User talk:Elboyd3/sandbox

Bridgetta Hines' Peer Review
Good afternoon. Your article does an exceptional job of explaining the Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution. Before reading your article, I had no idea what it was, but now I have a better insight on it and its origins. Your article is mapped out well and I was impressed by how clear and concise you were in breaking down and explaining the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, as I have never heard of this before. I am glad you broke them down into sections with examples of what each are.

There are a few minor changes that I would suggest that you apply to the article for a little more clarity in certain areas. I looked online to see if I could find some information on Gottman's model, but I could only find Gottman's method, so I would suggest that you change the word model to method, for clarity. I would also suggest that you move "This model is the work of psychological researcher John Gottman, a professor at the University of Washington and founder of The Gottman Institute and his research partner Robert W. Levenson" this sentence to the lead section, so that readers can understand the relevance of Gottman's method to the Cascade Model of Relational Dissolution. Also, instead of it is noted, use Note, instead so the information appears more like a statement.

I would also suggest that under the section titled "Regulated and Non-Regulated Couples" that you use the word obtained in this sentence: "Information gained from the RCISS and SPAFF analysis lead the the formation of the idea of regulated and non-regulated couples" rather than gained. Under the Marital Typology section, I suggest using a semi-colon in the following sentence: "Gottman's research indicates that there are five types of marriages, three of which are stable and avoid entering the Cascade Model, and two that are volatile" where you have a comma. "Gottman's research indicates that there are five types of marriages: three of which are stable and avoid entering the Cascade Model, and two that are volatile." In the following sentence, I suggest using "the three" instead of "All three stable couple types achieve a similar balance between positive and negative affect; however, this does not mean that negative interactions or communication is completely eliminated".

Most importantly, I would suggest moving Mis-Match Theory above the definitions of Hostile and Hostile Detached, because it looks as if it stands alone, but because it proposes information about the two, it would be a great lead into these two typologies. I'd also like to note that this section is written well and is very informative.

Last, under the Criticism section, I would suggest that you change the word claiming to his claims in the following sentence: "Gottman has been criticized for claiming that his Cascade Model can predict divorce with over a 90% accuracy" and add a citation to this sentence as well. Also, "deemphasis" needs a hyphen. And in the last sentence, "Stanley's findings indicate that, while Gottman's findings are interesting, there are too many unexplained methods and that additional research is needed before the overhauling Gottman's suggested" I would suggest using Finally or some other closing statement or word before Stanley's name to indicate that you are wrapping up the article.

I noticed that your article was organized very well and I am going to go back to my article and work on more organization and clarity, like your article is. You have done an exceptional job on this article and as I stated, it is very insightful. I really enjoyed reading and reviewing your article! BHines10 (talk) 22:15, 1 March 2019 (UTC)Bridgetta Hines