Couples can argue over even the slightest difference of opinion. It can be as simple as preferring different kinds of breakfast cereals. You want the healthy organic variety, and your partner wants the sugar-coated flakes he had as a child. This trivial dispute often escalates until, in the worst-case scenario, you’re ready to break up.
How did things get so out of control? If you love someone, you should be able to handle some daily bickering. Relationship researchers often point out ways that conflicts become dysfunctional. In the newest approach, focus is placed on emotional regulation as the key to neutralizing some of these unpleasant interactions.
Self-Determination Turns Its Attention to Conflict in Relationships
In a new approach to understanding relationship difficulties, University of Quebec’s Aurélie Thuot-Jolicoeur and colleagues (2026) posed a conflict-ridden scenario at the outset of their paper. A couple argues over how to spend some of their time while on a Parisian vacation. But instead of luxuriating in the lovely scenery and enjoying all that Paris has to offer, they began to quibble over whether to see a museum on one of their precious days in the French capital. One partner excitedly suggested this activity, but the other shot her down, claiming to be too tired. Suspecting this was an excuse for disinterest, the protagonist in this story becomes distressed. Over the next few days, the memory popped up unexpectedly, creating renewed emotional wounds.
In posing the alternative to this unpleasant outcome, the authors suggest that the distressed partner could acknowledge feeling upset and then ask why the partner wasn’t interested. Empathizing with the partner rather than becoming upset could enhance the relationship as they “form a more understanding and insightful attitude”
If you’ve ever been in a situation such as this (maybe not in Paris…), you can undoubtedly feel some empathy for each relationship partner as the original scenario unfolded. To get from scenario one to scenario two, the authors suggest, requires that you engage your emotion regulation strategies. To do so, they propose, involves the motivational approach known as Self-Determination Theory (SDT). According to SDT, instead of avoiding conflict or reacting immaturely by sulking or yelling, you are better off using integrative regulation, in which you allow yourself to notice and ultimately accept your emotions, even the unpleasant ones. You can now enter into a conflict constructively as you seek to learn from the conflict about your own emotions and those of your partner.
Testing SDT’s Effectiveness in Keeping Conflicts in Check
Based on SDT, the U. Quebec authors proposed that it’s not conflict alone that causes problems; it’s also the tendency to ruminate unproductively over a past disagreement with your partner. The memory of an event, they suggest, can be just as important as the event itself, especially if it fails to be resolved or brings up unpleasant emotions. You need to be able to control your emotions when those memories pop up in much the same way you do when encountering the situation in the first place.
To test this idea, Thuot-Jolicoeur et al. asked participants to describe a memory of a significant conflict they experienced with a partner. To measure emotion regulation from the SDT perspective, they asked participants to rate items tapping dysregulation (“When I feel negative emotions, I can’t concentrate on the other things I have to do”) and integrative regulation (“On occasions, feeling negative emotions helped me to understand something about the situation I was in”). These were part of the dispositional emotion regulation questions. Separately, the authors rated the extent to which these strategies were used in the recalled event itself.
The conflicts couples brought into the study included these three themes: (1) sexuality and intimacy; (2) needs, values, and interpersonal differences; and (3) practical conflicts. Relationship quality was the outcome of the analyses using emotion regulation of each partner as predictors.
As hypothesized, when partners used integrative regulation when recalling a conflict, their relationship satisfaction was higher than when they used dysfunctional regulation. Over time, the authors proposed, if the recall of a conflicted memory prompts renewed use of dysregulated strategies (hostility, withdrawal, or rumination), the negative effects will only increase exponentially, driving the couple members further apart. If, instead, couples put the conflict in the rearview mirror through integrative regulation, they can move toward greater closeness and understanding.
Putting SDT’s Strategies to Use
Knowing that the dysregulated recall of a troubling event with your partner can be as detrimental to your relationship as the event itself can be helpful as you and your partner try to move past the difficult emotions. As in the Parisian vacation example, the partner who felt hurt and dismissed could use these feelings to gain important self-insights. Maybe the partner truly was tired and needed time to rest and refresh. This doesn’t mean that the partner had somehow fallen out of love or was otherwise ready to move on from the relationship.
Emotion Regulation Essential Reads
Reworking the recall of an event that caused distress can help to nip your feelings of being hurt and rejected in the bud. Furthermore, as you try to move on, it can also be helpful to isolate the event itself as the cause of your distress rather than generalize to everything being wrong in the entire relationship. Sharing your feelings in a nonthreatening or non-accusatory way can get you and your partner onto a path toward greater understanding.
To sum up, relationships are never 100 percent smooth going, but zeroing in on the conflicts—and their memory—that shape your relationship can help you move from dysfunction to emotional acceptance.
