Skip to main content

What does a report say when everything's going well?

What solid couples do in their messages

Our exchanges are healthy — what does that look like from the outside?

Reconstructed case for educational purposes100% fictional data, real clinical patterns. No real conversation.
The report's verdict

What solid couples do in their messages: they repair quickly, turn toward each other in the small moments, and work through disagreements without contempt.

6.8:1
Positive/negative ratio — above the healthy threshold (5:1)
8/100
Contempt — lower than 90% of couples
79/100
Balance of investment between Lina and Adam
What this report reveals
  • Why this relationship holds — and what makes it reproducible.
  • The exact reflexes that protect the couple (repair, turning toward the other).
  • Where to stay watchful even when everything is going well.

Conversation statistics

💬
506
Messages
📝
7,958
Words exchanged
📅
113
Days
📈
4.5
Messages / day
03 May 2026
First message
Lina
24 Sept 2026
Last message
Adam
32 j
Longest streak
without a break
3.7 min
Average response time
Lina

Message distribution

Lina257 msgs (51%)
14.9 words/msg72 emojis43 questions
Adam249 msgs (49%)
16.6 words/msg70 emojis39 questions

Evolution over time

Activity by hour

Activity by day

Heat map

Activity by day and hour

0h
4h
8h
12h
16h
20h
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Sun
Less
More

Expressions from Lina

Most frequent bigrams and trigrams

1.
"see you tonight"x24
2.
"I miss you"x18
3.
"thinking of you"x14
4.
"sleep well?"x8

Expressions from Adam

Most frequent bigrams and trigrams

1.
"I miss you"x30
2.
"sleep well?"x23
3.
"thinking of you"x22
4.
"see you tonight"x8

Most used words by Lina

1.
us60
2.
want56
3.
laugh46
4.
tomorrow42
5.
hey34
6.
you32
7.
plan30
8.
together26
9.
hug26
10.
evening21

Most used words by Adam

1.
tomorrow54
2.
plan49
3.
together43
4.
hug35
5.
hey33
6.
you30
7.
laugh29
8.
evening20
9.
us18
10.
want16

Favourite emojis of Lina

😊
x98
😘
x49
😍
x48
❤️
x33
🥰
x33

Favourite emojis of Adam

❤️
x79
😘
x73
😍
x72
🥰
x52
😊
x36

The relationship analysis

82
Overall relationship score · Lina & Adam
Solid

What solid couples do in their messages: they repair quickly, turn toward each other in the small moments, and work through disagreements without contempt. Nothing spectacular — a quiet, mutual security that the report makes visible and measurable.

What the messages reveal

Reconstructed excerpts — the report reads each exchange and highlights the underlying pattern.

Lina
Sorry about earlier, I reacted too quickly. You were right on the substance.
Rapid repairSpontaneous apology after friction. The ability to repair quickly (Conflict 72/100) is, in Gottman's work, the strongest predictor of durability.
Adam
Thank you for saying that, it means a lot. Shall we talk it over calmly tonight?
Turning toward the otherAdam welcomes the repair and offers to continue: this is a "turning toward the other" — the opposite of stonewalling.
Lina
I thought of you as I walked past our café ☕
Connection bidA micro-attempt at connection within daily life. These small repeated "bids" nourish secure attachment (both are secure).

Relational dimensions

Conflict at 72 doesn't mean “no conflicts” — it means disagreements that are well managed, with quick repair. That's what a healthy relationship is: not the absence of friction, but its regulation.

Attachment profile

Two secure profiles (78 and 80): neither pursuit nor withdrawal. Closeness is comfortable for both — the quiet foundation that makes everything else simpler.

Gottman’s 4 Horsemen

The lower the score, the better. Above 50 = warning signal.

Positive/negative ratio: 6.8:1(healthy threshold = 5:1)
This is what a solid couple looks like through the report: contempt at 8, positive/negative ratio at 6.8. In Gottman's research, that's exactly the combination that predicts durability — plenty of positive, almost zero contempt.

Cognitive distortions

Thinking biases detected in the conversation

Cognitive distortions (Aaron Beck) are automatic thinking biases that warp our perception of relational reality. A high score indicates a more pronounced presence of this bias.

LowModerateHigh
Marked distortions
Low14/100

Pursuer / withdrawer dynamic

Who pursues the exchange vs who withdraws

Lina (pursues)Adam (withdraws)
51%
49%

Balance: Balanced

The in-depth analysis

Sternberg’s Triangle

The 3 components of love according to triangular theory.

According to Robert Sternberg, complete love rests on three pillars: intimacy (emotional), passion (physical/romantic) and commitment (decisional). The balance between these three components defines the type of relationship.

Intimacy82/100
Passion55/100
Commitment84/100
Relationship type: Consummate love

The combination of intimacy 82, passion 55 and commitment 84 outlines a "consummate love" profile. The three pillars support one another: this is what gives the relationship its stability.

5 Love Languages

Predominant love languages of each person (Chapman).

Gary Chapman identifies 5 love languages: words of affirmation, acts of service, gifts, quality time and physical touch. Knowing each partner’s dominant language improves mutual understanding.

Words of Affirmation
Lina
74
Adam
80
Acts of Service
Lina
58
Adam
76
Gifts
Lina
66
Adam
77
Quality Time
Lina
75
Adam
77
Physical Touch
Lina
63
Adam
61

Gap: Lina and Adam express affection through similar channels: one person's gestures are "read" by the other, which limits misunderstandings.

Identifying the language actually received (rather than the one we spontaneously give) prevents the feeling of "giving without being loved in return."

Detected breakpoints

Key moments where the dynamic shifted

The emotional timeline pinpoints the key moments where the relational dynamic shifted significantly: conflicts, distancing, reconnections.

9 June 2026Low

A disagreement over organization escalates a notch — then spontaneous apologies and a return to calm within the day.

15 Jul. 2026Low

Misunderstanding over an unspoken expectation: named, heard, repaired without resentment.

Relationship prognosis

Favorable

81/100

Positive factors

  • + Positive/negative ratio at 6.8 (well above the healthy threshold of 5)
  • + Near-zero contempt (8) — the single best predictor of durability
  • + Quick repairs after disagreement

Risk factors

  • - Gentle vigilance: don't take security for granted
  • - Keep naming needs even when everything's going well

Nonviolent Communication

NVC Score (Rosenberg): use of OFNR format vs judgment/blame.

Nonviolent Communication (Marshall Rosenberg) assesses the ability to express one’s needs and emotions without aggression or judgment. A high score indicates more empathetic communication.

81
Lina
NVC Score /100
85
Adam
NVC Score /100

Examples

✓ NVCLina

« When you let me know you'll be home late, I worry less — thank you. »

Observation + positive impact: reinforces the desired behavior without demanding.

✓ NVCAdam

« I would have liked us to talk about it first; I felt presented with a fait accompli. »

Expresses the feeling and the need for consultation without attacking the person.

Both often manage to connect fact, emotion and need — this is what allows tensions to be defused before they escalate.

DISC Profile

Dominant communication style of each person.

The DISC model (W. Marston) classifies behaviors along 4 axes: Dominant (Red — results-oriented), Influential (Yellow — relationship-oriented), Steady (Green — cooperation-oriented) and Conscientious (Blue — precision-oriented). Each has distinct motivations and communication styles.

Dominant (D)
Lina
17
Adam
12
Influential (I)
Lina
31
Adam
34
Steady (S)
Lina
57
Adam
66
Conscientious (C)
Lina
33
Adam
38
D = Dominant
I = Influential
S = Steady
C = Conscientious

Lina and Adam do not share the same communication style (couple's communication: 80/100). Neither good nor bad — the challenge is to translate from one style to the other: a direct profile gains from slowing down, a relational profile from daring to be explicit.

Karpman’s Triangle

Dominant roles in the relational dynamic (Transactional Analysis).

Karpman’s drama triangle identifies three dysfunctional relational roles: Persecutor, Victim and Rescuer. A high score on a role indicates a tendency to adopt it during conflicts.

Persecutor
Lina
11
Adam
9
Victim
Lina
25
Adam
18
Rescuer
Lina
33
Adam
26

For Lina and Adam, the victim/rescuer/persecutor roles stay occasional and faint: the relationship is not organized around the drama triangle.

Johari Window

Zones of self-knowledge and knowledge of the other in the relationship.

The Johari window (Luft & Ingham) maps 4 zones of self-knowledge: open (known to all), blind (seen by the other but not by oneself), hidden (known to oneself but not shared) and unknown.

Lina

63
Open
Shared and known
20
Blind
Seen by the other
22
Hidden
Deliberately hidden
4
Unknown
Unconscious

Adam

64
Open
Shared and known
21
Blind
Seen by the other
21
Hidden
Deliberately hidden
4
Unknown
Unconscious

For Lina as for Adam, enlarging the "open" area — saying what one feels, asking for feedback — mechanically reduces the misunderstandings of the blind and hidden areas.

FIRO by Schutz

Fundamental relationship needs: expressed vs desired.

Schutz’s FIRO model measures three fundamental interpersonal needs: Inclusion (need to belong), Control (need for power) and Affection (need for closeness), each in an expressed and a wanted version.

Lina

Inclusion
Expressed
43
Desired
35
Control
Expressed
14
Desired
24
Affection
Expressed
46
Desired
43

Adam

Inclusion
Expressed
50
Desired
39
Control
Expressed
23
Desired
30
Affection
Expressed
52
Desired
42

For Lina and Adam, the gap between what each one EXPRESSES and what they DESIRE is the real source of frustration: Lina waits for an initiative that he/she never openly asks for, while the other does not perceive the need.

Polyvagal Theory

Dominant autonomic nervous system activation state in exchanges (Porges).

Polyvagal theory (S. Porges) distinguishes three states of the nervous system: ventral (connection and safety), sympathetic (fight/flight) and dorsal (freeze/shutdown). These states deeply influence communication within a couple.

Ventral (connection)
Lina
59
Adam
59
Sympathetic (fight/flight)
Lina
20
Adam
16
Dorsal (freeze)
Lina
21
Adam
25

Both spend most of their time in a "ventral" state (safety): this is the state where dialogue and repair are possible.

Young Schemas

Early maladaptive schemas influence your relational behaviours.

Early maladaptive schemas (Jeffrey Young) are deep emotional patterns formed in childhood that influence our adult relationships. A high score indicates a stronger activation of the schema.

21
Abandonment / instability
Lina
19
Emotional inhibition
Adam
18
Approval-seeking
Lina
SchemaLinaAdam
Disconnection & Rejection
Abandonment / instability2115
Mistrust / abuse95
Emotional deprivation1317
Defectiveness / shame129
Impaired Autonomy
Impaired Limits
Insufficient self-control01
Other-Directedness
Subjugation170
Approval-seeking1811
Overvigilance
Emotional inhibition1019
0-25 (low)
26-50 (moderate)
51-75 (active)
76-100 (dominant)

Personalised action plan

Therapeutic exercises tailored to your relational profile.

This action plan offers progressive exercises, at your own pace, to reinforce your strengths and work on the areas for improvement that were identified.

1

Maintain what works

Weeks 1-2
Connection ritual
Daily

Keep the daily touchpoint that already works (morning coffee, evening message), without taking it for granted.

Positive review
Weekly

Each week, Lina and Adam name one thing the other did that mattered.

2

Repair even faster

Weeks 3-4
The repair gesture
As needed

After friction, a sign agreed in advance (a word, a gesture) to defuse things before they escalate.

3

Keep voicing needs

Weeks 5-6
Open question
Weekly

"What do you need right now?" — ask the question even when everything is going well.

4

Celebrate

Weeks 7-8
Mark the positive
Monthly

Take the time to say explicitly what is working, rather than only talking about the problems.

Strengths

  • Positive/negative ratio at 6.8 (well above the healthy threshold of 5)
  • Near-zero contempt (8) — the single best predictor of durability
  • Quick repairs after disagreement
  • Two secure attachments that answer each other

Points to watch

  • !Gentle vigilance: don't take security for granted
  • !Keep naming needs even when everything's going well

What the report answers

What does the attachment style reveal in this case?

Two secure profiles (78 and 80): neither pursuit nor withdrawal. Closeness is comfortable for both — the quiet foundation that makes everything else simpler.

What red flags does the report detect?

Gentle vigilance: don't take security for granted Keep naming needs even when everything's going well

What do the score and communication dynamic say?

This is what a solid couple looks like through the report: contempt at 8, positive/negative ratio at 6.8. In Gottman's research, that's exactly the combination that predicts durability — plenty of positive, almost zero contempt.

Confirm what's already working (and what can grow) → Analyze our conversation

Analyse our conversation · 2 min

Free dashboard · Full report from €1.99

Private analysis, no sign-up. Your messages stay yours.

Share this article:

Related situations

Join our exchange group

A caring, application-based space for exchange on WhatsApp — not therapy.

Join the Community (waiting list)
A healthy relationship through analysis: the positive case - ScanMyLove