by John Gottman
Amy decided to see a family therapist so they could get back on track. The therapist was encouraging, telling her that the most important thing for her to do was to start paying more attention to the details of her boys’ lives: to make a concerted daily effort to offer them praise for the things they were doing right, and to be absolutely certain to ask them about their activities—not in a nagging way, but in a way that showed she was really listening. It’s been challenging for Amy—especially with the demands of law school. But she says she’s finding small niches of one-on-one time daily for each boy, even if it’s just to drive one to football practice or to sit and play a short video game with the other. Her relationship with the boys is slowly improving as a result. “The biggest change is that I don’t think of them as a negative distraction anymore,” says Amy. “The breaks I take from my work to be with them are my reward.”
These stories show what we’re finding in our observational research—that the more people turn away from one another, the more conflict they’ll have to contend with later on. But the more they turn toward one another’s bids, the less contentious their relationships will be.
That’s not to say that an occasional missed bid spells disaster. Everybody drops the ball sometimes. And if you’re happy in a relationship, there’s often enough positive interaction happening between you that one missed bid won’t affect the overall quality of the relationship. But you can’t make a habit of turning away and expect the relationship to survive.
There are two more observations my colleagues and I have made about turning away that merit special attention. The first is that interrupting does not seem to be as harmful to relationships as the other two types of turning-away behavior: being preoccupied or ignoring the other person. Psychologists used to think that interrupting was a sign of trouble in a relationship. They’d look for a struggle for dominance between partners. They’d suspect that one person was trying unfairly to silence the other. But I believe that interrupting can also be a sign of people’s enthusiasm for interacting with each other. A pair may have so much to share that they literally can’t wait for their partner to stop talking before they jump back into the conversation. When interrupting happens in this way, and neither partner seems to be irritated by the disruptions, it may not be so harmful.
My colleagues and I also found some interesting differences in the way that being preoccupied relates to marital dissatisfaction in husbands and wives. Wives who turn away because they are preoccupied with other tasks are more often dissatisfied with their marriages than are husbands who do the same thing. It’s hard to say for certain what accounts for this difference, but I believe it may be related to differences in the meaning these women and men attach to turning their attention away from the relationships. Women may see turning away as an act of hostility, so when they do it, it’s a conscious expression of dissatisfaction with their spouses. But men may turn away without even acknowledging it consciously, and with no hostility intended. In other words, if a woman ignores her husband’s bids while she’s watching TV, she’s doing it to send a message that she’s mad at him. But if a man ignores his wife while he’s watching TV, he’s not trying to send any message; he’s doing it without even thinking about how it might affect his relationship with his wife.
Regardless of a person’s intentions, however, ignoring or turning away from another’s bid for connection makes the bidder feel bad. And if turning away becomes a habit, it can have a harmful effect on most any type of relationship.
Choosing to Turn Against Bids for Connection
Turning against a bid for connection means responding to it in a negative way. In our studies, we’ve seen many ways of turning against:
• Contemptuous responses that entail hurtful, disrespecting comments aimed at the person bidding for connection. Such put-downs are often delivered with an air of superiority, as if the speaker wants to put some distance between him- or herself and the bidder, and intentional insults will do the trick. Here are some examples:
CHILD: I don’t understand this math homework at all.
DAD: Of course you don’t. You take after your mother and all her lame-brained relatives.
HUSBAND: Do you want to go have some lunch?
WIFE: Is that all you ever think about—eating?
WORKER A: I enjoyed your presentation this morning. I learned a lot.
WORKER B: Well, that’s surprising. It wasn’t really aimed at your demographic.
• Belligerent responses that are provocative or combative. You get the sense that the speaker is looking for a fight. He or she would argue with whatever the bidder says, regardless of content. Belligerent responses often involve unfair teasing or a dare.
CHILD: Here’s an interesting article…
MOM: Can’t you see I’m trying to read?
SISTER A: Would you get me a napkin while you’re up?
SISTER B: Get it yourself.
HUSBAND: Do you want to watch TV tonight?
WIFE: So that’s all you think I’m good for, right? Sitting in front of the tube watching mindless TV shows all the time?
HUSBAND: Of course not. What would you like to do? Maybe you’d rather go see a play instead.
WIFE: Oh, like that’s supposed to make me feel better? (Mocking) “Maybe you’d rather go see a play instead.”
PARENT: I’m so frustrated with you, I don’t know what to do.
CHILD: Why don’t you just hit me and get it over with? I know that’s what you’re dying to do.
• Contradictory responses, in which a person seems intent on starting a debate or argument. This is less hostile than a belligerent response, but it still blocks the bidder’s attempt to connect.
FRIEND A: Would you like a tangerine?
FRIEND B: That’s not a tangerine. It’s a Satsuma orange.
WORKER A: I’d love to have your comments on this report by Friday.
WORKER B: Why Friday? Isn’t Monday good enough?
• Domineering responses that involve attempts to control another person. The respondent’s goal is to get the bidder to withdraw, retreat, or submit. You often hear a parental message in these responses, whether the speaker is a parental figure or not.
BROTHER A: Do you know where I’d love to go someday? India!
BROTHER B: Don’t be ridiculous! You’d hate it there, with all its poverty and overcrowding. Scandinavia—now there’s a place you’d really love!
FRIEND A: My car’s in the shop. Can you give me a lift?
FRIEND B: I suppose. But only if you’re ready at five P.M. sharp.
CHILD: Aw, Mom. Please don’t call me “Angel” in front of my friends.
MOM: But that’s who you are—my littlest angel. And that’s who you’ll always be.
• Critical responses that are broad-based attacks on a bidder’s character. They’re different from a complaint, which focuses on a particular event or specific behavior. When people are being critical, they frequently speak in global terms, saying things like “you always…” and “you never…” Often you’ll hear statements of blame or betrayal in these responses:
WIFE: I’m feeling really tired. I need some time alone this afternoon.
HUSBAND: That figures. You’re always so lazy and self-centered. All you do is think about yourself.
WORKER A: Have you got a minute? I’ve got some questions about this procedure.
WORKER B: Okay, but make it quick. I can’t afford to hold your hand all the time.
CHILD: Can we pull over soon? I’ve got to use the bathroom.
DAD: Why don’t you ever go before we leave the house? You never learn, do you?
• Defensive responses that create a sense of separation by allowing the speaker to relinquish responsibility for matters at hand. If the bidder is upset about something, the respondent may act like an innocent victim of misplaced blame.
HUSBAND: What a day I had! I’m exhausted.
WIFE: So you think my day was a picnic? I worked my tail off
, too!
WORKER A: The three-hole punch is missing. Has anybody seen it?
WORKER B: Don’t look at me!
WIFE: I’m worried about the bills.
HUSBAND: It wasn’t my idea to buy the new car.
Unlike turning-away responses, which are more mindless than malicious, turning against has a bite to it. It’s hard to hear such responses without thinking, “That’s mean,” or “That was uncalled for.” Still, I doubt that most people who turn against their loved ones really intend to cause as much harm to their relationships as they do in these exchanges. Rather, they may simply have developed a personal style of relating that’s characteristically crabby or irritable. This type of prickliness may result from many factors, such as having too many demands on your time, not enough peace of mind, or the lack of a satisfying purpose or direction for your life. Often it’s a spillover of self-criticism that has its origins in the distant past. The problem may also be a biologically based irritability that is chemically related to depression.
Regardless of its origins, however, habitually turning against another’s bids for connection is hard on relationships. This type of behavior says:
• Your need for attention makes me angry.
• I feel hostile toward you.
• I don’t respect you.
• I don’t value you or this relationship.
• I want to hurt you.
• I want to drive you away.
Even more than turning away, these responses can make the bidder feel hurt and rejected. If the respondent holds a position of power over the bidder—a boss, teacher, parent, or dominating spouse, for example—the bidder may even become anxious or afraid, which leads to suppressing feelings and avoiding conflict. Such reactions make sense when you’re in a relationship with somebody who habitually responds to you with contempt, belligerence, and other attacks; you find a way to start dodging those bullets. Take the employee whose boss constantly responds to her low-level bids with anger and irritability, for example. Once she catches on, she’s not likely to take the chance of discussing her most heartfelt dreams with him. Whether the worker is conscious of it or not, she may feel, “This guy is scary enough when I ask him to sign my time sheet. There’s no way I’m going to tell him what’s really on my mind.”
It’s not unusual for people to remain in such suppressed, conflict-avoiding relationships for an exceptionally long time. In the case of parent-child or childhood sibling relationships, there’s no way for a child to leave voluntarily. Unhappily married couples in this state may put off talking about separation or divorce indefinitely, despite their misery. Disgruntled employees may stay in their jobs much longer than they should. But all the while, it’s as if some radar inside is keeping track of incoming assaults. And once the radar registers a certain threshold, that’s it. The bidder says, “Why bother? I’ll only get hurt.” All bids cease, and partners drift apart. Although they may stay in the relationship, many quit interacting with each other altogether.
Exercise: Create an Emotion Log
An Emotion Log can be a way to document your progress toward improving emotional communication, including the ways you bid and respond to bids. Think of it as the kind of logbook an explorer might keep during a journey of great discovery. As an explorer, you may make observations and jot down notes on various topics, whether such details prove to be significant later on or not. What’s important is to get it all down on paper so that you can see interesting patterns emerge.
Choose whatever kind of blank book fits your style. Some people like to use a fancy bound journal, while others simply jot down notes in a spiral notebook. People with an artistic flair might want to use a drawing pad for sketching people’s facial expressions or illustrating insights. Others may want to scribble notes on napkins and receipts, and then stuff them all in a folder.
Regardless of your style, you can start by making entries about the bids and responses to bids you’re noticing each day. You might want to answer one or more of the following questions:
• What did you notice today about the way you made bids for connection with important people in your life?
• How did you feel about the way people responded to your bids?
• Did you notice anybody turning toward? Turning away? Turning against? What did that behavior look like?
• Was there anything about the way you made your bid that might have affected their choice in turning? Is there anything you might do differently next time?
• What did you notice today about the way you responded to other people’s bids for connection?
• Did you notice yourself turning toward, turning away, or turning against other people? What did that behavior look like?
• Was there something about the way that person made his or her bid that affected your choice in turning? Can you imagine making a different choice? Can you imagine how that might have affected the next thing that happened in the conversation?
The Difference Between Men and Women
Many factors influence the way people bid and respond to bids, and gender is certainly one of those factors. A few key points of difference, which emerged from our studies of husbands and wives, merit special attention.
First, we learned that husbands in happy marriages turned toward their spouses with much greater frequency than husbands in unhappy marriages did. But wives turned toward their partners with the same frequency whether their marriages were happy or not.
We can conclude from this that men may hold a significant key to determining whether or not their marriages will succeed. While wives’ attention to their husbands’ needs is always important, it’s the additional benefit of the husbands’ mindfulness that puts the relationship over the top, giving the couple a much better chance of a long, happy marriage.
That’s not to say that the wife’s contribution is inconsequential. Our studies show that the wife’s sense of humor, interest, and affection can have a big impact on the husband’s ability to remain calm during conflict—a factor that ultimately predicts stability in a marriage. In this regard, it’s the wife’s positive expression that makes a bigger difference than the husband’s. But what allows a wife access to these attributes when she’s engaged in a conflict? Our research reveals that it’s the practice she gets constantly turning toward her husband in everyday interaction.
We also found that in partnerships where spouses turned away from each other’s bids, husbands and wives were equally likely to get hostile with one another during disagreements. But in marriages where partners turned against each other, the husbands typically suppressed their feelings or became hostile. Their wives, on the other hand, usually reacted in just one way: They simply suppressed their feelings.
It’s hard to say for certain why this gender difference exists in marriages where spouses turn against each other. One reason may have to do with the balance of power in relationships. Many women whose husbands consistently turn against their bids may simply feel too frightened by their spouses’ anger to react with hostility during an argument. So they shut down and try to avoid or suppress their negative feelings.
Another theory might be that, under stress, men tend to become more irritable and critical than women do. In fact, a recent study on differences in stress among men and women showed that while men tend to respond with a “fight or flight” reaction, women are more likely to “tend and befriend”—i.e., to seek support from and affiliation with others. While suppressing one’s feelings is not exactly seeking affiliation, at least it’s not antagonistic in the way that a hostile reaction would be.
Exercise: What’s Your Style of Bidding and Responding to Bids?
To download a PDF of the following exercise, click here.
To take this test, think about a person who’s important to you—perhaps a partner, friend, child, parent, sibling, or coworker with whom you’re currently having some conflict or discomfort.
If you have a high level of intimacy and trust with t
his person, you might ask him or her to take the test as well. That way, you can share the results, which may lead to a better shared understanding of how you can interact in ways that will strengthen your relationship.
If you don’t feel that you can ask this person to take the test with you, taking it alone may still benefit your relationship—especially if it helps you to see the relationship from the other person’s perspective.
Here’s what you do:
1. Complete each item, indicating the extent to which you agree or disagree with each statement about yourself in this relationship. For each item, circle the alternative that best fits.
SA = strongly agree
A = agree
N = neutral
D = disagree
SD = strongly disagree
2. If you’re doing this exercise with another person, talk about the results and what you’ve learned from them. If you’re doing the exercise alone, complete each item again, this time pretending to be that other person. This can help you to see your relationship from the other person’s perspective. Either way, consider what you’ve learned and areas in which you might want to improve your bidding and responses in the future.
Bidding
1. I sometimes get ignored when I need attention the most.
2. This person often doesn’t notice me.
3. This person usually doesn’t have a clue to what I am feeling.
4. I try, but am not successful in obtaining the social support I need in this relationship.
5. I think that this person should know what I need without my saying so explicitly.
6. I often have difficulty getting a meaningful conversation going with this person.
7. I have trouble getting emotionally close to this person.