Reaching Out Without Words: Why Small Bids for Connection Get Missed
Two people can live in the same home and tell completely different stories about it. One says they keep trying to connect. The other says nothing is being offered. In a new article for The Good Men Project, clinical psychologist Sarah El Nabulsi argues that both accounts can be accurate, because not every attempt at closeness comes with words.
What a bid for connection is
The psychologist John Gottman calls these attempts bids: any small reach for another person's attention, interest, warmth, humour or help (Gottman & DeClaire, 2001). The other person can turn toward the bid, turn away from it, or turn against it. Bids are small and they are constant, far more frequent than the serious conversations people tend to think of as the heart of a relationship.
Ordinary moments seem to carry weight. In an observational study of 49 newlywed couples, the way partners engaged during a short, everyday dinnertime interaction was linked with more humour and affection when the same couples later discussed a disagreement (Driver & Gottman, 2004). The design shows a link rather than cause and effect, as the authors note.
Bids that announce themselves, and bids that don't
Some bids are easy to read: "Can we talk tonight?" or "I've had a hard week." Others carry no label at all. A question about the plan for Saturday. A phone held out with something on the screen. An offer to sort out a task nobody asked about. Staying in the room a little longer than needed. A brief touch while passing in the kitchen.
To the person making them, these quieter bids can feel obvious. To the person receiving them, they can look like routine, and slip by. Nobody is at fault. One person is signalling quietly while the other is listening for something louder.
Why some people keep their bids quiet
In El Nabulsi's view, the form a person's bids take is learned. People who were praised for coping and for not adding to anyone's load can learn to offer help or company instead of asking plainly for closeness. They also tend not to say anything when a bid goes unanswered.
There is a second reason worth naming. Asking plainly carries a risk: the answer could be no, or no answer at all. For people who live with a lot of worry, that risk can feel large, and keeping a need vague can feel safer. Psychologists call this kind of move avoidance. It lowers the discomfort in the moment, and it also keeps the need out of sight, so it is less likely to be met. Over months and years, quiet bids that go unanswered tend to become fewer, and a person can end up seeming far away while feeling unheard.
El Nabulsi is clear that this is not a matter of one gender being worse at connection. People of any gender can reach quietly, and people of any gender can be direct. The difference is in the signal.
What research says about being responded to
Feeling answered by a partner appears to matter beyond the moment. In a study of 235 couples who were recorded discussing real personal problems, people who saw their partner as more supportive during the conversation finished it in a better mood and reported greater well-being a year later (Lemay, Cutri & Or, 2026).
Over a longer span, a study of more than 2,000 married adults in the United States found that perceiving a partner as caring, understanding and appreciative predicted increases in eudaimonic well-being (a sense of meaning, purpose and personal growth) ten years later, after accounting for neuroticism, extraversion and responsiveness from family and friends (Selcuk, Gunaydin, Ong & Almeida, 2016). It did not predict hedonic well-being, such as everyday happiness. Both are associations rather than proof of cause.
Three small things to practise this week
1. Put a few words on one quiet bid a day. "I'd like your company" while making tea. "I wanted you to see this" while holding out the phone. The gesture stays small; it simply becomes easier to read.
2. Ask for the other person's quiet signals. At a calm moment, ask: "How do you reach for me when you'd like us to be closer but don't put it into words?" Then watch for those signals and respond, even briefly.
3. Notice your own vague asks. When you catch yourself hinting rather than asking, pause and ask yourself what you are avoiding. It may be the chance of hearing no. Naming that, even privately, is the first step toward asking more directly.
When the pattern between two people has hardened into resentment or frequent conflict, these steps may not be enough on their own, and couples therapy with a qualified clinician is worth considering.
Where anxiety fits
The third practice touches something familiar in anxiety: avoiding a feared outcome by keeping things vague, staying quiet, or not trying at all. Learning to spot avoidance, and what keeps it going, is a core part of structured, evidence-based work on anxiety.
Anxiety 101 has five modules plus one advanced section, covering the nature of anxiety, its triggers and symptoms, CBT principles, understanding avoidance, and practical behavioural tools. It is self-paced and private, in English with Arabic subtitles.
About Sarah El Nabulsi
Sarah El Nabulsi, M.Sc., M.A., M.A. is a DHA Licensed Clinical Psychologist in Dubai and a Certified Gottman Therapist, with over 15 years of experience supporting adults and couples. She writes for Gulf News and Psychreg, has contributed to The Good Men Project, and created the online courses Anxiety 101 and Master Yourself.
Sources
Driver, J. L., & Gottman, J. M. (2004). Daily marital interactions and positive affect during marital conflict among newlywed couples. Family Process, 43(3), 301–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.00024.x
Gottman, J. M., & DeClaire, J. (2001). The relationship cure. Crown Publishers.
Lemay, E. P., Cutri, J. N., & Or, R. T. (2026). Directive and interpretive functions of world beliefs in dyadic interaction: Providing and perceiving social support. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 52(10), 3295–3309. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251366093
Selcuk, E., Gunaydin, G., Ong, A. D., & Almeida, D. M. (2016). Does partner responsiveness predict hedonic and eudaimonic well-being? A 10-year longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78(2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12272
Comments