Gottman method

1. Introduction

Version followed: Gottman Method Couples Therapy as published by The Gottman Institute (John and Julie Gottman) in its Level 1 (Clinical Foundations) and Level 2 training descriptions and its therapist guide to assessment and feedback for the Gottman Relationship Checkup, supplemented by a 2017 handout set from a Gottman Master Trainer (Michael McNulty) and by Gottman Institute blog articles. Not drawn on: the Level 1–3 training manuals (which are sold only to trainees), the Gottmans' handbook chapter, 10 Principles for Doing Effective Couples Therapy (2015) or The Science of Trust (2011). Anything that would come only from those texts is marked [uncertain] or given as [synthesis].

Gottman Method Couples Therapy is a couple therapy built on John Gottman's observational research with couples. It assesses a relationship against a seven-level model, the Sound Relationship House (SRH), which has trust and commitment as its two walls. It then uses structured exercises to strengthen three systems: the friendship system (love maps, fondness and admiration, turning toward bids), the conflict system (handling solvable problems and holding a dialogue about perpetual ones) and the shared-meaning system (life dreams, rituals, roles, goals, symbols). The theory of change has three parts. Couples replace the corrosive conflict patterns (the "Four Horsemen": criticism, defensiveness, contempt and stonewalling) with their antidotes. Calming the body (physiological soothing) makes listening possible. A stronger friendship builds positive sentiment, and that positive sentiment carries the couple through conflict, including problems that will never be fully solved. [source: GI Level 1 and Level 2 pages; GI Checkup therapist guide; McNulty 2017 handouts]

2. Framework

The Gottman materials describe the therapy as an assessment, then a collaboratively agreed treatment plan, then intervention by SRH level. They do not set out a fixed manualised session-by-session protocol. [source: GI Level 1 and Level 2 pages; GI Checkup guide]

Phase 1: Assessment (3 sessions; roughly 4–4.5 hours in the room, plus questionnaires) [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017; one practice's disclosure statement for timings]

Session 1, conjoint (about 80–90 min): informed consent and an outline of the assessment; the couple's narrative of why they have come and what they want; the Oral History Interview; an observed conflict discussion of about 10 minutes; an explanation of the questionnaires (online Gottman Relationship Checkup or paper forms).
Session 2, individual interviews (about 45 min each, in one split session or two sessions): each partner's own account, family of origin, prior relationships and therapy, co-occurring problems, hopes and expectations including any thoughts of leaving, commitment, personal goals and a cost/benefit view of the relationship.
Between sessions: each partner completes the Checkup privately. The Level 2 battery also lists Locke-Wallace, Weiss-Cerretto, the SRH questionnaires, the "19 Areas Checklist", EAQ, SCL-90, the Detour Scales, CAGE, b-MAST and supplemental measures. These are named here only; no items are reproduced. [source: GI Level 2 page]
Session 3, feedback and treatment planning (about 80–90 min): integrate all the data, present strengths and challenges level by level on the SRH, propose a treatment plan and revise it with the couple.
Criterion to move on: both partners accept the formulation and goals and agree to continue. Screening has found no contraindication, such as characterological violence or untreated substance problems for which couple work is inappropriate (see section 5). [source: GI Level 2 page; GI Checkup guide]

Phase 2: Treatment. Mainly conjoint sessions with occasional individual sessions. You choose interventions from three profiles built from the assessment: the Friendship Profile, the Conflict Profile and the Shared Meanings Profile. You work through them in the order agreed in the plan. [source: GI Level 2 page; practice disclosure] A common sequence, which is [synthesis] and not a published rule: first soothing and stopping the Horsemen, so sessions are safe; then the friendship interventions together with the conflict interventions; then shared meaning. Level 1 teaches a standard structure for a therapy session, but the pages do not describe it [uncertain].

Phase 3: Phasing out. Sessions become less frequent so the couple practise the skills on their own. [source: practice disclosure] Criterion to move on [synthesis]: the couple repair and soothe without you, hold a dialogue about their perpetual problems without gridlock, and keep their rituals of connection between sessions. The Stress-Reducing Conversation is taught explicitly to reduce relapse. [source: GI Level 2 page]

Phase 4: Termination and follow-up. At least one joint closing session to review progress and identify remaining work. One Gottman-trained practice describes follow-ups at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months. [source: practice disclosure; this is one practice's version, not confirmed as Institute policy, so treat it as uncertain]

Typical length and frequency: the sources do not give a typical number of treatment sessions or a session frequency. They say length depends on the couple's goals, with review points along the way [uncertain]. A Gottman-trained therapist describes 20-minute speaker turns in intensive retreat formats, so extended and intensive sessions are part of practice. [source: Dr.K, Gottman-Rapoport page]

Training and credentialing: the Institute's path is Level 1 (Clinical Foundations), then Level 2 (on-demand, about 19 hours, with an exam pass mark of 80% for CE credit and a Certificate of Completion), then Level 3 and a separate Certification Track leading to the Certified Gottman Therapist (CGT) credential. No licence is required simply to use the interventions. Presenting yourself as a Gottman-certified therapist requires the certification track. Its requirements (consultation, video review, fees) are not drawn on [uncertain]. Separate add-on courses cover affairs and trauma ("Treating Affairs and Trauma", which requires Level 1) and addiction (Robert Navarra is a guest lecturer in Level 2). [source: GI Level 1 and Level 2 pages]

3. Guiding principles

The relationship is the client. Balance concern for the relationship with concern for each partner, and take no side. [source: practice disclosure]
Frame difficulties as the relationship's struggle, never one partner's fault. In feedback, say what "the relationship is struggling with", not what one partner does wrong. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Build a trusting alliance with each partner. Use the individual interviews to learn each person's view and commitment privately. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Engage, don't lecture. Feedback and teaching should be interactive and checked against the couple's own experience. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Let the assessment drive treatment. Choose interventions from the Friendship, Conflict and Shared Meanings profiles, not from habit. [source: GI Level 2 page]
The SRH is the shared map. Use it to explain the formulation, order the treatment and show progress. [source: GI Level 2 page; GI Checkup guide]
Name strengths and offer hope. Report what works as well as what does not, and tell the couple there are concrete tools for each weak level. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Soothe the body first. A flooded partner cannot listen (Gottman's remark is that a heart rate above about 100 bpm makes listening hard), so stop and soothe before you continue. [source: GI blog, gridlocked conflict; GI Level 2 page]
Replace each Horseman with its antidote. Do not just forbid behaviours; teach the specific replacement behaviour. [source: McNulty 2017]
Anger is not the enemy. The target is conflict without the Four Horsemen or abuse, with positive affect during disagreement, not a conflict-free relationship. [source: McNulty 2017]
Tell solvable problems from perpetual ones. Solve solvable problems with the conflict skills. For perpetual problems, aim for dialogue and a temporary compromise that "declaws" the issue, not a solution. [source: GI blog, gridlocked conflict; GI Checkup guide]
Understanding comes before advice. In support conversations, partners listen and validate before they offer solutions. [source: GI blog, Stress-Reducing Conversation]
Friendship underpins conflict management. The "Positive Perspective" level shows whether the friendship is working, and that perspective is what lets repair attempts succeed. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Keep no secrets, and keep questionnaire answers private. Do not hold secrets that betray a partner; encourage disclosure in session instead. Never give either partner the Checkup scores or the other partner's answers. [source: practice disclosure; GI Checkup guide]
Screen for contraindications. Distinguish situational from characterological violence, and decide when substance use makes the method appropriate or not. [source: GI Level 2 page]
Agree the plan together. Present the treatment plan as a proposal and revise it with both partners. [source: McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide]
Plan for relapse prevention. Build in maintenance tools (Stress-Reducing Conversation, rituals) and taper sessions rather than stopping abruptly. [source: GI Level 2 page; practice disclosure]
Level 2 names "three qualities every therapist needs", and the Gottmans' 10 Principles book sets out further stance principles. Neither is drawn on, so they are not listed [uncertain].

4. Intervention inventory

The official inventory is the Clinician's Toolkit taught in Level 1. It contains card decks (Love Map, Opportunity, Salsa in three intensities, Open-Ended Questions, Rituals of Connection), laminated handouts (Repair Checklist and Four Horsemen, SRH, Conflict Blueprint, Dreams within Conflict, Gottman-Rapoport, Art of Compromise) and Relationship Guides (Relaxation Exercise, Small Things Often, How to Be a Great Listener, Aftermath of a Fight, Avoiding the Four Horsemen, Fondness & Admiration). [source: GI Level 2 page] Where the content of a tool is not drawn on, the entry says so and the steps are marked [synthesis]. Do not reproduce Toolkit cards or handouts; use the purchased originals with clients.

A. Assessment and feedback

A1. Couple narrative

Purpose / when: first session. It gives each partner's account of the presenting problem and their goals, and lets you start an alliance with both.
Steps: (1) Outline the 3-session assessment. (2) Ask an open question about what brings them in. (3) Give each partner uninterrupted time, then ask how each sees the problem and what each wants from therapy. (4) Note where their accounts agree and differ, and what goals they share. [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017]
Example language (illustrative): "I'd like to hear from each of you in turn. What brings you here now, and what would you like to be different by the end?"
Watch for: one partner speaking for both; contempt while the other speaks (an early marker for the Conflict Profile); goals that don't match (one wants repair, the other wants a way out), which you follow up in the individual interviews [synthesis].

A2. Oral History Interview

Purpose / when: session 1, after the narrative. It shows the friendship and the shared-meaning base: how the couple met, first impressions, and how they came through major life transitions. [source: GI Checkup guide; GI Level 2 page]
Steps: ask chronologically about meeting and courtship, what attracted each partner, the decision to commit, and major transitions (moves, children, losses), and how they got through hard times. Exact item wording is [uncertain]. Listen as much for how they tell the story (warmth, "we-ness", glorifying the struggle, or disappointment and chaos) as for the content [synthesis].
Example language (illustrative): "Take me back to when you first met. What stood out about each other?"
Watch for: warmth and humour returning as they tell the story (a resource for the friendship work), or a story rewritten so negatively that even the good times are recalled darkly. That rewriting suggests negative sentiment override [synthesis, linked to the "negative sentiment override" pattern in McNulty 2017].

A3. Observed conflict discussion

Purpose / when: session 1. A sample of how the couple actually handle conflict, coded informally against the research markers (facial expressions, vocal tension, words; the SPAFF system is taught in Level 2). [source: GI Checkup guide; GI Level 2 page]
Steps: (1) Help them choose a real, ongoing disagreement. (2) Ask them to talk it over as they would at home for about 10 minutes, and say you will stay out of it. (3) Observe "like a fly on the wall" (GI Checkup guide), without intervening unless safety requires it. (4) Afterwards ask how typical the conversation was. [source: GI Checkup guide]
Example language (illustrative): "Please pick something you disagree about that matters to you both, and talk about it for about ten minutes as you would at home. I'll just watch."
What to note: harsh or soft startup; each of the Four Horsemen; repair attempts and whether they land; signs of flooding; accepting or rejecting influence; escalation in response to low-intensity negativity; positive affect, humour and affection during the conflict. [source: McNulty 2017 for the list of patterns]

A4. Individual interviews

Purpose / when: session 2. Each partner's private view, history, commitment and safety.
Steps: cover the topics listed in section 2, Phase 1. Ask directly about violence, fear of the partner, substance use, affairs, and thoughts of leaving. State your no-secrets policy before the interview starts. [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017; practice disclosure; the explicit safety questions are [synthesis] consistent with the Level 2 contraindication topics]
Example language (illustrative): "Before we start: I won't keep secrets that would harm your partner, and I won't repeat what you tell me. If something comes up that your partner needs to know, I'll help you find a way to tell them."
Watch for: very different levels of commitment; an ongoing affair; fear or coercive control. Any of these changes the plan (see section 5).

A5. Questionnaires / Gottman Relationship Checkup

Purpose / when: between sessions 1 and 3. Standardised data on each SRH level, problem areas and individual comorbidity.
Steps: (1) Give the Checkup overview at the end of session 1. (2) Each partner completes it in a password-protected account of their own. (3) Only you see the responses. (4) Integrate the results clinically; never hand over the analysis or scores. [source: GI Checkup guide] The paper alternatives and screens are listed in section 2. [source: GI Level 2 page]
Watch for: big gaps between partners' answers; flags on individual measures (mood, substance use) that need a referral or a different order of treatment [synthesis].

A6. Feedback session and treatment plan

Purpose / when: session 3. Turns the assessment into a shared formulation and contract.
Steps (following the Checkup guide's nine elements, paraphrased): (1) Re-establish the alliance with each partner. (2) Keep both engaged rather than lecturing. (3) Hand out the SRH diagram. (4) Define each level in turn. (5) Say whether each level is a strength or a challenge for the relationship. (6) Do not give out reports or scores. (7) Offer hope and empathy, and name the tools for weak levels. (8) Explain your goals and the planned order of treatment. (9) Ask whether the feedback fits, what is missing, and what goals they would add. McNulty adds a brief history of when the concerns began, a diagnostic summary, and the interventions linked to each level. [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017]
Example language: "the relationship is struggling with" [short phrase, GI Checkup guide]. Fuller wording (illustrative): "Your friendship floors are strong: you know each other well and you still like each other. Where the relationship is struggling is the conflict floor. Arguments start harshly and repairs aren't landing. That's where I'd suggest we begin. Does that fit?"
Watch for: either partner hearing the feedback as blame (go back to framing at the level of the relationship); disagreement about the plan (revise it; don't defend it).

B. Conflict-system interventions

B1. The Four Horsemen and their antidotes

Purpose / when: whenever criticism, defensiveness, contempt or stonewalling appear, usually as the first conflict intervention.
Antidotes: criticism is replaced by a softened startup; defensiveness by accepting responsibility (even for a small part); contempt by building a culture of appreciation and respect and by describing your own feelings instead of your partner; stonewalling by soothing yourself and your partner. [source: McNulty 2017; "Avoiding the Four Horsemen" guide named in GI Level 2]
Steps (in session) [synthesis]: (1) Teach the four patterns briefly using the couple's own example from A3. (2) When one occurs in session, pause gently and name it without shaming. (3) Ask the speaker to try again using the antidote. (4) Ask the receiving partner how the second version landed.
Example language (illustrative): "Let me pause you. That came out as a criticism of who he is. Can you say it again as how you feel and what you need?"
Watch for: contempt (eye-rolling, mockery, superiority). The materials treat contempt as a key target, and the antidote is the fondness-and-admiration work, not only better wording. Defensiveness that turns into counter-attack.

B2. Softened startup

Purpose / when: for a partner whose complaints open harshly or as criticism; for raising a complaint without starting a fight.
Steps: (1) Describe the situation, not the partner's character. (2) State your own feeling. (3) State a positive need, meaning what you would like. McNulty's frame is "I feel ___ when ___, and I need ___." (4) Rehearse it in session and ask the listener for feedback. [source: McNulty 2017, which refers to an exercise in The Seven Principles]
Example language (illustrative): "I feel lonely when we're both on our phones at dinner, and I'd love twenty minutes of just us."
Watch for: "I feel that you…" disguising a criticism; needs stated as negatives ("stop doing X") instead of positive requests.

B3. Physiological soothing (flooding breaks and the Relaxation Exercise)

Purpose / when: whenever a partner is flooded, meaning physiologically overwhelmed (racing heart, unable to take in what is said). The Gottman materials treat this as a precondition for all conflict work. [source: GI Level 1 and Level 2 pages; McNulty 2017; GI blog, gridlocked conflict]
Steps: (1) Teach the couple to recognise flooding (McNulty's handout covers pulse rates; Gottman's figure is a heart rate above about 100 bpm). (2) Agree a signal for a break. (3) Take the break alone or together, with no rush. (4) Use a calming exercise, such as the Relaxation Exercise guide, whose contents are [uncertain]. (5) Return to the topic when calm. [source: GI blog, gridlocked conflict; McNulty 2017] Practical details [synthesis]: in session, check pulse or self-rated arousal; during the break, do something calming and avoid rehearsing grievances; the person who calls the break says when they will return.
Example language (illustrative): "I can see your body has gone into alarm. Let's stop the topic for now. Breathe slowly with me, and we'll come back to it when you're both settled."
Watch for: breaks used as permanent avoidance (stonewalling in disguise); escalation if the flooded partner is pushed to keep going. It is working when the couple come back from breaks and finish the conversation.

B4. Repair and de-escalation (Repair Checklist)

Purpose / when: when attempts to de-escalate fail or are missed. Effective repair and "preemptive repair" are goals of conflict management. [source: McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide; Repair Checklist handout named in GI Level 2]
Steps: the categories and items of the Repair Checklist are [uncertain]. A [synthesis] procedure: (1) Point out repair attempts in session (humour, a softer tone, "I see your point", a pause). (2) Help the receiving partner notice and accept them. (3) Have each partner pick two or three repair phrases they would actually use and practise them on a mild topic.
Example language (illustrative): "Did you notice she just tried to lighten it? What would it be like to take that offer?"
Watch for: repairs rejected because of negative sentiment override. If so, prioritise the friendship work.

B5. Accepting influence

Purpose / when: when a partner rejects or escalates against the other's input. Failure to accept influence is one of the listed negative patterns, and accepting influence is one of the six skills for solvable problems. [source: McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide]
Steps: no published procedure is described [uncertain]. [synthesis] Point out moments in session where a partner could say yes to part of the request; ask them to find the reasonable part of the other's position; use B6 and B9 to make room for compromise.
Example language (illustrative): "What part of what she's asking could you agree with?"

B6. Gottman-Rapoport Blueprint (speaker and listener)

Purpose / when: a structured way to process a specific conflict, adapted from Anatol Rapoport's conflict-resolution method. Taught in Level 1 as the "Rapoport Intervention". [source: GI Level 1 page; McNulty 2017; Dr.K]
Steps: (1) The couple choose one disagreement. Give the listener a clipboard and pen. (2) The speaker starts softly: the issue, their feelings and a positive need, using "I" statements, without blame. (3) The listener takes notes and postpones their own agenda and any persuasion. (4) The listener asks clarifying questions and names the speaker's feelings. (5) The listener summarises the speaker's position until the speaker says it is accurate. (6) The listener validates, for example "I can see why you would feel that way because…" (short phrase quoted from McNulty 2017). (7) Switch roles. A Gottman-certified practitioner gives each speaker about 20 minutes. (8) Only after both feel understood do they move to problem-solving or compromise. [source: McNulty 2017; Dr.K]
Therapist role [synthesis]: coach the speaker to soften, stop the listener from rebutting, and check the speaker's satisfaction with each summary.
Example language (illustrative): to the listener, "Your only job right now is to understand her. You'll get your turn, and your notes will help you remember your side."
Watch for: summaries that slip into rebuttal ("you feel X, but…"); flooding in the listener (go to B3). It is working when the speaker visibly relaxes and says "yes, that's it."

B7. Conflict Blueprint

A laminated Toolkit handout [source: GI Level 2 page]. Its content is [uncertain], so no steps are given here. Use the purchased original.

B8. Dreams within Conflict (gridlocked perpetual problems)

Purpose / when: for perpetual problems that have become gridlocked, meaning the same fight with no movement and growing hurt. Behind each fixed position is usually a dream, value or life story. The aim is dialogue and understanding, not a solution. [source: McNulty 2017; GI blog, gridlocked conflict; GI Checkup guide]
Steps: (1) Identify the gridlocked issue. (2) The speaker explains their position without criticism or blame, and may write it out first. (3) The listener asks a series of questions about the meaning, history, feelings, values and hopes behind the position. The handout's question list is [uncertain]. (4) The listener does not try to solve or persuade. (5) Switch roles. (6) Soothe or take breaks if either partner floods. (7) Move to B9 or to a temporary compromise. [source: McNulty 2017; GI blog, gridlocked conflict]
Example language (illustrative): "What does this mean to you? Is there a story from your life behind it? What would your deepest hope be here?"
Watch for: a shift from fixed positions to curiosity and tenderness. The goal is that the issue causes less pain ("declaw" it, GI blog, gridlocked conflict), not that it goes away.

B9. Art of Compromise (the oval exercise)

Purpose / when: after B6 or B8, to find a temporary compromise that honours both partners' core needs.
Steps: (1) Each partner draws a small oval inside a larger one. (2) The inner oval holds their minimal core needs, where they cannot yield. (3) The outer oval holds areas where they can be flexible. (4) Partners share their ovals and ask each other about both areas. (5) Together they draft a compromise to try for a set period and then review. [source: McNulty 2017; GI blog, gridlocked conflict]
Example language (illustrative): "Keep the inner oval as small as you honestly can, just the parts that would cost you yourself to give up."
Watch for: an inner oval holding everything (go back to B8); one partner always yielding. A compromise only one partner can live with won't last [synthesis].

B10. Aftermath of a Fight / Regrettable Incident

Purpose / when: to process a past fight or hurtful incident once both partners are calm, without re-fighting it.
Readiness check: both are calm, willing to understand the other's experience, speaking from their own experience without persuading, and in a distraction-free space. [source: GI blog, Aftermath (Benson)]
Steps: (1) Feelings: each partner lists only the feelings they had during the incident, without explaining them or commenting on the other's. (2) Realities: as speaker and listener, each describes their own perception; the listener summarises and validates that it makes sense from the speaker's point of view. (3) Triggers: each shares the sensitivities, often rooted in personal history, that escalated their reaction. (4) Ownership: each acknowledges their own part. (5) Planning: each names one thing they could do to make the next talk about this go better. [source: GI blog, Aftermath (Benson); the Relationship Guide "Aftermath of a Fight" was named in GI Level 2]
Example language (illustrative): "We're not going to decide who was right. Each of you was in the same event but had a different experience. Let's understand both."
Watch for: sliding back into debating the facts (bring them back to their own perception); triggers used as accusations ("your mother problem"). It is working when each partner can say what set off the other.

B11. Changing the Attack-Defend System

Named in Level 2 as interventions in "several modes" [source: GI Level 2 page]. The content is [uncertain]. Do not improvise this under the Gottman name.

C. Friendship-system interventions

C1. Love Maps

Purpose / when: when partners know little of each other's current inner world (worries, hopes, stresses, preferences). This is the first floor of the SRH. [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017]
Steps: use the Love Map and Open-Ended Questions card decks; their content is not drawn on, so don't reproduce them. A [synthesis] procedure: (1) In session, have the partners take turns asking each other open-ended questions about the present (not quizzes about facts). (2) The asker follows up with a second question before responding. (3) Assign regular question exchanges as homework. [source for the tools and the open-ended-question principle: GI Level 2 page; GI Checkup guide]
Example language (illustrative): "Ask her something about her life right now that you'd genuinely like to know. Yes-or-no questions don't count."
Watch for: questions used to make a point; one-way curiosity. It is working when partners are surprised by what they learn and keep asking.

C2. Fondness and Admiration

Purpose / when: the antidote to contempt. It shifts attention from scanning for faults to noticing what the partner does well. Use it whenever contempt or negative sentiment override shows up. [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017]
Steps: McNulty refers to an "I Appreciate" checklist, and there is a Fondness & Admiration Relationship Guide; their contents are [uncertain]. A [synthesis] procedure: (1) Each partner picks qualities they genuinely value in the other and thinks of a specific recent example of each. (2) They tell each other in session, quality plus example. (3) For homework, each partner expresses one specific appreciation a day.
Example language (illustrative): "Tell him one thing you admire about him, and the moment this week you saw it."
Watch for: appreciations that slide into complaints ("you're kind, when you bother"). If a partner can find nothing, explore past appreciations through the oral history and check for depression or detachment [synthesis].

C3. Turning Toward bids (Emotional Bank Account)

Purpose / when: when everyday bids for connection (comments, questions, gestures) are missed or rebuffed. Responding to bids is described as building the "Emotional Bank Account". [source: GI Checkup guide; McNulty 2017; GI Level 2 page]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Teach what a bid is, using examples from the couple's own life. (2) Help each partner name the bids they make and how they want them answered. (3) Point out turning toward, turning away and turning against in session. (4) For homework, each partner notices and answers small bids, and they review together. Support with the Small Things Often and Opportunity tools; their contents are [uncertain].
Example language (illustrative): "When she said 'look at that bird', that was a bid. A small 'oh, nice' is turning toward."
Watch for: bids that come out as complaints because softer bids failed before. Teach the bidder to soften, and the receiver to hear the request inside the complaint.

C4. Stress-Reducing Conversation

Purpose / when: a daily or regular conversation about stress from outside the relationship. It builds support and the sense of "us against the problem". Taught in Level 2 to reduce relapse. [source: GI Level 2 page; GI blog, SRC]
Steps: each partner takes a turn of agreed length to talk about outside stresses while the other: does not offer unsolicited advice; shows genuine interest; communicates understanding; takes the speaker's side; presents a united front; expresses affection; validates emotions. Then they swap. [source: GI blog, SRC, eight guidelines paraphrased] The length of each turn was not specified in the source [uncertain].
Example language (illustrative): to the listener, "Don't fix it. Just help her feel you're on her side." To the couple: "This isn't for problems between you. Those have their own conversation."
Watch for: relationship complaints slipping in (redirect them to conflict tools); the listener defending the boss or friend the speaker is upset with.

C5. How to Be a Great Listener; Small Things Often

These are Relationship Guides named in the Toolkit [source: GI Level 2 page]. Their content is [uncertain], so use the purchased originals.

D. Shared-meaning system and the upper floors

D1. Rituals of Connection

Purpose / when: for couples without dependable shared routines (reunions, meals, bedtime, weekends, celebrations, rituals around illness or loss). Taught as deepening the friendship system and as part of shared meaning. [source: GI Level 2 page; McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide]
Steps: use the Rituals of Connection card deck (not drawn on). A [synthesis] procedure: (1) Each partner describes rituals from their family of origin and what they meant. (2) Together they choose one ritual to design: what, when, who does what, and how it should feel. (3) Try it, then review it the next session.
Example language (illustrative): "What would a good goodbye in the morning look like for each of you?"
Watch for: rituals imposed by one partner; rituals dropped when stress rises (a relapse signal).

D2. Shared meaning: dreams, roles, goals and symbols

Purpose / when: the top floors of the SRH: honouring each other's life dreams, and building shared rituals, support for each other's life roles, shared goals and common symbols (for example, what "home" means). Level 1 teaches two shared-meaning interventions, which the pages don't name [uncertain]. [source: GI Checkup guide; GI Level 1 page]
Steps [synthesis]: (1) Ask each partner, in turn, about their life dreams and what they want the relationship to support. (2) Explore what roles (partner, parent, worker, friend) mean to each. (3) Explore what symbols, such as "home", mean to each. (4) Draft shared goals and a statement of values together. (5) Connect the gridlocked issues from B8 to these dreams.
Example language (illustrative): "When you picture the two of you twenty years from now, what does a life well lived look like?"
Watch for: mismatched dreams. Treat them with B8 dialogue, not by ranking whose dream counts.

D3. Intimacy and sexuality (Salsa card deck)

The Salsa card deck, in mild, medium and spicy levels, is a Toolkit tool for conversations about sex and romance [source: GI Level 2 page]. Its content is [uncertain]. Use it as a structured conversation prompt for partners to discuss preferences verbally. For sexual dysfunction, refer to or integrate sex therapy [synthesis].

E. Affair recovery: Atone, Attune, Attach

Purpose / when: after an affair, once the affair has ended and both partners want to try to rebuild. Level 2 covers applying the method to affairs, and the dedicated training is Treating Affairs and Trauma, which is not drawn on. The three-phase outline below comes from Gottman-trained practitioners' pages that cite The Science of Trust and What Makes Love Last? [source: GI Level 1 and Level 2 pages; Dr.K, affair stages; Austin Relational Wellness, three phases]. Treat details as secondary sources [uncertain].
Prerequisite: all contact with the affair partner ends. Where contact is unavoidable (for example at work), strict, transparent boundaries are agreed with the hurt partner. The involved partner commits through consistent action, not only words. [source: Dr.K, affair stages]
Phase 1, Atone: the involved partner takes full responsibility and shows remorse for the harm (not just for being caught); answers the hurt partner's questions honestly; is transparent about past and current behaviour; listens to anger without defending or shutting down. The hurt partner's pain and anger are validated. The therapist facilitates these conversations so both feel heard. [source: Dr.K; Austin Relational Wellness]
Phase 2, Attune: rebuild emotional connection. Partners talk about the affair's impact and their needs without blame, and use the conflict skills (softened startup, accepting influence, repair). The involved partner is reliably transparent. The hurt partner gradually becomes open to the involved partner's perspective, without that excusing the betrayal. Positive shared experiences resume. [source: Dr.K; Austin Relational Wellness]
Phase 3, Attach: rebuild security and a shared future. The involved partner responds consistently to bids. Physical intimacy resumes at a pace the hurt partner can manage. The couple create new rituals and a shared vision with explicit commitments and boundaries. [source: Dr.K; Austin Relational Wellness]
Example language (illustrative): to the involved partner, "Your job right now isn't to explain yourself. It's to understand what this did to her, and to keep answering honestly."
Moving between phases: no explicit criteria were found. Recovery is described as non-linear, often taking a year or two or more. [source: Dr.K; uncertain] [synthesis] Move from Atone to Attune when the hurt partner reports that their questions are being answered consistently and the involved partner can hear anger without defending themselves. Move to Attach when everyday trust behaviours have been reliable for a sustained period.
Watch for: rushing through phases; the involved partner growing impatient with requests for reassurance; ongoing contact or new secrets; the hurt partner showing trauma-like symptoms (intrusive images, hypervigilance), which need explicit trauma-informed pacing [synthesis]. [source for the first three hindrances: Dr.K]

5. Handling problems

The Gottman pages name these problem areas but give little procedural detail. Most responses below are therefore [synthesis] built on the method's own tools; the source is given wherever there is one.

Intimate partner violence. Level 2 teaches distinguishing situational from characterological violence, and when couple therapy is appropriate or contraindicated. [source: GI Level 2 page] Response [synthesis]: screen in the individual interviews (A4), in private. If there is characterological violence, coercive control or fear of the partner, do not run conjoint conflict exercises. Move to safety planning, individual services and specialist perpetrator programmes. Situational, low-level, mutual conflict with no fear or injury may continue, with explicit no-violence agreements and a flooding plan (B3). The Institute's exact decision criteria are [uncertain].
Substance use. Level 2 addresses when the method is and isn't appropriate (screens: CAGE, b-MAST), with Navarra's guest lecture on couples in recovery. [source: GI Level 2 page] Response [synthesis]: active, uncontrolled use usually means substance treatment first or in parallel. In recovery, frame relapse prevention as a shared project and use the Stress-Reducing Conversation and rituals to support it.
Ongoing affair or secret disclosed in an individual session. Under the no-secrets policy, don't hold it. Encourage and support the partner to disclose it in session within a short time, or stop the couple work. [source: practice disclosure; the time frame is synthesis] Affair work (E) cannot start while the affair continues. [source: Dr.K]
Very different levels of commitment (one partner leaning out). The individual interviews ask about commitment and thoughts of leaving. [source: McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide] Response [synthesis]: name the difference openly in feedback with the partner's consent, and agree a time-limited contract or a discernment-style focus before skills work. Don't push skills onto a partner who hasn't decided to stay.
Overwhelm and flooding in session. Stop and soothe (B3). Gottman's figure is a heart rate above about 100 bpm. [source: GI blog, gridlocked conflict] Response [synthesis]: lower the intensity (go from a gridlocked topic to a solvable one), have the listener take notes to slow things down, use structured turns (B6), and end the session with a short appreciation (C2) rather than mid-escalation.
Stuck or gridlocked couples. Switch from problem-solving to Dreams within Conflict (B8). The goal is dialogue and a temporary compromise, not a solution. [source: McNulty 2017; GI blog, gridlocked conflict] If B8 stalls [synthesis]: check for flooding, contempt or negative sentiment override, and go back to friendship work (C1 to C3) before returning to the issue.
Negative sentiment override (everything is read negatively; repairs fail). This is named as a negative pattern. [source: McNulty 2017] Response [synthesis]: prioritise fondness and admiration and turning toward; point out the partner's positive moves in session; postpone heavy conflict topics.
Contempt that doesn't stop. Contempt is the key target. Its antidote is a culture of appreciation and describing yourself instead of the partner. [source: McNulty 2017; GI Checkup guide] Response [synthesis]: interrupt it every time, explore the unmet need or long-held resentment beneath it in an individual session, and assess whether the contemptuous partner is still committed.
Resistance to structured exercises ("this feels artificial"). Response [synthesis]: link each exercise to the couple's own feedback on the SRH ("this is the floor we said was weak"), present the structure as temporary scaffolding, and let them adjust wording as long as the exercise still does its job.
Non-adherence to homework. The method uses between-session exercises. [source: practice disclosure] Response [synthesis]: shrink the task (one appreciation, one question), schedule it as a ritual, troubleshoot obstacles, and check in on the homework at the start of every session. Repeated non-adherence by one partner is itself a commitment question.
Ruptures with the therapist (a partner feels the therapist is siding with the other). The method's protection is frame-level feedback, alliance with each partner, and checking reactions. [source: GI Checkup guide] Response [synthesis]: name it, acknowledge it without being defensive (model the antidote to defensiveness), ask what the partner noticed, and rebalance attention. Consider a brief individual session with each partner.
Asking for scores or the other partner's answers. Decline. The analysis is for clinical use only, and sharing it would breach the privacy promised to each partner. [source: GI Checkup guide] Offer instead the SRH-level feedback on strengths and challenges.
Individual psychopathology (depression, PTSD, trauma). Screen with SCL-90 and the other measures. Level 2 covers PTSD and trauma, and there is a separate course on affairs and trauma. [source: GI Level 2 page; GI Level 1 page] Response [synthesis]: refer for individual treatment where needed, pace conflict work to the trauma-affected partner's window of tolerance, and use soothing (B3) generously.
Relapse after phasing out. Response [synthesis]: offer a booster session, revisit the Stress-Reducing Conversation and rituals, and look for a new stressor; the follow-up schedule in section 2 gives natural checkpoints. [source for follow-ups: practice disclosure]
Cultural, same-sex and gender-diverse couples. The sources give no guidance [uncertain]. [synthesis] Check that the SRH concepts and examples fit the couple's norms, adapt the language of rituals and roles, and do not assume heteronormative roles in D2.

Sources

Sources:

Further reading (not drawn on) [uncertain]:

Gottman, J. M., & Gottman, J. S. Gottman Method Couples Therapy Level 1, 2 and 3 training manuals. The Gottman Institute.
Gottman, J. S., & Gottman, J. M. (2015). 10 Principles for Doing Effective Couples Therapy. Norton.
Gottman, J. M. (2011). The Science of Trust: Emotional Attunement for Couples. Norton.
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work. Crown.
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (2012). What Makes Love Last? Simon & Schuster.
Gottman, J. M. (2015). Principia Amoris: The New Science of Love. Routledge.

← Previous · V-060Nurturing Parenting Next · V-063 →Emotionally focused couples therapy