While we have often discussed how universal emotional expressions are, emerging research is expanding this universality even beyond our own species!

A recent 2017 study from the University of Helsinki sought to better understand how humans recognize emotions and facial expressions in dogs. The study found that, not only can humans effectively read canine expressions, but many only had to rely on basic human empathy to do so.

While it seems intuitive that humans with long-term experience living with dogs can learn to read their facial expressions, this study went further, finding that previous experiences with dogs were only a secondary factor.

Instead, the ability to empathize in general proved to be an effect method for understanding canine facial expressions. That said, participants with previous experiences with dogs were better able to understand other aspects of body language, such as posture or tail movements.

This research built on previous work that explored our capacity to read canine expressions. In a 2013 study, researchers at the Walden University in Florida showed human participants images of a dog displaying various emotions, including happiness, fear, sadness, anger, and disgust. Long-term followers of this blog might notice a telling overlap with the seven basic emotions.

While participants often had trouble identifying sadness and disgust, almost half were able to recognize fear in the dog’s face. Surprisingly, 88 percent properly identified happiness, including those with little previous experience with dogs.

This study helped establish our ability to read canine emotions, and the more recent study from the University of Helsinki demonstrated that this ability is rooted in facial recognition, not unlike our ability to recognize emotions in fellow humans.

Perhaps more surprisingly, it isn’t just humans that can read dog emotions. Additional research has also found that they are quite good at reading ours!

For example, a 2016 study out of the University of Lincoln, exposed dogs to a series of images displaying human facial expressions. They juxtaposed these images with audio clips of humans expressing similar emotions through voice commands. Sometimes they matched the audio and visual cues to present the same emotion, while often they exposed the dog to conflicting emotions.

Their research found that dogs showed a marked increase in attentiveness and interest when the audio and visual cues displayed the same emotion. This suggested that they had the ability to recognize human emotions, from both our facial expressions and our voices.

Concurrent research, again at the University of Helsinki, came to a similar conclusion. A 2016 study tracked the eyes of dogs that sought to read human faces, finding that they focus primarily on our eyes and responded quickly to expressions of anger.

These methods of inquiry help bridge the gap between human and animal emotions. This does more than understand interspecies interactions. In fact, by comparing forms of facial or emotional recognition, we can better understand the nuances of our own, human capacities.

For more information on animal emotions, see our past posts here and here.

No, this isn’t a religious sermon, but it is an important message for anyone in a committed relationship.

In previous blogs, we have delved into several factors that make marriages fail, succeed, and flourish. Building off that work, it is important to examine some of the other major challenges that face married couples. While this focuses on marriages, as always, these principles can apply to all sorts of interpersonal relationships.

Dr. John Gottman, who has spent years studying relationships, warns of the “Four Horsemen,” that can consistently spell doom for marriage. While we discussed one, contempt, in a previous article, he describes the remaining horsemen as criticism, defensiveness, and stonewalling.

Criticism, which we touched on only briefly, constitutes attacks on your partner’s character, often involving ad hominem attacks. Importantly, Dr. Gottman distinguishes between “criticism” and what he describes as simple critiques or complaints.

Essentially, a criticism involves telling your partner that there is something wrong with them, while critiques and complaints presents concerns over specific behaviors or, at their best, offer positive requests for certain behaviors. For example, contrast this criticism: “How can you leave dirty clothes everywhere? Why do you have to be so messy?” with the complaint “Could you try to pick up your dirty clothes?”

The former example involved actually attacking one’s partner, while the latter was framed in the context of an active request. The critical difference, then, between criticism and complaints rests in fostering an acceptance of each other’s needs and in preventing an atmosphere of distrust or conflict. It is in those toxic, criticism-filled, atmospheres that the other Horsemen, such as defensiveness and stonewalling thrive.

Defensiveness is probably all too familiar to each of us. This horseman arises when we face perceived criticism and consider these attacks to be unfair or unjust. Then the defensive partner will attempt to retaliate by lashing out in response, turning the situation around on their significant other.

Building on the example discussed earlier, this could result in the retort that “You are just as messy! Why don’t you clean up more, if it bothers you so much?” Often, this is intended to mitigate the criticism and resolve the situation, but instead it usually fails to end the conflict, perpetuating tension and continuing to undermine trust in the relationship.

Similarly, the final horseman, stonewalling, is similar in some ways to defensiveness, except that it involves a complete withdrawal from the interaction. The stonewalling partner will respond to a criticism, or even valid complaint, by simply shutting down and refusing to respond or address the issue. This can involve leaving the room or completely ignoring your partner.

So, we’ve outlined these apocalyptic relationship habits, but what is there to do about them? The first step, of course, is properly recognizing their signs, but Dr. Gottman offers further advice on managing them properly. He emphasizes the notion of “management” over “resolution,” because these conflicts will inevitably occur, but it is important to better handle them when they do arise.

We’ve already discussed how criticism can be converted into valid complaints, but what about the other two? Rather than becoming defensiveness, we have to work to take responsibility for a given problem. Instead of shifting blame in the dirty clothes example, the partner ought to respond positively and help clean up the house. This needn’t involve taking complete blame, but requires at least acknowledging a sense of shared responsibility.

Finally, sometimes distance from a stressful situation may be necessary, which is the impulse that drives stonewalling. Instead of withdrawal, however, it may be important to agree on taking some time apart to engage in a soothing activity. Just fifteen minutes of time alone can allow couples to revisit issues with compassion instead of anger and frustration.

While these horseman are likely to be constant challenges for any couple, proper management can go a long way towards preserving healthy and happy relationships.

For more information on Dr. Gottman’s relationship advice, see our past blogs here and here.