The Manager

The woman walked into her office and sat down. It was Friday. She hated Fridays. Every Friday her boss conducted evaluations. He was the type of boss who only pointed things out if they were not good enough. The boss never said anything kind about the work she put in.

The woman had developed a bad feeling about her boss. Every time she saw him, she got a pit in her stomach. When he did say something neutral in the hall, even if it was a greeting, the woman interpreted the comment in a negative light. Years of being called into his office for “constructive criticism” had trained the woman’s mind to associate time with her boss with feeling inadequate.

The woman got to where she hated going to work. Her work represented her boss. She hated feeling inadequate and his constant criticism helped supply a steady stream of the emotion. When she worked on paperwork, she constantly heard his voice in her head. When she weighed out decisions, she made decisions based on what was going to generate the least amount of paperwork. At times, she felt paralyzed in her decisions because she felt like she would never measure up to his expectations.

The woman eventually got to where she would lie awake at night thinking about her dislike for work. She began to think about going to other jobs. The thought of going to other jobs made her feel lighter. She often found herself dreaming of different employment. She felt so bad about herself that she wondered if she would measure up at a new job.

One day the woman was eating lunch at a diner. An old friend saw her and sat next to her. Her friend had landed a promotion at a new firm and was in a management position now. Her friend listened to the woman’s complaints and offered her a new job. Her friend complimented her and made her feel valuable.

The woman started meeting up with her friend at the diner. She liked the way she felt valuable whenever she talked to her friend. She started experiencing herself differently. She decided that maybe there was a better work life elsewhere. She put in an application at her new job.

Negative Probability

Jacob was very analytically minded. He saw the world in black and white. He was quick to point out the flaws he saw in every situation. Jacob had a quick wit about him. His favorite form of humor was sarcasm.

When Jacob got married to Tiffany, she thought his playful sarcasm was cute. She knew he was critical about flaws, but she could easily overlook them. He had many other qualities that were easy to love.

During their first year of marriage, Jacob noticed that he could point out one of Tiffany’s mistakes and she would lovingly accept his comment as constructive criticism. They spent a lot of time being close to each other. Jacob constantly showered Tiffany with praise.

As they entered the fifth year of their marriage, Jacob and Tiffany fell into a routine. The routine resulted in undiscussed expectations about who’s chore belongs to whom. Jacob didn’t believe that someone should be complimented for things that they “should already be doing.” Jacob stopped complimenting and expressing appreciation for Tiffany’s efforts. He continued to point out the flaws in Tiffany’s actions. He continued the sarcastic jokes.

Jacob started to notice that Tiffany was changing. He thought that maybe she had a mental disorder that he hadn’t noticed when they were dating. Tiffany was not taking his constructive criticism well, even when he used soft tones. She was constantly misinterpreting neutral statements as criticism, when they were not intended to be criticism. Jacob thought she was overly sensitive. She got upset easily over his sarcastic jokes and took them very personal. In Jacob’s mind, there was something clearly wrong with Tiffany.

Jacob suggested that Tiffany see a psychiatrist for medication. When she said “no,” Jacob went to a therapist to inquire about how to live with someone who has a mental illness. He was convinced that she was unstable because she would seem happy until he talked to her and then she would suddenly become offended and irritable.

Jacob’s therapist explained that the mind works in probability. If the majority of the conversations that Jacob had with Tiffany were negative, Tiffany would interpret the neutral statements as negative. Tiffany would also expect Jacob’s next conversation to be negative, so she would already be irritated and ready for a conflict. She would approach Jacob in an irritated mood, Jacob would respond negatively to that mood, which would confirm to Tiffany that she was correct for assuming that Jacob would be negative.

Negative Probability Logistics

The mind works in probability. If the last few times I had a conversation with my spouse and the conversation resulted in an argument, my mind would naturally assume that the next conversation would also result in an argument. If the last few times I talked to my spouse I was critical, then my spouse will assume that I will be critical again. She will assign a negative connotation to my neutral body language, texts, and words.

It is easy to assume that if couples say one neutral statement and one positive statement then the two statements will cancel each other out and the mind will recognize neutral statements as neutral. John Gottman (1999) discovered that happy couples have a ratio of five positive interactions to every one negative.

Until a couple experiences significantly more positive interactions than negative, the spouse will assume negative intent. The mind will interpret most of the intentional negatives plus all the unintentional negatives as negative. This phenomenon results in one person being irritable before even talking to the other person, simply because the expectation will be that the conversation will be negative. When the body anticipates a problem, it will turn on the sympathetic nervous system. This system will facilitate anxiety and anger.

After multiple interactions that have resulted in hurt feelings, both people in a relationship will likely be approaching each interaction with the anticipation of being hurt. Both people will be experiencing anxiety or irritability before they read a text or hear a word. Both people will interpret the message based on their current physiological state.  Both people will react to the other person’s reaction. The reaction will reconfirm that the probability of things going poorly is very high. This will set up the couple for another round of failed conversations.

If a person has experienced a previously abusive relationship, then that intense experience will also taint the perception of neutral statements. In these instances, it is helpful to approach the situation with a physically calm presence and a calm voice. An analogy to this would be adopting an animal that had been previously abused. You would expect that animal to be very sensitive to aggressive tones, tense body language, and heightened emotions. The animal’s response is physiological. The animal is recoiling in instinct. The same thing will happen with a human being. A spouse who has been through a lot of trauma will respond well to a physical presence that exudes a sense of calm. The same spouse will have a poor physiological reaction to heightened emotions, even if their brain is telling them otherwise. This issue will not be resolved with logic. You will not likely be able to tell the body to respond differently. The issue can be resolved with tenderness.

This problem will also intensify if one person is abusive to themself and constantly puts themself down or compares their current state to an unreasonable ideal. If a spouse is spending the day tearing themselves down and then hears a small critique, they will respond with the accumulative emotional effect of the combined negativity. If a spouse is constantly comparing their current state to an abstract ideal that cannot be reached, and that spouse hears a critique, then the spouse will also respond with emotions that have accumulated through self-critique coupled with your comment. In these cases, it is best to not criticize. They are already criticizing themselves. Adding to it is only going to make things worse. There are other approaches that have good results and do not require criticism. This book will discuss some of those approaches.