Featured Post

The End (of the Beginning)

For my blog this may be the end, but as for me, it is not the end, it is not even the beginning of the end. It is simply the end of the begi...

Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Science Says Mutual Vulnerability Leads to Love: Does Shidduch Dating Give Us an Edge?

There's been a lot of buzz regarding psychologist Aron's 36 Questions experiment, which explores how to foster interpersonal closeness between two strangers. He proposes that having two people share increasingly personal information with each other mirrors the manner in which two people develop emotional intimacy. 

The study involves a heterosexual man and woman meeting for the first time in a lab. They sit together answering a series of personal questions, and then they stare silently into each other’s eyes for four minutes. The result? Six months later, the two participants got married.

The study's author explains, "One key pattern associated with the development of a close relationship among peers is sustained, escalating, reciprocal, personal self-disclosure." In other words, vulnerability leads to closeness. By forcing people to be open and emotionally vulnerable with each other, this encourages closeness.

Mandy Len Catron writes an article for the NY Times, To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do This, in which she relates her personal experience with Aron's 36 Questions. She tells how an old college buddy says to her, “I suspect, given a few commonalities, you could fall in love with anyone. If so, how do you choose someone?” They decided to give The 36 Questions a shot. Catron shares that her personal experiment taught her that love doesn't just happen to us; it's more malleable than you might think. She says,
It’s true you can’t choose who loves you . . . and you can’t create romantic feelings based on convenience alone. Science tells us biology matters; our pheromones and hormones do a lot of work behind the scenes.
But despite all this, I’ve begun to think love is a more pliable thing than we make it out to be. Arthur Aron’s study taught me that it’s possible — simple, even — to generate trust and intimacy, the feelings love needs to thrive.
If all this is accurate, does the fast-paced, goal oriented style that we date engender vulnerability like Aron's Questions? Are these feelings "real," or are we just confusing this intensity with "liking" the person? Is this feeling sustainable when real life kicks in? Can you really love anyone as long as some basic prerequisites are present?

Perhaps the fact that shidduch dating is just more focused is what's at play here. Maybe removing a large aspect of physical compatibility from the equation while dating helps to foster more genuine emotional closeness quicker.

Trust, emotional intimacy, comfortability, are all important in a relationship, but there are a lot of other things that are important in a "forever" relationship too. Perhaps those conditions aren't so basic, but if met, then yes, being able to be vulnerable with someone can definitely lead to what we kids call love nowadays.

7 comments:

  1. Sounds like a simple recipe. Add a teaspoon of trust, a cup of vulnerability and shared interest and goals over time. The problem is how comfortable does it feel to be vulnerable on a shidduch date? Where we know whatever we said can and will be held against us. Its as if we say "lets put a boy and girl on a petri dish and wait and observe to see if a connection grows". I don't know about you, but this hasn't worked for me. - a singled out warrior

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can I give you some dating advice? Even within a shidduch forum you can break the rules a little, color outside the lines. Don't hotel haunt; go have fun and experience each other. You don't have to Petri dish date.

      Perhaps much of what you say/do on a date may be held under a microscope, but it's all in perspective of who you are. It's big picture. Just be you. Life begins at the end of your comfort zone.

      Delete
    2. Guess the point is to expand the comfort zone :-)

      Delete
  2. I had read through the 36 Questions previously, and the questions alone irritated me. A lot of them were based on hypotheticals, and I hate hypotheticals. They mostly represent how we would like to see ourselves, as opposed to how we really are.

    When we date, I would prefer that I see someone as he is. One can also tell then if he is the sort of person who wants to become better.

    Plus, the questions are really really deep. I need time to think them over and craft a response. "Wait, wait, I want to change my answer to Question 15!"

    If I feel like there is some sort of initial connection/chemistry/comfort on a date, then I'll be vulnerable, taking the risk that "something will be held against me." What I've learned about dating is that worrying about public opinion is way too darn exhausting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hypotheticals tell you a lot about a person -- his goals, his values, and yes, how he sees himself. Regardless, knowing him "as he is" would come about through shared experiences I guess, because even within formal conversation there is self-report bias.

      Sure, if you had time to think the questions through you may answer differently, but answering them off the cuff lends a bit of a different perspective into who you are too.

      So maybe I'm weird, but I embrace vulnerability. I like this sort of thing; it helps me feel like I'm connecting with the other person. How many times have I played The Ungame, Loaded Questions, or Perfect Matches on a date? Usually those are good dates for me (unless it isn't and then doesn't matter what we're disclosing to each other). Too much small talk grates on me.

      I'm with you. Worrying about what people think about you is overrated. Live on the edge and be the author of your story. To quote Brene Brown again, “You either walk inside your story and own it or you stand outside your story and hustle for your worthiness." "...let go of who you think you're supposed to be and embrace who you are."

      Delete
    2. I really appreciate what you said and especially liked your quote from Brene. I am a huge fan of the work and research she has put into understanding relationships etc. Those of you not familiar with her work can watch her ted talk. She's very insightful. I still think that most of us struggle being in the here and now and letting go of the worry. Additionally, the way the shidduch system is set up and the expectations are it takes a lot of strength to let go and let Hashem show the way. It always struck me as interesting that we always are preached to believe and rely that Hashem is in charge and then somehow with shidduchim its like we believe He's disabled and can't find and help us through the process.

      Delete
    3. It does take a lot of strength. I think with almost anything in which there is a perception of control, there is a delicate hishtadlus/emunah balance.

      Delete

Pageviews