Why Couples Stop Seeing Each Other—and How Curiosity Restores Intimacy

James Tobin, Ph.D.

Most couples do not lose love first. They lose curiosity. Long-term intimacy depends on the ability to keep discovering the person you think you already know.

KEY POINTS

• Many relationships suffer from excessive certainty rather than insufficient communication.
• Partners often relate to narratives about one another rather than the living person in front of them.
• Curiosity is a powerful antidote to defensiveness, contempt, and emotional disengagement.
• Research suggests that feeling accurately seen and understood is strongly associated with relationship satisfaction and emotional well-being.
• Couples therapy often works by helping partners perceive one another differently before they behave differently.
• Healthy intimacy requires balancing familiarity with mystery.

What Is Otherness in Relationships?

If you’re searching for answers about why relationships become stale, disconnected, or emotionally flat, you’re not alone.

Many people wonder:

• Why do couples grow apart?
• Why do relationships become boring over time?
• How do I reconnect with my spouse or partner?
• Why do I feel emotionally disconnected from someone I love?
• Can couples therapy help us feel close again?

One answer may lie in a surprisingly powerful concept: otherness.

Otherness refers to the recognition that another person possesses an inner world that cannot be fully known, possessed, predicted, or reduced to a simple explanation. In healthy relationships, partners remain curious about one another. In struggling relationships, curiosity is often replaced by certainty.

Most couples do not stop loving one another overnight. Instead, they gradually stop encountering one another as complex, evolving human beings.

The partner who once felt fascinating becomes:

• “The anxious one.”
• “The emotionally unavailable one.”
• “The controlling one.”
• “The selfish one.”

Over time, people stop relating to the person in front of them and begin relating to a story about that person.

That shift can quietly undermine intimacy.

Why Relationship Quality Matters More Than Most People Realize

Relationship distress does not remain neatly contained within a relationship.  Research consistently links chronic relationship conflict with:

• Depression
• Anxiety
• Increased stress
• Sleep disturbances
• Reduced life satisfaction
• Poorer physical health outcomes

The American Psychological Association (APA), National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), and National Institutes of Health (NIH) have all highlighted the profound connection between emotional relationships and overall psychological well-being.

Conversely, healthy relationships are associated with:

• Greater resilience
• Better emotional regulation
• Improved coping during adversity
• Increased life satisfaction
• Better psychological and physical health

For many adults, relationship quality becomes one of the strongest predictors of overall happiness and well-being (Robles et al., 2014). More recent relationship-science research continues to support the idea that close relationships significantly influence emotional functioning, life satisfaction, and mental health across adulthood (Proulx et al., 2023).

This matters because many couples assume their difficulties are “just communication problems.”

Often, the issue runs deeper. Many couples have stopped truly seeing one another.

The Concept of “Otherness”

The concept of otherness appears throughout philosophy, sociology, psychology, and psychotherapy, reflecting a longstanding recognition that human beings can never be fully reduced to another person’s assumptions, categories, or interpretations.

Across disciplines, scholars have argued that mature relationships require the capacity to recognize the separate subjectivity of another person—their unique thoughts, emotions, experiences, motivations, and inner life (Buber, 1923/1970; Levinas, 1969).

In philosophy, Martin Buber’s distinction between I-Thou and I-It relationships suggests that genuine human connection occurs when we encounter another person as a living, evolving consciousness rather than as an object to be categorized or managed (Buber, 1923/1970).

Similarly, Emmanuel Levinas argued that ethical relationships begin with recognizing the irreducibility of the Other—the idea that another person’s experience always exceeds our understanding of them (Levinas, 1969).

In sociology, the concept of the “Other” has been used to examine how individuals and groups construct identity through distinctions between self and others. While categorization helps people navigate social life, excessive simplification can obscure the complexity and individuality of those around us (Berger & Luckmann, 1966).

Psychology has approached similar questions through research on schemas, attribution processes, confirmation bias, and expectancy effects. Studies consistently demonstrate that people tend to interpret others through pre-existing cognitive frameworks, often noticing information that confirms existing beliefs while overlooking contradictory evidence (Ross et al., 1977; Snyder et al., 1977). Although these cognitive shortcuts help organize experience efficiently, they can become problematic in intimate relationships when partners begin relating more to their assumptions about one another than to the actual person in front of them.

Contemporary psychotherapy has increasingly emphasized the importance of maintaining openness, curiosity, and responsiveness within close relationships. Attachment-based approaches, including Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT), suggest that emotional connection depends not only on communication skills but also on the capacity to remain emotionally engaged with a partner’s evolving subjective experience (Greenman & Johnson, 2022; Johnson et al., 1999). From this perspective, healthy intimacy requires balancing familiarity with mystery—knowing another person deeply while remaining aware that there is always more to discover.

Returning to Buber, in particular, he described two fundamentally different ways of relating to another person:

• In an I-It relationship, the other person becomes an object—categorized, managed, summarized, and reduced.

 

• In an I-Thou relationship, the person is encountered as a living, changing, dynamic human being.

Many distressed couples unknowingly shift from I-Thou to I-It.

The partner becomes known in advance. Predictable.  Pre-written.  Once this occurs, perception narrows and vitality begins to disappear.

The central challenge of long-term intimacy is not merely learning about another person.  It is resisting the temptation to conclude that you already know everything important about them.

Why Couples Stop Seeing Each Other

One of the greatest threats to intimacy is not conflict.  It is presumed knowledge.

Many couples enter therapy believing that communication is the primary problem. While communication certainly matters, deeper issues often exist underneath the arguments.

Partners begin perceiving one another through accumulated narratives.

A husband no longer hears his wife’s anxiety as a nuanced emotional signal emerging from her lived experience.

Instead, he hears:

“Here she goes again.”

A wife no longer experiences her husband’s withdrawal as a complicated adaptation shaped by shame, fear, or overwhelm.

Instead, she experiences:

“The same emotional unavailability as always.”

Both partners become trapped inside cognitive shorthand.

Psychologists refer to these shortcuts as schemas—mental frameworks that help organize information efficiently.  Unfortunately, what improves cognitive efficiency can sometimes undermine intimacy.

Because intimacy depends upon continued perception.  And perception often collapses under certainty.

What Modern Relationship Science Says About Curiosity

Although curiosity is rarely discussed as a primary relationship skill, a growing body of research suggests that it may be one of the most important ingredients in long-term intimacy.

When people think about successful relationships, they often focus on communication skills, conflict management, trust, or compatibility. These factors certainly matter. However, contemporary relationship science increasingly points toward a deeper process underlying many of these qualities: the ability to remain open, interested, and responsive to another person’s evolving experience.

At its core, curiosity is the willingness to acknowledge that another person’s inner world remains larger than our assumptions about them.

This seemingly simple stance has profound implications for relationship functioning.

Curiosity, Perceived Responsiveness, and Relationship Satisfaction

One of the strongest predictors of relationship satisfaction identified in contemporary relationship research is perceived partner responsiveness—the extent to which individuals feel understood, validated, and cared for by their partner (Reis et al., 2004).

People tend to feel closer to those who demonstrate genuine interest in their thoughts, feelings, experiences, and perspectives. In contrast, emotional disconnection often develops when individuals feel dismissed, misunderstood, stereotyped, or psychologically invisible.

Curiosity serves as one of the primary mechanisms through which responsiveness is communicated.  When a partner asks thoughtful questions, seeks clarification, and demonstrates openness to understanding another person’s experience, they communicate a powerful message:

“Your inner world matters to me.”

Research suggests that this experience of being known and understood contributes significantly to emotional intimacy, trust, relationship satisfaction, and psychological well-being (Lemay & Clark, 2008; Reis et al., 2004).

Attachment Security and Emotional Engagement

Attachment research provides another lens through which to understand the importance of curiosity.  According to attachment theory, secure relationships develop when individuals experience their partner as emotionally available, responsive, and engaged (Bowlby, 1988; Johnson, 2019).

Importantly, responsiveness requires curiosity.

It is difficult to respond effectively to another person’s needs if we assume we already know what they are feeling.

Partners who remain curious are more likely to notice subtle emotional shifts, inquire about underlying concerns, and remain engaged during moments of vulnerability.

Recent reviews of Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) suggest that one of the mechanisms through which relationship change occurs is the strengthening of emotional responsiveness and attachment security between partners (Greenman & Johnson, 2022; Wiebe & Johnson, 2016).

From this perspective, curiosity is not merely an interpersonal courtesy.  It is a pathway toward emotional safety.

Curiosity and Psychological Flexibility

Curiosity is also closely related to what psychologists call psychological flexibility—the ability to remain open to new information rather than becoming rigidly attached to existing assumptions.

Psychological flexibility has emerged as a central concept in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and has been associated with greater relationship satisfaction, emotional regulation, and resilience (Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010).

In relationships, flexibility allows individuals to revise outdated narratives about one another.

Instead of:

“My partner is selfish.”

Curiosity asks:

“What else might be happening here?”

Instead of:

“She’s always anxious.”

Curiosity asks:

“What concern is she trying to communicate?”

This shift may seem subtle, but it fundamentally changes how partners interpret and respond to one another.

The Neuroscience of Curiosity and Novelty

Neuroscience provides additional insight into why curiosity matters.

Human beings are naturally drawn toward novelty. Novel experiences tend to activate neural systems associated with attention, learning, motivation, and reward (Kang et al., 2009).

Ironically, one of the challenges of long-term relationships is that familiarity can reduce attention.  The brain becomes efficient.  It assumes.  It predicts.  It fills in missing information.  This tendency conserves cognitive resources but can inadvertently undermine intimacy.

Partners stop observing carefully because they believe they already know what they will find.  What often disappears is not depth, but attention.

Many couples who describe feeling bored or disconnected are not necessarily lacking complexity within the relationship. Rather, they have stopped approaching one another with the curiosity that originally made that complexity visible.

Curiosity and the Therapeutic Alliance

Contemporary couples therapy research further highlights the importance of openness and curiosity.

Studies examining the therapeutic alliance consistently find that couples who feel understood, respected, and collaboratively engaged in treatment tend to experience better outcomes (Fang et al., 2023).

The same principle applies within relationships themselves.  People become more emotionally available when they feel genuinely seen.  They become more willing to reveal themselves when they believe another person is interested in understanding rather than judging them.  In this sense, curiosity functions as a relational invitation.

It creates conditions under which disclosure, vulnerability, and intimacy become possible.

Expectancy Effects: We Often Create the Person We Anticipate

One of the most fascinating findings in social psychology is that human beings do not simply respond to reality—they respond to their expectations about reality.

Researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that beliefs about other people influence perception, interpretation, behavior, and ultimately relationship outcomes. This phenomenon is often referred to as an expectancy effect or self-fulfilling prophecy (Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1968; Snyder et al., 1977).

The basic principle is deceptively simple:  What we expect from another person often changes how we behave toward them.

And how we behave toward them often increases the likelihood of eliciting exactly the response we anticipated. In this way, expectations can become self-confirming.

The Classic Research

Some of the most influential research on expectancy effects came from educational psychology.

In a landmark study, Rosenthal and Jacobson (1968) informed teachers that certain students had been identified as likely to demonstrate unusually strong intellectual growth. In reality, the students had been selected randomly.  Yet over time, many of these students showed greater academic gains.  Why?  Not because they possessed special abilities.  But because teachers unconsciously interacted with them differently.

They provided:

• More encouragement
• Greater patience
• More attention
• More opportunities
• More positive feedback

The expectation subtly altered the relationship.  And the relationship altered the outcome.

Researchers later found similar processes operating across many social contexts, including friendships, workplaces, families, and romantic relationships (Snyder et al., 1977).

Expectancy Effects in Intimate Relationships

This process occurs constantly in long-term relationships.

Imagine a husband who has gradually come to view his wife as chronically anxious or emotionally reactive.  Long before she speaks, his expectations begin shaping his behavior.

He may:

• Listen less openly
• Become impatient more quickly
• Prepare counterarguments before she finishes talking
• Dismiss concerns prematurely
• Focus selectively on evidence supporting his existing narrative

His partner often detects these shifts immediately.

Human beings are remarkably sensitive to how they are being perceived.  We notice subtle facial expressions.  Changes in tone.  Moments of disengagement.  Micro-signals of judgment.

The wife may then become more frustrated, defensive, or emotionally intense—not because the original assumption was necessarily correct, but because the interaction itself begins pulling both partners toward the expected roles.

The husband experiences:

“See? She’s overreacting again.”

The wife experiences:

“See? He never really listens.”

Both partners leave the interaction believing their original assumptions have been confirmed.  In reality, both may have participated in creating the outcome.

The Hidden Cost of Relational Narratives

Over time, couples often develop stable narratives about one another:

• “She’s too emotional.”
• “He’s emotionally unavailable.”
• “She’s controlling.”
• “He’s selfish.”
• “She always criticizes.”
• “He never cares.”

These narratives provide cognitive efficiency.  They simplify a complex reality.

The problem is that once a narrative becomes established, perception often becomes selective.

Psychologists refer to this as confirmation bias—the tendency to notice information that supports existing beliefs while overlooking information that contradicts them (Nickerson, 1998).

Partners begin scanning for evidence that confirms their story.  Moments that support the narrative become highly visible.  Moments that challenge it become psychologically invisible.  Eventually, the narrative starts replacing the person.  The relationship no longer occurs between two evolving individuals.  It occurs between two accumulated interpretations.

Why This Matters in Couples Therapy

One of the most important shifts in successful couples therapy is not necessarily behavioral.

It is perceptual.

Partners begin questioning the certainty of their assumptions.  The spouse who appeared selfish becomes visible as overwhelmed.  The partner who seemed emotionally detached becomes understandable as ashamed, fearful, or uncertain.  The person who looked controlling becomes recognizable as anxious and desperate for security.

This does not mean problematic behavior suddenly disappears.  Rather, the meaning of the behavior changes.

And meaning profoundly influences emotional reactions.

Research on attachment and emotionally focused therapy suggests that when partners begin viewing one another through a more nuanced and compassionate lens, emotional responsiveness often increases and conflict becomes easier to navigate (Greenman & Johnson, 2022; Johnson et al., 1999).

Expectancy Effects and Otherness

Expectancy effects are particularly relevant to the concept of otherness because they reveal how easily human beings stop encountering one another directly.  Instead of meeting the person in front of us, we begin interacting with our prediction of them.

Otherness invites a different stance.

It asks us to remain open to the possibility that our understanding is incomplete.  That our interpretation may not be the whole story.  That there may still be something we have not seen.

In this sense, curiosity functions as a corrective to expectancy effects.

Curiosity asks:

• What am I assuming right now?
• What evidence am I ignoring?
• How might my expectations be shaping this interaction?
• What if there is more complexity here than I realize?

These questions create psychological space.  And psychological space often creates relational possibility.

Your Partner Is a Country, Not a Possession

One of the most useful metaphors in couples therapy is this:  Your partner is not your possession. Your partner is a country.

A complicated one.

A historically layered one.

A beautiful one.

A wounded one.

A country with regions you have explored and regions you have never truly seen.

At the beginning of relationships, people naturally approach one another like travelers entering a fascinating foreign city.

They ask questions.  They observe carefully. They tolerate ambiguity.  They assume there is depth beneath the surface.

But many long-term couples stop relating this way.

Instead of approaching their partner like a traveler entering living terrain, they approach them like commuters driving a route they believe they have already memorized.

No discovery.  No surprise.  No awe.

Yet most people remain profoundly unexplored by their partners—even after decades together.  Not because the information is unavailable.  But because certainty has replaced inquiry.

Why Couples Therapy Often Works by Changing Perception

One of the most surprising findings from contemporary couples therapy research is that successful treatment often changes perception before it changes behavior.  Partners begin seeing each other differently before they begin acting differently.  The spouse who appeared selfish becomes visible as overwhelmed.  The partner who seemed emotionally unavailable becomes understandable as fearful or ashamed.  The individual who looked controlling becomes recognizable as anxious and desperate for security.

New perception creates new possibilities for interaction.

Research suggests that emotional engagement, attachment security, and the therapeutic alliance are among the strongest predictors of successful outcomes in couples therapy (Doss et al., 2022; Fang et al., 2023).

Otherness as an Antidote to Contempt

Contempt is one of the most corrosive forces in long-term relationships.  Contempt emerges when a partner no longer appears fully human but instead becomes reduced to a collection of irritating traits and predictable failures.

Otherness interrupts contempt because curiosity humanizes.

Instead of asking:

“What’s wrong with this person?”

Curiosity asks:

• What fear exists beneath this reaction?
• What is this behavior protecting?
• What experience shaped this pattern?
• What have I stopped noticing about this person?

Dimensionality restores compassion.  And compassion often restores connection.

A Clinical Exercise: Encountering Your Partner Again

Try the following exercise:

Ask your partner:

“What is something about your life, thoughts, emotions, or experience recently that you wish I understood better?”

Then:

• Listen for ten uninterrupted minutes.
• Ask only clarifying questions.
• Do not defend.
• Do not advise.
• Do not explain yourself.
• Do not problem-solve.

Your sole task is understanding.

Many couples discover something surprising:  They have not been observing each other closely for a very long time.

Considering Couples Therapy in Orange County?

If you and your partner are struggling with:

• Emotional distance
• Repetitive conflict
• Communication difficulties
• Trust concerns
• Relationship dissatisfaction
• Life transitions

Evidence-based couples therapy may help.

Related resources:

• Couples Therapy: https://jamestobinphd.com/couples-therapy/
• Relationship Concerns: https://jamestobinphd.com/relationship-concerns/
• My Approach: https://jamestobinphd.com/my-approach/
• Moments That Matter: How Change Really Happens in Couples Therapy https://jamestobinphd.com/moments-that-matter-how-change-really-happens-in-couples-therapy/
• The Key Components of Successful Couples Therapies https://jamestobinphd.com/the-key-components-of-successful-couples-therapies/

To schedule a consultation:

https://jamestobinphd.com/locations-contact/

A Local Perspective

As a licensed psychologist serving Orange County—including Irvine, Newport Beach, Costa Mesa, Anaheim, Laguna Beach, and surrounding communities—I frequently work with professionals, entrepreneurs, parents, and couples navigating the unique pressures of Southern California life.

My approach integrates psychodynamic psychotherapy, attachment-based therapy, CBT, ACT, and emotionally focused principles to help individuals and couples develop greater insight, resilience, and connection.

Closing Thought

The greatest threat to long-term love may not be conflict.  It may be the illusion that you already know who your partner is.

The moment curiosity disappears, perception narrows.

The moment perception narrows, complexity vanishes.

And when complexity vanishes, relationships often become populated by caricatures rather than human beings.

Many couples assume intimacy means eventually figuring each other out. But the healthiest relationships operate according to a different principle: genuine intimacy does not emerge from certainty—it emerges from sustained curiosity.

Modern relationship science increasingly suggests that thriving relationships are built less upon perfect communication techniques and more upon emotional responsiveness, attachment security, psychological flexibility, and the ongoing capacity to remain open to another person’s experience (Greenman & Johnson, 2022; Reis et al., 2004). Partners who feel understood, valued, and emotionally seen tend to report greater relationship satisfaction, stronger emotional connection, increased resilience during stress, and deeper trust.

Curiosity plays a central role in this process.  Curiosity interrupts defensiveness.  Curiosity softens contempt.  Curiosity slows projection.  Curiosity expands perception.  Most importantly, curiosity allows another person to continue evolving rather than remaining trapped inside an outdated story.

Perhaps the deepest act of love is not understanding someone completely.  Perhaps it is remaining interested in them despite believing that you already do.

The healthiest relationships are not those in which partners believe they have finally figured each other out.  They are the ones in which both people continue approaching one another with openness, humility, and a willingness to be surprised.

Because the people we love are never finished becoming who they are.  And neither are we.  The quality of a relationship is shaped, in part, by the quality of attention we bring to it.  When attention disappears, certainty takes its place.  When curiosity returns, people often begin seeing one another again—not as fixed characters in an old relational script, but as living, changing, psychologically complex human beings.

As countries still worth exploring.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does “otherness” mean in relationships?

Otherness refers to recognizing that your partner possesses a complex inner world that cannot be fully known or reduced to simple labels.

Why do couples become bored with each other?

Boredom often reflects collapsed perception rather than an absence of compatibility. Partners stop noticing, exploring, and discovering one another.

Can couples therapy help restore curiosity?

Yes. Effective couples therapy often helps partners see one another differently before they behave differently.

Is curiosity more important than communication skills?

Both matter. However, curiosity frequently creates the emotional conditions that make productive communication possible.

About the Author

James Tobin, PhD (link to: https://jamestobinphd.com/about/) is a licensed psychologist in Irvine and Orange County, California, with extensive experience helping adults and couples navigate relationship challenges, emotional disconnection, anxiety, and life transitions. His work integrates psychodynamic psychotherapy, attachment theory, CBT, ACT, and relational approaches to facilitate meaningful and lasting change.

Disclaimer

This article is intended for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute psychological, medical, or legal advice. Reading this article does not establish a therapist-client relationship. If you are experiencing a mental health emergency, contact 911 or appropriate emergency services immediately.

References

Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Anchor Books.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. Basic Books.

Buber, M. (1923/1970). I and thou (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Doss, B. D., Roddy, M. K., Wiebe, S. A., & Johnson, S. M. (2022). A review of the research during 2010–2019 on evidence-based treatments for couple relationship distress. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 48(1), 283–306.

Fang, M., Morgan, P., Yzaguirre, M. M., Tseng, C.-F., & Wittenborn, A. K. (2023). The therapeutic alliance in couple therapy: Patterns by treatment and sex in a randomized controlled trial of emotionally focused therapy and treatment as usual. Family Process, 62(4), 1423–1438. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12892

Greenman, P., & Johnson, S. M. (2022). Emotionally focused therapy (EFT): Attachment, connection, and health. Current Opinion in Psychology, 43, 146–150.

Johnson, S. M. (2019). Attachment theory in practice: Emotionally focused therapy (EFT) with individuals, couples, and families. Guilford Press.

Johnson, S. M., Hunsley, J., Greenberg, L. S., & Schindler, D. (1999). Emotionally focused couples therapy: Status and challenges. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6(1), 67–79.

Kang, M. J., Hsu, M., Krajbich, I. M., Loewenstein, G., McClure, S. M., Wang, J. T., & Camerer, C. F. (2009). The wick in the candle of learning: Epistemic curiosity activates reward circuitry and enhances memory. Psychological Science, 20(8), 963–973.

Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30(7), 865–878.

Lemay, E. P., Jr., & Clark, M. S. (2008). How the head liberates the heart: Projection of communal responsiveness guides relationship promotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 647–671.

Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority (A. Lingis, Trans.). Duquesne University Press.

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.

Proulx, C. M., Helms, H. M., & Buehler, C. (2023). Relationship quality and well-being: Emerging findings from contemporary relationship science. Journal of Family Theory & Review.

Reis, H. T., Clark, M. S., & Holmes, J. G. (2004). Perceived partner responsiveness as an organizing construct in the study of intimacy and closeness. In D. J. Mashek & A. Aron (Eds.), Handbook of closeness and intimacy (pp. 201–225). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Robles, T. F., Slatcher, R. B., Trombello, J. M., & McGinn, M. M. (2014). Marital quality and health: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(1), 140–187.

Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., & Hubbard, M. (1975/1977). Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: Biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(5), 880–892.

Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 656–666.

Snyder, M., Tanke, E. D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal behavior: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(9), 656–666.

Authoritative Web Resources

https://www.apa.org/topics/marriage-relationships

https://www.apa.org/topics/healthy-relationships

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health

https://www.nih.gov/health-information

https://iceeft.com

https://www.gottman.com