What do you think?
Rate this book
In cautarea rationala a dragostei adevarate
In cautarea rationala a dragostei adevarate. Stiinta relatiilor de cuplu fericite si durabile Tu la ce te uiti cand iti alegi partenerul sau partenera? Majoritatea oamenilor cauta fiinte atragatoare si bine situate social, insa cercetatorii au demonstrat ca nu acesta este lozul castigator. Noi functionam dupa reguli vechi de mii de ani, de cand supravietuirea era un lux, numai ca, in ultimii 150 de ani, odata cu cresterea duratei de viata si cu progresele din domeniul medicinei, regulile jocului selectiei partenerilor s-au schimbat. Una peste alta, nu avem la dispozitie decat 3 dorinte pentru a configura portretul alesului sau alesei inimii noastre, daca vrem sa avem o relatie stabila si fericita. Vei afla din paginile acestei carti cum au evoluat relatiile de cuplu de-a lungul timpului, care tip de personalitate si stil de atatament au prognosticul cel mai bun pentru un mariaj ca-n povesti, cum sa evaluezi trasaturile unui potential partener, ce sa eviti si asupra caror aspecte sa te opresti. Dragostea poate fi oarba, insa, cu un pic de ajutor din partea stiintei, vei reusi sa-ti gasesti drumul spre o fericire durabila in doi.
320 pages, Paperback
First published January 28, 2014
224 people are currently reading
4535 people want to read
About the author
Ty Tashiro
2 books75 followersTY TASHIRO is an author and relationship expert. In his forthcoming book, AWKWARD: The Science of Why We’re Socially Awkward and Why That’s Awesome, he explains why some of the same characteristics that make people feel socially awkward can be the same traits that propel them toward extraordinary achievements. He received his Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Minnesota and has been an award winning professor at the University of Maryland and University of Colorado. He lives in New York City.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 130 reviews
October 23, 2025
Imagine scientific research that can provide insights into the best traits to look for in a romantic partner. The Science of Happily Ever After: What Really Matters in the Quest for Enduring Love provides the results of extensive relationship research studies as well as tips about red flag behaviors. The book is about making smarter choices.
According to the book, being in love requires two essential ingredients: liking and lust. High degrees of liking are what researchers call quality friendships, and they are characterized by three components: fairness, kindness, and loyalty. Although 90% of people will marry in their lifetime, only three out of ten will find enduring love.
There are three steps to accurately see your romantic future:
1. Accurately observe important traits during the early stages of dating.
2. Find a reliable framework to help organize your observations.
3. Use the framework to estimate the chances of forming a satisfying and stable relationship.
The Big Five personality traits are:
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extroversion
Agreeable
Neuroticism
The Science of Happily Ever After: What Really Matters in the Quest for Enduring Love delves into each of the personality traits and how they impact relationship satisfaction. Interspersed throughout the book are stories about couples.
Fascinating and, at times, entertaining insights.
According to the book, being in love requires two essential ingredients: liking and lust. High degrees of liking are what researchers call quality friendships, and they are characterized by three components: fairness, kindness, and loyalty. Although 90% of people will marry in their lifetime, only three out of ten will find enduring love.
There are three steps to accurately see your romantic future:
1. Accurately observe important traits during the early stages of dating.
2. Find a reliable framework to help organize your observations.
3. Use the framework to estimate the chances of forming a satisfying and stable relationship.
The Big Five personality traits are:
Openness
Conscientiousness
Extroversion
Agreeable
Neuroticism
The Science of Happily Ever After: What Really Matters in the Quest for Enduring Love delves into each of the personality traits and how they impact relationship satisfaction. Interspersed throughout the book are stories about couples.
Fascinating and, at times, entertaining insights.
October 18, 2014
The Science of Happily Ever After is a frustrating book, flitting between being a helpful snapshot of current information about long-term relationships--a purely descriptive one-- and a much more ambitious work that attempts to delve into that (arguably) unavoidably irrational facet of people's lives and impose order through collecting insights from the empirical literature of psychology. In the former, it succeeds. In the latter, it fails, exhibiting two bad tendencies of social science books written for a general audience: it blithely infers causation from broad empirical studies showing correlations, and tries to enliven them through anecdotes. When veering into the second area, Tashiro's writing takes the worst of Malcolm Gladwell (oversimplifying, yet without Gladwell's skillful storytelling) and mixes it with an undergraduate-economics-student-like satisfaction in stating the conclusion of an empirical study as if a causal link is unmistakably present.
First, the good. Tashiro shows how dire the status quo is re: marriages: there's the Census's 50% divorce rate, plus 10% of permanently separated but not legally divorced couples, plus 7% chronically unhappy couples means that 1/3 of couples who marry end up having a "successful" marriage. (12-13) Lust declines rapidly post-honeymoon (18), so couples' only chance is to constantly strengthen their "liking" for each other. Who are these couples who survive/thrive? Their chances are better if individually they're (1) not very neurotic, (2) in low need of novelty (decreasing the chance of cheating), and (3) generally kind people. (173-181) Truly ground-breaking insights[...] although at least now they're empirically supported.
The trouble with this book is that (as I'm sure Tashiro himself realized) the above findings aren't too interesting. He adds some useful tips-- family/friends are better judges of potential partners than you are due to your blinders, and personality traits are fairly stable over time, so don't bank on changing your partner--and again, while obvious, he has rigorous support for these propositions.
However he (in my opinion) makes the correlation-to-causality jump recklessly in his main argument in the book, which is that his findings (in the paragraph two above) justify calling certain personalities (e.g., those less prone to worry) "better" than others (e.g. pg. 77)--better in the sense that all else equal that person will have a greater chance of a successful marriage--and that his readers should base their future dating/partner selection decisions on finding the best personality they can. It's a reckless jump because he doesn't inquire into any of the mechanisms by which people (all of whom have some combination of the 5 basic personality traits he relies on) interact, and he doesn't discuss whether there's any variation depending on one partner's personality (actually, he does once, briefly, and the findings undercut his main thesis--"neurotics were actually more likely to break up with partners who were low in neuroticism compared to partners who were high in neuroticism" (175))--by showing that for one group of people, choosing a partner with a "better" personality would lead to a higher chance of breaking up).
In this sense, his book's conclusion seems light-years behind a dating website with an algorithm that improves over time: the latter says: given your combination of personality (and other) characteristics and our database of prior interactions among people with varying personality (and other) characteristics, these potential partners have the highest percent chance of success for you. Tashiro can only offer that, all else equal, these potential partners will have the highest percent chance of success. If anything, all of the one-on-one interactions over the course of a relationship seems like they demand the most personalized inquiry. Tashiro exalts his data-based approach by comparing it to what most people actually do, which is (he asserts, with some empirical support) essentially date someone you're very attracted to, leaving the rest (i.e. their personality) largely to chance. If you characterize his approach as being thoughtful/deliberative, then great, but again I think he over-reaches, and essentially says: aim for someone with the "best" personality you can get, neglecting [I would argue presumptively huge] between-personality effects. I guess really, all he needs is more data, and then he can write a second book that's a sort of open-source dating algorithm: if you have ABCD personality, DWJC personality and you have the best chance of success. But as it is I thought his argument was weak; again, maybe because the 21st century has spoiled me by constantly allowing me receive individualized feedback (see, e.g., Goodreads providing personalized book recommendations for me; Netflix doing the same for movies).
First, the good. Tashiro shows how dire the status quo is re: marriages: there's the Census's 50% divorce rate, plus 10% of permanently separated but not legally divorced couples, plus 7% chronically unhappy couples means that 1/3 of couples who marry end up having a "successful" marriage. (12-13) Lust declines rapidly post-honeymoon (18), so couples' only chance is to constantly strengthen their "liking" for each other. Who are these couples who survive/thrive? Their chances are better if individually they're (1) not very neurotic, (2) in low need of novelty (decreasing the chance of cheating), and (3) generally kind people. (173-181) Truly ground-breaking insights[...] although at least now they're empirically supported.
The trouble with this book is that (as I'm sure Tashiro himself realized) the above findings aren't too interesting. He adds some useful tips-- family/friends are better judges of potential partners than you are due to your blinders, and personality traits are fairly stable over time, so don't bank on changing your partner--and again, while obvious, he has rigorous support for these propositions.
However he (in my opinion) makes the correlation-to-causality jump recklessly in his main argument in the book, which is that his findings (in the paragraph two above) justify calling certain personalities (e.g., those less prone to worry) "better" than others (e.g. pg. 77)--better in the sense that all else equal that person will have a greater chance of a successful marriage--and that his readers should base their future dating/partner selection decisions on finding the best personality they can. It's a reckless jump because he doesn't inquire into any of the mechanisms by which people (all of whom have some combination of the 5 basic personality traits he relies on) interact, and he doesn't discuss whether there's any variation depending on one partner's personality (actually, he does once, briefly, and the findings undercut his main thesis--"neurotics were actually more likely to break up with partners who were low in neuroticism compared to partners who were high in neuroticism" (175))--by showing that for one group of people, choosing a partner with a "better" personality would lead to a higher chance of breaking up).
In this sense, his book's conclusion seems light-years behind a dating website with an algorithm that improves over time: the latter says: given your combination of personality (and other) characteristics and our database of prior interactions among people with varying personality (and other) characteristics, these potential partners have the highest percent chance of success for you. Tashiro can only offer that, all else equal, these potential partners will have the highest percent chance of success. If anything, all of the one-on-one interactions over the course of a relationship seems like they demand the most personalized inquiry. Tashiro exalts his data-based approach by comparing it to what most people actually do, which is (he asserts, with some empirical support) essentially date someone you're very attracted to, leaving the rest (i.e. their personality) largely to chance. If you characterize his approach as being thoughtful/deliberative, then great, but again I think he over-reaches, and essentially says: aim for someone with the "best" personality you can get, neglecting [I would argue presumptively huge] between-personality effects. I guess really, all he needs is more data, and then he can write a second book that's a sort of open-source dating algorithm: if you have ABCD personality, DWJC personality and you have the best chance of success. But as it is I thought his argument was weak; again, maybe because the 21st century has spoiled me by constantly allowing me receive individualized feedback (see, e.g., Goodreads providing personalized book recommendations for me; Netflix doing the same for movies).
July 29, 2015
The biggest issue I have with this book as a fellow counseling psychologist, is that the author throws around the 50-60% divorce rate without providing the nuance it deserves. The rates are about half that high for people with higher levels of education and people who wait until after 25 to get married. Painting the marriage landscape as that bleak seemed disingenuous.
August 14, 2015
I really liked how the book is presented with practical information and easy to follow advice. I felt the stories might have been a bit distracting (as page fillers per se) though I did enjoy them nonetheless.
NOTES
There are 4 types of love
Liking declines at 3%/yr (Fairness and Loyalty)
Lust declines at 8%/yr (Biological impulses)
It's better to invest disproportionately in Liking versus Lust
3 out of 10 couples live happily ever after
Divorce rate is 50% and then there are another 15% that are in unhappy relationships, so the unhappiness rate is somewhere around 67%. So the glass is really 1/3 full.
Find three traits that matter to you when looking for a mate, you only have 3 choices given the laws of probability
Check out the mate dollars game
Studies show that social level, kindness, and attractiveness.
Men invest in attractiveness and women invest in resources according to sexual strategies theory by Dr. David Buss
Physical attractiveness is a key component for short term mating strategy while kindness and conscientiousness is dominant in long term mating strategies
People tend to hold onto partners as time continues due to sunken costs and time wasted
We focus too much on what a relationship was and idealize what it can be due to romantic era hopes
As long as you are above the poverty line, and basic needs are met, then relationship stability isn't going to be anchored on wealth
The key to successful relationships is finding win-win situations in which both parties are compromising
Predicting love ch6
1. Accurately observe important traits when dating
Traits are critical to determine happinessPersonality traits, attachment styles and Relationship markersPersonality traits are heritable and stableWYSIWYGAttachment styles are a result of the parenting environmentRelationship markers how partners think of the cause of relationship problems, how partners ask for what they want, and how partners magnify positive aspect of the relationship
2. Find a reliable framework to organize those observations
3. Use that framework to predict a stable and satisfying relationship
PERSONALITY TRAITS
Highly geneticBig 5 model of personality traitsOpeness to experienceAgreeablenessGet people to report on themselves though people can skew results depending on their motivationDoing a partner report can also be biased due to relationship motivationsRatings or friends and family. They know bestGetting a read from multiple sources is very useful. Do a self assessment, assess your partner, then get friends and family to throw in their opinions so you can better average out what those traits are and how important they are to youNeuroticism- how people react in stressful situations (e.g. standing in a line, airport security, etc.) This is one of the most important factors when considering relationship stabilityNovelty seekers (fun, spontaneous, exciting) is coorelated with increased risk for substance abuse, abusive behavior, and explosiveness when they feel the relationship is being threatened. Are more likely to burn out faster when the relationship stagnates.Agreeableness is a great relationship predictorLow neuroticism, medium novelty seeking, and high agreeableness
Ch8
Attachment styles
John Bolby did the initial research on attachment styles
Strange situated method: How did I respond when my mom would drop me off in pre-k? Did I play with toys close to you? Did I venture far?
Ch9 RED FLAGS IN THE RELATIONSHIPS
John Gottman - emotional bank account for the partners (5 positive behaviors nulifies 1 negative comment)
Negative partner attributions
Stable - unlikely to change
Global- affect many parts
Intent
Partners who impose trait like character attributions result in more instability and dysfunction
Demand/Withdraw pattern: if you withdraw- then you need to learn to stand your ground on certain issues. This is a substantial red flag as it takes a strong toll on your relationship.
How to amplify the positives in the relationship:
* (sharing good news and being validated by your partner), 1. Choose a partner that shares their good and positive stories
2. Choose a partner who is attentive and empathic enough to understand the magnitude of importance of the good/positive event
3. Choose a partner that is secure enough to believe that you are being sincere when responding to their feelings. That way they don't actively or passively discount the genuineness of your happiness about their accomplishment.
Grow your emotional bank account by investing in partners who don't impose partner attributions and don't engage in the demand/withdraw pattern, and seek those who can enhance the benefits of capitalization.
Ch10
MAKING YOUR DREAMS COME TRUE
Happily ever after CAN come true
Settle for nothing less
Take action to make your dreams come true
1. Clarify your ultimate goal
* What do you want in your love life?
2. Diagnose what you usually wish for
* Identify your partner selection patterns from previous relationships
* How have your past partners rewarded you (e.g. novelty seekers are fun)? Or sheltered you (e.g. made you feel safe)?
* Become aware of what kind of partners you have been choosing and the risks that come with those partners
3. Focus on the three traits you want in a partner
* "I am wishing for someone who..."
For this exercise, list 10 traits that you'd like and then rank order these items based on your order of priority
4. Devise a structured plan of action to act on your three wishes
* Break down your goal into smaller pieces
5. Evaluate your progress
* Track your small victories
* Brainstorm your successes with your friends and family
TAKE ACTION
NOTES
There are 4 types of love
Liking declines at 3%/yr (Fairness and Loyalty)
Lust declines at 8%/yr (Biological impulses)
It's better to invest disproportionately in Liking versus Lust
3 out of 10 couples live happily ever after
Divorce rate is 50% and then there are another 15% that are in unhappy relationships, so the unhappiness rate is somewhere around 67%. So the glass is really 1/3 full.
Find three traits that matter to you when looking for a mate, you only have 3 choices given the laws of probability
Check out the mate dollars game
Studies show that social level, kindness, and attractiveness.
Men invest in attractiveness and women invest in resources according to sexual strategies theory by Dr. David Buss
Physical attractiveness is a key component for short term mating strategy while kindness and conscientiousness is dominant in long term mating strategies
People tend to hold onto partners as time continues due to sunken costs and time wasted
We focus too much on what a relationship was and idealize what it can be due to romantic era hopes
As long as you are above the poverty line, and basic needs are met, then relationship stability isn't going to be anchored on wealth
The key to successful relationships is finding win-win situations in which both parties are compromising
Predicting love ch6
1. Accurately observe important traits when dating
Traits are critical to determine happinessPersonality traits, attachment styles and Relationship markersPersonality traits are heritable and stableWYSIWYGAttachment styles are a result of the parenting environmentRelationship markers how partners think of the cause of relationship problems, how partners ask for what they want, and how partners magnify positive aspect of the relationship
2. Find a reliable framework to organize those observations
3. Use that framework to predict a stable and satisfying relationship
PERSONALITY TRAITS
Highly geneticBig 5 model of personality traitsOpeness to experienceAgreeablenessGet people to report on themselves though people can skew results depending on their motivationDoing a partner report can also be biased due to relationship motivationsRatings or friends and family. They know bestGetting a read from multiple sources is very useful. Do a self assessment, assess your partner, then get friends and family to throw in their opinions so you can better average out what those traits are and how important they are to youNeuroticism- how people react in stressful situations (e.g. standing in a line, airport security, etc.) This is one of the most important factors when considering relationship stabilityNovelty seekers (fun, spontaneous, exciting) is coorelated with increased risk for substance abuse, abusive behavior, and explosiveness when they feel the relationship is being threatened. Are more likely to burn out faster when the relationship stagnates.Agreeableness is a great relationship predictorLow neuroticism, medium novelty seeking, and high agreeableness
Ch8
Attachment styles
John Bolby did the initial research on attachment styles
Strange situated method: How did I respond when my mom would drop me off in pre-k? Did I play with toys close to you? Did I venture far?
Ch9 RED FLAGS IN THE RELATIONSHIPS
John Gottman - emotional bank account for the partners (5 positive behaviors nulifies 1 negative comment)
Negative partner attributions
Stable - unlikely to change
Global- affect many parts
Intent
Partners who impose trait like character attributions result in more instability and dysfunction
Demand/Withdraw pattern: if you withdraw- then you need to learn to stand your ground on certain issues. This is a substantial red flag as it takes a strong toll on your relationship.
How to amplify the positives in the relationship:
* (sharing good news and being validated by your partner), 1. Choose a partner that shares their good and positive stories
2. Choose a partner who is attentive and empathic enough to understand the magnitude of importance of the good/positive event
3. Choose a partner that is secure enough to believe that you are being sincere when responding to their feelings. That way they don't actively or passively discount the genuineness of your happiness about their accomplishment.
Grow your emotional bank account by investing in partners who don't impose partner attributions and don't engage in the demand/withdraw pattern, and seek those who can enhance the benefits of capitalization.
Ch10
MAKING YOUR DREAMS COME TRUE
Happily ever after CAN come true
Settle for nothing less
Take action to make your dreams come true
1. Clarify your ultimate goal
* What do you want in your love life?
2. Diagnose what you usually wish for
* Identify your partner selection patterns from previous relationships
* How have your past partners rewarded you (e.g. novelty seekers are fun)? Or sheltered you (e.g. made you feel safe)?
* Become aware of what kind of partners you have been choosing and the risks that come with those partners
3. Focus on the three traits you want in a partner
* "I am wishing for someone who..."
For this exercise, list 10 traits that you'd like and then rank order these items based on your order of priority
4. Devise a structured plan of action to act on your three wishes
* Break down your goal into smaller pieces
5. Evaluate your progress
* Track your small victories
* Brainstorm your successes with your friends and family
TAKE ACTION
May 24, 2015
This book started out well, but mostly it just made me depressed. Humans are complicated and messy and terrible and wonderful. Despite the author's warning that singles cannot wish for too many things in a partner, "The Science of Happily Ever After" makes it seem like you actually do need to check off a bunch of boxes before considering a long-term relationship with someone. Neurotic? Let them go. Thrill-seeking? Nope. Doesn't have the greatest parents? Drop them.
My real question is...what happens when you see yourself in one of the characteristics he warns about? I'd be curious to know how the author himself feels he stacks up as a potential romantic partner -- does he truly think most people, himself included, would meet all the prerequisites he outlines? Now that would be enlightening.
My real question is...what happens when you see yourself in one of the characteristics he warns about? I'd be curious to know how the author himself feels he stacks up as a potential romantic partner -- does he truly think most people, himself included, would meet all the prerequisites he outlines? Now that would be enlightening.
January 7, 2016
First off, I just want to say that this was a very well researched book and I believe it has a lot of good insight into why often many people divorce or stay married unhappily. That being said, I completely understand why a lot of people who would read this book would not like it. It is a very frank look, an honest look at how we look at ourselves, and many people out there are not relationship material and siting this out can have a backlash from people who have troubles with love frequently, often not because of they don't want a relationship, but because they struggle with a lot of problems, be it anxiety, depression, personality disorders, or other mental disorders and many who just struggle with a myriad of health problems and/or low self esteem. I can see why many people might take offense to this book, but this book is not without hope or without help. I, myself, struggle with bipolar disorder and know that when it comes to finding a stable mate that the odds are against me, simply because of my own personal problems, but that does not mean, and even the author of this book CLEARLY states in the book, that you are forever doomed because of your problems. It is about how you act and react to your partner and situations therein the relationship that determine whether or not your relationship can work out. None of us are perfect, he says so himself, and we all carry baggage. Some of us just have more than others. You have to be supportive in a relationship. You have to care about your partner and their feelings and make an effort to work things out. Relationships take work and that's with any relationship you have, be it romantic or familial or friendship. None of us can change our pasts, nor can we always change our characteristics (not all of us come from loving, securely bonded homes; nearly half of us have anxious or avoidant bonds with our familial roots), but that does not mean we can't make ourselves better with what we can do. We have to be brave enough in relationships to know when we have to act. If anything at all, this helped me realize the patterns of mistakes I have made in previous relationships. Sex is a good thing and means a lot, but it also shouldn't mean everything, just like so many other characteristics in any romantic relationship. Being able to spot red flags in potential mates ahead of time is a godsend (and when I say "red flags", I mean like characteristics like "possessive", "controlling", "abusive", "apathetic", "verbally abusive", "angry", etc. Your obvious relationship killers, which are not always easy to spot right away, especially with guys who are good liars). Using your friends/counterparts to help spot these ahead of time is a great idea, seeing in how we all often get lost when we are within the relationship (so long as it isn't like an interrogation).
There is no easy way to find a mate, no quick fixes, but many of the traits Tashiro mentions in his book (agreeableness, novelty seeking, attachment type) are very good starting points.
My only complaint about this book is that the author uses the study from the 1990's about how 1 in 2 marriages ends in divorce. That study that was done then was not a good study, as it did it not accurately depict the real picture of divorce in America. It didn't count the people in the relationships right from the start, because it didn't show who got divorced then remarried and divorced again. That study was not at all done well. So even though Tashiro says that only 30% of us end up with happy marriages, I honestly think it's a little higher than that. Maybe by 8%. Not a drastic difference, I'm sure, but I get what he was saying.
There is no easy way to find a mate, no quick fixes, but many of the traits Tashiro mentions in his book (agreeableness, novelty seeking, attachment type) are very good starting points.
My only complaint about this book is that the author uses the study from the 1990's about how 1 in 2 marriages ends in divorce. That study that was done then was not a good study, as it did it not accurately depict the real picture of divorce in America. It didn't count the people in the relationships right from the start, because it didn't show who got divorced then remarried and divorced again. That study was not at all done well. So even though Tashiro says that only 30% of us end up with happy marriages, I honestly think it's a little higher than that. Maybe by 8%. Not a drastic difference, I'm sure, but I get what he was saying.
April 9, 2014
This book is entertainingly written and informative.
The reason it is just "OK" to me that it is almost too entertaining and well-written. Author Ty Tashiro is moving into "glib" territory.
Plus, although I recognize that he is going to fictionalize his anecdotes, at least one of the anecdotes he uses moves into complete unreality. At one point, he talks about a teen who loses her virginity on Christmas Eve and then spends the next week *at school* worrying about whether or not she is pregnant. No school is in session the week after Christmas. Yes, I'm quibbling -- but there are a number of little instances where unnecessary details are added that only highlight the fact Tashiro is using a (probably completely) made-up story.
Also, the book jacket copy promises the answers to questions that I had to search to find afterwards and weren't actually major parts of the book.
Finally, this is main premise: That you only get to pick three major traits in your partner before making it statistically impossible that you will find someone who meets all the measures. I understand the math, but I don't buy it.
My husband of nearly 20 years had a huge list of bizarre and picky "requirements" for his spouse. I ain't all that wonderful, and I met far more than three of them.
I think there's far more to the reasons why people have trouble finding a partner -- it's not that all people are picky about their requirements but that they don't recognize when someone meets them. I know I didn't. A lot of it seems to about being open to different people who have been put in your path.
The reason it is just "OK" to me that it is almost too entertaining and well-written. Author Ty Tashiro is moving into "glib" territory.
Plus, although I recognize that he is going to fictionalize his anecdotes, at least one of the anecdotes he uses moves into complete unreality. At one point, he talks about a teen who loses her virginity on Christmas Eve and then spends the next week *at school* worrying about whether or not she is pregnant. No school is in session the week after Christmas. Yes, I'm quibbling -- but there are a number of little instances where unnecessary details are added that only highlight the fact Tashiro is using a (probably completely) made-up story.
Also, the book jacket copy promises the answers to questions that I had to search to find afterwards and weren't actually major parts of the book.
Finally, this is main premise: That you only get to pick three major traits in your partner before making it statistically impossible that you will find someone who meets all the measures. I understand the math, but I don't buy it.
My husband of nearly 20 years had a huge list of bizarre and picky "requirements" for his spouse. I ain't all that wonderful, and I met far more than three of them.
I think there's far more to the reasons why people have trouble finding a partner -- it's not that all people are picky about their requirements but that they don't recognize when someone meets them. I know I didn't. A lot of it seems to about being open to different people who have been put in your path.
July 28, 2014
I have mixed feelings about this one.
First, reading this book on kindle is just a pain. It's not only difficult from a reading perspective, but for a self-help genre book, it's criminal that the setup is making it harder for the reader to take away messages and organize their thoughts. It's one of those books that relies a lot on lists and headings and diagrams and this and that, things that work really well in a digestible chunk on a page. On my kindle set to the font size that I find comfortable? It gets cumbersome and confusing.
Add that to the slightly repetitive nature of the word choice and the subject matter, a reader like me starts to resent the text/setup and start skimming. I picked this book up for a reason, for goodness knows I don't have years to read about attractiveness studies and attachment styles and what have you, a summary will do, thank you very much. And after I had read the book, sure, I had a summary. But I felt a little cheated, for a long form article and an interactive workbook analyzing yourself and past partners would have been far more worth a reader's time. Or even better, testing yourself on being able to discern the lessons on real life situation would be great...have a website, show videos that help you train yourself to analyze people and situations similarly to how they describe. It's frustrating to be told "don't rely on yes/no answers to determine is someone is high on the neuroticism scale" but then be told nowhere near enough on interpreting open-ended situations.
Obviously, I appreciate the time he spent summarizing the literature in a complicated field, but really, brevity and real-world examples to train interested readers would have served him better.
First, reading this book on kindle is just a pain. It's not only difficult from a reading perspective, but for a self-help genre book, it's criminal that the setup is making it harder for the reader to take away messages and organize their thoughts. It's one of those books that relies a lot on lists and headings and diagrams and this and that, things that work really well in a digestible chunk on a page. On my kindle set to the font size that I find comfortable? It gets cumbersome and confusing.
Add that to the slightly repetitive nature of the word choice and the subject matter, a reader like me starts to resent the text/setup and start skimming. I picked this book up for a reason, for goodness knows I don't have years to read about attractiveness studies and attachment styles and what have you, a summary will do, thank you very much. And after I had read the book, sure, I had a summary. But I felt a little cheated, for a long form article and an interactive workbook analyzing yourself and past partners would have been far more worth a reader's time. Or even better, testing yourself on being able to discern the lessons on real life situation would be great...have a website, show videos that help you train yourself to analyze people and situations similarly to how they describe. It's frustrating to be told "don't rely on yes/no answers to determine is someone is high on the neuroticism scale" but then be told nowhere near enough on interpreting open-ended situations.
Obviously, I appreciate the time he spent summarizing the literature in a complicated field, but really, brevity and real-world examples to train interested readers would have served him better.
August 9, 2019
2.3 - I think this had potential, and it is a pretty decent accumulation of romantic studies, but I think the overall issue I have is that it is TOO simplistic, to the extent it's sort of just pointing out the obvious. Anything that's not a 'duh' moment is often so beyond normal human interaction or comprehension. no one is going to sit on the first date testing for neuroticism. no one is going to ask their friends to fill out a ranking survey after they meet their other half. it's just not practical. so while this is a great collection of studies - tho often oversimplified to the point that you almost forget correlation =/= causation - I think the idea this would ever be marketed as a self help book is just.....misguided.
April 2, 2014
I enjoyed the book in that it gave the reader another perspective on the art of finding a good mate. it gave the reader a few things to consider when choosing a mate, that may not have been considered when choosing a partner for a long term relationship. Easy to read, but it read like a thesis paper with the evident structure of that type of writing. The few interjections of real life episodes was entertaining and I would have liked to follow out those relationships a little farther to provide the reader with a visual they can relate to. There was a lot of studies to support the Author's viewpoint, but it concerned me that many of these studies were small in nature.
A little on the dry side for me, to much documentation of studies and not enough getting into the nitty gritty of proposed viewpoint. I would have like to read more of the author's viewpoint as it related to real life situations and how to utilize the strategies that were proposed.
All in all not a bad book though.
A little on the dry side for me, to much documentation of studies and not enough getting into the nitty gritty of proposed viewpoint. I would have like to read more of the author's viewpoint as it related to real life situations and how to utilize the strategies that were proposed.
All in all not a bad book though.
August 30, 2023
The Science of Happily Ever After, authored by Ty Tashiro, is a book that delves into the science behind relationships and provides practical tips for individuals seeking to make wise and informed choices when it comes to choosing a partner. Tashiro presents his argument in three parts, with the first part setting the foundation for his argument by highlighting the fact that over two-thirds of couples end up unhappy, and that people often use primitive instincts when selecting a partner, despite these instincts becoming irrelevant in modern society.
In the second part of the book, Tashiro explores why these instincts are irrelevant by providing scientific studies that examine the relationship between certain desires and martial satisfaction. He argues that these desires do not necessarily lead to the satisfaction that individuals anticipate. The third part of the book provides practical tips on how to make informed choices when looking for a partner, suggesting that individuals should focus on emotional stability and good personality traits rather than physical attractiveness or wealth.
The book is informative and provides useful knowledge for readers seeking to understand relationship dynamics from a psychological perspective. The practical tips in the third part of the book are particularly helpful for individuals seeking to understand their own self-dynamics in relationships. However, the author's argument is not always coherently built, and he tends to create complex assumptions based on limited informations. Additionally, some of the facts and arguments presented in the book may be irrelevant to non-western readers, as they may not apply to their cultural situations.
Overall, the book was an enjoyable read and quite informative.
In the second part of the book, Tashiro explores why these instincts are irrelevant by providing scientific studies that examine the relationship between certain desires and martial satisfaction. He argues that these desires do not necessarily lead to the satisfaction that individuals anticipate. The third part of the book provides practical tips on how to make informed choices when looking for a partner, suggesting that individuals should focus on emotional stability and good personality traits rather than physical attractiveness or wealth.
The book is informative and provides useful knowledge for readers seeking to understand relationship dynamics from a psychological perspective. The practical tips in the third part of the book are particularly helpful for individuals seeking to understand their own self-dynamics in relationships. However, the author's argument is not always coherently built, and he tends to create complex assumptions based on limited informations. Additionally, some of the facts and arguments presented in the book may be irrelevant to non-western readers, as they may not apply to their cultural situations.
Overall, the book was an enjoyable read and quite informative.
October 28, 2020
This book exemplifies a lot of the problems of pop psychology and especially pop psychology about relationships: using studies to tell a story and asserting that that story is true, without recognizing that other stories are equally plausible based on the data; telling a story about how people are X way because of evolution without any mention of social and cultural factors (particularly yikes when the story is about gender and gender differences in attraction); gender essentialist, doesn't mention trans people, and barely acknowledges same-sex couples/attraction; anecdotes/analogies which are supposed to make the science accessible but which end up taking up a lot of space and feel vaguely condescending; and an attempt at a scientific tone of voice when talking about attraction/physical appearance that comes off a little creepy from a male author. It was also written rather poorly. And there was one anecdote in which (tw: domestic violence)
December 1, 2021
You can only make 3 wishes when choosing a romantic partner.
What are your 3 wishes?
This book is about the psychology of love and relationships. 💕
Tashiro explains the science behind what makes a lasting relationship and what you should really wish for.
✨ Why do we ignore our own wishes?
✨ Why do we fall for the beauty trap?
✨ Does money really make happy relationships?
✨ Which personality traits are important?
✨ Why do friends and in-laws matter?
✨ How can we get good at looking for red flags?
I thoroughly enjoyed reading, reflecting on my own wishes.
As interesting as the book and it’s research were, there’s one thing I disagreed with — making a wish list. Instead, I think our wishes should be not be what we want from a partner but what we want to preserve in ourselves and what we can offer.
1. Curiosity
2. Peaceful
3. Playful
What are your 3 wishes?
This book is about the psychology of love and relationships. 💕
Tashiro explains the science behind what makes a lasting relationship and what you should really wish for.
✨ Why do we ignore our own wishes?
✨ Why do we fall for the beauty trap?
✨ Does money really make happy relationships?
✨ Which personality traits are important?
✨ Why do friends and in-laws matter?
✨ How can we get good at looking for red flags?
I thoroughly enjoyed reading, reflecting on my own wishes.
As interesting as the book and it’s research were, there’s one thing I disagreed with — making a wish list. Instead, I think our wishes should be not be what we want from a partner but what we want to preserve in ourselves and what we can offer.
1. Curiosity
2. Peaceful
3. Playful
April 13, 2014
I won this book in a Goodreads Giveaway and spent my time while reading thinking of single friends who would enjoy it. It takes a scientific look at what humans look for in a mate and why those traits may not lead to "happily ever after". I thought it was interesting and informative, and I could think back to my younger days and wish I had known then what I learned from Dr. Tashiro in this book. His recommendations make sense and are illustrated with examples from real-life people, which keeps it all quite entertaining. This book could be very useful if you are seeking that certain special someone. (I plan to give it to my younger daughter, who is actually in this seeking phase of her life.)
June 14, 2023
The book is a captivating exploration into the complexities of romantic relationships. Drawing from psychological research, Tashiro delves into the fascinating world of human connections, uncovering the factors that contribute to long-lasting love. One of the highlights of this book is Tashiro's ability to bridge the gap between scientific findings and real-life experiences. He presents the material in an accessible and engaging manner, making it relatable to readers of all backgrounds. By intertwining personal anecdotes, case studies, and empirical evidence, Tashiro offers a well-rounded perspective on the intricacies of romantic relationships.
The author takes a refreshing approach by challenging popular misconceptions about love and dispelling common myths that perpetuate unrealistic expectations. Tashiro highlights that statistically each single personality trait that we want our partner to have decimates the number of potential partners that we can choose from. Tashiro says that statistically most of us have about three such wishes before the chances of actually finding our ideal partner practically reaches zero. Thus, the author remarks that we must carefully choose our three wishes and align them with the goal of actually reaching"happily ever after".
The book offers some research-based personality traits that we should desire in out ideal partner: high in openness, but not too high; high in agreeableness; low on neuroticism; has a secure attachment style and others. I do not wholeheartedly agree with these suggestions. Of course, in general, most marriages would be happier if one of the partners did not have vices(people high in openness are prone to them), isn't a horrible person that is constantly disagreeing with everything, or isn't a constant nervous wreck for no reason at all. But I believe that two specific people can use their random set of personality traits for the benefit of their relationship if they have properly understood each other.
For example, a disagreeable partner can also be extremely honest and if well-intentioned to bring out the best in his partner - he would be more likely to speak up and tell his partner that he is slowly developing a vice, or simply going in a bad direction.
Some agreeable people would kindly let you build your own hell, as long as they don't seem unpleasant as you are building it.
Disagreeableness can also be helpful if a third party to the relationship intends to break it or to cause harm to the happiness of the partners. A disagreeable partner would be more likely to show such third party the door, and set up healthy boundaries between the partners and malevolent third parties, which definitely increases the chances of the partners to live happily ever after. Similar cases can be made for neuroticism, as a very relaxed partner can be too calm to see future threats for himself and the relationship, and would be less likely to take action to prevent them.
Attachment styles were something new for me and I shall have to read more about them.
What sets "The Science of Happily Ever After" apart is its emphasis on evidence-based insights. Tashiro supports his claims with solid scientific research, presenting studies and data to back up his arguments. This evidence-driven approach adds credibility to the book and enhances its value for readers seeking practical guidance.
The author takes a refreshing approach by challenging popular misconceptions about love and dispelling common myths that perpetuate unrealistic expectations. Tashiro highlights that statistically each single personality trait that we want our partner to have decimates the number of potential partners that we can choose from. Tashiro says that statistically most of us have about three such wishes before the chances of actually finding our ideal partner practically reaches zero. Thus, the author remarks that we must carefully choose our three wishes and align them with the goal of actually reaching"happily ever after".
The book offers some research-based personality traits that we should desire in out ideal partner: high in openness, but not too high; high in agreeableness; low on neuroticism; has a secure attachment style and others. I do not wholeheartedly agree with these suggestions. Of course, in general, most marriages would be happier if one of the partners did not have vices(people high in openness are prone to them), isn't a horrible person that is constantly disagreeing with everything, or isn't a constant nervous wreck for no reason at all. But I believe that two specific people can use their random set of personality traits for the benefit of their relationship if they have properly understood each other.
For example, a disagreeable partner can also be extremely honest and if well-intentioned to bring out the best in his partner - he would be more likely to speak up and tell his partner that he is slowly developing a vice, or simply going in a bad direction.
Some agreeable people would kindly let you build your own hell, as long as they don't seem unpleasant as you are building it.
Disagreeableness can also be helpful if a third party to the relationship intends to break it or to cause harm to the happiness of the partners. A disagreeable partner would be more likely to show such third party the door, and set up healthy boundaries between the partners and malevolent third parties, which definitely increases the chances of the partners to live happily ever after. Similar cases can be made for neuroticism, as a very relaxed partner can be too calm to see future threats for himself and the relationship, and would be less likely to take action to prevent them.
Attachment styles were something new for me and I shall have to read more about them.
What sets "The Science of Happily Ever After" apart is its emphasis on evidence-based insights. Tashiro supports his claims with solid scientific research, presenting studies and data to back up his arguments. This evidence-driven approach adds credibility to the book and enhances its value for readers seeking practical guidance.
October 1, 2019
A fast and interesting read where Tashiro pulls together lots of interesting studies and stories from his own friends and patients to illustrate what makes for (more) successful romantic relationships. Basically, when your friends and family express doubts and think your lover is a loser, it's best to listen to them. You are blinded by your infatuation and, in that state, have no idea what's best for you. Have a fling, if you must, but don't move in with or marry the person.
Personality traits stay pretty constant over a life time. Don't expect marriage or having kids to change them. And you can't have everything, so dump the laundry list of features you're looking for in a perfect mate. Tashiro runs the numbers, and each additional criterion winnows your choices frighteningly. You get to pick three things only, and he argues that you shouldn't waste them on wealth or wanting somebody hot.
It'd be nice if everyone dating had a website where their registered friends and family could submit anonymous scores about their date and the resulting relationship. Good scores? The person's probably a keeper. Bad scores? Run away while you can and wait for your feelings to pass.
Personality traits stay pretty constant over a life time. Don't expect marriage or having kids to change them. And you can't have everything, so dump the laundry list of features you're looking for in a perfect mate. Tashiro runs the numbers, and each additional criterion winnows your choices frighteningly. You get to pick three things only, and he argues that you shouldn't waste them on wealth or wanting somebody hot.
It'd be nice if everyone dating had a website where their registered friends and family could submit anonymous scores about their date and the resulting relationship. Good scores? The person's probably a keeper. Bad scores? Run away while you can and wait for your feelings to pass.
December 26, 2025
this book is full of humor, relatable stories, insightful research, and tangible goals/advice. Dr. Tashiro does an incredible job distilling an immense amount of information into extremely accessible prose. I learned a LOT about myself, my childhood, and why I’ve chose the partners that I have in the past. I’m looking forward to working through the last chapter about coming up with wishes and goals for a future partner in the days to come!!! I HIGHLY recommend this book!
August 5, 2024
I really loved this book. I used to pick my partners based on moment to moment feelings and I thought I needed a more structured approach. I think this book provides a good framework for making wise decisions in romantic relationships. My favourite part is that it is backed up by scientific evidence and it provides you with practical exercises to make better decisions. Highly recommend!
April 25, 2019
I saw this book name dropped when searching for books on the neuroscience of relationships. Unfortunately, it wasn't exactly the book I was hoping for, yet it is an entertaining read in its own right.
The Science of Happily Ever After by Ty Tashiro is a pop-sci book taking a data-driven approach to finding the partner of your life. The author defines "happily ever after" as a lasting relationship in which both liking and lust are fulfilled and describes which factors contribute to that outcome.
The book starts off with a simple assumption - by being too picky about potential partners we greatly diminish our chances of finding The One. Assuming normal and independent distributions, wishing for a partner with well-above-average looks, intelligence, and emotional stability might leave us with low odds of finding a partner. Adding a couple of more wishes creates a probabilistic impossibility. So, if we only get to pick three wishes it would be good to know what characteristics give the best "return of investment" for a stable relationship.
Most people squander their wishes selecting for looks, which don't predict relationship quality well and deteriorate over time; and wealth, which predicts relationship quality quite well - but only until a couple collectively escapes the poverty level. Than if those features aren't meaningful in the long run, what is?
The author proposes three framework of traits (immutable characteristics) that have some predictive power about relationship quality: personality, the relationship between the partner and his parents, and how the partner solves problems in a relationship. The book suggests which traits in these frameworks are desirable in a partner (high agreeableness, low neuroticism, trusting relations with parents, not-assigning blame when solving problems) and how to filter for them in a confusing dating scenario.
The book is written by a practicing couples therapist in a simple conversational style. Each chapter follows the same pattern: an anecdote showcasing the importance of the issue discussed in the chapter followed by psychological data (or lack of data) and how it contributes. I was enamored by how the feeling based matter of relationship was dissected by the evidenced based approach taken by the author. Although most what's discussed applies to any type of monogamist relationship, the book's target reader is a single woman looking for a man.
Even though, I'm usually very wary of psychological research, the factors are so down-to-earth-logical that I'd be hard pressed to disagree with any claim given in the book (being a little less wary of confirmation bias). Even if I'm not quite sold on the power of attachment theory I can easily admit that the type of relationship between your partner and his parent can have some say on the type of relationships they will seek; people that are neurotic aren't fun to be around; and people that are novelty seekers might be fun to be around but get bored easily.
I liked the book a lot, but I felt that there were obvious stuff missing: discussing how common values, goals or interests influence relationship quality or what to do when you're the one that's less than a perfect match.
The Science of Happily Ever After was a cheerful read - the anecdotes are cute, the writing is clear and explains scientific concepts in layman terms. Even where the author discussed things that were painfully obvious, he did it in a way that I was happy to read about (an old truth being always preferable to new bullshit). All in all, a solid, comfy book about a topic most single people would find dear.
The Science of Happily Ever After by Ty Tashiro is a pop-sci book taking a data-driven approach to finding the partner of your life. The author defines "happily ever after" as a lasting relationship in which both liking and lust are fulfilled and describes which factors contribute to that outcome.
The book starts off with a simple assumption - by being too picky about potential partners we greatly diminish our chances of finding The One. Assuming normal and independent distributions, wishing for a partner with well-above-average looks, intelligence, and emotional stability might leave us with low odds of finding a partner. Adding a couple of more wishes creates a probabilistic impossibility. So, if we only get to pick three wishes it would be good to know what characteristics give the best "return of investment" for a stable relationship.
Most people squander their wishes selecting for looks, which don't predict relationship quality well and deteriorate over time; and wealth, which predicts relationship quality quite well - but only until a couple collectively escapes the poverty level. Than if those features aren't meaningful in the long run, what is?
The author proposes three framework of traits (immutable characteristics) that have some predictive power about relationship quality: personality, the relationship between the partner and his parents, and how the partner solves problems in a relationship. The book suggests which traits in these frameworks are desirable in a partner (high agreeableness, low neuroticism, trusting relations with parents, not-assigning blame when solving problems) and how to filter for them in a confusing dating scenario.
The book is written by a practicing couples therapist in a simple conversational style. Each chapter follows the same pattern: an anecdote showcasing the importance of the issue discussed in the chapter followed by psychological data (or lack of data) and how it contributes. I was enamored by how the feeling based matter of relationship was dissected by the evidenced based approach taken by the author. Although most what's discussed applies to any type of monogamist relationship, the book's target reader is a single woman looking for a man.
Even though, I'm usually very wary of psychological research, the factors are so down-to-earth-logical that I'd be hard pressed to disagree with any claim given in the book (being a little less wary of confirmation bias). Even if I'm not quite sold on the power of attachment theory I can easily admit that the type of relationship between your partner and his parent can have some say on the type of relationships they will seek; people that are neurotic aren't fun to be around; and people that are novelty seekers might be fun to be around but get bored easily.
I liked the book a lot, but I felt that there were obvious stuff missing: discussing how common values, goals or interests influence relationship quality or what to do when you're the one that's less than a perfect match.
The Science of Happily Ever After was a cheerful read - the anecdotes are cute, the writing is clear and explains scientific concepts in layman terms. Even where the author discussed things that were painfully obvious, he did it in a way that I was happy to read about (an old truth being always preferable to new bullshit). All in all, a solid, comfy book about a topic most single people would find dear.
December 4, 2014
Few months ago, I've read an article in The Atlantic that left me with an impression that Ty Tashiro's book was a book about the science of partner selection and maintaining loving relationship for decades.
Instead of that, I ended up reading sciency self-help book for, I'd say, single people in an age group 18-20 that haven't read anything that covers the subject yet. It's sloppy in places:
· 1,843 calories just to stay alive in early 1800s, for someone living a very sedentary lifestyle, really?,
· I'm terribly sorry, but this on figure 3.1 is not how the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs look like, so I'd say it should have a different caption,
· Our ancestors mating preferences didn't evolve because they were good for family or species survival (IIRC the author got that one right on the third try,
· "Teenagers hyped up on a sugar" isn't a metaphor that should exist in a book that has the word science on the cover,
· Strange Situation experiment hasn't looked exactly like retold here,
and the opening anecdotes were written by Danielle Steel (or whoever is the romance novel queen these days).
Easy read, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended on a best beach reads lists. I might even vote for it.
I'm giving it two stars because it's well-referenced, so it's easy to use it as a starting point for further research.
Instead of that, I ended up reading sciency self-help book for, I'd say, single people in an age group 18-20 that haven't read anything that covers the subject yet. It's sloppy in places:
· 1,843 calories just to stay alive in early 1800s, for someone living a very sedentary lifestyle, really?,
· I'm terribly sorry, but this on figure 3.1 is not how the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs look like, so I'd say it should have a different caption,
· Our ancestors mating preferences didn't evolve because they were good for family or species survival (IIRC the author got that one right on the third try,
· "Teenagers hyped up on a sugar" isn't a metaphor that should exist in a book that has the word science on the cover,
· Strange Situation experiment hasn't looked exactly like retold here,
and the opening anecdotes were written by Danielle Steel (or whoever is the romance novel queen these days).
Easy read, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended on a best beach reads lists. I might even vote for it.
I'm giving it two stars because it's well-referenced, so it's easy to use it as a starting point for further research.
March 9, 2014
In The Science of Happily Ever After, Dr. Ty Tashiro ties together real-life situations with extensive research examples to offer a look at finding enduring love. Tashiro avoids the trap of treating the material as just dry research by providing good information about what it takes to successful select a partner not just for life but also for a happy life. The Science of Happily Ever After offers helpful tips about what to look for in a mate and how to avoid common pitfalls that hamper this search. Dr. Tashiro offer examples of what to look for in a relationship and what traits are most sought after in a relationship. The information in the book could be helpful in the quest for finding a lasting partnership. The book was read after receiving a copy through the Good Reads First Reads offer.
May 3, 2015
The science of happily ever after is about the process of partner selection based on scientific research which is very eye-opening and insightful
In a nutshell,this book tells you what really matters when it comes to choosing a partner which is to focus on personality traits rather than looks or wealth . You have got only three wishes for love which means that you have to wish for three traits in a partner ,more than three traits and you will narrow down your options and exclude lots of potential partners then finding out your and your partner's attachment style will also help you making the relationship work when it gets tough
I gained lots of insight reading this book and hopefully that will help me choose wisely and get me to my happily ever after ,Highly recommend for singles :)
In a nutshell,this book tells you what really matters when it comes to choosing a partner which is to focus on personality traits rather than looks or wealth . You have got only three wishes for love which means that you have to wish for three traits in a partner ,more than three traits and you will narrow down your options and exclude lots of potential partners then finding out your and your partner's attachment style will also help you making the relationship work when it gets tough
I gained lots of insight reading this book and hopefully that will help me choose wisely and get me to my happily ever after ,Highly recommend for singles :)
August 23, 2017
I had higher expectations for the content of this book.
It took 173 pages before the topic rolled around to the information I was expecting from the title/description. The first half of the book covers what I think would be pretty common knowledge for anyone who's read about relationships (which I have done) and is therefore, a bit of a drudge.
On the plus side, the book had a pleasant little formula. The author did a nice encapsulation of each "lesson" with a personal and adorable story.
I couldn't help feeling the target audience is the rather disenchanted dater who is trying to figure out a safe, effect equation for finding someone they could settle down with.
It took 173 pages before the topic rolled around to the information I was expecting from the title/description. The first half of the book covers what I think would be pretty common knowledge for anyone who's read about relationships (which I have done) and is therefore, a bit of a drudge.
On the plus side, the book had a pleasant little formula. The author did a nice encapsulation of each "lesson" with a personal and adorable story.
I couldn't help feeling the target audience is the rather disenchanted dater who is trying to figure out a safe, effect equation for finding someone they could settle down with.
January 15, 2017
The books presents several examples of how to choose and/or live with ones current spouse with fewer conflicts. The book was easy to read and written in a format for all readers to enjoy. However, at times some of the points in the book seems redundant. The author also shares many studies and personal stories regarding how relationships function. The personal stories were by far the best part of the book. Many of the studies presented in the book while some what interesting did not garb my attention like the personal stories. Overall I give it a three our of five.
December 19, 2016
Far too many statistics and explanations that were in too much depth on the obvious parts and skipped over the really interesting parts. It read like a research paper on the topic, interspersed with little anecdotesto add a human touch. While it gives a lot of information about average outcomes in relationships, there is little guidance for the individual case (unless it makes you feel a lot better seeing what everyone else did).
June 21, 2015
I really wish I could give this 2.5 stars as that's really what I feel like it deserves. There's plenty of useful information here, just not as much in the way of practical application as I'd have hoped for. It's definitely written with for those who are currently single, so the applications suggested are much less useful for those already in a long term relationship.
July 12, 2019
I don't normally read books like this, but I read a positive and intriguing review of The Science of Happily Ever After, so I picked it up. Then I remembered why I don't normally read books like this...
Where to begin? First, I strongly feel this book should be classified as YA, and shelved in the YA section of books and libraries, because that's clearly the demographic Tashiro is speaking to. And perhaps if one is young and just beginning to date, there is some value to reading this book. As a thirty-something who has been dating for a while, I found myself finishing sections and thinking "well, duh" a lot. This book is also only of value for singles. If you're already married, engaged, or otherwise in a long-term relationship, all you are likely to get out of this book is a list of depressing reasons why you've probably chosen the wrong person. I thought at first that maybe I was just misread the description, but the number or reviews I've read since in which the person stated that they "thought this book was for married couples" or "had hoped to get some insight into prolonging an existing relationship" made me realize that the publisher is probably marketing it to a wider demographic than it is intended for, hoping to sell more copies (thank goodness I get my books from the library).
As for the actual content of the book, Tashiro gives repetitive overviews of relationship studies and research, but not much in the way of practicable advice, which is a problem since the book claims to be a guide to dating smartly to find a good long-term partner. I found many holes and problems in this book, but the chapter that made me want to throw it against the wall was "Why the In-Laws Matter", about partners' attachment styles. His point seems to be that one needs to choose someone with a secure attachment style and avoid those with anxious or avoidant attachment styles from the get-go. Except he only provides two ways of recognizing attachment styles: when problems arise in the relationship, and the family environment a person was raised in. Plenty of couples date for months before any real problems arise in a relationship, at which point most people are already invested, so this seems like a poor way of gauging something he claims is so important. And as for one's familial situation, he himself states that, in studies, almost half of observed children who began life as securely attached individuals due to a positive family environment lost that secure attachment due to various experiences as they grew up (see page 195)-a point that he also contradicts and I guess just hopes the reader won't notice, and he completely fails to acknowledge that through processes like therapy, an anxiously or avoidantly attached person could develop a more healthy and secure attachment style. So where does that leave the reader? He never provides any clearer indication of how to recognize attachment style. He mentions a study in which participants were given dating site-style profiles on paper to choose from, without ever meeting the individuals in person, and that most of the participants chose people from these profiles with an attachment style similar to their own. How the heck is one supposed to know someone's attachment style from just a picture and short dating site bio?!? He never says. I don't think he knows the answer.
The above is just one example, the book leaves many gaps in information and what information he does provide he contradicts just paragraphs later. He also tries to make each section "relatable" with supposedly real-life anecdotes before and after. Another reviewer pointed out a major flaw in one of them that led her to believe they're entirely made up, and I have to say I hope she's right because otherwise, their inclusion greatly disturbs me. Many of them are extremely personal, including incidents that he claims he learned about in therapy sessions, and he makes it quite clear in a couple of instances that he did not obtain permission to use these stories for his book (how could he when the couple in question dropped out of therapy suddenly and he never saw them again?) Doesn't this breach patient-client privilege? Even if my name and identifying factors were altered, I would be mortified to see a therapist and then learn that something I believed I was discussing in a private session was in a book he or she wrote. This really makes me trust Tashiro less as a credible authority on this subject.
I have the distinct impression that Tashiro began the research process with a hypothesis and when it came time to actually write the book, was not willing to let that hypothesis go, despite the fact that much of the research seems to contradict it. And whatever his hypothesis or the research results, what he fails to do is clearly explain what practical actions the reader can take to recognize the traits they are supposed to look for in potential partners-one is just supposed to be able to recognize these things in another immediately, I suppose. I feel like he should have just written an academic paper for the social sciences community instead of trying to write a dating self-hep book. If these kind of books are your jam and you're looking for something that will actually be helpful as you navigate dating, skip this one. There has to be something better out there.
Where to begin? First, I strongly feel this book should be classified as YA, and shelved in the YA section of books and libraries, because that's clearly the demographic Tashiro is speaking to. And perhaps if one is young and just beginning to date, there is some value to reading this book. As a thirty-something who has been dating for a while, I found myself finishing sections and thinking "well, duh" a lot. This book is also only of value for singles. If you're already married, engaged, or otherwise in a long-term relationship, all you are likely to get out of this book is a list of depressing reasons why you've probably chosen the wrong person. I thought at first that maybe I was just misread the description, but the number or reviews I've read since in which the person stated that they "thought this book was for married couples" or "had hoped to get some insight into prolonging an existing relationship" made me realize that the publisher is probably marketing it to a wider demographic than it is intended for, hoping to sell more copies (thank goodness I get my books from the library).
As for the actual content of the book, Tashiro gives repetitive overviews of relationship studies and research, but not much in the way of practicable advice, which is a problem since the book claims to be a guide to dating smartly to find a good long-term partner. I found many holes and problems in this book, but the chapter that made me want to throw it against the wall was "Why the In-Laws Matter", about partners' attachment styles. His point seems to be that one needs to choose someone with a secure attachment style and avoid those with anxious or avoidant attachment styles from the get-go. Except he only provides two ways of recognizing attachment styles: when problems arise in the relationship, and the family environment a person was raised in. Plenty of couples date for months before any real problems arise in a relationship, at which point most people are already invested, so this seems like a poor way of gauging something he claims is so important. And as for one's familial situation, he himself states that, in studies, almost half of observed children who began life as securely attached individuals due to a positive family environment lost that secure attachment due to various experiences as they grew up (see page 195)-a point that he also contradicts and I guess just hopes the reader won't notice, and he completely fails to acknowledge that through processes like therapy, an anxiously or avoidantly attached person could develop a more healthy and secure attachment style. So where does that leave the reader? He never provides any clearer indication of how to recognize attachment style. He mentions a study in which participants were given dating site-style profiles on paper to choose from, without ever meeting the individuals in person, and that most of the participants chose people from these profiles with an attachment style similar to their own. How the heck is one supposed to know someone's attachment style from just a picture and short dating site bio?!? He never says. I don't think he knows the answer.
The above is just one example, the book leaves many gaps in information and what information he does provide he contradicts just paragraphs later. He also tries to make each section "relatable" with supposedly real-life anecdotes before and after. Another reviewer pointed out a major flaw in one of them that led her to believe they're entirely made up, and I have to say I hope she's right because otherwise, their inclusion greatly disturbs me. Many of them are extremely personal, including incidents that he claims he learned about in therapy sessions, and he makes it quite clear in a couple of instances that he did not obtain permission to use these stories for his book (how could he when the couple in question dropped out of therapy suddenly and he never saw them again?) Doesn't this breach patient-client privilege? Even if my name and identifying factors were altered, I would be mortified to see a therapist and then learn that something I believed I was discussing in a private session was in a book he or she wrote. This really makes me trust Tashiro less as a credible authority on this subject.
I have the distinct impression that Tashiro began the research process with a hypothesis and when it came time to actually write the book, was not willing to let that hypothesis go, despite the fact that much of the research seems to contradict it. And whatever his hypothesis or the research results, what he fails to do is clearly explain what practical actions the reader can take to recognize the traits they are supposed to look for in potential partners-one is just supposed to be able to recognize these things in another immediately, I suppose. I feel like he should have just written an academic paper for the social sciences community instead of trying to write a dating self-hep book. If these kind of books are your jam and you're looking for something that will actually be helpful as you navigate dating, skip this one. There has to be something better out there.
August 9, 2020
I've been focusing on the "inner work" side of making myself ready for partnership for a while. I read this book to mix in some science to my approach.
Tips for future readers: skip "part 2" of the book (this middle third). It boils down to one sentence: optimizing for attractiveness or wealth do not predict relationship satisfaction, even though it's what our brains are programmed for.
Tips for future readers: skip "part 2" of the book (this middle third). It boils down to one sentence: optimizing for attractiveness or wealth do not predict relationship satisfaction, even though it's what our brains are programmed for.
July 12, 2025
One of the problems in modern romance is that trusting in fate leads people to look for love in the wrong places and instills false beliefs about how love endures. The infatuation early in relationships often creates overly rosy perceptions of the partner’s traits and the relationship’s characteristics. Years can pass before the fog of infatuation dissipates, strategic self-presentation fades and the discordant tones of conflict begin to fully appear in a relationship. Before people realize who their partners are, they may have made commitments to relationships that make dissolving them more difficult. Moving in together, adopting a dog and getting married are all commitments that increase the barriers to breaking up, even if those relationships have become unsatisfying.
Women want partners who are as wealthy as possible sounds shallow, so they frame their wish for wealth in terms of traits that sound more socially acceptable. Although some singles may truly want traits like intelligence for the purposes of enlightened conversations by the fireplace or a partner with a college degree so that they might enjoy the benefits of a broad liberal arts education, these also happen to be traits that are associated with higher earning potential. Similarly, wishing for a partner with a personality trait like social dominance might be derived from an admiration of individuals who can take command of a situation and lead, but once again this trait is often associated with higher earnings. Researchers found a remarkably consistent link between economic hardship and increased emotional distress in partners, and this distress is then associated with less relationship satisfaction. Money matters, but only up to a certain point.
In the typical Gottman study, couples come to the laboratory and are asked to talk to each other for fifteen minutes about a “continuing disagreement” or the “events of the day.” Researchers, who have never met the couples they are observing on video, code the interactions for key behaviors, such as instances of defensiveness or resentment and problem-solving strategies. Numerous studies suggest that these small glimpses into couples’ lives, lasting only fifteen minutes and entailing conversational subjects as mundane as “events of the day,” allow researchers to predict whether those couples will divorce fourteen years later with about 90 percent accuracy.
Here’s one of the most difficult facts to stomach when it comes to accurate ratings of personality in romantic situations, which is that on average, your friends and even your family know best.
For example, the negative emotional states that are characteristic of neuroticism cause people to make decisions that bring the most immediate reward but the worst long-term consequences. Consider those of us who wake up feeling like we don’t want to go to work, a state that can occur in both neurotic and non-neurotic individuals. Neurotic individuals, being more prone to stronger negative emotions in that situation, might be more likely to choose the solution with the most immediate reward: stay in bed. Of course, this leads to a cascade of bad long-term consequences, such as getting in trouble at work. Partners low in impulse control and high in novelty seeking are a combination of high openness and low conscientiousness. To get a two-for-one deal on your wishes, let’s just combine low to moderate conscientiousness and high levels of openness into a trait that personality psychologists call novelty seeking. The good news about partners high in novelty seeking is that they usually don’t have the self-control to hide their personality for long. However, the confusing part about novelty seekers is that early in a relationship, they are fun, spontaneous and exciting. They also become easily and deeply absorbed in the relationship when they are first falling for you, and it feels great to have someone so invested and intrigued. However, novelty seeking is associated with an increased risk for substance abuse, abusive behavior and explosiveness during discussions about conflict, which are all associated with less relationship satisfaction. Novelty seeking is also predictive of becoming bored more easily with doing the same thing, which is a recipe for disaster when it comes to sustaining a relationship with one person day after day. Novelty seekers’ tendencies combine to make partners who provide less relationship stability. Novelty seekers are more likely to end a relationship because the “spark is gone.” Essentially, they burn bright at the start, showing tremendous interest in you and the relationship, but are more likely to burn out in a rapid and spectacular fashion. Importantly, novelty seekers are more likely to cheat, and there is probably no single behavior that poses more of a risk to relationship stability than infidelity. More likely to put themselves in high-risk situations, such as going to a nightclub and drinking too much while looking at pretty lights and pretty women.
Understandably, humans came to value two traits when basic needs and longevity were far from guaranteed: partners with access to resources and partners who looked healthy.
You create your version of happily ever after by wishing wisely for great partners and then having the courage to trust your ability to love well and to be loved in return.
Women want partners who are as wealthy as possible sounds shallow, so they frame their wish for wealth in terms of traits that sound more socially acceptable. Although some singles may truly want traits like intelligence for the purposes of enlightened conversations by the fireplace or a partner with a college degree so that they might enjoy the benefits of a broad liberal arts education, these also happen to be traits that are associated with higher earning potential. Similarly, wishing for a partner with a personality trait like social dominance might be derived from an admiration of individuals who can take command of a situation and lead, but once again this trait is often associated with higher earnings. Researchers found a remarkably consistent link between economic hardship and increased emotional distress in partners, and this distress is then associated with less relationship satisfaction. Money matters, but only up to a certain point.
In the typical Gottman study, couples come to the laboratory and are asked to talk to each other for fifteen minutes about a “continuing disagreement” or the “events of the day.” Researchers, who have never met the couples they are observing on video, code the interactions for key behaviors, such as instances of defensiveness or resentment and problem-solving strategies. Numerous studies suggest that these small glimpses into couples’ lives, lasting only fifteen minutes and entailing conversational subjects as mundane as “events of the day,” allow researchers to predict whether those couples will divorce fourteen years later with about 90 percent accuracy.
Here’s one of the most difficult facts to stomach when it comes to accurate ratings of personality in romantic situations, which is that on average, your friends and even your family know best.
For example, the negative emotional states that are characteristic of neuroticism cause people to make decisions that bring the most immediate reward but the worst long-term consequences. Consider those of us who wake up feeling like we don’t want to go to work, a state that can occur in both neurotic and non-neurotic individuals. Neurotic individuals, being more prone to stronger negative emotions in that situation, might be more likely to choose the solution with the most immediate reward: stay in bed. Of course, this leads to a cascade of bad long-term consequences, such as getting in trouble at work. Partners low in impulse control and high in novelty seeking are a combination of high openness and low conscientiousness. To get a two-for-one deal on your wishes, let’s just combine low to moderate conscientiousness and high levels of openness into a trait that personality psychologists call novelty seeking. The good news about partners high in novelty seeking is that they usually don’t have the self-control to hide their personality for long. However, the confusing part about novelty seekers is that early in a relationship, they are fun, spontaneous and exciting. They also become easily and deeply absorbed in the relationship when they are first falling for you, and it feels great to have someone so invested and intrigued. However, novelty seeking is associated with an increased risk for substance abuse, abusive behavior and explosiveness during discussions about conflict, which are all associated with less relationship satisfaction. Novelty seeking is also predictive of becoming bored more easily with doing the same thing, which is a recipe for disaster when it comes to sustaining a relationship with one person day after day. Novelty seekers’ tendencies combine to make partners who provide less relationship stability. Novelty seekers are more likely to end a relationship because the “spark is gone.” Essentially, they burn bright at the start, showing tremendous interest in you and the relationship, but are more likely to burn out in a rapid and spectacular fashion. Importantly, novelty seekers are more likely to cheat, and there is probably no single behavior that poses more of a risk to relationship stability than infidelity. More likely to put themselves in high-risk situations, such as going to a nightclub and drinking too much while looking at pretty lights and pretty women.
Understandably, humans came to value two traits when basic needs and longevity were far from guaranteed: partners with access to resources and partners who looked healthy.
You create your version of happily ever after by wishing wisely for great partners and then having the courage to trust your ability to love well and to be loved in return.
January 6, 2018
I got this book thinking since it was written by a Dr it would be more factual than option based. The author did not seem open minded what so ever and personally driven in a large portion of the book. I got this book with the intent of gaining knowledge, not being repulsed with this book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 130 reviews