Despite the established efficacy and the recognition that the Johnson and Gottman models have achieved in the field of couple therapy (Bradley, Friend & Gottman, 2011; Byrne, Carr, & Clark, 2004; Gottman, 1993; Gottman & Gottman, 2008; Gottman & Kimberly, 2005; Halchuk, Makinen, & Johnson, 2010; Johnson, 2008; McLean, et al., 2008; Naaman, Pappas, Makinen, Zuccarini, & Johnson-Douglas, 2005), there is surprisingly little in the literature that discusses the integration of these two clinical approaches. This lack of development is particularly noteworthy given the trend toward the integration of theory and practice in the field of couple therapy (Blow & Sprenkle, 2001; Davis & Piercy, 2007a; Davis & Piercy, 2007b; Sprenkle, Davis, & Lebow, 2009; Gurman, 2008). This article shows how the Johnson and Gottman models are compatible and how they can be successfully wed into a more integrated and comprehensive model of couple therapy. While both Johnson and Gottman agree that one of the most important cornerstones of their treatment models is improving the emotional regulation and connection of the couple, they differ with respect to their theoretical roots and their conceptualization of healthy relationships (Gurman, 2008;Young, 2005). The following discussion first focuses on exploring these differences and then examines the shared commonalities and strengths of their approaches. Finally, a new treatment model is proposed that integrates the commonalities and strengths of these two clinical approaches. Gottman's Model Gottman's model of couple therapy evolved out of his research on marital interaction and on what predicted divorce for couples (Bischoff, 2002; Gottman, 1982; Gottman, 1998; Gottman & Gottman, 2008; Gottman & Levenson, 1984; Gottman & Levenson, 1988; Gottman & Levenson, 1992; Gottman & Levenson, 2002a; Gottman & Levenson, 2002b; Gottman, Markman, & Notarius, 1977; Jenicus & Duba, 2003; Levenson & Gottman, 1985; Madhyastha, Hamaker, & Gottman, 2011). His interest was on identifying the critical interactional and conflictual factors that contributed to failed and successful marriages. As such, Gottman's early research was not so much focused on how to facilitate clinical treatment, but on identifying key communication and problem solving characteristics of both healthy and unhealthy marital relationships (Gottman & Silver, 1994). By taking this position, he avoided becoming identified with any particular school of couple therapy and his observational studies produced ground breaking findings that were influential across the theoretical spectrum in the field of couple therapy (Atkinson, 2005; Young, 2005).