Arguments over who does the washing up or mows the lawn are less likely to occur between seasoned spouses who have learned the art of conflict avoidance, research has shown.
A study of 127 middle-aged and older couples found that over time they grew less willing to risk having explosive rows.
Instead, they became more likely to adopt strategies such as changing the subject or keeping silent.
Such behaviour is normally seen as damaging to relationships because it leads to bottled up anger and resentment.
But for older couples, who have had decades to voice their disagreements, it might offer a way to keep the peace, say psychologists.
Scientists watched the progress of the married couples over 13 years and filmed 15 minute discussions between them, noting how they communicated.
In particular, the researchers were looking for evidence of "demand-withdraw" conversation patterns. This occurs when one person in a relationship is blamed or pressured by the other and responds by withdrawing or trying to avoid the issue.
Over the years, both husbands and wives increasingly demonstrated avoidance during conflict, said the researches whose findings are published in the Journal of Marriage and Family.
Both the age of the partners and the length of time they had been together probably contributed to the trend, said the researchers.
"It may not be an either-or question," said lead author Dr Sarah Holley, from San Francisco State University. "It may be that both age and marital duration play a role in increased avoidance."
She stressed that the "self-perpetuating and polarising nature" of demand-withdraw communication could be especially destructive in marriages.
If, for instance, a husband avoided his wife's demands to do housework, this could lead to an escalation of her demands and his withdrawal.
"This can lead to a polarisation between the two partners which can be very difficult to resolve and can take a major toll on relationship satisfaction," said Dr Holley.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article