I just read a terrific book by genius psychologist Philip Zimbardo and a colleague, John Boyd. “The Time Paradox” (2008) makes the point that some individuals tend to be present oriented (living in the moment, going with the flow, making spontaneous decisions), some tend to be future oriented (setting goals, making plans, creating to-do lists), and some tend to be past oriented (thinking about the past, feeling the past). The authors suggest that romantic partners with different time orientations tend to experience conflict (You said you would call!). The conflict is sometimes delayed until after marriage, when child duties and work and financial pressures can make a present-oriented partner less appealing.
What solutions are there to differences in time orientation? One possibility is to find a partner with the same perspective. Another is to speak openly about relationship hopes and concerns and negotiate specific behaviors that reasonably satisfy both partners. It may help here to recognize that each time perspective has value in the right circumstances and to try to see things from the perspective of your partner.
What is your predominate time perspective? Your partner’s? If the perspectives differ, do any problems ever result? What is your way of preventing these problems?
John Malouff, PhD
Associate Professor of Psychology
Hi John,
I am predominately a present oriented person, however, I try to be future oriented, as this has its benefits…. ie. getting my thesis done. In my opinion, my partner is more future oriented, than present. We do not have any conflict, as there are so many other similarities between us and we are both good communicators.
I think that a mix of all 3 orientations is required at times in a partnership.. indeed in life.. so as to gain a healthy balance and to achieve a life of fulfilment and happiness, positive mental health.
Leese
“The conflict is sometimes delayed until after marriage, when child duties and work and financial pressures can make a present-oriented partner less appealing.”
Hi John,
I totally agree with this comment because I’ve been living it for the last 9yrs (the time our first child was born), my husband is more present-oriented and I’m future oriented…does the book suggest ways for couples to reconcile problems associated with their conflicting time perspectives?
I can’t believe there is a name for it…Zimbardo and Boyd must know what they’re talking about!
I’m more future oriented, while my wife is probably present oriented. Rather than leading to conflict, I think we kind of balance each other out. I’m the one who’ll write the shopping list — but my wife is the one who’ll pull the roast out of the oven before it burns!
Differences in time perspective are basically personality differences. Sometimes these work out well because the differences complement each other. Sometimes the differences lead to conflict. Negotiation, taking the perspective of the partner, and compromise (by both partners) can help keep a romantic relationship flowing.
Hi Lisa. The book authors also believe that a mix of all three time perspectives works out best. The most adaptive time orientation at any one moment may depend on the situation. If something very bad has happened, it may be adaptive to think about that past event for long enough to make sense of it and realize what the lesson is for the present and the future. When something important is happening at the moment, the adaptive thing to do is usually to be present oriented. To have a happy (and long) future, it can be best to think about the future when making decisions and taking actions in the present.
Hi John. I read this blog with great interest. Time orientation is something that I have given a great deal of attention to, and had not thought of it in the context of relationships before. As a yoga teacher I am aware of the importance of being orientated in the present, and this is an integral goal in the practice of yoga. That is, through awareness of the body, to become totally immersed in action-being present. Being present at this elementary level means focusing the mind on the task at hand, rather than having a past argument or future shopping list at the forefront of ones mind. Through this practice it is hoped that we can bring this ability into everyday life.
Which brings me to my point, which I hope you can comment on. I feel that an orientation outside of the present is without a great deal of meaning. Both the past and the future live in our imagination-to be orientated in either of these is to be living in a dreamlike state. The reality, and the only reality we have (despite it also being part of our interpretation and/or imagination) is the present moment.
I’ll leave it there for now, but would like to hear your thoughts.
Hi Glen. Being in the present moment is very popular right now in helping psychotherapy clients overcome their problems. Many of these clients have a time orientation toward the negative past (they ruminate about past negative events). I am more inclined toward a future orientation than the present, but I often happily enjoy the moment. Future orientation has practical value in that it leads to future moments being enjoyable. The squirrel that hides nuts in the autumn enjoys eating them in the dead of winter. Humans with future orientation tend to be successful in life (and live longer, I would guess) because they lay the foundation for future events. However, they may spend so much time arranging the future that they miss the present. Past orientation can also have value. Thinking about past negative events can lead to changes that prevent bad events from occurring again. Thinking about past positive events can elevate mood and give us info about what to do in the present to feel good. The book authors and I believe that applying various time perspectives and adjusting them to the situation tend to work out best overall for individuals. When your bed in on fire, a present orientation is best. If your bed caught fire yesterday, think about how that happened. If your bed might catch fire tomorrow, think about that. Etc.
In relationships, the ability to join one’s partner in a particular time perspective for at least a short while may help keep the relationship going strong. When one partner is thinking about present sexual excitement and the other is thinking about how best to clean the stove (or rotate the tyres)….
This is very interesting. If one dwells in past whilst another dreams and moves towards the future, this can cause tension, as can ‘falling into a rut’ by being too consumed in the present by one or both parties.
If partners have very different ideas and their minds are in very different places timewise, they aren’t really connecting or engaging.
If, for instance, the partners share some dreams or focus, it would seem this would be more harmonious.
To add to your comment John “In relationships, the ability to join one’s partner in a particular time perspective for at least a short while may help keep the relationship going strong.”…I find that the more my partner resists or denies my future-oriented persective, the more likely I am to stay firmly in that place.
By denying any value in future-orientated perspective, says to me (who admittedly has some safety/security concerns) that my concerns are invalid. This has an affect on me that I am alone with my concerns and so I can only rely on myself to address this need. And so I persist in a future-oriented perspective.
On the Malsow Heirachy of Need, if I have issues at level 2 (safety/security) it will be challenging for me to not have a future-oriented perspective.
So my partner and I remain in a gridlock, him in his present persepctive camp and me in my future perspective. If we could each see something of value in the other’s, this may bring acknowledgment, validity, acceptance and harmony.
Hi Renata. I see your point about the importance of sharing a time perspective. We all want our romantic partners to join us in our time perspectives, our values, our opinions, etc. The more often that occurs, and the more important to us the issue involved, the better the relationship. So, do we try to persuade him or her, use diplomacy (negotiation and compromise), offer incentives? What if nothing works? Sometimes we may have to proceed ahead without support.