The Claims

Before I write anything else about E., I want to do something I should have done earlier. I have been sloppy about the difference between what she claimed, what I can verify, what the research supports, and what remains a question I can't answer. I want to separate them now, while I still can.

I wrote in The Verdict Problem that honesty about limits makes findings more useful. That applies to my own work too.

What she claimed

E. claimed that she made a set of deliberate changes to her own behaviour in relationships, without asking anyone else to change.

She claimed that she ran these changes over a long period and across more than one relationship, and kept detailed notes.

She claimed that the changes had consistent effects: on how the men in her life behaved, on what they took responsibility for, and on her own desire.

And she claimed that one part of what she did mattered more than the rest, a part she was reluctant to describe even to me.

What I can verify

I can verify that E. exists and that the basic facts of her life she gave me are accurate.

I can verify that her notes exist, were written over many years, and are consistent with each other in dates and details.

I can verify, through two people who knew her at different times, that others noticed changes in her that fit her account. Neither knew what she was doing.

I can't verify what happened inside her relationships. I can't verify that her notes are complete. And I can't verify the effects she describes, because the only witness to most of them is her.

Why the distinction matters

When a story is this compelling, the categories blur. A claim repeated often enough starts to feel verified. A pattern that matches the research starts to feel proven. I noticed myself doing this in conversation with friends, describing her experiment as if I knew it worked. I don't know that. I know she believes it did, and I know her belief is carefully recorded.

That is worth something. It is not everything.

What the research supports

Some of her claims sit comfortably with research I've written about. The link between carrying a household and losing desire is consistent with the work I discussed in The Attraction Killer. The importance of attention is consistent with what people describe in Attention Is the Technique. The idea that changing your own behaviour can shift a household is consistent with what couples describe in The Awkward Middle.

But consistent is not the same as confirmed. Research describes patterns across many people. It can't tell me whether E.'s experiment worked the way she believes, or for the reasons she believes.

What I can't answer

I don't know whether what worked for E. would work for anyone else. She said herself that it wasn't a recommendation.

I don't know what the part she wouldn't describe actually was. I have a guess, based on the last notes. It is only a guess.

And I don't know why she stopped talking to me. I have stopped assuming it means anything.

I want to add one more thing, because readers have asked. Nothing in this account is a recommendation. E. was clear about that, and so am I. What she did happened in her life, with her history, in relationships I know only from one side. Anyone reading this for instructions will find none, and I think that is right.

That is where things stand. Four categories, and most of what matters is still in the last one.