
The ambivalent marriage takes a toll on health - zabramow
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/the-ambivalent-marriage-takes-a-toll-on-health/
======
hckr1292
IMHO as a married person, this is a fantastic area for research! The basic
concept makes intuitive sense and I'm inclined to believe that feeling very
positively about one's marriage is better for a person's health then feeling
ambivalent about the relationship.

However, with a sample size of only 94, I'm skeptical that this study is
representative of US marriages at large. I'm also skeptical that it is
possible to control for the influence of age and generational effects given
that the couples have been married from 1 to 41 years in such a small study.

While interesting and important as a research topic, this really feels like it
should be taken with a grain of salt.

~~~
Homaniac
Why are you skeptical due to the sample size of 94? The sample size only needs
to be large enough to capture the variance in the response for the population.
The sample size does not need to increase as the population being studied
increases. Look into the concept of statistical power.

~~~
avsbst
I think the original commentor's skepticism, while possibly too concerned with
sample size, is still valid. This study is trying to draw connections between
two large and hard to understand systems, marriage and cardiovascular health.
While the sample size may have captured enough variance in a certain
population to generalize the results I doubt they can be generalized world
wide, nation wide, state wide or possibly even city wide.

For example, how did they find these participants? Did the researchers just
pull married couples from the BYU campus or from across the city? Given BYU
and Utah's population are they mostly LDS couples? What about their race given
that the LDS is significantly more caucasian than the US overall? What about
diet given that LDS members generally don't consume alcohol or caffeinated
beverages? What about geography? Perhaps temperature or altitude affected the
cardiovascular markers or measurements were taken under different conditions
for different groups?

All of the above things I've mentioned may or may not affect cardiovascular
health, and I doubt they captured or had the time and resources to control for
all these factors and any additional ones I didn't bring up. So I think being
skeptical is okay. Until this study has been reproduced multiple times or we
understand the entire pathway connecting marriage and heart health (a highly
unlikely occurrence) I will remain skeptical because that's how good science
works.

~~~
Homaniac
Ah yeah, it definitely cannot be generalized to US marriages at large due to
the sample only being from a limited area. Confounding factors may definitely
be an issue as well.

------
randomname2
This mirrors some of the findings of Dr. John M. Gottman, who studied conflict
in married couples and found that having your significant other hold you in
disgust is so stressful that it can have a negative effect on your immune
system.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Was this the same research that showed that one of the biggest predictors for
divorce was whether your partner held you in contempt? I recall reading that
_that_ was a bigger problem for marriages than things like outright hostility
or infidelity, but I could be remembering things completely wrong.

~~~
randomname2
Yes: "Gottman's theory states that there are four major emotional reactions
that are destructive and thus are the four predictors to a divorce: criticism,
defensiveness, stonewalling, and contempt. Among these four, Gottman considers
contempt the most important of them all."

------
TheBeardKing
Since I'm no sociologist, how do these researchers go about determining
whether correlation = causation? I myself would tend to come to the opposite
conclusion, that healthy motivated people with good vitals are more likely to
put more effort into their marriage, because being healthy just makes you feel
better in general. I've been married for 10 years, 2 kids, and I look forward
to seeing my sexy wife because she makes an effort to keep herself looking
good, and I put in the same effort. I think having the good vitals mentioned
in this article improves your outlook on every aspect of life, but of course
it's just one factor coming into play with money, time, other relationships,
etc.

------
0xdeadbeefbabe
> Subjects used a palm pilot to record exactly what they were doing at the
> moment the blood pressure was taken — eating, working, resting, interacting
> with their spouse.

A palm pilot?

Edit: What? That isn't interesting? It would be funny if business people were
modding me down.

~~~
pavel_lishin
It was probably a very cheap device they could give out to the people in the
study.

------
pearjuice
>It is also not clear if the high blood pressure findings shown in the study
would eventually lead to poorer health over time.

So in the article headline they state that the ambivalent marriage takes a
toll on health, but in the article itself they clearly contradict this and
state they are not sure whether this is even true (see above quote). I think
AB-testing pointed out that the masses are becoming aware of Betteridge's law
and online media now show more caution when publishing headlines with question
marks at the end.

It's not unlikely that a few months ago, this article would have been
published as "Does the ambivalent marriage take a toll on health?". At least
then it would have been clear from the get-go that this is linkbait.

~~~
lectrick
Thank you for reminding me of
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines)
. I knew this was a thing, but I forgot the name of it.

