Behavioral science suggests people are held back from reaching out by a fear of intruding — but recipients, in study after study, report feeling something much closer to gratitude
Behavioral science suggests people are held back from reaching out by a fear of intruding — but recipients, in study after study, report feeling something much closer to gratitude
Think about the last message you almost sent. The old friend you thought about contacting after years of silence. The colleague you considered checking in on during a difficult period. The relative you nearly called, then didn’t. In most of those cases, something stopped you. And whatever that thing was, it almost certainly involved imagining how your reaching out would be received.
The word that tends to come up when people are asked to name the specific fear: intrusion. New research suggests the fear is almost always wrong about the person on the other end.
The hesitation and what it’s made of
Reaching out after a silence requires a small act of imagination. You have to picture the other person’s reaction when your message arrives — whether your contact will feel welcome or whether the gap has stretched too long for the gesture to land well. And when you can’t be sure where you stand with someone, or how much you still mean to them, the imagination tends toward caution.
People cite the same hesitations in these moments. I don’t want to bother them. They’re probably busy. It’s been too long now and it would be strange. The silence has gone on for so long that breaking it would feel like making a statement. For some people, the worry is more specific: what if they don’t remember me as fondly as I remember them?
What all of these hesitations share is that they are generated entirely from the inside. The imagined awkwardness is the initiator’s. The projected discomfort — the intrusion — is being assembled without any actual signal from the person who would receive the message. It is a story about someone else’s reaction, written by someone who has not asked them.
What the research found
A team of behavioral scientists led by Peggy J. Liu, Ph.D., of the University of Pittsburgh’s Katz Graduate School of Business, set out to test how accurate people are at predicting how much their outreach would be appreciated. The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in July 2022, involved more than 5,900 participants across multiple experiments — including field studies in which participants reached out to real acquaintances via text, email, and phone. Not strangers. People they actually knew.
The results were consistent across every version of the experiment. “Our research suggests that people significantly underestimate how much others will appreciate being reached out to,” Liu noted. Those who initiated contact consistently predicted that their gesture would land with less warmth than recipients reported it actually did. The gap appeared whether the reach-out was a short message, a longer note, or a small gift. It appeared in close relationships and in more distant ones. And notably, the effect strengthened as the social distance increased: the more time that had passed or the further apart the two people had drifted, the more the initiator underestimated how much the other person would appreciate being contacted.
Why the gap exists
The researchers identified a specific mechanism. As Liu explained: “We found that people receiving the communication placed greater focus than those initiating the communication on the surprise element, and this heightened focus on surprise was associated with higher appreciation.”
In other words, the unexpectedness of being reached out to — the very thing initiators fear will read as strange or intrusive — is precisely what tends to make the gesture feel meaningful to the person receiving it. The initiator has been deliberating over whether to send the message. From where they stand, the act has lost whatever spontaneity it had. But to the recipient, it arrives as an unexpected signal: someone was thinking of them, and acted on it, when they had no particular obligation to do so. That tends to feel significantly better than the initiator predicted.
The research also showed that the more surprising the context — the longer the gap, the weaker the current tie between the two people — the greater the appreciation on the receiving end. The cases that feel the most daunting to initiate are the ones that produce the strongest positive response.
In describing her own response to these findings, Liu offered something unusually honest: “I sometimes pause before reaching out to people from my pre-pandemic social circle for a variety of reasons. When that happens, I think about these research findings and remind myself that other people may also want to reach out to me and hesitate for the same reasons. I then tell myself that I would appreciate it so much if they reached out to me and that there is no reason to think they would not similarly appreciate my reaching out to them.”
This is a useful shift in framing. The fear of intruding is essentially a projection — the assumption that the other person will experience your message the way you experience sending it. With all the ambivalence, the second-guessing, the awareness that it might land awkwardly. The research suggests that projection is almost systematically off. What feels risky from one side tends to feel like warmth from the other.
None of this means every attempt to reconnect will go smoothly. Context matters, relationship history matters, and there are genuine situations where silence is the right answer. The findings come from experimental settings, and real relationships carry complications that a study cannot fully capture. But for the category of situations that most people are actually thinking of — the person you’ve been meaning to contact for months, the old friend you’ve thought about but not written to, the colleague you’ve lost touch with — the main obstacle appears to be a fear that exists largely in the imagination of the person who hasn’t yet sent the message.
The person on the other end is much more likely, the data says, to feel something quite different when it arrives.
Ainura was born in Central Asia, spent over a decade in Malaysia, and studied at an Australian university before settling in São Paulo, where she’s now raising her family. Her life blends cultures and perspectives, something that naturally shapes her writing. When she’s not working, she’s usually trying new recipes while binging true crime shows, soaking up sunny Brazilian days at the park or beach, or crafting something with her hands.
Behavioral science suggests people are held back from reaching out by a fear of intruding — but recipients, in study after study, report feeling something much closer to gratitude
Think about the last message you almost sent. The old friend you thought about contacting after years of silence. The colleague you considered checking in on during a difficult period. The relative you nearly called, then didn’t. In most of those cases, something stopped you. And whatever that thing was, it almost certainly involved imagining how your reaching out would be received.
The word that tends to come up when people are asked to name the specific fear: intrusion. New research suggests the fear is almost always wrong about the person on the other end.
The hesitation and what it’s made of
Reaching out after a silence requires a small act of imagination. You have to picture the other person’s reaction when your message arrives — whether your contact will feel welcome or whether the gap has stretched too long for the gesture to land well. And when you can’t be sure where you stand with someone, or how much you still mean to them, the imagination tends toward caution.
People cite the same hesitations in these moments. I don’t want to bother them. They’re probably busy. It’s been too long now and it would be strange. The silence has gone on for so long that breaking it would feel like making a statement. For some people, the worry is more specific: what if they don’t remember me as fondly as I remember them?
What all of these hesitations share is that they are generated entirely from the inside. The imagined awkwardness is the initiator’s. The projected discomfort — the intrusion — is being assembled without any actual signal from the person who would receive the message. It is a story about someone else’s reaction, written by someone who has not asked them.
What the research found
A team of behavioral scientists led by Peggy J. Liu, Ph.D., of the University of Pittsburgh’s Katz Graduate School of Business, set out to test how accurate people are at predicting how much their outreach would be appreciated. The study, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in July 2022, involved more than 5,900 participants across multiple experiments — including field studies in which participants reached out to real acquaintances via text, email, and phone. Not strangers. People they actually knew.
The results were consistent across every version of the experiment. “Our research suggests that people significantly underestimate how much others will appreciate being reached out to,” Liu noted. Those who initiated contact consistently predicted that their gesture would land with less warmth than recipients reported it actually did. The gap appeared whether the reach-out was a short message, a longer note, or a small gift. It appeared in close relationships and in more distant ones. And notably, the effect strengthened as the social distance increased: the more time that had passed or the further apart the two people had drifted, the more the initiator underestimated how much the other person would appreciate being contacted.
Why the gap exists
The researchers identified a specific mechanism. As Liu explained: “We found that people receiving the communication placed greater focus than those initiating the communication on the surprise element, and this heightened focus on surprise was associated with higher appreciation.”
In other words, the unexpectedness of being reached out to — the very thing initiators fear will read as strange or intrusive — is precisely what tends to make the gesture feel meaningful to the person receiving it. The initiator has been deliberating over whether to send the message. From where they stand, the act has lost whatever spontaneity it had. But to the recipient, it arrives as an unexpected signal: someone was thinking of them, and acted on it, when they had no particular obligation to do so. That tends to feel significantly better than the initiator predicted.
The research also showed that the more surprising the context — the longer the gap, the weaker the current tie between the two people — the greater the appreciation on the receiving end. The cases that feel the most daunting to initiate are the ones that produce the strongest positive response.
A Pew survey of 6,000 Americans found that most people still call their mother first when life gets hard
The message you haven’t sent
In describing her own response to these findings, Liu offered something unusually honest: “I sometimes pause before reaching out to people from my pre-pandemic social circle for a variety of reasons. When that happens, I think about these research findings and remind myself that other people may also want to reach out to me and hesitate for the same reasons. I then tell myself that I would appreciate it so much if they reached out to me and that there is no reason to think they would not similarly appreciate my reaching out to them.”
This is a useful shift in framing. The fear of intruding is essentially a projection — the assumption that the other person will experience your message the way you experience sending it. With all the ambivalence, the second-guessing, the awareness that it might land awkwardly. The research suggests that projection is almost systematically off. What feels risky from one side tends to feel like warmth from the other.
Related Stories from The Blog Herald
None of this means every attempt to reconnect will go smoothly. Context matters, relationship history matters, and there are genuine situations where silence is the right answer. The findings come from experimental settings, and real relationships carry complications that a study cannot fully capture. But for the category of situations that most people are actually thinking of — the person you’ve been meaning to contact for months, the old friend you’ve thought about but not written to, the colleague you’ve lost touch with — the main obstacle appears to be a fear that exists largely in the imagination of the person who hasn’t yet sent the message.
The person on the other end is much more likely, the data says, to feel something quite different when it arrives.
Related Stories from The Blog Herald
Ainura Kalau
RECENT ARTICLES
A national health survey found workers whose sleep shifted by more than 2 hours between weekdays and weekends were 50% more likely to rate their own health as poor, even though nothing about their actual diagnosis had changed
Psychology says older adults who scroll the most in the evening usually aren’t the loneliest people in the house. They’re often the ones who found it, quietly, the safest substitute they have left for calling someone directly.
People who check their phone hardest during a stressful week aren’t the most addicted, they’re the ones who never learned another way to regulate what they’re feeling
The liking gap turned out to be largest specifically in the shyest people studied, meaning the people most convinced they weren’t liked were also the same people whose own self-criticism was distorting the read in the first place
A 1988 study had one group of people write about their most traumatic experience for 20 minutes a day, four days in a row, while another group spent the same four days writing about something completely ordinary, and when researchers measured their immune response afterward, the group who wrote about the hard thing came out with a measurably stronger one
People about to give a speech consistently believe their own nervousness is far more visible to the room than it actually is, a specific mismatch researchers gave its own name decades ago and the pattern keeps showing up