Interpersonal relationships have two or more people. They can be Platonic, romantic, familial, or friendships. Healthy interpersonal relationships bring happiness to those involved within the relationships.
Although we likely have different definitions of happiness; happiness is one thing in life, we all want.
As Aristotle put it, “Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.”
This seems like a pretty good deal then: Healthy relationships bring happiness, meaning, and purpose to our lives.
So, how do we get them?
Healthy Relationships have People that Love Themselves
What is seen today as a cliché, the 20th Century Psychoanalytic theorist, Erich Fromm, was the first to argue: healthy relationships are dependent on you authentically loving yourself.
(And no, authentically loving yourself is not a form of narcissism.)
In his 1956 book, The Art of Loving, Fromm presents a five-stage theory of love that shows how you can achieve healthy relationships in your life.
Stage 1: Self-Love (Love of Self)
Stage 2: Motherly and Fatherly Love (Love of Parents)
Stage 3: Brotherly Love (Love of Friends and Humanity)
Stage 4: Erotic Love (Romantic Love)
Stage 5: Love of God (Ethereal Love)
Each stage in Fromm’s theory is dependent upon the stage(s) before it:
To have healthy relationships with your parents, you must first have a healthy relationship with yourself — meaning a stable self-esteem and a strong self-concept.
Self-esteem: how you feel about yourself.
Self-concept: how you think about yourself.
To have healthy friendships, you must first have a healthy relationship with yourself and your parents.
To have healthy romantic relationships, you must first have a healthy relationship with yourself, your parents, and your friends.
To have healthy ethereal relationships, you must first have a healthy relationship with yourself, your parents, your friends, and your romantic partners.
People tend to blame the unhealthiness of their current relationships on the relationships themselves. Whereas Fromm argues the health of previous relationships — with you at their bases — is the most likely cause for the health of your current relationships.
Healthy Relationships have People Actively Addressing their own Internal Conflicts
To authentically love yourself — and thereby have healthy relationships, you must overcome your own internal conflicts.
We all have internal conflicts. What you do with your internal conflicts, ultimately defines the health of your relationships.
For example, psychoanalytically speaking, your personality is composed of three parts, the id, ego, and superego.
Your id is driven by the basic motivators for survival: fighting, flighting, feeding, and sex.
The ego is the rational part of your personality, it contextualizes id-driven behaviors within the rules of society; and the ego creates compromises between itself and the id; itself and the superego; and the id and the superego.
The superego is your ideal, but irrational conscience; it is constantly wanting what it cannot realistically have.
Your id, ego, and superego are perpetually in conflict with one another; however, by creating and implementing compromises for them, you can alleviate most of these internal conflicts.
If you are not actively creating compromises, then the conflicts among the id, ego, and superego spill over from yourself and become interpersonal conflicts with the people you are in relationships with.
For example, when the superego spills over into your relationships, it makes the people you are in relationships with feel guilty or shameful; when the ego spills over, it makes the people you are in relationships with feel stupid or confused; and when the id spills over, it makes the people you are in relationships with feel worthless or frightened.
Id spillage even has the potential of causing physical or sexual harm; for example, women and children are victims of violence caused by their domestic partners and family members much more so than by strangers.
Healthy Relationships have People Aware of what they Cannot Control
Although we have some control in forming and maintaining healthy relationships, through working on our self-esteems, self-concepts, and internal conflicts, it is important to recognize, most of the factors that form relationships are “beyond our control.”
Simply put, the physics of the universe — more so than the psychology of the universe, determine relationships.
The most likely “beyond our control” factors that determine relationship formation are proximity, time, reciprocity, and excitation transfer.
The physics of proximity are simple, the physically closer you are to someone — the more likely a relationship will form.
The physics of time are simple too, the longer the amount of time you are with someone — the more likely a relationship will form.
Proximity and time are the primary causes for relationships forming.
Driven by your conscience, the principle of reciprocity is the more things a person gives you — the more likely you will be giving this person things in return.
Driven by your central nervous system, the principle of excitation transfer is the more physiologically arousing situations are when you are with a person — the more physiologically arousing you will find this person.
Healthy Relationships have People with Things in Common and NOT in Common
Healthy relationships certainly require people to have things in common with one another, but they also require people to NOT have things in common with one another.
For example, which of the relationships represented by the following three Venn diagrams is likely to be the healthiest?
Often people incorrectly select Relationship 1, because the media and fairy tales present this “I’d die without your love!” relationship as being ideal.
However, Relationship 1 represents a co-dependent relationship. Because the people in this relationship have near everything in common with one another, this type of a relationship has no room for relationship or personal growth. And, co-dependent relationships are often associated with pathology, dissatisfaction, and abuse.
Relationship 2 represents the healthiest relationship. Having things in common with the person you are in a relationship with, is obviously important for relationship formation and bonding. What is not so obvious, but just as important, is having things not in common with those we are in relationships with. When shared, these “not in common” things allow for relationship growth and when not shared, allow for personal growth.
The most likely things people in romantic relationships have in common with one another are their Ages, Levels of Education, Races, Religions, Self-Esteems, Heights, Constructive Behaviors, Intelligence, Social Economic Statuses, Attitudes, Employment Statuses, and Levels of Physical Attractiveness.
Interestingly, the things we have in common with our romantic partners are diverse in their biological, psychological, and sociological dimensions; and mostly “beyond our control.” However, not all these things predict healthy romantic relationships.
Healthy Relationships have People with Self-Esteems, Constructive Behaviors, and Attitudes in Common
Of all the things we can have in common with our romantic partners, only three things are associated with healthy relationships: Self-Esteems, Constructive Behaviors, and Attitudes.
Self-esteem is whether a couple has the same levels of feelings for themselves.
Attitude is whether a couple has the same fundamental beliefs.
And, constructive behavior is whether a couple acts in unison during times of distress and crises.
When held in common, these three things help overcome the inevitable conflicts that occur within long-term relationships.
Of course, every relationship is different. However, relationships with none of the aforementioned factors are likely to be unhappy, exhausting, and potentially toxic. Whereas, relationships with most of these factors are likely to be happy, energizing, and meaningful.
References
Allen, J. P., Narr, R. K., Kansky, J., & Szwedo, D. E. (2019). Adolescent peer relationship qualities as predictors of long-term romantic life satisfaction. Child Development, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13193
Altman, I. (1973). Reciprocity of interpersonal exchange. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 3, 249–261.
Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 265–289.
Buss, D. M., & Barnes, M. (1986). Preferences in human mate selection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 559–570.
Festinger, L., Schachter, S., & Bach, K. (1950). Social Pressures in Informal Groups. New York: Harper.
Freud, Sigmund (1923), Das Ich und das Es, Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag, Leipzig, Vienna, and Zurich. English translation, The Ego and the Id, Joan Riviere (trans.), Hogarth Press and Institute of Psychoanalysis, London, UK, 1927. Revised for The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, James Strachey (ed.), W.W. Norton and Company, New York City, NY, 1961.
Fromm, E. (1956). The Art of Loving. Harper & Bothers: New York.
Gerlach, T. M., Arslan, R. C., Schultze, T., Reinhard, S. K., & Penke, L. (2019). Predictive validity and adjustment of ideal partner preferences across the transition into romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116, 313–330.
Hall, J. A. (2019). How many hours does it take to make a friend? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36, 1278–1296.
Lucas, D. R. (2012). Being: Your Happiness, Pleasure, and Contentment, Plymouth: Hayden-McNeil.
Morton, H., & Gorzalka, B. B. (2015). Role of partner novelty in sexual functioning: A review. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 41, 593–609.
Ney, P. G. (1988). Transgenerational child abuse. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 18, 151–168.
Noriega, G., Ramos, L., Medina-Mora, M. E., & Villa, A. R. (2008). Prevalence of codependence in young women seeking primary health care and associated risk factors. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 78, 199–210.
Rosenfeld, M. J. (2014). Couple longevity in the era of same‐sex marriage in the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 76, 905–918.
Sverdlik, N. (2012). The content of internal conflicts: A personal values perspective. European Journal of Personality, 26, 30–44.
United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (2018). Global Study on Homicide: Gender-Related Killing of Women and Girls. Vienna.
Zillmann, D. (1971). Excitation transfer in communication-mediated aggressive behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 7, 419–434.
…
Don Lucas is a Professor of Psychology and head of the Psychology Department at Northwest Vista College in San Antonio Texas. He loves psychology, teaching, and research.
If you like this story, then check out Don’s videos on his YouTube channel, 5MIweekly: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQFQ0vPPNPS-LYhlbKOzpFw/featured, follow him on Instagram @5MIweekly, and like him on Facebook: http://fb.me/5MIWeekly
