Understanding the Subjective Goldilocks Formula in Communication and Relationships

The Subjective Goldilocks Formula Explained

The subjective Goldilocks formula was first introduced by Mia Porriciello, Psychotherapist & Couples Therapist (Milton Keynes, UK). Often, people overlook or dismiss the experiences of others. They label them as too much or not enough, too emotional, or too negative. These judgments are frequently presented as if they are objective truths. However, in therapeutic work—especially within relational and couples contexts—this assumption tends to falter. What feels overwhelming for one person may seem insignificant to another. What one person perceives as neglectful may feel safe or spacious to someone else.

The Subjective Goldilocks Formula

This clinical and relational framework clarifies that there is no universal standard for what is “just right.” Instead, it focuses on what is metabolically tolerable for a specific nervous system, shaped by its unique history.

Moving Beyond the Classic Goldilocks Principle

The traditional Goldilocks principle suggests that optimal functioning exists somewhere between extremes—not too much, not too little, but just right. While this idea is useful, it subtly implies unrealistic expectations. Such expectations can lead to unattainable standards that create distance among individuals. It holds the notion that “just right” is fixed or universally recognisable. In psychotherapy, this assumption does not hold. The Subjective Goldilocks Formula reframes the question entirely: Just right for whom, and based on what experiences?

Why “Too Much” and “Too Little” Are Learned Experiences

From a developmental and neuropsychological perspective, human beings do not evaluate intensity in the abstract. They assess it through memory—often implicit, somatic, and pre-verbal.

• “Too much” often signals an experience that once arrived without safety, choice, or attunement.

• “Too little” often indicates an experience that once failed to arrive when it was needed.

  
  

These responses are not character flaws or signs of resistance. They are adaptive calibrations of the nervous system.

Subjective Thresholds, Not Universal Standards

Every individual carries two learned thresholds:

• Lower Threshold: Below which an experience registers as absence, neglect, or rejection.

• Upper Threshold: Above which an experience registers as intrusion, engulfment, or threat.

  
  

These thresholds are shaped by relational history, not by conscious preference. Consequently, two people can experience the same behaviour in radically different ways—and both experiences can be valid.

The Subjective Goldilocks Formula (Conceptual Model)

What feels “just right” emerges not solely from the stimulus but from the interaction of several variables.

Perceived Optimality (Pₒ) is a function of four interacting variables:

Pₒ = f ( I × C × H × S )

Where:

• I — Intensity of the stimulus (affection, closeness, autonomy, challenge, emotional expression)

• C — Current context (relational safety, timing, power dynamics, consent, meaning)

• H — Historical imprint (attachment patterns, trauma, emotional deprivation or overwhelm)

• S — Self-regulatory capacity (nervous system flexibility, emotional integration, reflective capacity)

  
  

Implications for Couples and Relationships

In couples therapy, conflict often arises when partners assume their Goldilocks zone should be shared. The Subjective Goldilocks Formula offers a different perspective:

• The issue is not about who is right.

• The issue is about whose nervous system learned which limits, and why.

• Growth comes not from forcing alignment but from expanding tolerance through safety, pacing, and repair.

  
  

As regulatory capacity increases, the “just right” zone widens. It is not coerced; it is cultivated.

The Moral of the Story

There is no such thing as “too much” or “too little” in an arbitrary or moral sense. There is only:

• History

• Context

• Capacity

• Meaning

  
  

What feels just right is not found by comparison—it is grown through experience.

Practical Applications of the Subjective Goldilocks Formula

Understanding the subjective Goldilocks formula can significantly enhance communication in relationships. Here are some practical applications:

Recognising Individual Experiences

It is essential to acknowledge that each person has a unique perspective shaped by their history. This recognition fosters empathy and understanding. Instead of dismissing a partner's feelings, individuals can validate their experiences. This validation can lead to deeper connections and improved communication.

Creating Safe Spaces for Dialogue

Creating a safe space for open dialogue is crucial. Partners should feel comfortable expressing their feelings without fear of judgment. This safety allows for honest conversations about what feels “just right” for each individual. By doing so, couples can navigate their differences more effectively.

Expanding Tolerance and Understanding

As partners learn about each other's thresholds, they can work together to expand their tolerance. This process involves understanding each other's limits and pushing gently against them. It is about cultivating a shared space where both individuals can feel safe and understood.

Emphasising Growth Over Perfection

Instead of striving for a fixed standard of “just right,” couples can focus on growth. This perspective encourages partners to embrace their differences and learn from each other. It shifts the focus from perfection to progress, fostering a more resilient relationship.

Conclusion

The subjective Goldilocks formula offers a profound insight into communication within relationships. By understanding that each person's experience is shaped by their unique history, couples can foster deeper connections. This understanding encourages empathy, creates safe spaces for dialogue, and promotes growth. Ultimately, what feels “just right” is not a universal standard but a personal journey shaped by experience.

About the Author

Mia Porriciello is a psychotherapist and couples therapist based in Milton Keynes, United Kingdom. Her work integrates neuroscience, developmental psychology, psychodynamic and Jungian perspectives, and an existential understanding of human meaning-making. She specialises in relational dynamics, emotional management, and the adaptive function of emotional experience.