We talk about the book Laws of Connection by David Robson.
Here are Andy’s notes for the book including the 12 laws:
Law 1: be consistent in your treatment of others. Avoid being a stressful frenemy
Self-explanatory, try and be useful to others and try not to upset others.
Show an interest in others, be enthusiastic, value others opinions and so on.
Most interesting part of this law was to do with what kind of relationships lead to the lowest wellbeing.
4 types of relationships
He uses 2 questions to assess the quality of a relationship.
How helpful is this connection?
How upsetting is this connection?
Supportive relationships: highly helpful, low upsetting.
Most beneficial.
Aversive: low helpful, high upsetting.
These are best to avoid if you can.
Example, a boss who berates you.
Indifferent: low helpful, low upsetting.
E.g. a neighbour.
Ambivalent: high helpful, high upsetting.
People are who are helpful but hurtful.
Hurtful can be if they generate any negative emotion in general.
E.g. they show a lack of interest in your life.
What the research shows is that it is the ambivalent relationships that had the biggest negative impact on wellbeing. Coming back to the law, you want to avoid being that ambivalent person.
Law 2: create a mutual understanding with the people you meet; ignore superficial similarities and instead focus on your internal worlds, and the peculiar ways that your thoughts and feelings coincide.
We build connections with people who share how we think and respond to things.
Focus on this shared internal reality and you build a much stronger connection than talking about superficial facts.
30 questions for building shared reality
There is the ‘30 questions for falling in love’ — this is actually a media myth, the 30 questions were never designed for that purpose.
They were designed by the researcher for seeing if they could create a stronger shared reality between people quickly.
The 30 questions get people to discuss things like most embarrassing moment.
These led to people feeling as connected to someone they just met as their best friends.
Neuroscience
There is neural synchronisation between people who have close shared realities.
They can monitor two people watching a film, see how they respond, and accurately predict how close they are in the social connection.
Most of the synchronisation is in the default mode network.
Law 3: trust that others, on average, will like you as much as you like them, and be prepared to practise your social skills to build your social confidence.
Evidence shows that people are pessimistic about how much others like them.
So if you enjoy an encounter, it probably means the other person did.
Therefore, you should follow up, knowing that they are unlikely to because they underestimate how much you liked them.
Self-perception of social competence
Multiple research studies show that it is widely held that people believe they are not socially competent enough to talk to new people and that the conversation will be awkward.
This is largely misplaced, people are overwhelmingly forgiving in interactions.
Researchers even purposely made conversations awkward, and the other side takes tremendous effort to bring the conversation back.
People judge others 50% less than we assume they do in interactions.
The liking gap
People had to guess had much they think someone they met liked them after a first interaction.
On average, they were off by a factor of 2x.
So they assumed X likes them 3/10 when that person would say a 6/10.
So we are pessimistic by 2x the amount of how much someone likes us on average.
This is very important, because it means people are less likely to follow up than they should be. So you should take that initiative.
Law 4: check your assumptions; engage in ‘perspective-getting’ rather than ‘perspective-taking’ to avoid egocentric thinking and misunderstandings.
We overly assume others understand or think the same way we do.
Evidence shows that we are ineffective at putting ourselves in someone else’s shoes.
The best approach is to ask more questions rather than try to guess what they think/feel.
Egocentric thinking
We assume that others interpret things or understand them the same way as we do.
An example from the book, Edgar Hoover wrote “watch the borders” on a document, meaning the formatting of the document. No one bothered to ask him, instead everyone started panicking about the US’s border.
Assumption of transparency
We overly assume that other people can read our mind and emotion much better than they can.
Example people assume that when they feel negatively about something that it is written all over their face.
In reality, most people don’t know what your emotional state is from your body language.
So you ought to tell people how you feel rather than assume they know.
Perspective taking
In research, participants were found to be bad at deliberately taking someone else’s perspective to predict how they would think/feel/respond.
This even included the participants taking the perspective of someone close like their romantic partner.
Ask questions, don’t try perspective take
The lesson is it is much better to just ask questions about how someone feels or to clear up a confusion.
This is contrary to the cognitive empathy champions who say put yourself in the shoes of others.
Instead, ask questions to get their perspective, rather than assume you know.
Law 5: in conversation, demonstrate active attention, engage in self-disclosure, and avoid the novelty penalty, to build mutual understanding and contribute to the merging of our minds.
Basically pay attention.
Be willing to share real information that can erode your status (vulnerability).
Focus on common experiences and interests.
Attention is self-explanatory
People know if you are paying attention or not.
The best way to show you are paying attention is to ask follow-up questions.
The novelty penalty
In a study, 3 people watch a video, sometimes the same video, sometimes not.
When the researcher shares what they had seen, people prefer hearing about the same video that they had seen than learning something new.
This is the novelty penalty — when people don’t have enough knowledge to immerse themselves in your descriptions this can create a feeling of distance.
Basically, it is better to talk about shared interests or common experiences.
So when your friends glaze over while you talk about your holiday, you know why.
Law 6: praise people generously, but be highly specific in your words of appreciation.
Lots of benefits for expressing thanks, gratitude and praise in general.
How to praise well
Describe the benefits of an action for us — thank you for gifting me this, it will be really beneficial for X.
Better yet, praise the personal qualities that contributed to the act of generosity — thank you for being the kind of person who takes the time and effort to find such a great gift, you know me so well.
Flattery & gratitude biases
People assume their compliments will be received less well than they are.
People also assume that others already know how grateful one is when they don’t.
Law 7: be open about your vulnerabilities, and value honesty over kindness (but practise both, if possible).
People prefer people who are vulnerable.
People had better relationships by focusing on honesty rather than kindness.
Keeping secrets
The research shows that keeping secrets causes stress and negatively impacts our health and relationships.
Basically, try minimise your own and don’t force secrets on others.
Vulnerability
People who show vulnerability such as admitting to doing something they shouldn’t have are received far more positively than people assume they will be.
One study produced a bio of a student with an embarrassing made up fact that they are a bed wetter.
The student has to estimate how poorly they will be perceived, and is off by a factor of 2.
People tended not to care when reading their bio.
In general, this is because people assume the person is being more authentic by sharing that negative statement about themselves.
Vulnerability study of weaknesses versus strengths
Students were asked to imagine picking a few statements that might represent their inner life to a stranger. Some were asked to select from a list of fears and insecurities:
I get frustrated easily and tend to give up on things before I should.
I can be closed-minded to ideas and opinions that are unlike my own.
Etc.
Others were asked to pick a few apt statements from a list of strengths, such as:
I am pretty sure in who I am.
I am open to new ideas and opinions that are unlike my own.
The students answers were given to different groups, the participants that chose strengths had an average likability rating of 3.8; the students who chose weaknesses were liked 4.3.
Evasion and paltering is not likeable
People prefer honesty over those who evade questions.
Example, someone who admits to having frequently done something unethical is preferred to someone who chooses not to answer.
We don’t trust the latters integrity.
Paltering (changing the subject or answering around the question) is equally judged harshly.
Example, asking someone for their sales forecast and they tell you about historic success to avoid talking about the future.
The myth of the white lie
Even prosocial dishonesty, untruths designed to save other people’s feelings, can come with a penalty.
A study got three groups to act in different ways for 3 days:
Complete honesty all conversations.
To be kind, caring and considerate.
To behave normally.
The group that were honest in all conversations scored as highly on measures of pleasure and social connection but the honest group found more meaning in the exchanges.
White lies are tolerable when the situation is beyond someone’s control and declaring the truth could bring no benefits (e.g. “you look good today”).
Law 8: do not fear envy. Disclose your successes but be accurate in your statements and avoid comparing yourself to others. Enjoy ‘confelicity’ — the success of others.
Evidence shows people over assume that others will be negative about their success.
But, people like people who share their successes openly.
So we should be open with those around us about our success, but be accurate.
Humblebrag
The humblebrag is a seemingly self-deprecating comment or complaint that simply draws attention to what someone has. It tends to incite a desire to punish the person by others, with the assumption that others want to see their status eroded.
Example: “there weren’t enough electric car charging stations in the neighbourhood. So we had no choice but to move to a bigger house with a private garage for our Tesla”.
Confelicity & celebrating openly
To invite confelicity, a shared joy in each other’s achievements that strengthens our connections, it is better to openly celebrate our achievements without fearing envy.
Confelicity is correlated with greater closeness, joy for the person experiencing success and for the person celebrating another’s achievement.
False modesty
Downplaying our achievements can harm people’s perceptions of your authenticity. Because the desire to appear modest is itself a sign of extreme vanity, and people are unlikely to warm to the attempted deceit.
Bragging dimensions
Accuracy — how much evidence one has for their brag.
Viewed more favourably if accurate.
Comparison — whether or not we are making a direct comparison to other people.
Viewed more favourably if no comparison.
Law 9: ask for help when you need it, in the expectation that your pleas for support can build a stronger long-term bond.
Evidence shows people are more willing to help than we expect (by about 2x our expectation).
Requests can increase others esteem for us.
Asking for help an effective way to improve how much someone likes us
Evidence shows that asking for help from someone who might not even like you and improve how much they like you.
It shows vulnerability by asking for their help and treats them as someone helpful.
Law 10: offer emotional support to those in need, but do not force it upon them. Validate their feelings while providing an alternative perspective on their problems.
Emotional support
We underestimate how much people will appreciate our offers of emotional support.
This is especially true for those on the fringes of our social network.
Passive listening doesn’t work
We often believe that passive listening is the best way to offer support, let people vent their feelings.
Research shows this is ineffective.
To help people, we must validate their experiences and help them reconstrue the situation, so that they can gain more insight into their problems and where possible reappraise the negative emotions.
How to help people
Focus on questions that help them reframe, don’t try reframe it for them.
Ask ‘what caused you to feel that way?’, ‘what do you tink caused the other person to act that way?’.
Give control the person of interest, don’t force a conversation on them.
If someone is upset, say “I notice you are upset, I am here to talk whenever you like” rather than trying to get them to talk about why they are upset immediately.
Law 11: be civil and curious in disagreements; show interest in the other side’s viewpoint; share personal experiences (yours or others); and translate your opinions into their moral language (what they value / care about).
Why people take extreme views
People who feel more lonely are much more likely to conform to social views.
Disagreement over seemingly self-evident truths with these people can exacerbate their feelings of isolation, reinforcing the strength of their beliefs.
Example people who are lonely are much more likely to adhere to conspiracy theories.
To help these people, focus on reducing their feelings of isolation rather than the logic of how they think.
Be respectful
Basic, pay respect rather than insult.
Might come a surprise given how politicians compete today, but it is much more effective if they debate respectfully.
Be curious
People want to be heard and understood.
Even if you disagree with someone, try to understand their perspective, ask questions.
This invites reciprocation and evidence shows asking someone questions about their stance rather than pushing your opinion causes them to be more reflective.
You never even need to state your opinion, only need to ask good questions that gets them to think.
Personal stories over statistics
Anecdotes are much more persuasive than pure data/facts.
Law 12: for your wellbeing, choose forgiveness over spite. Look at the big picture in arguments. Ensure your apologies define the offence, take responsibility for your actions, and express regret.
Benefits of forgiveness
Forgiveness is linked to better mental and physical health.
It is better to forgive people regardless of what they have done than hold a grudge.
Apologies
People overestimate the discomfort of an apology.
We underestimate how much better we will feel for making amends.
We also underestimate how much our words will mean to the other person.
