When Proximity Disguises Connection

Sometimes what feels like a meaningful connection is in fact a convenient one. You spend time with a colleague because you’re on the same project; you have a gym buddy because you train side by side each week; you chat with someone at the coffee machine because your routines align. It feels like closeness, and in many ways it is… but what it really might be is proximity.

Here’s the thing: remove the shared space, the project, the workout schedule, and what often happens is that the dynamics change. Suddenly, the person who always had time doesn’t. The spontaneous interactions fade. The contact slows. And what you’re left with is a quiet question: Did I matter to them, or was I just part of their convenience-network?

I’ve always noticed which relationships shrink when the convenience disappears, and which ones stay. It’s an uncomfortable filter, but also a freeing one. It lets you see who’s there because they want to be, not just because you happen to be around.

What this really means is: effort reveals truth. The ones who reach out, check in, or make space for you when distance grows, those are the ones who see you, not just your proximity.

There’s solid science behind this feeling that “being around someone means connection.” Two concepts in social psychology are especially relevant: the proximity (or propinquity) effect and the mere-exposure effect.

• The propinquity effect (sometimes called the proximity principle) says people are more likely to form relationships with those physically or psychologically close to them. That might mean living nearby, working together, sitting next to each other, etc.

  
  

• The mere-exposure effect says that repeated exposure to something (or someone) makes us like them more, simply because they become familiar.

  
  

So when you spend time side by side with someone, the interaction becomes easier, the barrier to connection is lower. That lower barrier feels like “we have something”; but what if the barrier disappears; you both change jobs, move cities, stop going to the same gym? That illusion of connection is then tested.

Here’s where things get more subtle. Because proximity reduces effort, it’s easy to be present, spontaneous, to rely on overlap. That means some relationships grow because of convenience, not necessarily deep mutual intention.

What this means is: You may have been someone’s friend because you were in the same space, at the same time. Great. But if you were only there because it required little effort, then once that circumstance changes, the connection often doesn’t survive.

You might ask: is that unfair? Maybe. But what it does help you see is that real connection (the kind you want) isn’t just about being around each other, it’s about making the effort to be there even when you’re not automatically around.

There are signs that a relationship is drifting from “we’re in it together” into “you’re there when it’s easy.” Things like:

• You no longer run into them accidentally; you have to reach out, and you do.

• They rarely initiate contact or respond reluctantly,

• You find you’re only together when one of you needs something (help, advice, a ride), rather than just for connection.

• The shared space that used to bind you (office, gym, project) is gone, and you realise the relationship doesn’t change, it shrinks.

That’s not a judgment on the other person. It’s simply an observation: proximity gave cover to convenience. Once the cover is gone, the relationship reveals its true intention or lack thereof.

For a relationship to feel genuine, not just convenient, I believe it must show resilience when convenience is withdrawn. It should ask:

• Will they still reach out when we’re not in the same place?

• Will the contact happen without the context that made it easy?

• Will the investment (time, energy, emotional presence) remain when it’s no longer the default option?

Not every relationship needs to pass the “distance test.” But if you care about building deeper, more intentional connections, here are a few small things that help:

1. Pause before assuming closeness equals depth | Notice where the connection happens. Is it always in shared spaces? Ask yourself: If this context ended, would we still talk? That question alone brings awareness.

2. Create contact outside of convenience | If you always talk at the gym, text them one day just to check in. If your friendship revolves around work, invite them for a walk after hours. The shift in context will tell you a lot.

3. Invest in relationships that feel mutual | Research on reciprocity and relational maintenance  shows that balanced effort, when both people contribute,  keeps connections alive. Pay attention to that balance.

4. Be honest when a relationship fades | Sometimes, letting a convenient relationship go is not loss, it’s clarity. You can appreciate what it was without needing to keep it alive artificially.

5. Build new spaces of connection | You can intentionally design proximity: join a group, pick up a class, volunteer, travel. The proximity effect works both ways, it can help new, meaningful bonds form, as long as you bring genuine interest with it.

Here’s the bottom line: proximity is powerful. It helps connection form. But it can also mask convenience. What separates the “nice because easy” relationships from the “meaningful because chosen” ones is what happens when the easy fades. When you step out of shared context, will they step in?

You don’t need every pleasant relationship to survive distance. What you want is a few that would because they’re based on intention, not convenience.

‘Till next time…