Chapter 37 Exercises

Exercise 37.1 — Sternberg's Triangle: Case Application (Individual, 30 minutes)

Choose one of the following fictional or public relationships (or a relationship from a film, book, or television series that your instructor approves): - A long-married couple in a film (e.g., The Notebook, Marriage Story, Away from Her) - A historical couple about whom sufficient biographical information exists - A fictional couple from literature you have read in another course

Using Sternberg's triangular theory, analyze the relationship at two distinct points in time: 1. Early in the relationship (high passion likely) 2. Later in the relationship (whatever stage the narrative reaches)

For each time point, rate — with brief justification — the relative level of passion, intimacy, and commitment (use a scale of 1–5). Then: (a) identify what "type" of love the combination represents at each stage; (b) identify what changed and why; (c) evaluate whether the relationship moved toward or away from consummate love.

Write up your analysis in 400–600 words.

Exercise 37.2 — The Four Horsemen: Conversation Rewrite (Pair or Individual, 45 minutes)

Below is a fictional dialogue between two partners in a conflict about household responsibilities. Identify every instance of the Four Horsemen in this exchange:

Alex: "You never think about anyone but yourself. Every week this kitchen is a disaster and I have to clean it up alone, as usual." Blake: "Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot you're a saint who does everything around here. I work sixty hours a week. What exactly do you want from me?" Alex: "I want you to care. But you clearly don't." Blake: [rolls eyes, picks up phone, begins texting] Alex: "Are you seriously on your phone right now? I'm talking to you." Blake: [silence]

Part A: Label each Four Horsemen instance you find (multiple may appear in a single line).

Part B: Rewrite the dialogue to remove all Four Horsemen. The conversation should still be about the same conflict (household responsibilities) and the same underlying feelings should be expressible — but using the alternative language Gottman recommends (specific complaints rather than character attacks; taking responsibility; staying engaged; accepting repair).

Exercise 37.3 — Responsive vs. Spontaneous Desire: Concept Mapping (Small Group, 30 minutes)

In groups of 3–4, discuss and then diagram a simple "concept map" showing the relationships among the following terms from Section 37.8: - Spontaneous desire - Responsive desire - Dual Control Model (briefly — look this up if needed) - Contextual stimuli - Long-term relationship desire trajectory - Erotic context

Your map should show how these concepts are related (use labeled arrows). Then, as a group, identify one question the spontaneous/responsive distinction does NOT answer — something Nagoski's framework leaves unclear or underexplained.

Exercise 37.4 — Attachment Style Reflection (Individual, Private)

This exercise is for your own learning and will not be submitted.

Revisit the attachment style dimensions (anxiety and avoidance) from Chapter 11. Based on your self-understanding (not the quiz scores necessarily, but your own observations of how you behave in close relationships):

  1. When you have experienced conflict in a close relationship, what is your most common first response? (Pursue/seek reassurance? Withdraw/go quiet? Something else?)

  2. When a close person you depend on seems distant or distracted, what is your interpretive default? (They must be upset with me? They must be tired/stressed and it's not about me? Something more complex?)

  3. Looking at Section 37.7's description of anxious and avoidant patterns in long-term relationships — does either description resonate? If so, what specific feature?

  4. What would "earned security" look like for you — what kind of partner behavior, over time, would feel like it was gradually shifting your default toward more trust?

Keep these reflections in a private journal. They may be useful in later discussions.

Exercise 37.5 — Cross-Cultural Comparison: Okafor-Reyes Year 4 (Short Paper, 600–800 words)

Sections 37.2 and 37.6 describe a finding from the fictional Okafor-Reyes Year 4 data: long-term relationship satisfaction predictors show more cross-cultural convergence than early attraction predictors.

Write a short analytical paper that: 1. Explains Reyes's interpretation of this finding (convergence suggests an evolved cross-cultural core of long-term love) 2. Explains Okafor's interpretation (convergence may reflect global diffusion of Western romantic ideals through media) 3. Describes what type of empirical evidence would help distinguish between these two interpretations 4. Takes a position on which you find more convincing and why

Use the methodological tools from Chapter 3 (effect sizes, cross-cultural sampling, distinguishing correlation from causation) to support your argument.

Exercise 37.6 — Relationship Maintenance Audit (Reflective Writing, Individual)

Section 37.10 identifies six categories of relationship maintenance behaviors: positivity, assurances, sharing tasks, openness, social networks, and conflict management quality.

Think of a close relationship in your life — romantic, familial, or a close friendship. For each of the six categories: 1. Describe one specific behavior you engage in that represents this category (be concrete) 2. Identify one category that you believe you underinvest in relative to others 3. Describe what one specific change in your own behavior might look like in that underinvested category

This is for your own reflection. Share as much or as little as you are comfortable with in class discussion.