Podcast: Play in new window

Subscribe: RSS

Ever wondered why, despite our best intentions, we keep falling into the same relationship traps? Or how two people can feel worlds apart even when they desperately want things to work? The subtle dance of self-worth, mutual respect, and compatibility often determines whether love thrives or fizzles out. Too often, we end up settling for relationships that slowly chip away at our confidence, hoping for change while ignoring the mismatch in values, traits, and emotional needs.

In this episode, listeners are guided through a groundbreaking and practical approach for understanding the science behind love and relationship fulfillment. The conversation explores how to identify personal values and trait preferences, assess compatibility, break destructive patterns, and recognize the significance of self-worth in sustaining a healthy partnership. With fresh, research-backed insights, the episode offers actionable steps and honest reflections to help anyone desiring deeper connection, clarity, and empowerment in their romantic life.

Zoey Charif spent two decades decoding patterns of human attraction, pulling from her background in criminology, data analytics, and a drive to challenge everything we’ve been taught about love.

Born in Afghanistan, raised in Vancouver, and now based in Orange County, California, Zoey brings a rare blend of emotional depth, analytical precision, and lived experience to her work. Her framework is coachable and designed to help people transform their relationships.

Episode Highlights

04:43 Explaining the Love Formula: Scoring self and partner alignment.

08:41 When perceived value differs: Anxious and avoidant relationship patterns.

10:05 Attachment styles, emotional investment, and patterns of effort.

14:12 Personality dichotomies: Are we attracted to similar or opposite traits?

18:34 Distinguishing between values and traits in attraction.

21:14 Recognizing and interrupting destructive relationship patterns.

26:15 Impact of inconsistency: How decreasing value affects relationship satisfaction.

29:34 Core values: Dependability and reliability as key to relationship stability.

30:27 Using the Love Formula to rebuild connection and alignment in marriage.

33:47 Maintaining mutual admiration and fulfillment in long-term love.

36:58 The crucial role of self-worth and normalizing singlehood.

Your Check List of Actions to Take

• Reflect on Your Self-Worth: Honestly assess your own values and self-worth before seeking or deepening a relationship.
• Identify Core Values: Clearly write down the values that matter most to you in life and relationships.
• Rate Yourself: Give yourself a score on how well you feel you embody your own values and standards.
• Evaluate Your Partner: Honestly assess your partner against your values, noting alignment and gaps.
• Notice Trait Preferences: Identify the traits you’re consistently attracted to, even if they might not serve you in the long term.
• Watch for Destructive Patterns: Examine your previous relationship patterns for recurring traits or behaviors that led to dissatisfaction.
• Communicate Openly: Share your value and trait scores with your partner as a tool for honest, non-defensive discussions about your relationship.
• Prioritize Self-Awareness: Regularly check in with yourself to ensure your choices align with your values and that you’re not compromising your well-being for the relationship.

Mentioned

Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT) (*Psychology Today) (link)

The Gottman Method

12 Relationship Principles to Strengthen Your Love (free guide)

Love Can, In Fact, Be Calculated (Hardcover) by Zoey Charif (*Amazon Affiliate link) (book)

Connect with Zoey Charif

Websites:lovecaninfactbecalculated.com

Instagram:instagram.com/zoeycharif

TikTok:tiktok.com/@zoeycharif?_t=8ruz0ZyCH9i&_r=1

Connect with Dr. Jessica Higgins

Facebook: facebook.com/EmpoweredRelationship 

Instagram: instagram.com/drjessicahiggins 

Podcast: drjessicahiggins.com/podcasts/

Pinterest: pinterest.com/EmpowerRelation 

LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/drjessicahiggins 

Twitter: @DrJessHiggins 

Website: drjessicahiggins.com  

Email: [email protected]

If you have a topic you would like to be discussed, please contact us by clicking on the “Ask Dr. Jessica Higgins” button here. 

Thank you so much for your interest in improving your relationship. 

Also, I would so appreciate your honest rating and review. Please leave a review by clicking here. 

Thank you!  

*With Amazon Affiliate Links, I may earn a few cents from Amazon if you purchase the book from this link.

Episode Transcript

Zoe, thank you for joining us. I'm really excited about our conversation. 

Thank you so much for having me. I'm very excited to be here. 

Yeah. Just as we've been chatting, I can appreciate just how much you devote to your work and your passion and your enthusiasm, and I was even reflecting on your desire to make a difference. So thank you for what you're doing, and I know you've developed something called the love formula. Before we get into how to describe that, how you apply it, would you be willing to share a little bit more about how this became for you? 

Sure. So about 20 years ago, when I was studying criminology, I had a laser focus on human behavior and human intentions. Around that time, I was in a long-term relationship, and I was cheated on. So that laser focus of criminality just instantly shifted to preserving my heart and trying to understand why I was cheated on, trying to understand why I was not lovable or loved right at that time. And then I just went down this rabbit hole, and I came across something online, and that's what started the whole framework of the love formula 20 years ago. And I kept that theory in my back pocket for the last 20 years. And about six years ago, I'm like, it's valid. So I pushed myself to write about it. I developed the chapters, I developed the framework. 

Eventually, I confirmed through data analytics that, in fact, I can calculate love. In fact, we can calculate self-worth. In fact, using these calculations, you can improve a relationship not just with your partner, but with yourself. In fact, I confirmed that it starts with you. So I confirmed that the cliche

is validated with numbers, with stats, and with data. So that's how it all started. And this is where I've landed 20 years later. 

Yes, and the culmination. And I appreciate just the space that you gave me to develop. Right. Sometimes we might feel the resonance and want to develop it, but also just being able to back that up with further data, and just for people listening, when you talk about numbers and research, would you like to just briefly speak to how you accumulated that? 

So the foundation of the framework comes down to you can't love someone who's not a match. It won't work. The brain is not programmed in that way. The brain is programmed to seek a strong mate. If within your mind, whatever definition you have of strength, whether it's education or it's physical or whatever it may be, however you define it in your mind. If the person in front of you, the person that you've connected within your definition and your framework, does not fit those standards, your emotions will not follow; your neurochemicals will shut down when you're with them. Your hormones, be it oxytocin or whatever gets you going, right? And those healthy neurochemicals, serotonin, dopamine, they will not activate if your brain has defined them to be less than you. 

So the whole foundation of the framework is that 

The question becomes, how do you measure a match? Well, it comes down to values and traits. You first measure yourself based on your own values, and you give yourself a score on how well you feel. You meet your own values, and you meet your own standards. Next, you give your partner a partner values score. So you rate them against your values. It doesn't matter what their values are. They might have a completely different set. What matters is, do they fit your standards? So now you have two scores. You have the self-score, which is a numerical assessment of your self-worth, your standards, and your self-love, which is the key to everything. 

And I'll dive into this later because this is hands down the most important part. And next, you have the partner value score, which is essentially evaluating if you respect them. 

That's how we evolve as humans. Then there's a second part of the formula, which is the traits. So values are not the only thing we're looking for here. We're not just looking at whether you respect the person. We're looking at whether you're attracted to them. So you give them a partner traits score to that effect. You don't rate yourself on traits because opposites do attract, but you do rate them. And then you average out the partner value score. 

The partner trait score, if that total number is a match for you, is perfect. But the analytics show that the perfect match is when the partner is 4% above you. And it's interesting, I did not expect that. But the interpretation of this is that you admire them and you feel lucky to be with them. Hence why, when there's a breakdown of the relationship, if you guys fight, whatever it may be, you're more likely to put your best foot forward because you feel lucky to have them, and you don't want to lose them. 

So, for people listening, and my understanding of your formula is that two people could rate their partner differently. So both partners optimally, and I guess in your formula, both people would rate their partner that 4% favorable, and that would be more optimal than you appreciate their values and their traits, and the match on values and their traits. 

Exactly. 

Before we move into attachment dynamics, I want to note that attachment patterns are adaptive strategies shaped by early experience, not character flaws. As you'll hear, we're exploring how certain dynamics feel in a relationship and how to discern whether a relationship is secure and mutual. 

Let me pitch to you a scenario. What if you view your partner as, let's say, 5% above you? That means that you admire them, and you feel very lucky to be with them. If they, for whatever reason, in their minds have decided that you don't quite meet their standards, whether those standards are fair or unfair, it's. The humans are nuanced. Everyone will have their own framework, their own checkboxes. But if they think that you're, let's say, 10% under them, what's going to happen is you may become a self-sacrificer in that relationship. You may become infatuated, you may put in more effort than them. And I don't know if this sounds familiar, but if you learn about the avoidant anxious dynamic, that's what it resembles. 

It resembles someone who is afraid to lose the other person and just gets anxious, not knowing whether they're back. And then the avoidant is a person who's. They avoid the relationship, they avoid the dynamic. In my opinion, we've labeled the anxious avoidant dynamic to situations where, 

That's how I've, in my years of experience, that's what I've noticed. Someone who truly cares about you will not put you back on the market. 

“Okay, so I don't fully disagree with you. And I also think that there are variables.”So, where I would agree with you is this sense of someone who is not as invested or doesn't value the relationship, or their significant other is more primed to not turn towards right, and how these relationship dynamics manifest. And also, I, having done my dissertation and really having done a lot of work with the EFT and the attachment research, I do know from very early on that people have certain strategies in the way that they protect themselves. So where I will say is that it could look similar and that the origins. But I think where there could be a real indication is whether someone is interested in repair, whether someone is making the effort. So even though their first tendency is to be a little bit more contained. 

Well, I'll just use myself here as an example. So my husband does have a little bit more of that contained, that more protective, which could be labeled as avoidant tendencies. And when I took risks early on in our relationship, he did turn towards me; he did really respond. And he does show effort; he does invest. And I know he values me. So I want to say yes. And the attachment research, I think, has a lot of value. And what you're really presenting is it kind of reminds me of he's just not that into you. Yeah, like let's not make a bunch of excuses and reasons, like if someone is not valuing, that's going to be demonstrated. And let's be real about that. 

“Yeah, and I really appreciate that you said that because I agree with you. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.” The truth is, we all have learned to love in a certain way. I guess where I'm coming from is I see so many myths online about the runner chaser, for example, and people justifying being treated not so well and being undervalued. And then thinking it's okay that I'm a self-sacrificer, you know, there's a meaning behind this, and this is just their attachment style. That's what scares me. There's so much information online that can validate their thoughts that no, this person is into you. And from the research that I've seen, from the analytics, that doesn't seem to be the case. I'll give you an example. So for the couples who are currently together, the partner's score was 4% above theirs. Okay. 

The group below them, the Partner score was -5%. They were in an on-and-off relationship. So if you look at anxious avoidance styles, and of course, you're the expert here, this is just from my general understanding, so please correct me if I'm wrong. The anxious avoidant, if it's not checked, if there's not enough education behind it or knowledge behind it, can very easily fall into the trap of an on-and-off. And from the interpretation here, it's that one person put in effort, they felt like the other person was not putting in effort. And in that case, the values score dropped. So the number one value that we saw across the board was dependability and reliability as an avoidant. 

If you're gonna bail when things are not right from the analytics, from what I'm seeing and the interpretation, it's that they start to lose value in the eyes of the person doing the calculations. So it actually turns into you are not good enough for me, you're an avoidant. It turns into, eventually, you're not my rock. And I can't be in a relationship where you're not a rock. So, you know, chicken or the egg type of scenario, but at some point, they're not a match. 

I'm so glad you're saying this because I do think that this is important to acknowledge that someone's perception, or, in EFT language, they might say view of others, or even in the Gottman language, they might say the sentiment, the positive sentiment override, or the negative sentiment override. And when we look at the importance of secure functioning, that is the consistency, the reliability, and the availability. Is someone engaged, are they responsive, and are they available? So what you're looking at, I think, absolutely correlates with the research on attachment and all the other research that I don't know if you're incorporating or if you're looking at a certain aspect of your primary research and how you've interpreted that, but absolutely right. If someone's not responding or showing up, that's not a secure functioning relationship, and that's hard to sustain. 

And when we look at attachment, it's very difficult for those. And I don't know how long your relationships were as far as in and out, but typically, it's hard to sustain the avoidant anxious dynamic. 

Exactly, I think we're mostly saying the same thing, just different angles. And different terminology. But yeah, I mean, I agree with you though, that if there is education behind it and knowledge and you can read between the lines, especially with an avoidant who's scared and you can read between the lines, oh, this is a protective mechanism or a defense mechanism. Then that can certainly make you stronger if you gently communicate it, and hopefully, they'll be open to communicating with you back. That key, though, the knowledge there, though, if it's not there, then it's just going to break down. And once again,  the analytics showed that it becomes a mismatch at some point. 

Yeah. Well, to be able to access vulnerability, to be able to access the connection. If there's no ability to repair, then there are no other things that support that more secure functioning. And this reminds me, your formula reminds me back in undergrad, I believe, when we look at the old school ways in which people partnered, it was people who were of similar attractiveness or of similar SEO status, or there was a similarity of compatibility of how people were ranking value around maybe more traits. I mean, that was more retroactive research.  Just how people are partnering. But it seems to go along with what you're describing here. 

Yeah, thank you for saying that. I compare the values. And in the formula, I essentially give room for flexibility on what you're attracted to because opposites can attract. But the analytics actually showed that people tend to be more attracted to who they are than to what they are, their essence. Here's how I know this. I developed personality type dichotomies. Okay. There is one in particular, which is the diversified versus the alike. Diversity is the opposites attract. Right. The issue is I want someone who's me, traits-wise. So there are the healthy alike and the extreme alike. So healthy alike is just a little bit leaning towards alike, but not overly. And then the extreme opposite is I want that person to be exactly like me. The healthy, diversified person is the one who's open to nuance and differences in personality, in essence. 

And then there's the extremely diversified, which is, I just want the exact opposite of me. And whatever the relationships that were currently together were healthy alikes and extreme alikes. Not the Diversifieds. And I did not put that in my analytics because I labeled it extreme. So I didn't want to give the impression that it's not right or that there was something wrong with it. But no, the analytics show that the more the person is you, traits-wise, the more you're likely to be with them. In fact, I had a situation where I went, I became diversified, and it broke down. Oh, look at this. We're so different. How fun. And it didn't work well. 

Again, I so appreciate just what you're bringing in. And I'm aware of, as I mentioned, the Gottmans, they talk about every relationship has some differences that pose a challenge in my language curriculum for working on how to work together. So that's the one that's on time, the one that's a little more spontaneous, or the one that's the saver, the spender, the extrovert, the introvert. So I know you speak about these things, so I think some of that will exist. And I think in David Schnarz's world, it was that this could provide some erotic tension, right? There's, you don't always want to have the same. But to your point, you're saying there's a likeness that really does support. There's a lot that is offered when people are aligned on values. And then would you give some examples? 

Because people might associate values and traits, but how are you looking at you? Would you give some examples of what those are? 

What you respect in other people and what you respect in yourself. Risk traits, those are characteristics that you're inherently drawn to. They can be physical traits. They can be humor or intelligence. These are the things that you can not. You can't necessarily change. So just to give an example, Jessica, if I told you a joke, can you help whether you find that funny or not, can you really help it? It's hard, right? It's very automatic. It's very instinctual. That's what traits are. Traits are not necessarily decisions where it's like, I choose to be attracted to that person. And sadly, this is why some of us fall into destructive relationship patterns. It's because if, for example, you grew up in a dysfunctional home, that becomes your wiring. It's something that you are inherently drawn to. 

It's what's familiar to you, right? Doesn't mean that's what you want. It just means that's what you're doing. Mind and body, for whatever reason, have decided this is Familiar. This is a comfort zone. Yes. Right. So with traits, one thing I say is you can be drawn to destructive traits. That does not necessarily mean it needs to be the end-all, be-all. You can stop yourself in your tracks and stop that pattern, right? You might be drawn to it because, again, can you really help what you find funny to the same extent, can you help what makes you horny? Can you, though, right? Can you help what turns you on? Can you help your body know what it wants before your brain can say, no, no, we don't want that. No, no, we're trying to stop this shitty ass pattern. 

Okay, but with that, this is why you have a brain. We are non-animals, right? We are humans. We make decisions, right? Maybe our free will. Sometimes it's difficult at times to tap into that because our bodies have their own formula and mechanisms for what they want. But you can stop yourself and say, no, I don't want this. So, going back to the traits, sometimes the traits conflict with the values. If your value is dependability and reliability, which again, we saw that as number one across age groups, across all relationship types. But what if one of your trait preferences is emotional unavailability, not because you're choosing it, but because you've seen yourself falling into a pattern of being attracted to that? Well, there's a huge conflict there. 

“Yes, talk to us about that because I was aware, and that seems a really important thing to bring light to.” And I appreciate, just as humans, that we have conscious choice and that you're inviting people to recognize there are different pools or tendencies inside of us and that we can really be more discerning about what we're aligning with. So, for one that recognizes, oh, to the point of emotional unavailability, I wouldn't consciously say that I want that trait or I value that trait. Yet if I look at my patterns, I keep choosing in. So, with someone emotionally unavailable, how do you help people work with. 

“So self-awareness is obviously the first step.” By doing the formula, when you're listing out your values and your trait preferences, the goal is not to put numbers that you think you want to have, or values you think you want to have, or you have to be honest with yourself if you have trait preferences. And the best way to determine the trait preferences is to watch your pattern. What do you keep falling into? So if you start to determine that you have trait preferences that are destructive, the next time you meet someone, it's oh, that person falls exactly within the trait preference that I have. But from experience, this trait preference is not sustainable. I will not be in a happy long-term relationship if I find someone with this trait. 

That's where the human brain and our emotional intelligence kick in, and where free will kicks in. But they have that thing, though, they have that edge that I'm constantly getting in trouble with, catch yourself. You don't have to go for a second, third, or seventh date. You can say, for now, I choose not to do that to myself, and I choose to make better decisions for myself. 

I will also say, though very quickly, if it's okay to tap back into the anxious avoidant. Yeah, an avoidant will be emotionally unavailable. And the thing is with dynamics and the way the brain is programmed, I. 

Think it's a really powerful reinforcement. When we look at intermittent reinforcement, that's the most powerful reinforcement. So we look at casinos, or you don't know when you're going to get a positive response, or you're not going to get responsiveness. That's, that's the most compelling dynamic. I might have made a face because, from a research perspective, we categorize,e but I think humans typically live a little bit more on a continuum. So I think people who have avoidant tendencies, I wouldn't say they're not like binary, not emotionally vulnerable or available. I feel there's a range of people's availability, and the way they've interpreted that is I'm broken, shame I'm not enough. So what often lives in their internal state is I'm afraid to turn towards because I think I'm going to make, I'm going to mess it up, or I'm going to hurt the person. 

So again, I think there can be layers here. But I do agree with you. If the pattern dynamic is always the superiority, a superiority, or the power differentials, you have age differences, you have money differences, you have different ways in which people feel a sense of power. And when that continues to be prevalent, I would agree with you absolutely. The person who's a little bit more anxiously primed is trying to understand, trying to check for stability, trying to feel safe. And the way they interpret is typically like ooh, they don't care, or they're not into this, or they might leave, and then the hypervigilance of over-functioning or trying to make it work. So I do think there's a real validity to what you're describing. I'm just adding. 

Yeah, and I really appreciate that. I love that you're bringing the academic understanding, perspective, and insight. I guess when I say avoidant, what I mean to say is that their behaviors are matching and very similar to those of emotionally unavailable people. And regardless, the way I understand it, whether you're an avoidant and truly not functioning properly, when it comes down to demonstrating love and communication, whether you're truly an avoidant or emotionally unavailable, if you're connecting with that person, something in your subconscious will ping, I'm not good enough. Regardless of what their intention is, regardless of the reason, interpretation of the interpretation, their dysfunction, whether they think they're better or not better, they're, regardless of that,

And if your brain is saying, oh shoot, they are better than me, they're bigger than me, I need. 

To perform better, I need to be perfect. 

Yes, exactly. That's where the issue arises right now. Again, I've come across an avoidant where there was a protective little conversation that happened, and I could read between the lines, I saw between the lines thing, and I'm very glad that I did. But I was able to communicate in a way that he snapped out of his avoidant tendencies. Right. But with that said, there's no way, if I didn't have this knowledge, that I would have known whether he's emotionally unavailable or avoidant. Yeah. And if I hadn't caught myself, my brain would have said, I'm scared, I'm out, I'm anxious, I'm, oh shoot, what the fuck just happened? Right. So I was lucky that I had that knowledge. But all to say, it's that signal. It's that signal, and it's your subconscious that you have to be solid with and strong with. 

And that's

And if you happen to have trait preferences where you attract, call it avoidant, call it emotionally unavailable, however it's affecting you is what you need to pay attention to. And that's what I would suggest, spiral into a new relationship like that. 

Yeah, well, and I can appreciate that this and lived experience are confusing because sometimes the data points aren't always like they might show signs of availability, or then they might not be available. And to your point about having consistency and reliability, that can get painful. And just to clarify, when you said earlier, let's say in this dynamic, the one that's a little bit more anxious is working hard to keep things stable or engaged, over functioning, and then at some point they start to devalue because that partner's not showing up and then something switches and then they're now maybe initiating distancing or breaking up or withdrawal because of what you're describing, that they are now valuing less the way that person's showing up. 

Exactly. Because what we're seeing is that the number one value across the board is dependability and reliability. People want a rock. 

Yes. 

So eventually, if the avoidant or however we're. We want to frame that, if they're lacking consistency, they're not able to validate their partner, they're not able to communicate well for whatever reason, at some point, the other person will say, it's not good enough for me, it's not sustainable. So when the partner score is under less than 5%, just 5%, these people tended to be in an on-and-off relationship. It still wasn't stable. And then below that was when the partner's score was minus 10%. That would be a mutual breakup. The interpretation there is that one person gets lazy, then the other person stops putting in effort. Then there may be fears of, why would I invest in this if it's so unstable? And then it's a mutual breakup. It's like, this isn't going anywhere. So maybe at some point it started positively. 

I sincerely believe that at some point, all these couples who were together and then eventually broke up saw something special in them. Scores fluctuate, especially in long-term relationships and marriages. When you meet someone, you're like, oh my God, right? And you might give them a high score, and you might feel very lucky. And then over time, you start to see layers of the person and how they treat disagreements. Or maybe you start to see their misalignments. And if you've been with them for long enough, you might say to yourself, well, why would I leave? We have an attachment now. We're attached. Our friends know about us. We have a routine. That's attachment. But then over time, especially in marriage, and I understand it, especially if there's a kid, there are kids and Morgan involved. Like, I totally get it, but sometimes it just falls into misalignment. 

But one more thing is that this tool and this framework can get you back into alignment. It's a tool for communication. What are the values? How do you score yourself? How do you score your partner? Work on that. Forget about the fights, forget about all the things that have happened between you guys. Just list out your values. Tell your partner how you rate yourself. Tell your partner how you rate them. Be soft. Got a tool to bully. 

Yes, I want to talk about that. I would love to hear more about that. I also want to just, if I'm hearing you in long-term relationship marriages, that perhaps people don't break up, but the misalignment is creating a lot of dissatisfaction or disconnection. So it might not be an actual breakup at times; it might just be a disconnection and not feeling okay. 

Yeah, I'll give you a perfect example, actually. My husband. So a year into our marriage, we were completely misaligned. We were not seeing eye to eye, and we were not doing great. And I'm literally a relationship expert, so why am I not using this framework in my own relationship? I always hesitated doing that because I didn't want to feel, ooh, I know everything. But we got to a point where it's, if this does not get addressed, we're both unhappy right now. So 

we did it together. And I gave him a lesser score in dependability and reliability compared to when we met, when we were engaged, all of that. He gave me a lower score for communication stuff. I was a little sharp. I was a little. My communication was not patient. I lost patience. So neither of us went into why. 

Kevin didn't say, hey, I stopped being dependable because of X, Y, and Z. I didn't tell him that my communication style sucked because of X, Y, and Z. Instead, we just said, here's where you are, here's where I would like you to be. Can we work on that together? And we did. And he became more of a rock in the relationship. What I wanted as a husband to receive, right. And I was softer with him. I became softer and kinder and more gentle, which is what he needs to feel respected. So little by little, we started building our respect and our scores. Right. 

And I will say also when you're in a marriage, because when we did the formula together, I think it was our six-month mark, he was above me, slightly above me, and I had a strong score in his mind as well. When we did it again one year into our relationship, I'm like, oh, this is not a man who's attracted to me right now or who feels I'm matching his values. And that scared me a little bit because I'm like, I want my husband to enjoy me. And this is what he needs, just a gentler communication style, which is not unfair. And I think that he had that same stark realization as well, because as a husband, he wanted to feel like a man. But when he started to realize, hey, the scores are dropping here. 

And again, we didn't go into why we just went into, let me fix it so I could show up as that spouse that I want to be. So it came down to pride as well. It's like, no, I'm not going to be that wife. I want to be better and the same with him. 

Well, it's really, it sounds like zoning in and getting very clear about what matters and having a tool that helps show that more vulnerably or make that more visible. And also the reality check, right, that sometimes when there are interactions that go the way we want them to or feel challenging, then we just might think, oh, we just need to resolve those things. When actually it's whittling away at our attraction, our love, our respect. That's notable. So to have a real, honest conversation. And that is a wake-up call. 

It really is. And the best wake-up call is that the couples who are together see their partner as 4% above them.

if you want, you care, not just your relationship, if you care about yourself, if you want to be happy, yeah. If you want to feel fulfilled, if you want to gain that attraction back, if you want to feel attractive and desired, who wouldn't want that? Who wouldn't want to be admired? 

And values, typically, they change a bit, but they often are very connected to what matters most. So I think, yeah, absolutely, pay attention to that. Okay, so I know we don't have a ton of time, and you had mentioned the importance of self-love or self-worth. Would can we talk about that a little bit? And maybe you're mentioning it here, like our happiness, our well-being, to not compromise, to really be in touch with. But tell us more here. 

Okay, so this is literally the most important part of the framework. And I didn't realize that this would become the biggest revelation of the framework. Okay, so let's let me back up a tiny bit. The average self-score for women is 76%. The average self-score for men is 73%. So that's essentially the baseline. The couples who were currently together had a strong self-score. They had a higher self-score than the average, or just about. Okay, what that means is that the ones who were broken up either in an on-and-off in a mutual breakup, or they were broken up with, had a lower self-score. In other words, you need to have strong self-worth to be in a sustainable relationship. There was one group above the current group with an even stronger self-score. 

And the reason I want to talk about this is that I want to normalize being single; these people did the breaking up. They chose not to settle. And they're 78% soft score average. They're notably higher than the average self-score. All to say, if you're in a relationship and you're unhappy and you're afraid of what family will say, what friends will say, what community will say, what social media will say, if you happen to break up, and oh my God, the world will fall down, and who am I going to be? 

I'm never gonna find anyone else. 

Never gonna find it. Actually, the analytics show that you will be more fulfilled than all the other groups. 

If you don't find someone. 

Even if you don't, which is. I loved seeing that, especially with women. We put so much pressure on ourselves in our 30s. Oh, get married, have a kid, have a mortgage, have the wedding so the parents can be happy, so that you can fit in with your social media friends. We need to let that go, and we need to normalize it. Normalize being single. And the analytics are showing that you're in a better position. Putting that aside, though, for the couples who are currently together, you still need a strong self-score. You did. So what that means is if you're harping on someone, whether it's a breakup or someone that you wish that you could have, it's got nothing to do with them. Work on yourself. Work on yourself. Your confidence will radiate, and you will glow. 

And if this person doesn't want you'll say, I don't care, I'm gonna move on and find my other. And so literally that soft score, I did not realize that 

Because if you have a lower-than-average self-score, you won't make it. 

And you're likely to put up with a bunch of stuff that is perhaps destructive and harmful to your well-being. You're gonna have a low standard. 

That's exactly it. If you have a low self-score, let's call it a 70%. That means that you will accept someone in your life who's also a 70%. Okay, a 70% is not someone who, by definition, through the data that you respect. 

And these are not huge differences in percentages. 

They're not; we're talking 1 to 2%. So for women, 76% is the average self-score. For men, it was 73%. But then the on and off relationships, I think it was down to 72, then to 71, then to, I think 70 was the lowest, and the 70 was when they were broken up. But even then, the partner score, by the way, was -25%. All in all, think about how badly that partner was treating them. 

Right. 

That wasn't that score. How bad did it get? 

Yes, yes. Well, and this is. 

And then you were broken up with after all that you were broken. 

Right. 

Get out. Right. 

I think the percentage difference is if I don't. I'm curious what you would say because you've been immersed in this, but my first blink on it is that someone could think they have a relatively high self-esteem or self-worth because they're, oh, I'm successful in this area, and yet they're still saying yes to really unhealthy dynamics that it maybe isn't that far. Just those percentage differences are huge. 

So what happens if you're killing it in life? You respect yourself so much, you give yourself a 90%, okay, but you grew up a certain way, and now your familiarity and your comfort zone is, let's say, emotional unavailability. Although those are the values that you seek and work on so hard, your trait preferences may conflict. Now, what happens if you are more emotional than practical? You are more traits-focused, traits-leaning than values-leaning when you determine what you want in a relationship and your decision-making. Right. So the people who are currently together tend to fall in the healthy emotional zone, which means their traits are leaning. The ones who are traits-focused, which means all the way traits only, not enough of the values, when determining who's a good partner, do not sustain the relationship. 

Okay, if you are not either close to the middle or slightly towards practical, slightly towards emotional, and either all the way in the extreme, you're not going to sustain it. And you're still, regardless of how hard you work on yourself, how hard you work on your peace of mind, your success, your social network, your strength, your image, your health consciousness, doesn't matter if you're more trait-focused, and even if one of those traits is destructive, boom, you've fallen into a bad pattern. 

So what does someone do? As we're winding down, you're leaving on a cliffhanger. 

Self-awareness. Write it out, write it out. Ask yourself, why am I so good to myself, and yet I can't find a partner who's good to me? Write it out. It's probably not in the values; it's probably in the traits. There's something in the traits there. Either that or you think you need to be a hero to self-validate, and if that's the case, snap out of it. And I say that love because I used to be there. So everything that I say is always out of love because I've been there. But I kicked my own butt to get myself out. So, I think that's why I come off a little. 

You're being very directive, and you're being clear, and you have a lot of evidence to support the dangers of being in misconception or fantasy, and really calling out and giving people a real skillful tool to work with that can assist them to align. 

Yeah. 

How can people get in touch with you, and what are you up to? 

Okay, so you can find my website, lovecaninfactbecalculated.com, otherwise I'm on social media, Instagram and TikTok, Zoey Charif. And if you want to pick up the book, it's on Amazon and Barnes and Noble, and will you say the. 

Name of the book one more time? 

Sure. It's called “Love Can, In Fact, Be Calculated.” 

Excellent. Well, thank you so much. 

I really appreciate you. 

Yes, I enjoyed this very much. 

Thank you.