WEBVTT - You Have More Influence Than You Think 0:00:14.916 --> 0:00:32.996 Pushkin. When I think of influence, I think of any 0:00:33.036 --> 0:00:39.156 time one person changes another person's attitude or behavior. That's 0:00:39.236 --> 0:00:43.276 Vanessa Vans, a professor of social psychology at Cornell, an 0:00:43.316 --> 0:00:45.996 author of the book You Have More Influence Than You Think. 0:00:46.836 --> 0:00:49.316 When I hear a title with the word influence in it, 0:00:49.676 --> 0:00:53.236 I immediately think of Dale Carnegie. In nineteen thirty six, 0:00:53.356 --> 0:00:56.156 he published the book How to Win Friends and Influence People, 0:00:56.476 --> 0:00:59.916 and it's still a bestseller today. Dale makes the case 0:00:59.956 --> 0:01:02.836 that influence is a skill we need to actively cultivate, 0:01:03.316 --> 0:01:07.396 but Vanessa makes the opposite argument. I am very purposely 0:01:07.516 --> 0:01:10.716 not the modern day Dale Arnegie, because I think there's 0:01:10.716 --> 0:01:13.876 so many resources out there that are trying to be that, 0:01:14.076 --> 0:01:16.596 you know, like here's how to win friends and influence people, 0:01:16.676 --> 0:01:20.876 just in these other thousand different ways. And I think 0:01:20.916 --> 0:01:25.316 my take is really that we already are influencing people, 0:01:25.756 --> 0:01:32.156 we just don't see it. On today's episode, what science 0:01:32.196 --> 0:01:38.196 teaches us about the influence we already have. I'm Maya Shunker, 0:01:38.356 --> 0:01:40.796 and this is a slight change of plans, a show 0:01:40.796 --> 0:01:43.116 about who we are and who we become in the 0:01:43.156 --> 0:01:56.836 face of a big change. I love when I come 0:01:56.876 --> 0:01:59.636 across research that shows we can improve our lives with 0:01:59.796 --> 0:02:03.596 just a small shift and perspective. Vanessa says, we don't 0:02:03.636 --> 0:02:06.676 need to follow a rigid set of principles or completely 0:02:06.716 --> 0:02:11.436 overhaul our personalities to be influential. There's a much simpler approach, 0:02:11.756 --> 0:02:14.876 and it starts with recognizing what even counts is influence. 0:02:16.036 --> 0:02:18.596 I think a lot of people think of influence in 0:02:18.676 --> 0:02:21.676 a very formal sort of way. They think of those 0:02:21.756 --> 0:02:26.516 times when you're actively trying to persuade someone to completely 0:02:26.596 --> 0:02:29.836 change their minds, or you're standing in front of a 0:02:29.916 --> 0:02:33.116 room with your presentation trying to win over a set 0:02:33.156 --> 0:02:39.436 of clients. My definition of influence captures those kinds of instances, 0:02:39.476 --> 0:02:42.876 but it's also broader than that. It's also the times 0:02:42.916 --> 0:02:46.276 we just make a throwaway comment and suddenly that changes 0:02:46.316 --> 0:02:49.316 the way someone feels about something. It's just army or 0:02:49.436 --> 0:02:53.556 presence in a room that changes how people talk about 0:02:53.596 --> 0:02:56.956 a particular topic. And so I think of influence is 0:02:56.996 --> 0:02:59.516 so much more broad than a lot of people tend 0:02:59.556 --> 0:03:02.916 to think of influence. Yeah, and one reason your approach 0:03:02.916 --> 0:03:05.836 really resonates with me is that the know how to 0:03:06.476 --> 0:03:10.156 win over people strategically, it's always felt so ichy to 0:03:10.236 --> 0:03:13.516 me like a person needs to depart from who they 0:03:13.556 --> 0:03:16.156 are in order to have an impact on the world. 0:03:16.236 --> 0:03:19.436 And I think, as listeners will hear over the course 0:03:19.436 --> 0:03:22.756 of our conversation, this is about just staying true to 0:03:22.756 --> 0:03:25.076 who you are and what you already are made up of, 0:03:25.556 --> 0:03:27.796 and that can be enough. You don't have to engage 0:03:27.836 --> 0:03:33.316 in these huge strategic changes in order to affect people. Yeah. Absolutely, 0:03:33.396 --> 0:03:35.756 we think we need to try so hard and get 0:03:35.796 --> 0:03:39.316 the wording exactly right to impact another person. But often 0:03:39.476 --> 0:03:43.796 just saying what we think, no matter how inarticulately, no 0:03:43.796 --> 0:03:48.356 matter how softly, at times people hear it and they 0:03:48.396 --> 0:03:50.196 think about it later, and we don't always see that. 0:03:50.316 --> 0:03:53.116 We think that if we had influenced someone will turn 0:03:53.156 --> 0:03:55.316 to us and say, right there, oh, you've totally changed 0:03:55.316 --> 0:03:58.276 my perspective on that. But think about all the times 0:03:58.276 --> 0:04:01.276 that you change your opinion, right, It often happens a 0:04:01.356 --> 0:04:04.076 week later, when you're still thinking about something somebody said. 0:04:04.196 --> 0:04:06.876 It happens after somebody else said the same thing. It's 0:04:06.916 --> 0:04:10.716 got this cumulative sort of nature, and we have a 0:04:10.716 --> 0:04:13.116 lot more influence that we don't see through these more 0:04:13.156 --> 0:04:18.116 subtle sorts of things. Yeah, as we're moving about in 0:04:18.156 --> 0:04:21.836 this world, we sometimes believe that we are wearing what 0:04:21.876 --> 0:04:24.876 you call an invisibility cloak. When we're sitting on the subway, 0:04:24.956 --> 0:04:27.956 listening to a podcast, or eating lunch at a cafe. 0:04:28.316 --> 0:04:31.316 It just feels like we're in our own little worlds 0:04:31.396 --> 0:04:34.236 and that no one's noticing us. I certainly feel this way, 0:04:34.596 --> 0:04:38.316 but research shows that isn't true, right, do you mind 0:04:38.396 --> 0:04:42.516 Vanessa sharing an example from the research. Sure. So. This 0:04:42.596 --> 0:04:46.716 is researched by my colleague Erica Boothby and her collaborators, 0:04:46.716 --> 0:04:50.036 and they show that we tend to think that we 0:04:50.076 --> 0:04:55.556 are observing other people more than other people are observing us. So, 0:04:55.916 --> 0:05:00.596 for example, and one study, researchers surveyed people who were 0:05:00.596 --> 0:05:04.556 eating lunch in a cafeteria and they asked them how 0:05:04.636 --> 0:05:07.756 much they thought other people were noticing them and curious 0:05:07.796 --> 0:05:11.956 about them. It turns out they underestimated how much people 0:05:11.996 --> 0:05:15.676 were noticing and curious about them by about sixty seven percent, 0:05:15.716 --> 0:05:18.236 which is a huge amount. You know, when I take 0:05:18.236 --> 0:05:20.436 a step back, it makes a lot of sense why 0:05:20.476 --> 0:05:24.316 we would reliably underestimate how much other people are observing us. 0:05:24.436 --> 0:05:28.316 We're rarely confronted with positive evidence that people are observing us, right, 0:05:28.516 --> 0:05:32.556 because it's really uncomfortable to sustain eye contact with someone 0:05:32.596 --> 0:05:34.756 on the subway who's just looked at you and you're 0:05:34.796 --> 0:05:36.876 looking at them. And you talk about the fact that 0:05:36.996 --> 0:05:40.876 humans tend to engage in what's called gaze deflection. So 0:05:41.236 --> 0:05:43.476 what this refers to is that when we look at someone, 0:05:44.116 --> 0:05:47.116 they have a tendency to deflect our gaze and to 0:05:47.156 --> 0:05:49.956 look away from us, even if they were just looking 0:05:49.956 --> 0:05:53.316 at us moments before. So we are absolutely left thinking 0:05:53.356 --> 0:05:55.476 that we are the only ones out there in the 0:05:55.516 --> 0:05:58.836 world who are observing others. That's right. And you could 0:05:58.836 --> 0:06:01.356 totally imagine the times that you know, you looked over 0:06:01.396 --> 0:06:04.316 at someone and caught eyes and you quickly looked away, 0:06:04.756 --> 0:06:07.836 and your assumption was probably that they caught you looking 0:06:07.836 --> 0:06:10.396 at them, right, when it's just as likely that you 0:06:10.436 --> 0:06:14.276 caught them looking at you. Okay, So, Vanessa, we've just 0:06:14.396 --> 0:06:18.556 established that generally speaking, we tend to underestimate how much 0:06:18.556 --> 0:06:21.716 people notice us. But you say that there's no need 0:06:21.756 --> 0:06:24.516 to get paranoid. Why should I not feel paranoid in 0:06:24.556 --> 0:06:27.556 this moment? Usually the first thing people think when I 0:06:27.596 --> 0:06:29.556 say that other people are paying attention to you more 0:06:29.596 --> 0:06:32.916 than you realize. Is that everybody's paying attention to the 0:06:32.916 --> 0:06:35.596 exact things that we wish that they weren't paying attention 0:06:35.636 --> 0:06:39.076 to our bad hair days or the times we misspoke 0:06:39.316 --> 0:06:42.876 or the times we tripped and fell, when in fact 0:06:42.996 --> 0:06:45.756 that's also not true, so it's actually kind of happy 0:06:45.756 --> 0:06:48.956 news all around. This is based on a finding called 0:06:48.996 --> 0:06:53.276 the spotlight effect. This fear that we have a spotlight 0:06:53.316 --> 0:06:58.556 shining on our most self conscious flaws or concerns, and 0:06:58.596 --> 0:07:01.876 that everybody else is looking at them, when in fact 0:07:01.956 --> 0:07:04.596 they aren't. They're seeing us as a whole person, and 0:07:04.836 --> 0:07:08.236 whatever embarrassing thing we have going on, they really aren't 0:07:08.236 --> 0:07:12.796 even noticing. So, to summarize, we tend to underestimate how 0:07:12.876 --> 0:07:15.436 much other people notice us, except when it has to 0:07:15.476 --> 0:07:18.276 do with something that we're very self conscious about or 0:07:18.276 --> 0:07:21.636 we're really embarrassed by. And one reason that this is 0:07:21.676 --> 0:07:26.996 so important is because of the connection between observation and influence. 0:07:27.156 --> 0:07:30.916 Right when others are observing us, we have the potential 0:07:30.956 --> 0:07:33.596 to influence them. When we're observing others, they have the 0:07:33.596 --> 0:07:36.356 potential to influence us. And so it's really important to 0:07:36.396 --> 0:07:38.916 realize that there is a really strong connection between these 0:07:38.956 --> 0:07:44.276 two concepts. That's right, So our mere presence with another 0:07:44.316 --> 0:07:48.116 person can impact so many things. Let's talk about a 0:07:48.156 --> 0:07:51.676 few situations in which we might be influencing people without 0:07:51.716 --> 0:07:56.796 realizing it, what I might call passive influence. Research shows 0:07:56.836 --> 0:08:00.876 that just sharing in an experience with someone can influence 0:08:01.276 --> 0:08:04.636 how they experience that thing. So this is work on 0:08:04.676 --> 0:08:10.356 this idea that shared experiences tend to be amplified or intensified. 0:08:10.916 --> 0:08:13.996 And some of my favorite work on this was done 0:08:14.156 --> 0:08:19.396 using chocolate, where they had a participant come in and 0:08:19.596 --> 0:08:22.116 eat a piece of chocolate and they either did it 0:08:22.156 --> 0:08:25.636 by themselves or they did it with another person in 0:08:25.676 --> 0:08:28.756 the room who ate the exact same kind of chocolate. 0:08:28.956 --> 0:08:31.476 And they weren't allowed to speak, and they couldn't even 0:08:31.516 --> 0:08:33.956 look at each other and make guys and decide that 0:08:34.436 --> 0:08:36.556 this is good or this is bad. All they could 0:08:36.556 --> 0:08:40.276 do was be present in the same room together, and 0:08:40.316 --> 0:08:43.116 the fact that they were eating this chocolate in the 0:08:43.156 --> 0:08:48.116 same space as another person actually amplified the experience of 0:08:48.116 --> 0:08:52.076 eating that chocolate. So when the chocolate was sweet and delicious, 0:08:52.716 --> 0:08:55.636 they said that it was even more sweet and delicious 0:08:55.636 --> 0:08:57.996 if they were eating it with another person than if 0:08:57.996 --> 0:09:01.476 they were eating it by themselves. But the most interesting 0:09:01.516 --> 0:09:04.356 thing to me is that it's not just that the 0:09:04.396 --> 0:09:08.676 presence of another person made the experience better or more positive. 0:09:09.156 --> 0:09:11.796 It turns out that when they gave them bitter chocolate, 0:09:11.876 --> 0:09:14.796 which didn't taste great, and they ate it with another person, 0:09:14.956 --> 0:09:18.756 they thought it tasted worse and more bitter. So even 0:09:18.916 --> 0:09:21.196 in the case where you were doing something negative, the 0:09:21.236 --> 0:09:23.676 experience was amplified. It wasn't made better by the presence 0:09:23.716 --> 0:09:27.756 of another person. It was actually just intensified intensified. Yeah. 0:09:27.756 --> 0:09:31.876 And what do you think the mechanism at play here is? Yeah. 0:09:31.876 --> 0:09:35.396 So the researchers explain this finding by something that they 0:09:35.436 --> 0:09:39.516 call mentalization. So basically what this is is that while 0:09:39.556 --> 0:09:42.516 you're having an experience and reflecting on how you feel 0:09:42.556 --> 0:09:47.276 about that experience, you're simultaneously wondering how that other person 0:09:47.676 --> 0:09:51.716 is experiencing that thing and what they think of this chocolate, 0:09:51.756 --> 0:09:54.956 for example, And because you're seeing it through two minds, 0:09:55.036 --> 0:09:59.476 your own and another person's, it amplifies that experience. It's 0:09:59.516 --> 0:10:05.596 that experience squared, deliciousness squared deliciousness squared. Yeah. And you 0:10:05.676 --> 0:10:08.716 also say in your book that when we read books 0:10:08.756 --> 0:10:11.036 that we other people are reading. When we watch shows 0:10:11.116 --> 0:10:14.396 that other people are watching, we tend to pay more 0:10:14.396 --> 0:10:17.036 attention to those shows. We remember them better, Right, So 0:10:17.076 --> 0:10:19.556 it just feels like we're having a more immersive experience. 0:10:19.916 --> 0:10:21.916 That's right. When you have a book club and you 0:10:21.956 --> 0:10:24.516 know all your friends are reading the same book, you're 0:10:24.596 --> 0:10:27.796 reading the book with those other people in mind. I 0:10:27.836 --> 0:10:29.996 wonder how so and so is going to react to 0:10:30.036 --> 0:10:32.436 this plot turn, I wonder what this person's going to 0:10:32.516 --> 0:10:35.596 think of this particular character. My friends and I do 0:10:35.636 --> 0:10:38.756 this thing we call music Taste Test, where we all 0:10:38.796 --> 0:10:41.636 submit a set of songs and then it gets downloaded 0:10:41.636 --> 0:10:43.716 to a playlist that we all listen to, and then 0:10:43.716 --> 0:10:46.036 we rank them all after a couple weeks of listening 0:10:46.116 --> 0:10:49.396 to this playlist. It just makes listening to a playlist 0:10:49.516 --> 0:10:52.756 so much more interesting because the whole time I'm thinking like, 0:10:52.796 --> 0:10:54.636 oh my god, I know that this person is going 0:10:54.676 --> 0:10:56.556 to hate this song or this person's going to love 0:10:56.596 --> 0:10:59.276 this song, and it just amplifies the whole experience and 0:10:59.356 --> 0:11:02.836 makes it so much more pleasant. Yeah. I love the 0:11:02.876 --> 0:11:06.676 research showing that even when we're just an audience member, 0:11:06.916 --> 0:11:09.676 we can have influence on the person or people who 0:11:09.716 --> 0:11:11.956 are at the front of the room. And the reason 0:11:11.996 --> 0:11:15.516 that this is so surprising is because it's definitely a 0:11:15.516 --> 0:11:19.436 context in which we think influence flows in just one direction, 0:11:19.596 --> 0:11:22.836 right from say the speaker to the crowd, but it's 0:11:22.876 --> 0:11:25.996 actually flowing in two directions. Yeah, this is one of 0:11:25.996 --> 0:11:29.516 my favorite findings. Just like we think of influence in 0:11:29.516 --> 0:11:32.956 this formal way, right, we think that it's that person 0:11:32.996 --> 0:11:35.116 in the front of the room on the podium with 0:11:35.156 --> 0:11:37.956 the microphone, that's the person doing all the influencing in 0:11:37.996 --> 0:11:40.556 the room. But in fact, for anybody who stood in 0:11:40.596 --> 0:11:43.476 front of a room of people, you are looking out 0:11:43.556 --> 0:11:46.196 at that crowd of people and wondering what they think 0:11:46.196 --> 0:11:49.356 of you. Right, You're trying to get a response from them. 0:11:49.436 --> 0:11:52.596 You're trying to get them to like you, to agree 0:11:52.636 --> 0:11:54.756 with what you have to say, and so you're looking 0:11:54.756 --> 0:11:57.156 out for any kind of cue that they may or 0:11:57.196 --> 0:11:59.596 may not be agreeing with what you have to say, 0:11:59.916 --> 0:12:03.196 and so you're altering your behavior based on what you see. 0:12:03.596 --> 0:12:06.716 You also are altering the things you say based on 0:12:06.756 --> 0:12:10.836 what you presume that audience is going to respond to. So, 0:12:10.916 --> 0:12:13.796 in a classic study on how much we tend to 0:12:13.796 --> 0:12:16.516 tune our messages to the audience, that we're talking to. 0:12:17.076 --> 0:12:20.276 The experimenters brought participants into the lab and they had 0:12:20.316 --> 0:12:23.396 them listen to this speech. It was a neutral speech 0:12:23.676 --> 0:12:27.756 about legalizing marijuana, so there were pros, there were cons. 0:12:27.796 --> 0:12:32.556 It didn't make any particular conclusion. And then these participants 0:12:32.556 --> 0:12:35.956 were told, we'd like you to summarize this speech to 0:12:35.996 --> 0:12:39.356 this other person. They were either told, this other person 0:12:39.676 --> 0:12:45.436 is already pro legalization, or this other person is against legalization. 0:12:46.196 --> 0:12:49.636 The participants gave the summary of this neutral speech, but 0:12:49.836 --> 0:12:53.236 when they gave it to the person who was pro legalization, 0:12:53.916 --> 0:12:55.836 it took on a little bit more of a pro 0:12:56.076 --> 0:12:59.316 legalization bent. When they gave it to the person who 0:12:59.356 --> 0:13:03.676 was against legalization, it came across as much more against legalization. 0:13:04.636 --> 0:13:08.836 The most fascinating part about this is that the person 0:13:09.196 --> 0:13:13.356 who was receiving the summary knew that that person giving 0:13:13.356 --> 0:13:16.196 the summary didn't actually have this belief. They were just 0:13:16.236 --> 0:13:20.356 summarizing someone else's belief. So, for example, imagine I was 0:13:20.396 --> 0:13:25.276 summarizing this particular speech for you maya. I know that 0:13:25.396 --> 0:13:28.156 you know that it's not my opinion. I'm just doing 0:13:28.156 --> 0:13:30.436 this for the experiment, or I'm just summarizing this speech, 0:13:30.796 --> 0:13:34.676 and yet I'm somehow tailoring it to your viewpoint, because 0:13:34.716 --> 0:13:38.836 that desire to tune to your audience is so strong. 0:13:40.676 --> 0:13:43.676 I mean, that is so interesting. I don't know, it 0:13:43.716 --> 0:13:47.236 just feels like this very primitive desire to be liked, 0:13:47.716 --> 0:13:51.596 for people to like us. And so even when we 0:13:51.676 --> 0:13:53.836 know that person's not going to describe what I'm saying 0:13:53.836 --> 0:13:56.116 to my own values or beliefs, you just know in 0:13:56.156 --> 0:13:59.676 that moment, they're still, through some sort of association, going 0:13:59.716 --> 0:14:01.756 to like me a little more if I err on 0:14:01.796 --> 0:14:04.476 their side of the debate. Absolutely, we just don't want 0:14:04.476 --> 0:14:07.396 to be associated with that position that we know this 0:14:07.436 --> 0:14:09.836 person isn't going to like, even if we kind of 0:14:10.036 --> 0:14:13.036 say no, no, no, no, it's not mine. I'd love 0:14:13.076 --> 0:14:17.596 to also talk about situations where we make decisions that 0:14:17.636 --> 0:14:20.316 we think are just for us or just for ourselves, 0:14:20.756 --> 0:14:23.036 that they can have a really strong influence on those 0:14:23.076 --> 0:14:27.716 around us. Yeah, So this is another aspect of how 0:14:27.756 --> 0:14:31.436 we can impact people simply by them seeing what we do, 0:14:31.636 --> 0:14:35.596 simply by them observing our behaviors and our decisions. So 0:14:35.636 --> 0:14:38.156 you can imagine, you know, we see somebody else litter 0:14:38.476 --> 0:14:41.076 all of a sudden, we think, okay, that's normative around here. 0:14:41.236 --> 0:14:42.796 Maybe it's not a big deal if I'd throw my 0:14:42.876 --> 0:14:45.396 banan appeal on the ground. If we see somebody else 0:14:45.836 --> 0:14:49.316 put some trash in the correct receptacle, you know, we're 0:14:49.356 --> 0:14:52.716 more likely to follow suit. So one of the things 0:14:52.716 --> 0:14:55.716 that comes out of this tendency for people to observe 0:14:55.716 --> 0:14:58.636 our behaviors more than we realize and then follow suit 0:14:58.956 --> 0:15:02.356 with our behaviors more than we realize is that every 0:15:02.356 --> 0:15:05.836 time we make a decision or engage in a behavior, 0:15:06.356 --> 0:15:09.756 that decision or behavior actually has too a fact. We 0:15:09.916 --> 0:15:13.716 have a direct effect on our environment that particular decision 0:15:13.956 --> 0:15:17.876 that we've taken, but there's also this secondary indirect effect 0:15:17.916 --> 0:15:20.716 that could be even bigger, and that indirect effect is 0:15:20.836 --> 0:15:23.596 all the people who observed us do that thing who 0:15:23.636 --> 0:15:27.116 are now impacted by it. And this is something called 0:15:27.156 --> 0:15:31.236 behavior contagion, where basically, when we see somebody else do something, 0:15:31.636 --> 0:15:35.916 we're more likely to do it ourselves. So one example is, 0:15:36.236 --> 0:15:41.436 say I schedule a destination wedding. I'm not just responsible 0:15:41.476 --> 0:15:45.676 for the carbon footprint of my own wedding, but also 0:15:45.876 --> 0:15:47.876 for the fact that everybody who comes to my wedding 0:15:48.116 --> 0:15:50.796 and has an amazing time wants to have their own 0:15:50.836 --> 0:15:54.636 destination wedding, and now there are all these other destination 0:15:54.676 --> 0:15:57.996 weddings who are producing their own carbon footprint, and then 0:15:58.196 --> 0:16:01.956 those weddings spawn more people having destination weddings, and so 0:16:01.996 --> 0:16:05.076 there isn't just the one decision of my wedding, but 0:16:05.156 --> 0:16:08.316 in fact there is this effect where it continues on 0:16:08.436 --> 0:16:13.476 and on. After the break, Vanessa teaches us how to 0:16:13.516 --> 0:16:17.916 navigate situations when we're intentionally trying to influence others. She 0:16:17.996 --> 0:16:20.836 also shares a cautionary note about how we can wield 0:16:20.836 --> 0:16:24.036 our influence more carefully. We'll be back in a moment 0:16:24.116 --> 0:16:35.396 with a slight change of plans. So far, we've talked 0:16:35.396 --> 0:16:39.236 about ways in which we have what I was calling 0:16:39.276 --> 0:16:42.876 before more passive forms of influence, the way that we 0:16:42.916 --> 0:16:46.436 can influence people literally just by showing up. But of 0:16:46.476 --> 0:16:50.396 course there are times when we're more actively trying to 0:16:50.436 --> 0:16:54.756 influence people. So, for example, sometimes we need people to 0:16:54.796 --> 0:16:59.156 do things for us, and it can be extremely uncomfortable 0:16:59.276 --> 0:17:03.236 and nerve racking to make these kinds of requests. What 0:17:03.316 --> 0:17:07.196 does the research say about how we should be navigating 0:17:07.236 --> 0:17:11.516 these kinds of situations. This is such a fascinating topic 0:17:11.756 --> 0:17:15.036 because it seems like such a simple thing to ask 0:17:15.036 --> 0:17:18.476 someone for something. If I want something, you know, be 0:17:18.796 --> 0:17:21.556 a raise, or I just need a favor from a friend, 0:17:21.916 --> 0:17:24.436 I should be able to just go ask. And yet 0:17:24.716 --> 0:17:27.316 we all know that it's just not that simple, that 0:17:27.476 --> 0:17:32.196 asking can be so painful and awkward. But what we 0:17:32.316 --> 0:17:36.596 found in our research is that, in fact, people are 0:17:36.676 --> 0:17:39.676 much more likely to agree to do things for us 0:17:39.716 --> 0:17:43.076 when we ask for them than we expect. So this 0:17:43.276 --> 0:17:47.836 idea that people are disagreeable and when we ask for something, 0:17:47.876 --> 0:17:50.716 what we're trying to do is to get to yes 0:17:50.876 --> 0:17:53.756 or even get past no. Right, it's just not true. 0:17:54.236 --> 0:17:58.356 In fact, people tend to default to being agreeable, but 0:17:58.396 --> 0:18:01.676 we don't realize that until we start asking more and 0:18:01.756 --> 0:18:04.076 suddenly we realize that people are actually much more likely 0:18:04.116 --> 0:18:07.276 to agree than we expect. And you found this during 0:18:07.316 --> 0:18:10.676 your early years as a right. Yeah, When I was 0:18:10.716 --> 0:18:15.116 a graduate student at Columbia, Frank Flynn a professor at Columbia, 0:18:15.156 --> 0:18:18.076 and I we're running a study where we wanted a 0:18:18.116 --> 0:18:22.076 diverse adult participant sample, and so I left the Columbia 0:18:22.116 --> 0:18:24.476 campus and went down to Penn Station every day and 0:18:24.596 --> 0:18:26.956 asked people to fill out my survey for the study. 0:18:27.476 --> 0:18:32.556 And it was so painful going up to people. Yes, 0:18:32.636 --> 0:18:36.956 I can understand. It was just torturous going up to 0:18:36.996 --> 0:18:39.036 people over and over and being like, will you fill 0:18:39.036 --> 0:18:42.076 out my survey? Will you fill out my survey? And 0:18:42.156 --> 0:18:46.116 so when the study was completed and Frank Flynn and 0:18:46.236 --> 0:18:49.596 I started looking at the data, it didn't work out, 0:18:49.836 --> 0:18:52.476 and I was particularly devastated because it had been so 0:18:52.556 --> 0:18:55.596 painful to collect that data. Yeah, And so I was 0:18:55.636 --> 0:18:58.036 describing this to Frank and saying, oh my god, I 0:18:58.116 --> 0:19:01.036 just I can't believe it after all that, and he 0:19:01.116 --> 0:19:03.276 kind of looked at the data and was like, can 0:19:03.316 --> 0:19:05.756 you say more about what all that is because I'm 0:19:05.796 --> 0:19:08.676 looking and in fact, it looks like most people were 0:19:08.676 --> 0:19:12.076 saying yeah to you where the nose particularly bad? And 0:19:12.156 --> 0:19:14.716 I was like, no, actually, people were pretty polite when 0:19:14.716 --> 0:19:17.876 they said no. Most people were pretty happy to help. 0:19:18.436 --> 0:19:21.396 And so we realized that maybe that was the big 0:19:21.476 --> 0:19:26.116 finding that in fact, the way influence was in my head, 0:19:26.636 --> 0:19:29.876 the way it was to ask someone for something so painful, 0:19:29.996 --> 0:19:35.756 so awkward, actually wasn't as awful in reality. Yeah, I'm 0:19:35.836 --> 0:19:38.916 just thinking back to when I was an undergrad doing research, 0:19:39.036 --> 0:19:41.516 and that was during the period of my life where 0:19:41.516 --> 0:19:43.636 I studied non human primates, and so we'd end up 0:19:43.676 --> 0:19:46.876 going to this island where the monkey to human ratio 0:19:46.996 --> 0:19:49.676 is five hundred to one, and you can't like ask 0:19:49.756 --> 0:19:52.716 a monkey, hey, hey, monkey, do you want to participated 0:19:52.756 --> 0:19:54.796 by experiment? And so what we do is like we 0:19:54.916 --> 0:19:57.756 walk around with little fruits like coconuts and apples and 0:19:57.756 --> 0:20:00.436 stuff to try to lure them into the experiment, which 0:20:00.476 --> 0:20:03.356 was a whole different kind of asking. And I thought 0:20:03.396 --> 0:20:07.836 that was already a fairly painful experience, but it still 0:20:07.876 --> 0:20:10.316 fell short of how uncomfortable it was to ask adults 0:20:10.396 --> 0:20:14.396 a year later in my visual perception lab to fill 0:20:14.396 --> 0:20:16.356 out a survey for me in exchange for candy or 0:20:16.356 --> 0:20:19.036 whatever it was that I was asking of them. So, yeah, 0:20:19.196 --> 0:20:22.556 that's amazing. It's hard. It's hard for us humans. That 0:20:22.636 --> 0:20:24.916 needs to be my next study where I just have 0:20:24.996 --> 0:20:28.476 people either ask a person or some sort of non 0:20:28.556 --> 0:20:32.396 humans a recess of a caste exactly bring me back. 0:20:32.956 --> 0:20:38.116 Lots of screeching on that island. So backtracking a little bit, 0:20:38.156 --> 0:20:42.956 when it comes to people's willingness to say yes to 0:20:43.156 --> 0:20:45.956 things more than we think you said, that can also 0:20:46.356 --> 0:20:49.356 change our approach to asking people for things. I think 0:20:49.396 --> 0:20:53.756 the two main risks of underestimating our influence and others 0:20:54.036 --> 0:20:57.996 willingness to do things for us. Is one that we 0:20:58.116 --> 0:21:01.076 might be overly assertive, right if I think that you're 0:21:01.236 --> 0:21:03.476 not going to be open to my influence attempt, if 0:21:03.476 --> 0:21:05.516 you're going to say no, then I'm going to come 0:21:05.556 --> 0:21:07.956 in guns blazing trying to push for what I want. 0:21:09.236 --> 0:21:11.876 Other risk is that I assume that you're just going 0:21:11.956 --> 0:21:14.316 to say no, and so I don't even bother asking, 0:21:15.036 --> 0:21:18.636 or I ask for too little, or I ask indirectly 0:21:18.676 --> 0:21:20.796 by sort of hinting, so I don't really run the 0:21:20.876 --> 0:21:23.716 risk that you're actually going to reject me. And of 0:21:23.756 --> 0:21:27.516 course all those are also in effective ways of influencing 0:21:27.516 --> 0:21:30.276 other people. So it really keeps you from hitting that 0:21:30.316 --> 0:21:34.396 sort of perfect middle ground where you ask directly, you 0:21:34.516 --> 0:21:37.476 ask for what you think you deserve, but you don't 0:21:37.556 --> 0:21:39.836 do it in this overly assertive way that people don't 0:21:39.836 --> 0:21:45.156 respond well too. So there are studies showing that people 0:21:45.196 --> 0:21:47.556 are twice as likely to agree to things they're being 0:21:47.596 --> 0:21:50.676 asked then we think they are, and so we just 0:21:50.716 --> 0:21:54.276 overestimate in a lot of cases the likelihood of rejection. 0:21:54.916 --> 0:21:57.236 And you and your research team just ran such a 0:21:57.276 --> 0:22:00.156 clever study where you got people quite outside their comfort zone, 0:22:00.196 --> 0:22:03.196 I would say yeah. So one day we came up 0:22:03.236 --> 0:22:07.116 with the idea of sending our participants into libraries with 0:22:07.156 --> 0:22:08.996 a book that we made to look like a live 0:22:09.396 --> 0:22:13.956 book and asking people to vandalize the book. So they 0:22:13.956 --> 0:22:17.196 would go up to people in libraries and say, Hey, 0:22:17.436 --> 0:22:19.956 I'm playing a prank of my friend. Will you please 0:22:19.996 --> 0:22:22.356 just write the word pickle and pan in this library book. 0:22:22.876 --> 0:22:25.236 Of course, they thought most people would say no, yeah, 0:22:25.316 --> 0:22:29.276 but when they actually made the request, most people said yes. 0:22:29.916 --> 0:22:31.316 We didn't even think it was going to work. We 0:22:31.316 --> 0:22:34.636 were a surprise as our research participants. This is crazy, 0:22:34.756 --> 0:22:36.996 there's no way the study is going to work. And 0:22:37.116 --> 0:22:40.796 yet the majority of people ended up saying yes, yeah. 0:22:40.796 --> 0:22:43.796 And there's an interesting mechanism at play that's leading people 0:22:43.796 --> 0:22:47.116 to say yes that we might not fully appreciate. Do 0:22:47.156 --> 0:22:52.916 you mind talking about what researchers call insinuation anxiety? Sure? So. 0:22:53.156 --> 0:22:58.716 Insinuation anxiety is this fear we have of insinuating something 0:22:58.796 --> 0:23:04.036 negative about another person. So, for example, if someone were 0:23:04.076 --> 0:23:06.916 to ask me to borrow my cell phone and I 0:23:06.956 --> 0:23:09.996 said no, what does that say about what I think 0:23:10.036 --> 0:23:12.636 of them? That I don't trust them to give my 0:23:12.676 --> 0:23:15.316 phone back, that I think they might do something weird 0:23:15.396 --> 0:23:18.116 with it, that I don't think that they look like 0:23:18.156 --> 0:23:21.156 a nice person that I want to help out. There's 0:23:21.196 --> 0:23:24.916 so many worries there about what saying no might insinuate, 0:23:25.516 --> 0:23:30.076 and we're really averse to doing things that are socially risky, 0:23:30.596 --> 0:23:35.516 potentially making someone feel bad or awkward, or suggesting that 0:23:35.556 --> 0:23:38.556 we're not a helpful person. And you can see how 0:23:38.596 --> 0:23:41.476 powerful this effective is because even in a case where 0:23:41.516 --> 0:23:44.396 people are being asked to do what most of society 0:23:44.436 --> 0:23:47.476