Skip to content
EQTiger

Emotional bids: the research on small moments of connection

A bid for connection is any small attempt to get a partner's attention, interest or warmth, like "look at this" or a sigh after a long call. Research on newlywed couples links playful, engaged everyday moments to more humor and affection when the same couples later argue, and related studies link responding warmly to good news and thanking a partner to feeling closer. The evidence is real but mostly correlational, and some popular statistics about bids could not be traced to an openable peer-reviewed source.

Editorially checked

Explore your emotions and relationships with the free EQTiger assessment.

By EQTiger Editorial. Review status: needs-expert-review. Qualified review is pending; the review date records an editorial check. This is general education for adults, not therapy or couples counseling, and EQTiger does not diagnose anyone, including your partner.

What counts as a bid

The term is widely used in couples work influenced by John Gottman, and the closest peer-reviewed study we could verify is described below. A bid is a small request for connection. It can be a question ("Want to hear something funny?"), a comment ("That car is the color we painted our first kitchen"), a touch, a laugh, or even a heavy sigh that invites "what's wrong?". The partner can respond in roughly three ways, usually described as turning toward (engaging), turning away (not noticing or ignoring) and turning against (responding with irritation).

BidTurning towardTurning awayTurning against
"Ugh, my sister called again.""What did she want this time?"Keeps scrolling"Do we have to talk about your sister every night?"
Holds up the phone: "Look at this dog."Leans over: "Oh, those ears.""Mm.""I'm busy."
Sits down heavily after work"Rough one?"Says nothing"You're not the only one who's tired."

The labels are a practitioner's vocabulary. They are useful precisely because the moments are small: most bids are not about anything important, which is why they are easy to miss.

What the research actually found

Dinnertime and later arguments. Janice Driver and John Gottman observed 49 newlywed couples during a 10-minute dinnertime interaction and, separately, a 15-minute conflict discussion (Driver and Gottman, 2004). They developed a new coding system for the dinnertime moments. Couples who showed more playfulness and enthusiasm in the everyday moments also showed more humor and affection during conflict. The authors are clear that the study was observational and correlational, so it cannot show that turning toward bids causes better arguments. It is preliminary support for the idea that small daily moments matter.

Good news. In a related line of work, Shelly Gable and colleagues found that how partners respond when one shares good news is linked to relationship quality. In a study of 79 dating couples, responses to positive events predicted relationship well-being and breakup two months later more closely than responses to negative events (Gable, Gonzaga, and Strachman, 2006). Sharing good news is one of the most common bids there is.

Small kindnesses and thanks. Sara Algoe, Shelly Gable and Natalya Maisel studied cohabiting couples day by day and found that a partner's thoughtful actions prompted gratitude, and that gratitude predicted feeling more connected and satisfied the next day, for both partners (Algoe, Gable, and Maisel, 2010). A larger program of studies by Amie Gordon and colleagues found that people who felt appreciated were more appreciative in return, and appreciative partners were more responsive and more likely to stay together (Gordon and colleagues, 2012).

Positive feeling over the long run. Gottman and Levenson's 14-year study of married couples found that a lack of positive feeling, both in arguments and in ordinary conversation, predicted divorce later in marriage (Gottman and Levenson, 2000). That study used a prediction model fit within one sample, so its accuracy figure should not be taken at face value, but the direction of the finding fits the bids idea.

The statistic you may have seen

Popular articles often quote precise percentages for how often couples who stayed married turned toward bids compared with couples who divorced. We looked for a peer-reviewed paper reporting those figures with an abstract we could open and check, and did not find one. The 2004 dinnertime study above is the closest peer-reviewed source we could verify, and it reports associations, not those percentages. Until a checkable source is available, treat the specific numbers as unverified.

Phones and missed bids

Devices are a modern way to turn away without meaning to. In a survey of 143 married or cohabiting women, those who reported more technology interruptions during couple time also reported more conflict about technology and lower relationship satisfaction (McDaniel and Coyne, 2016). In an experiment where participants imagined a conversation with someone who kept checking their phone, more phone use lowered how good the conversation felt and how satisfied people were with the relationship (Chotpitayasunondh and Douglas, 2018). One study was cross-sectional and the other used an imagined, animated conversation, so neither shows what happens in a specific couple over time.

What the research does not show

  • That every missed bid matters. Everyone turns away sometimes, especially when tired, sick or busy with a baby. The research is about patterns over many moments, not single slips.
  • That bids explain why relationships end. Small moments are one ingredient among many, and these studies cannot separate cause from effect.
  • That turning toward means always being available. "I want to hear this, give me ten minutes to finish this email" is turning toward. Promising and then following through counts.

How to turn toward more often

  1. Learn your partner's bids. For a week, notice the small ways they reach for you: a comment from the other room, a link they send, sitting close.
  2. Respond with one specific thing. A question about the detail they mentioned shows you heard it.
  3. When you cannot engage, say when you can. "Hold that thought until after this call, I want to hear it."
  4. Make your own bids easier to see. "Can I tell you about my day? I need five minutes of you" is clearer than a sigh.
  5. Thank the small things. Saying "thanks for making coffee" is a bid in return.

Try a three-day bid log

If you want to see your own pattern rather than take the research on faith, keep a private log for three ordinary days. Each evening, write down two or three moments when your partner reached for you and what you did, plus one moment when you reached for them.

TimeTheir bidWhat I didNext time
7:15 amRead a headline out loudSaid "hm" and kept packing lunchesLook up and react to one sentence
6:40 pm"My knee is killing me"Asked what happened, got the ice packSame
9:30 pmSat next to me on the couchKept watching my show with earbuds inTake one earbud out

Most people find the misses cluster at predictable times: the morning rush, the first ten minutes home, the last hour with a screen. That tells you where one small change will do the most. The log is for your own learning, not something to show your partner as evidence, and it should never become a tally of their misses.

For specific words, see checking in after a hard day. If one of you rarely turns toward the other and it has become lonely, feeling taken for granted covers how to raise it.

Key studies

StudySampleFindingLimits
Driver and Gottman, 200449 newlywed couples: 10-minute dinnertime interaction and 15-minute conflict discussionPlayfulness and enthusiasm in everyday moments went with more humor and affection during conflict.Observational and correlational; preliminary.
Gable, Gonzaga, and Strachman, 200679 dating couples, videotaped, 2-month follow-upResponses to good news predicted well-being and breakup more closely than responses to bad news.Dating couples; short follow-up.
Algoe, Gable, and Maisel, 2010Daily reports from both partners in cohabiting couplesThoughtful acts prompted gratitude, which predicted next-day connection and satisfaction for both partners.Short-term, correlational self-reports.
Gordon and colleagues, 2012Series of cross-sectional, daily, lab and longitudinal studiesFeeling appreciated went with appreciating in return, more responsiveness and staying together.Mostly correlational.
McDaniel and Coyne, 2016143 married or cohabiting women, online surveyMore technology interruptions went with more conflict and lower satisfaction.Cross-sectional; women only.

Research notes

Every source below was opened and checked on the review date. Each note says, in one sentence, what the source found or argues.

  1. Driver and Gottman, 2004. Daily marital interactions and positive affect during marital conflict among newlywed couples. Family Process. Playfulness and enthusiasm in everyday dinnertime moments were linked to more humor and affection during a later conflict discussion, offering preliminary support for the importance of small daily moments. doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.00024.x
  2. Gable, Gonzaga, and Strachman, 2006. Will you be there for me when things go right? Supportive responses to positive event disclosures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(5), 904-917. How partners responded when the other shared good news predicted relationship well-being and breakup 2 months later more closely than how they responded to bad news. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.91.5.904
  3. Algoe, Gable, and Maisel, 2010. It's the little things: Everyday gratitude as a booster shot for romantic relationships. Personal Relationships. Thoughtful things a partner did prompted gratitude, and gratitude from these daily interactions predicted more connection and satisfaction the next day for both the person receiving and the person giving. doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2010.01273.x
  4. Gordon and colleagues, 2012. To have and to hold: Gratitude promotes relationship maintenance in intimate bonds. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. People who felt appreciated by their partners were more appreciative in return, and more appreciative partners were more responsive, more committed, and more likely to stay together over time. doi.org/10.1037/a0028723
  5. Gottman and Levenson, 2000. The timing of divorce: Predicting when a couple will divorce over a 14-year period. Journal of Marriage and Family. Negative affect during conflict predicted early divorce, while a lack of positive affect in conflict and everyday conversations predicted later divorce. doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2000.00737.x
  6. McDaniel and Coyne, 2016. "Technoference": The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women's personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. Women who reported more everyday technology interruptions in couple time also reported more conflict over technology, lower relationship satisfaction, more depressive symptoms, and lower life satisfaction. doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000065
  7. Chotpitayasunondh and Douglas, 2018. The effects of "phubbing" on social interaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. In an experiment, being phubbed more by a conversation partner lowered perceived communication quality and relationship satisfaction, explained by reduced belonging and changes in positive and negative feelings. doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12506

Start with the free EQTiger assessment (adults 18+), or browse more relationship help.

Your next 9 minutes

Understand your emotions.

36 questions about everyday moments. A fresh starting point for reflection.

Free to take. Full report $6.95. One-time payment. No subscription.

A little guidance

AI assistant, can make mistakes, not a therapist. Avoid sharing sensitive personal details.

Where would you like to begin?

I can explain the assessment and help you find your way.