Why Do Our Arguments Keep Going the Same Way? Understanding the Four Horsemen in Relationships

Written for Through The Woods Psychology by Counselling Intern Anvir Dhatt

It starts with the dishwasher.  

You asked your partner to unload it before you got home. They forgot. Again.

“You never listen when I ask you to do something.”

“I was busy! Why are you acting like I never do anything around here?”

“Right. Because you’re so helpful.”

“Whatever.”

And suddenly, neither of you is talking about the dishwasher anymore.

If this sounds familiar, you’re not alone. Couples can find themselves having different versions of the same argument over and over again. The topic might change, from chores to finances to family or how much time you spend together, but the way the argument unfolds can feel remarkably familiar.

Relationship researcher John Gottman developed one way of understanding some of these patterns through what he called the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: criticism, defensiveness, contempt, and stonewalling.

These behaviours can make conflict increasingly difficult to navigate, particularly when they become familiar ways of responding to one another. Recognizing the Four Horsemen isn’t about figuring out which one your partner is guilty of.It’s about noticing the cycle the two of you can get pulled into and learning how to respond differently.  

It can be tempting to think that healthy couples simply don’t argue very much. Relationship research suggests a more complicated picture.

In an early longitudinal study, Gottman and Krokoff (1989) observed couples discussing areas of ongoing disagreement and followed their relationship satisfaction over three years. Interestingly, disagreement and expressions of anger were not necessarily harmful to relationship satisfaction over time. Defensiveness and withdrawal, however, were among the interaction patterns associated with deterioration in marital satisfaction.

In other words, having conflict doesn’t automatically mean something is wrong with your relationship.

How you move through that conflict matters.

What Are the Four Horsemen?

1. Criticism: When the problem becomes the person

There is an important difference between having a complaint and criticizing your partner. A complaint focuses on a particular behaviour: “I was frustrated when the dishes weren’t done after we talked about it.” Criticism turns the problem into something about who your partner is: “You never think about anyone but yourself.” Research describing the Four Horsemen distinguishes criticism from a complaint because criticism attacks a partner’s character rather than addressing a specific behaviour. When we are hurt or frustrated, that distinction can disappear quickly. “I’m upset that this happened” becomes “This happened because this is the kind of person you are.” And understandably, being on the receiving end of that can make someone want to defend themselves.

2. Defensiveness: “But it’s not my fault!”

Back to our dishwasher. “You never help around here.” “What are you talking about? I did the laundry yesterday. You’re the one who left dishes in the sink this morning!” Now both partners are trying to prove their side, and neither feels particularly heard.
Defensiveness often involves denying responsibility, explaining why we aren’t at fault, or redirecting blame back toward our partner. It’s also a very understandable reaction. When we feel attacked, our instinct may be to explain ourselves. The problem is that when both people become focused on proving why they aren’t the problem, there isn’t much room left to understand each other.

3. Contempt: When frustration turns into disrespect

Contempt can sound like: “Wow, you did one load of laundry. Congratulations.” It can also be an eye roll, mocking tone, insult, or sarcastic comment (Beeney et al., 2019).  This is where conflict starts moving beyond “I’m angry about what happened” toward “I’m communicating that I’m above you or that you aren’t worthy of respect.” If resentment has been building for a long time, contempt may not appear out of nowhere. But expressing that resentment through ridicule or disrespect can make it much harder for either partner to feel safe enough to have the conversation underneath it.

4. Stonewalling: “I’m done.”

Eventually, someone checks out. Maybe they stop answering. They look at their phone. They leave the room. Or they simply go silent. This is stonewalling. Beeney and colleagues (2019) describe it as withdrawing from the interaction through behaviours such as becoming nonresponsive, avoiding eye contact, or distracting oneself. Importantly, withdrawal doesn’t necessarily tell us that someone doesn’t care about the relationship or the conversation. Sometimes a person simply reaches a point where continuing feels impossible. But to the partner who is still trying to connect or resolve the problem, that silence can feel like rejection. And that can make them push even harder. 

The Argument Can Become a Cycle

This is where I think the Four Horsemen become especially useful. Rather than imagining four separate boxes, think about what happens between two people. One partner criticizes. The other becomes defensive. Feeling unheard, the first partner becomes more frustrated and perhaps contemptuous. The other eventually withdraws. Now the first partner feels even more ignored, so they push harder. Research on the demand-withdraw pattern describes something very similar: one partner pressures for engagement or change through demands, complaints, or criticism while the other responds through withdrawal, defensiveness, or inaction.

In a meta-analysis of 74 studies involving 14,255 participants, Schrodt and colleagues (2014) found a meaningful association between demand-withdraw patterns and relational and communication outcomes.

This is why asking “Who started it?” isn’t always the most useful question.

A better question might be: “What happens between us once we get started?”


One way to interrupt the cycle is to get curious about the message underneath your reaction.

“You never make time for me” might be trying to communicate: “I miss you, and I want to feel important to you.”

“It’s not my fault!” might be: “I feel blamed, and I want you to understand my perspective.”

Sarcasm might be covering: “I’ve been frustrated about this for a long time, and I don’t think you understand how much it has affected me.”

And silence might mean: “I’m too overwhelmed to figure out what to say right now.”

These translations won’t fit every person or every argument. That’s the point. Instead of assuming we know what our partner’s behaviour means, we can become curious about what is happening underneath it.

Rewind: What Could the Conversation Sound Like Instead? Let’s go back to the dishwasher one more time.

Instead of: “You never help unless I ask you.”

Try:

“I’m feeling overwhelmed with everything that needs to get done tonight. Could you unload the dishwasher while I start dinner?”

Instead of immediately defending: “I do plenty around here!”

Try:

“I can see why you’re frustrated. I said I’d do it and I forgot.”

And if you notice yourself getting too overwhelmed to continue productively, rather than disappearing from the conversation: “I’m getting worked up, and I don’t think I’m going to communicate well right now. Can we take a break and come back to this?” The goal isn’t perfect communication. You’re probably still going to get irritated with each other sometimes. You may still become defensive or say something you wish you hadn’t.

The goal is learning to notice the pattern sooner and repair it when you can.

Try This During Your Next Argument

When you notice yourself getting pulled into a familiar conflict, ask yourself:

Am I talking about the problem, or am I attacking my partner’s character?

Am I listening, or am I preparing my defence?

What am I actually feeling or needing underneath what I’m saying?

Am I regulated enough to continue this conversation productively?

What happens between us when one of us starts feeling unheard?

Sometimes simply recognizing “We’re doing that thing again” can create enough space to choose a different next step.

Of course, knowing what healthy communication looks like and actually doing it in the middle of an argument are two very different things. Sometimes couples understand their communication patterns perfectly well and still find themselves falling into them. When a cycle has been reinforced over months or years, slowing it down can take practice.

Couples counselling can provide a space to understand not only what you’re arguing about, but also what happens between you while you’re arguing. That can include learning to recognize patterns such as criticism, defensiveness, contempt, and withdrawal, communicating underlying needs more directly, and finding ways to reconnect after conflict.

We’re Here to Help

At Through the Woods Psychology, I work with individuals and couples who want to better understand the patterns showing up in their relationships. My approach is warm, collaborative, and attachment-informed, with a focus on helping you move beyond what you are arguing about to understand what is happening between you when conflict takes over. Together, we can work toward communicating needs more openly, navigating disagreements with greater intention, and finding ways to reconnect when conversations do not go as planned.

If any of this resonates with you or you would like to learn more, please feel free to book a free initial consultation. 


You can also visit Through the Woods Psychology, email info@throughthewoods.ca, or call (403) 984-7922. 

References

Beeney, J. E., Hallquist, M. N., Scott, L. N., Ringwald, W. R., Stepp, S. D., Lazarus, S. A., Mattia, A. A., & Pilkonis, P. A. (2019). The emotional bank account and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse in romantic relationships of people with borderline personality disorder: A dyadic observational study. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(5), 1063–1077.

Gottman, J. M., & Krokoff, L. J. (1989). Marital interaction and satisfaction: A longitudinal view. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 57(1), 47–52.

Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., & Shimkowski, J. R. (2014). A meta-analytical review of the demand/withdraw pattern of interaction and its associations with individual, relational, and communicative outcomes. Communication Monographs, 81(1), 28–58.