Empathizing-Systemizing (E-S) Theory of couple communication difficulties…
Saturday, December 30, 2023.
In this post I’ll explore the implications of the Empathizing-Systemizing Theory (Baron-Cohen et al., 2005) within the context of couples therapy, particularly when applying the principles of the Gottman Method with neurodiverse couples.
The theory posits that humans exhibit varying degrees of Empathizing and Systemizing tendencies, influencing their interactions within relationships.
As a Gottman Couples Therapist, integrating this theory into my clinical practice has enhanced my ability to craft therapeutic interventions, and foster a more tailored approach for my neurodiverse couples.
The Empathizing-Systemizing Theory, introduced by Simon Baron-Cohen and colleagues in 2005, provides a unique lens through which to examine the dynamics of empathy and analytical thinking within humans.
Baron-Cohen's Empathizing-Systemizing Theory proposes a dual-dimensional classification of individuals based on their empathizing and systemizing tendencies (Baron-Cohen et al., 2005). Empathizing refers to the capacity to understand and identify with the emotions, thoughts, and feelings of others, while systematizing pertains to the inclination to analyze and construct systems, including those in the inanimate world (Baron-Cohen et al., 2005).
Empathizing Dimension:
Empathizing individuals are characterized by heightened sensitivity to the emotional experiences of others, strong interpersonal skills, and a proclivity towards nurturing relationships (Baron-Cohen et al., 2005). This dimension is closely aligned with the Gottman Method emphasis on emotional connection and attunement in relationships (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
Systemizing Dimension:
Conversely, systemizing individuals are more analytical, detail-oriented, and driven by a desire to understand the underlying structures and rules governing various systems (Baron-Cohen et al., 2005). This analytical orientation resonates with the Gottman Method focus on understanding relationship dynamics through systematic observation and analysis (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
Applying the Theory in Couples Therapy:
As a Gottman Couples Therapist, the Empathizing-Systemizing Theory provides a valuable framework for tailoring therapeutic approaches to the unique characteristics of each individual within a relationship. The E-S model assumes that all humans have both empathizing and systemizing skills, and that they distributed gifts amongst humanity independent of one another.
Assessment of Empathizing and Systemizing Tendencies:
Before embarking on therapeutic interventions, a comprehensive assessment of empathizing and systemizing tendencies is essential. Tools such as the Empathizing-Systemizing Quotient (Wheelwright et al., 2006) although it has cross-cultural challenges, This tool often helps identify the dominant traits of each partner, laying the foundation for a more personalized interventions.
Wheelwright, S., Baron-Cohen, S., Goldenfeld, N., Delaney, J., Fine, D., Smith, R., … Wakabayashi, A. (2006). Predicting Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) from the Systemizing Quotient-Revised (SQ-R) and Empathy Quotient (EQ). Brain Research, 1079(1), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.01.012
Couple Communication
Effective communication is paramount in couples therapy. Understanding each partner's empathizing and systemizing communication styles facilitates the implementation of tailored interventions. The Gottman Method's emphasis on the "Softened Startup" and "Repair Attempts" aligns seamlessly with the need to adapt communication strategies.
Balancing emotional expression and rational problem-solving:
The interplay between empathizing and systemizing tendencies often surfaces during conflicts. Empathizing individuals may prioritize emotional expression, seeking understanding and validation, while systemizing humans may lean towards logical problem-solving.
In couples therapy, achieving a balance between these two approaches is paramount, resonating with Gottman's emphasis on constructive conflict resolution (Gottman & Gottman, 2015).
The E-S Theory Framework
Empathizing Dimension:
Empathizing is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others. Humans who score high on the empathizing dimension are often characterized by their social and interpersonal skills. This involves the capacity to recognize emotions, respond appropriately, and navigate social situations effectively.
Empathizers tend to be attuned to the emotional states of those around them.
They are skilled in interpreting facial expressions, body language, and verbal cues. This dimension is crucial for building and maintaining social relationships, fostering empathy, and connecting with others on an emotional level.
Systemizing Dimension:
Systemizing, on the other hand, refers to the drive to analyze and build systems.
Individuals who score high on the systemizing dimension are often logical, analytical, and interested in understanding how things work. This cognitive style involves the exploration of patterns, rules, and structures to gain insights into the underlying mechanisms of various phenomena.
Systemizers may excel in fields such as science, engineering, mathematics, and technology.
Their ability to recognize patterns and formulate systematic approaches allows them to navigate complex systems efficiently. The systemizing dimension represents a cognitive style that leans toward analytical thinking and a fascination with the intricacies of the world.
Measuring E-S Cognitive Styles
Baron-Cohen and his colleagues developed the Empathizing Quotient (EQ) and the Systemizing Quotient (SQ) as tools to assess individual cognitive styles along the empathizing and systemizing dimensions. These self-report questionnaires provide a quantitative measure of where individuals fall on the empathizing-systemizing spectrum.
Empathizing Quotient (EQ):
The EQ measures one's ability to empathize with others. Individuals with higher EQ scores are likely to be more sensitive to emotions, have a greater capacity for understanding social dynamics, and excel in interpersonal relationships. The EQ questionnaire includes items that assess empathy in various contexts, such as understanding others' feelings, responding to emotional cues, and engaging in compassionate behavior.
Systemizing Quotient (SQ):
The SQ assesses the degree to which an individual is inclined toward systemizing activities. Higher SQ scores indicate a stronger interest in understanding and constructing systems. The SQ questionnaire includes items related to analytical thinking, interest in patterns, and a preference for systematic approaches in problem-solving.
Neurological basis of E-S Theory
Neurobiological Correlates:
Baron-Cohen suggests that the empathizing and systemizing dimensions are associated with distinct neurobiological profiles. He proposes that the female brain tends to show a more empathic cognitive style, while the male brain tends to exhibit a more systemizing cognitive style.
However, it's important to note that these differences exist on a continuum, and individual variations are vast.
Extreme Male Brain (EMB) Theory:
Building on the E-S theory, Baron-Cohen introduced the concept of the Extreme Male Brain (EMB). According to this theory, individuals with autism spectrum conditions (ASC) may demonstrate an extreme expression of the systemizing cognitive style, leading to challenges in empathizing. This theory provides a framework for understanding the cognitive profile of individuals with autism, emphasizing their strengths in systemizing activities.
Applications of the E-S Theory
Understanding Neurodiversity:
The E-S theory has significant implications for understanding neurodiversity. Neurodiversity emphasizes that neurological differences, such as those found in autism, ADHD, and dyslexia, are natural human variations rather than deficits. The E-S framework helps elucidate the cognitive strengths and challenges associated with different neurodivergent conditions.
Occupational Preferences:
The E-S theory has been applied to investigate occupational preferences and choices. Humans with high empathizing tendencies may be drawn to professions that involve caregiving, counseling, or social work. In contrast, those with high systemizing tendencies may gravitate toward careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
Educational Interventions:
Understanding the richness of difference in human cognitive styles can inform educational interventions. Tailoring teaching methods to accommodate diverse cognitive profiles may enhance learning outcomes. For example, recognizing and supporting the systemizing strengths of neurodivergent humans can facilitate their success in specific academic areas.
Criticisms and controversies of E-S Theory…
While the E-S theory has provided valuable insights into cognitive diversity, it has faced criticism and generated debates within the scientific community. Some critiques include concerns about oversimplification, gender stereotyping, and the limited scope of the empathizing and systemizing dimensions. Ongoing research aims to refine, test, and expand the theoretical framework, and it seems to be a rich vein of exploration.
Baron-Cohen has faced criticism by some for his "empathizing-systemizing theory", which states that humans may be classified on the basis of their scores along two dimensions (empathizing and systemizing); and that females tend to score higher on the empathizing dimension and males tend to score higher on the systemizing dimension.
In other words, Simon catches a lot of sh*t for his ideas.
Feminist scientists, including Cordelia Fine, neuroscientist Gina Rippon, and Lise Eliot have opposed his extreme male brain theory of autism, calling it "neurotrash" and neurosexism.
Nothing like a respectful debate…. On the other hand, Rachel Cohen-Rottenberg offers many thoughtful critiques of Simon’s ideas. Here is but one of them:
Baron-Cohen utterly ignores the fact that men are socialized to be analytical, practical, and unemotional, while women are socialized to be intuitive, emotional, and sensitive.
Because Baron-Cohen, like many of his peers in the academic and scientific communities, remains oblivious to the cultural context in which he operates, many autistic women still go undiagnosed.
We’re just not “male” enough to show up on his radar.
Rachel Cohen Rottenberg
Rippon also argues against using "male" and "female" for describing different types of brains, and that brain types do not correspond to genders. Despite the fact that most neuroscientists disagree.
Baron-Cohen has defended the neuroscience of sex differences against charges of neurosexism, arguing that "Fine's neurosexism allegation is the mistaken blurring of science with politics", adding that "You can be a scientist interested in the nature of sex differences while being a clear supporter of equal opportunities and a firm opponent of all forms of discrimination in society."
Gottman, Baron-Cohen, and E-S Theory
Simon Baron-Cohen's Empathizing-Systemizing theory is contributed to my understanding of cognitive diversity, despite the controversy, I find his ideas bold and interesting.
By conceptualizing cognitive styles along the dimensions of empathizing and systemizing, this theory may be shedding light on human differences and their implications for various aspects of life, from intimate family relationships to occupational choices.
Ongoing research continues to explore the nuanced interplay between neurobiology, gender, and cognitive styles, deepening our understanding of the complex tapestry of human cognition.
While Simon’s model may be little more than a useful lie, I find the assertion of an ungendered brain unhelpful, and contradictory of my direct clinical experience. The ungendered brain is a more a political aspiration than a demonstrable fact.
That why it is still a minority scientific opinion in neuroscience. And no amount of name-calling and slamming will change that singular fact.
Can we keep the nonsense of politics out of the research lab, please?
Encouraging Mutual Understanding:
A central goal in couples therapy is fostering mutual understanding. By utilizing various exercises and interventions, couples are encouraged to appreciate and understand each other's unique strengths and preferences. I can easily see how The Gottman Method's Love Maps and Emotional Attunement concepts align with the need for partners to deepen their understanding of each other (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
Building a Shared Vision:
The Empathizing-Systemizing Theory may help in creating a shared vision for the future by acknowledging and leveraging the strengths of both empathizing and systematizing perspectives.
This aligns with the Gottman Method's principle of building a shared meaning in a relationship, fostering a collaborative approach to goal-setting (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
Embracing Flexibility and Adaptability:
Recognizing the fluidity of empathizing and systematizing tendencies in different contexts is crucial. Couples are encouraged to explore and understand this fluidity, promoting flexibility and adaptability in their interactions.
This resonates with the Gottman Method's focus on ongoing assessment and adjustment within relationships (Gottman & Silver, 1999).
Integration with Gottman Method Principles:
The Empathizing-Systemizing Theory shows distinct possibility for integration with the core principles of the Gottman Method, enhancing its eventual applicability in couples therapy.
Whether addressing the "Four Horsemen" of relationship deterioration, building love maps, or fostering shared meaning, the understanding of empathizing and systematizing tendencies adds an additional layer of rich neurodivergent nuance to therapeutic interventions.
Final Thoughts…
In the emerging realm of neurodiverse couples therapy, the Empathizing-Systematizing Theory might eventually be refined by AI to deepen our understanding of diverse characteristics that humans bring into a relationship from the get go!
By recognizing and appreciating the interplay between empathizing and systematizing tendencies, couples can embark on a journey of self-discovery and mutual understanding. I can help with that.
Through effective communication, collaborative problem-solving, and the creation of a shared vision, intimate partners can build resilient and fulfilling relationships that will endure through time.
As we continue to explore the intricate tapestry of human connections, the Empathizing-Systematizing Theory remains a fascinating approach in fostering healthy and thriving neurodiverse relationships.
The shining spark of truth cometh forth only after the clash of differing opinions. If after discussion, a decision be carried unanimously, well and good; but if, the Lord forbid, differences of opinion should arise, a majority of voices must prevail. Abdul Baha.
Science seeks consensus. Bur right now, we have, indeed, a clash of differing opinions concerning the nature of neurodiversity. I’m hoping that we can manage the heat of political differences without compromising good science.
But I’ll happily explore and discuss interesting ideas… and let’s also be prepared to toss them overboard when better ones come along.
Live well, stay kind, and Godspeed.
REFERENCES:
Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 358(1430), 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2002.1206
Baron-Cohen, S., & Wheelwright, S. (2004). The Empathy Quotient: An Investigation of Adults with Asperger Syndrome or High Functioning Autism, and Normal Sex Differences. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(2), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jadd.0000022607.19833.00
Gottman, J. M., & Silver, N. (1999). The Seven Principles for Making Marriage Work: A Practical Guide from the Country’s Foremost Relationship Expert. Harmony.
Gottman, J. M., & Gottman, J. S. (2015). The Man’s Guide to Women: Scientifically Proven Secrets from the Love Lab About What Women Really Want. Rodale Books.
