvious with many of the clients that I see who have had abusive pasts. Many of them continue to treat themselves as harshly as their perpetrators once treated them. It is heartbreaking to see it time and time again, and I wish that they too could truly grasp and genuinely feel that they were not responsible for the abuses that they have suffered.

    Stay tuned for #10 through to #1…

  • What Do Clients Find Most Helpful About Therapy?

    What Do Clients Find Most Helpful About Therapy?

    When clients first begin their therapy journey, they often ask to be taught specific skills to help them achieve their particular goals.

    Clients believe that if they can be taught these skills, they will overcome their difficulties or the problems that led to them entering therapy. They will then have no subsequent complications or need for additional treatment in the future.

    Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) is a short-term treatment that clients can easily understand. CBT is based on the premise that all difficulties arise from unhelpful cognitions (beliefs, expectations, assumptions, rules and thoughts) and unhelpful behaviours. Therefore, CBT aims to help clients see that their cognitions and behaviours are unhelpful and tries to teach them skills that can help them replace these unhelpful cognitions and behaviours with more helpful ones. If this is achieved, the assumption is that clients will change and therefore improve.

    I believe that if a client can have more helpful cognitions and behaviours, they will have significantly improved psychological health and overall well-being. I’m just not sure if I agree that the process required to get to this outcome is the same as what many CBT clinicians would believe. For example, focus on distorted cognitions has been negatively correlated with overall outcomes in cognitive therapy for depression studies (Castonguay, Goldfield, Wiser, Raue, & Hayes, 1996).

    What leads to improvements in treatment?

    The article “What Leads to Optimal Outcomes in Therapy?” answers this question in detail and shows that the outcome is dependent upon (Hubble & Miller, 2004):

    • The life circumstances of the client, their resources and readiness to change (40% of overall outcome variance)
    • The therapeutic relationship (30% of total outcome variance)
    • The expectations about the treatment and therapy (15% of global outcome variance)
    • The specific model of therapy (15% of overall outcome variance)

    For cognitive therapy for depression, both therapeutic alliance and the emotional involvement of the patient predicted the reductions in symptom severity across the treatment (Castonguay et al., 1996). Many therapists are now aware of these findings, but clients are generally not.

    What do clients view to be the most valuable elements of therapy once they have improved?

    By the end of treatment, especially if it is a successful outcome, clients tend to have a much different outlook on what they think are the most valuable aspects of therapy compared to what they were looking for at the beginning of their treatment.

    Irvin Yalom’s excellent and informative book ‘The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy’ goes into detail about a study he conducted with his colleagues that examined the most important therapeutic factors, as identified by 20 successful long-term group therapy clients. They gave each client 60 cards, which consisted of five items across each of the 12 categories of therapeutic factors, and asked them to sort them regarding how valuable these items were across their treatment.

    The 12 categories, from least helpful to most helpful, were:

    12. Identification: trying to be like others

    11. Guidance: being given advice or suggestions about what to do

    10. Family reenactment: developing a greater understanding of earlier family experiences

    9. Altruism: seeing the benefits of helping others

    8. Installation of hope: knowing that others with similar problems have improved

    7. Universality: realising that others have similar experiences and problems

    6. Existential factors: recognising that pain, isolation, injustice and death are part of life

    5. Interpersonal output: learning about how to relate to and get along with others

    4. Self-understanding: learning more about thoughts, feelings, the self, and their origins

    3. Cohesiveness: being understood, accepted and connected with a sense of belonging

    2. Catharsis: expressing feelings and getting things out in the open

    1. Interpersonal input: learning more about our impression and impact on others

    The clients were unaware of the different categories and only rated each of the 60 individual items concerning how helpful it had been.

    When looking at these categories, giving advice or suggestions about what to do is often not found to be a beneficial element of the therapy process, even though this is precisely what most of the clients are initially looking for. Instead, it is far more critical to develop a more in-depth knowledge of themselves, their inner world, and how they relate to and are perceived by others in interpersonal situations.

    The top 10 items that the clients rated as most helpful were (Yalom & Leszcz, 2005):

    10. Feeling more trustful of groups and of other people.

    9. Seeing that others could reveal embarrassing things and take other risks and benefit from it helped me to do the same.

    8. Learning how I come across to others.

    7. Learning that I must take ultimate responsibility for the way I live my life no matter how much guidance and support I get from others.

    6. Expressing negative and/or positive feelings toward another member.

    5. The group’s teaching me about the type of impression I make on others.

    4. Learning how to express my feelings.

    3. Other members honestly telling me what they think of me.

    2. Being able to say what is bothering me instead of holding it in.

    1. Discovering and accepting previously unknown or unacceptable parts of myself.

    All 20 clients had been in therapy an average of 16 months and had finished or were about to complete their treatment. These items were about group therapy, so the most critical factors for change in individual treatment may be different. However, even with individual treatment, Yalom believes that the relationship heals in the end.

    For more information, feel free to check out Chapter 4 in ‘The Theory and Practice of Group Psychotherapy’ by Irvin Yalom and Molyn Leszcz (2005) or any of the other studies out there that look into the outcomes or therapeutic factors involved in change across psychological treatment.

    Suppose you have ever wanted to discover and learn more about yourself, accept yourself more, express yourself better or develop more trust in others. In that case, longer-term psychological therapy may be just what you need!

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist

  • How Have Intimate Relationships Changed Over the Years, and Where Does It Leave Us Now?

    How Have Intimate Relationships Changed Over the Years, and Where Does It Leave Us Now?

    I just finished reading the book ‘Modern Romance: An Investigation’ by Aziz Ansari and Eric Klinenberg and was pleasantly surprised to see such a well-researched book written predominantly by a Stand-up Comedian (with a helping hand from a Sociologist).

    For those of you who don’t know Aziz, his stand-up shows typically consist of interesting observations about relationships, as does his new series ‘Master of None’.

    Considering that I liked his stand-up and show, I was intrigued to see his book about relationships in my local bookstore. Here’s what his research found:

    How Has Dating Changed?

    1. Distance

    Back in 1932, a Sociologist named James Bossard examined 5000 consecutive marriage licences in the city of Philidelphia, USA, and looked into how close the partners had lived to each other before they married. Here’s what he found:

    • Same address — 12.64%
    • Same block — 4.54%
    • 1 to 2 blocks — 6.08%
    • 2 to 4 blocks — 7.3%
    • 4 to 10 blocks — 10.16%
    • 10 to 20 blocks — 9.62%
    • 20+ blocks — 17.8%
    • Different cities — 17.8%

    More than half of Philidelphia in the 1930s married someone who lived in a ten-block radius to them. More than one-in-six didn’t even cross the road to find their marriage partner.

    Other Sociologists looked to see if this pattern remained in smaller towns and found that it did whenever suitable marriage partners were available. For example, John Ellsworth Jr., who examined marriage patterns in a Connecticut town of less than 4,000 called Simsbury, declared:

    “People will go as far as they have to to find a mate, but no farther.”

    While this quote may still be somewhat applicable in modern times, it does seem that we are much more likely to date people of different origins, cultures and addresses to us, rather than settling down with someone who lived on the same street.

    2. Places

    Where we meet our romantic partners is much different too. Sociologist Michael Rosenfeld’s survey ‘How Couples Meet and Stay Together’ asked over 3,000 American adults of all ages when and how they met their spouse or romantic partner. Because the age of the respondents differed, it made it possible to see the changes between 1940 and 2010. Here’s what he found:

    • In 1940, the most common way couples met was through family (approximately 25%). The second was meeting through friends (21%), followed by meeting in church (13%), and being neighbours (12%).
    • In 1950, meeting via friends had become the most popular method to meet someone (approximately 26%). Meeting through family was still popular (24%) and was a clear second. Meeting in a bar or a restaurant (14%) was becoming more popular, and meeting at work (12%) or being neighbours (12%) was now more popular than meeting at church (10%).
    • In 1970, meeting through friends was the preferred method to find a partner (approximately 31%). Matching through family (20%) was challenged by meeting at a bar or restaurant (18%). Meeting at work was fourth (15%), followed by neighbours, church and college.
    • In 1990, meeting through friends was just below 40%, finding your partner at work was now second (20%), followed by meeting at a bar or a restaurant (18%). Meeting through family and being neighbours had declined as ways to find a partner. Instead, more people were meeting in college, presumably because more people were also going to college and studying longer. Some early adopters were starting to date online too, but this was still the least favourite method of meeting potential partners.
    • Fast forward to 2010, and meeting through friends was still the most common way couples met, but it was under 30% for the first time since 1960. Meeting at a bar or restaurant fought with meeting online for the 2nd most popular method, with both around 20%. Meeting online was already the most popular option for same-sex partners in 2005 and was up to about 70% by 2010. Meeting at work, meeting through family, being neighbours and finding dates through the church was now much less popular as ways to meet someone, and even meeting at college was beginning to decline. All thanks to the rise of the internet!

    In a separate study looking at how Americans met their spouses between 2005 and 2012, Psychologist John Cacioppo found that more than one-in-three married couples met online (34.95%), which was more than work (14.09%), friends (12.4%) and a bar or club (5.68%) combined. So all of the recent advances in technology, especially the internet and smartphones, really has changed the dating scene dramatically, including how we meet, who we meet, how many potential partners we can meet, and even how we communicate with each other.

    3. Communication Methods

    The first text ever was by a British engineer called Neil Papworth in 1992. It’s crazy to think how much this form of communication has grown in only 24 years. In 2007, text messages began to outnumber phone calls made in the US each month, and in 2010 the world sent approximately 200,000 texts each minute. Since 2010, the number of people owning smartphones has dramatically increased in the USA. It rose from 17% in 2010 to 58% in 2014. 83% of 18- to 29-year-olds already owned a smartphone in 2014. With greater smartphone use comes an increasing use in apps such as Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, and Viber, which further increases instant messages sent.

    Calling vs Texting vs Face-to-Face?

    First Dates

    Seeing that text messages have been a more popular way of communicating since 2007, does this mean that it is now okay to text someone to ask them out on a first date?

    • In 2010, only 10% of adults under 30 used texts to ask someone out for the first time.
    • By 2013, a Match.com survey found that this number had increased to 32%, with face-to-face still leading the way with 37%, a phone call less popular at 23%, and e-mails virtually non-existent at 1%.
    • For adults over 30, this same Match.com survey found that a phone call (52%) was the most likely method of communication when asking someone out on a date, followed by face-to-face (28%), text messages (8%) and e-mail (7%).

    Older females tended to appreciate phone calls in the focus groups that Aziz and Eric ran about whether to phone or text. They saw them as a sign of confidence and helped separate the person from other potential suitors. It also helped them feel more safe and comfortable going out on a date with someone they may not know very well.

    Younger females seemed just as afraid to receive phone calls as younger males were in making them. They preferred not having to respond on the spot and having time to think of a witty or genuine reply or not even reply at all if they weren’t interested, and texting provided them with these options.

    Breaking Up

    What about breaking up — can this too be done via text without seeing the reaction of the heart that you are potentially breaking? It sure sounds more comfortable, but is it socially acceptable?

    • In a 2014 survey of 2,712 18- to 30-year-olds, 73% said they would be upset if their date broke up with them via text, social media or email.
    • In this same survey, out of those who had ended a relationship in the previous 12 months, 25% had used text, 20% had used social media, 18% had split face-to-face, 15% had broken up through a phone call, and 11% had used email.

    With texting, those who had used this method to break up said that they did so because it was “less awkward” and easier to be “more honest.” I still think it is wrong to end a long relationship over text, no matter how much easier it may be. Even though the majority of young adults still agree with me, their actions say the opposite. It’s only a matter of time before their attitudes begin to change in regards to this too.

    Texting Guidelines for Dating:

    1. Do not just say “hey”, “hi”, “what’s up?”, “what’s going on?”

    • Generic messages like this tend to be a real turn-off for some people, especially females who receive many texts like this from several different guys. It is much better to ask a specific question about them or something that refers to the last time you spoke.

    2. Do not just engage in endless banter that never leads to a real-world catch-up.

    • Endless banter gets boring eventually, and older women, in particular, have less patience for constant text exchanges.

    3. Do not just ask someone if they want to “hang out sometime?”

    • It’s confusing whether hanging out is a date or just friends, and it may never lead to an actual date. So instead, invite them out to a particular event, or ask them to meet you at a specific time and place.

    4. Do try to proofread your text messages for correct grammar and spelling.

    • Incorrect spelling is often a major turn off, as is shortening words or using text slang. Determine the audience first, but stick to “tonight” rather than “2nite” if unsure.

    5. Do use a bit of playfulness and humour, but with caution.

    • Make sure that you have a similar sense of humour before engaging in anything too risky or crude, and remember that it can be challenging to pick up on tone in text messages.

    6. Follow the other basic rules around texting:

    • Please wait a while to text back instead of doing it right away, especially early in the dating process. Waiting a bit implies that you have a busy life and builds suspense, increasing the emotional intensity and attraction in the person who has to wait.
    • If you have already sent a text, do not send another message to the same person until you hear back from them unless it is an absolute emergency.
    • Write a similar amount in your texts to what the other person does. If you increase it slightly, they should too if they like you due to our tendency to reciprocate. If they do not, this may mean that they are not aware of the cultural norms around texting, or they are just not that into you.
    • If you are not interested, others will tell you to be upfront and honest with them, but most people actually either pretend to be busy or stop texting back.

    4. Expectations

    When choosing a partner, it seems that our expectations of what the other person needs to provide us have continued to increase over the past 50 years:

    • Before the 1960s, most people were happy enough with settling for a “companionate” or good-enough marriage. People didn’t spend forever looking for passion and love (even though this may have developed over time). Many people saw passionate love as too volatile or irrational to use as the basis for whether or not they should marry someone.
    • When looking for a prospective husband back in 1939, men with a dependable character, emotional stability, maturity and a pleasing disposition were all more highly sought after by women than men they felt mutual attraction and love towards.
    • By the early 1960s, 76% of women were willing to marry a man they didn’t love.

    “Marriage was an economic institution in which you were given a partnership for life in terms of children and social status and succession and companionship.” — Esther Perel.

    • When looking for a prospective wife in 1939, men also highly valued emotional stability, maturity, a dependable character and pleasing disposition, and interestingly also appreciated ambition and industriousness over mutual love and attraction.
    • By the early 1960s, however, only 35% of men admitted that they were willing to marry a woman that they didn’t love. Men already had more legal rights and financial freedom and weren’t looked down upon for moving out of the house and enjoying single life before getting married.
    • By the 1980s, things had changed, with 86% of men and 91% of women in the US saying they needed romantic love to marry someone.
    • In 2008, mutual love and attraction were rated #1 for men and women looking for a prospective partner.

    No longer do people settle for companionship or what is good enough. We also want passion and the perfect life partner who completes us, gives us belonging and identity, mystery and awe, and makes us happy. Some people even declare that they are looking for their soul mate and refuse to settle for anything less.

    This search for the perfect partner seems to take a lot of emotional investment, trial and error, potential heartbreak, and much stress and indecision. However, if we find our soul mate, the potential pay-off should theoretically be much higher than for an old-fashioned “companionate” marriage. However, with more possible options and higher expectations, how can we know if we have found the one to marry?

    5. Marriages

    At what age do we get married?

    From 1950 until about 1968, the average age of first marriages in the US was about 20 for females and 23 for males. In the mid-1970s, this age rapidly increased until it briefly stagnated at about 24 for women and 27 for men between 1999 and 2004. It then began to rise again to about 27 for females and 29 for males in 2014. In bigger cities, such as New York, it is over 30 for both males and females.

    After how long do we tend to get married?

    Before the 1960s, the average couple wed after just six months, according to Stephanie Coontz, author of ‘Marriage, A History’. However, the dating period and the engagement period tend to be much longer these days, with some couples even choosing to live together in a de-facto relationship without ever marrying.

    Do we even need to get married anymore?

    Before the 1960s, getting married, buying a house, and moving out were the first significant steps that signified the transition to adulthood. Single women rarely lived alone, and many families discouraged their daughters from moving into shared housing with other working girls. Their parents were heavily involved in their decisions, even who they dated, and typically always knew about their whereabouts.

    Women of previous generations would sometimes get married to get out of the house and get their first taste of adulthood and freedom. However, once married, they were not always more free to do what they wanted. Instead, they had to depend on their husbands for legal and financial purposes whilst being fully responsible for looking after the house and the children.

    Although things still aren’t fully equal with men and women, with women typically earning less and having to do more housework and child-rearing, they now have equal legal rights regarding property and divorce. Alongside the greater acceptance of various lifestyle choices, including moving out without getting married, marriage is now a choice rather than a necessity for many women.

    https://youtu.be/cYdsWtku9gg

    6. Choices

    Thanks to the advances in technology, we now have more potential options available to us at the click of a mouse or swipe of a button than we have ever had before.

    Thanks to the greater rights and freedom provided to most women in the Australian culture, we also have a new developmental period between adolescence and adulthood called emerging adulthood (ages 18–29). It is a phase where people can go to university, start a career, travel, move around a bit, and have some fun and relationship experiences before settling down and getting married.

    During emerging adulthood, we end up greatly expanding our pool of potential romantic partners. Once you include online dating and other apps for meeting people, the number of possible partners grows exponentially, especially in bigger cities like Melbourne.

    But does having more choices make it easier to find “the one”?

    Research on the paradox of choice would suggest not. As I’ve already mentioned in a previous post, Barry Schwartz, a Psychologist, describes an experiment at a supermarket where they offered 24 different samples of jelly (jam) to customers on day one and six jellies on day two. The day with only six options outsold the day with 24 possibilities by ten times the amount.

    Too many options lead to indecision and paralysis and higher discontent after a decision. So before you are searching for a partner, especially if it is online, make sure that you have a sense of what is truly important to you and what is not, and try to limit your search to these options. Then if you find someone who seems to be alright, give them a real chance before moving onto the next one. You’re likely to be more satisfied on a long-term basis if you do.

    Dr Damon Ashworth

    Clinical Psychologist