Stop Trying to "Communicate Better." Start Asking for What You Need.

In almost every initial consultation with a new couple, I hear the same diagnosis. They sit on the couch, look at each other with exhausted frustration, and say:

"We just need to communicate better."

Sometimes the expectation is for me to pull out a whiteboard and teach them "active listening" techniques or give them a script for "I statements." More often the expectation is that I can change their partner.

My response usually surprises them.

"I listened to you argue for the last twenty minutes. You don't seem to have a problem communicating. You both articulated your positions very clearly. You understand English perfectly fine.

You don't have a communication problem. You have a translation problem. You are translating your unmet needs into criticism, and then wondering why your partner gets defensive."

When couples say they want better communication, what they usually mean is: "I want my partner to agree with me faster so this fight can end," or "I want to stop feeling so lonely in this room."

More talking isn't the solution. Better "tools" aren't the solution. The solution is understanding the mechanics of how you are accidentally sabotaging the connection you are desperate for.

The Research: It’s Not About Eloquence, It’s About "Bids"

For decades, researchers like Dr. John Gottman have studied thousands of couples in "love labs," observing them for days at a time to see what actually separates the masters of relationships from the disasters.

Gottman found that successful couples don't necessarily have deeper conversations or fewer arguments. What they do have is a higher rate of responding to "bids for connection."

A "bid" is any attempt from one partner to get the attention, affirmation, or affection of the other. It is rarely a grand romantic gesture. It’s tiny.

It’s a sigh while reading an email. It’s saying, "Wow, look at that bird outside." It’s reaching out to squeeze a hand while watching TV.

In every bid, there is a silent, subtextual question: "Are you there with me?"

The research is stark: In happy relationships, partners turn toward these bids about 86% of the time. In relationships headed for divorce, they turn toward them only 33% of the time. They either ignore the bid (turning away) or respond with hostility (turning against).

When a bid is ignored, the asker doesn't just feel unheard; they feel unimportant. And when we feel unimportant, we rarely say, "I feel sad." We get angry.

The Couch Scenario: A Case Study in Failure

Let’s look at the example I see most often.

It’s 8:30 PM. Dinner is done. You are both on the couch. One partner is scrolling through their phone, lost in an algorithm. The other partner is sitting there, feeling the distance widening, wanting connection but not knowing how to get it.

The need is simple: "I miss you. I want your attention."

But that feels vulnerable to say. What if they say no? So, instead of leading with the vulnerability, you lead with protection. You cloak the need inside a criticism.

You say: "Are you seriously going to be on your phone all night?"

Let’s analyze the mechanics of this interaction.

You have successfully communicated a sentence. Your partner understands the words. But they do not hear a bid for connection. They hear an attack. They hear that they are doing something wrong.

Because they feel attacked, their brain’s defense system activates. They have two options: fight back or shut down.

They might say: "I’ve been working all day, can I just have five minutes of peace?" (Fight) Or they might just sigh, roll their eyes, and keep scrolling. (Flight/Freeze)

The result? You feel even lonelier, and now you are also angry. Your partner feels judged and micro-managed. Nobody got what they wanted.

The Shift: The Courage to Be Direct

The mistake in the couch scenario isn't a lack of communication skills. It's a lack of courage. It takes courage to state a need without wrapping it in barbed wire.

If you want to change the dynamic, you have to change the input. You have to stop criticizing what you don't like and start asking for what you do want.

Let's replay the couch scene. You feel the distance. You recognize the need: I want connection.

Instead of the criticism, you try a "Soft Start-Up." This is another Gottman concept that simply means starting a conversation without blame.

You say: "Hey, I’m feeling a little lonely over here. I’d love it if you put the phone down for ten minutes and just hung out with me."

Look at the difference.

There is no attack. There is no "you always" or "you never." There is just a statement of internal reality ("I feel lonely") followed by a specific, actionable request ("put the phone down for ten minutes").

Your partner might still say no. They might be exhausted. But they cannot argue with your feelings, and they don't need to defend themselves against a request. You have immensely increased the odds of them turning toward your bid rather than against it.

The Work

"Communicating better" isn't about learning how to debate your partner more effectively. It’s about learning how to drop your weapon before you walk in the room.

It requires you to pause when you feel irritated, trace that irritation back to the underlying unmet need, and then take the risk of stating that need clearly.

It is terrifying to say "I need you" instead of "You are annoying." But one leads to a fight, and the other leads to a chance for connection. You have to decide which outcome you want more.