Predicting Divorce

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


To the socially observant, this should come as no shock: divorce is most common during two distinct stages in a marriage. The first is the famed itch that falls within the first seven years; the second coincides with midlife crises. A new study, though, actually shows how the kinds of problems a dysfunctional couple faces can predict in which of these two stages they are more likely to split. John Gottman of the University of Washington and Robert Levenson of the University of California at Berkeley present the findings in this month's issue of the Journal of Marriage and the Family.

The researchers tracked 79 marriages in Bloomington, Ind., beginning in 1983. Over the course of 14 years, they periodically checked in with the couples, questioning them about their levels of marital satisfaction. In the end, 22 couples, or 28 percent, had divorced. And what Gottman and Levenson observed were two patterns of behavior. Couples who broke up early in their marriages tended to fight openly and consistently with each other, whereas those who split in midlife were more often alienated and avoidant. Gottman adds that although bad marriages aren't all bad in the same ways, most--including these main types--can benefit from counseling.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe