Hello, Stranger(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Hello, Stranger
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/26/opinion/sunday/hello-stranger.html
36 comments
Social engineering uses this a lot. It's rare and catches people of guard when a stranger strikes up a conversation and positioning yourself as friendly and attentive about listening and putting the emphasis on the stranger and not yourself can really open a lot of doors. Compliments, reiterating the persons information but leaving it open ended allowing them room to elaborate, etc. People love talking about themselves and they love people that make it easy for them to do.
If you haven't already read Dale Carnigie's "How to win friends and influence people" that book literally changed the way I communicate with people.
If you haven't already read Dale Carnigie's "How to win friends and influence people" that book literally changed the way I communicate with people.
If you haven't already read Dale Carnigie's "How to win friends and influence people" that book literally changed the way I communicate with people.
This is such an under-rated classic. Everyone should read it. I don't know where it fits in the technical or business curriculum, but one less book on accounting/strategy/programming wouldn't hurt, and this book has a lot of power.
This is such an under-rated classic. Everyone should read it. I don't know where it fits in the technical or business curriculum, but one less book on accounting/strategy/programming wouldn't hurt, and this book has a lot of power.
You should also re-read it if you last read it several years ago. A lot of the things in it are habits and it is hard to pick up on several habits all at once.
Very true. Hard to ingrain anything without review and practice.
[deleted]
Tangentially related:
the recent "Humans of New York," blog/book [1] and the various other spin offs [2][3] seem to thrive on this same experience. Something about breaking the ice and making human connections seems to strike an inherent chord within many people, despite the difficulty many of us have putting such techniques into practice.
[1] - http://www.humansofnewyork.com/ [2] - http://portraitsofboston.com/ [3] - http://facesoforlando.tumblr.com/
[1] - http://www.humansofnewyork.com/ [2] - http://portraitsofboston.com/ [3] - http://facesoforlando.tumblr.com/
Also tangentially related, the New York Times "One in 8 Million" feature from 2009 adopts a similar principle [1]
A different person each week, just telling their story, accompanied by striking black and white photography from Todd Heisler.
Simple, yet fascinating.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/1-in-8-million...
A different person each week, just telling their story, accompanied by striking black and white photography from Todd Heisler.
Simple, yet fascinating.
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/1-in-8-million...
That's one of my all-time favorite multi-media series. So powerful. I think the best segment is the one about a grandfather in NYC: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/1-in-8-million...
Greeting strangers and making small talk is normal behavior in Georgia. Kind of sad how the north coastal cultures treat friendliness as an abnormal behavior.
> When I was in college I heard a story on NPR about a journalist named the Georgia Rambler. He would journey throughout Georgia on a whim, stopping to talk to strangers.
Australia's SBS television station had a show called Front Up which did exactly this. They would randomly walk through the streets, stop and interview people. Random people, fantastic stories:
Australia's SBS television station had a show called Front Up which did exactly this. They would randomly walk through the streets, stop and interview people. Random people, fantastic stories:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEF01EAB281F220ECDid you learn any principles for how to break the ice non-awkwardly?
That's a good question. No magic bullets, but I think one principle is to keep it casual. A lot of journalists get so into the mindset of shaping a character in their heads that they forget to experience whatever it is they're doing.
E.g. When someone is walking through the buffet in a diner, that's probably not the time to ask, "How old are you? How long have you lived here?" Better to say "These yams look delicious" and see where the conversation leads.
E.g. When someone is walking through the buffet in a diner, that's probably not the time to ask, "How old are you? How long have you lived here?" Better to say "These yams look delicious" and see where the conversation leads.
[deleted]
That sounds like a truly great idea!
I may be alone in this but I don't want anyone to talk to me. I don't even want people to talk around me but that's probably not anything I can expect. I want to read my book. I want to be left alone. In Japan it's very much frowned upon to talk on the train, at least in Tokyo. I kind of like that system.
Why? I'm just not friendly. I don't enjoy talking. It's filled with social anxiety and if I want to stop talking I can't just stop. I can't just say "you know what I don't want to talk anymore" and then look away in the middle of a conversation. I don't want to spend 20 minutes or half the day wondering how I came across in the conversation. I definitely don't want my time dictated by others. I had a friend actually get mad at me when I said I would ignore someone who struck a conversation with me on BART, he felt I was obligated to respond to not make that person feel shitty, but maybe that person should just have noticed that my body language is all about being left the fuck alone.
Why? I'm just not friendly. I don't enjoy talking. It's filled with social anxiety and if I want to stop talking I can't just stop. I can't just say "you know what I don't want to talk anymore" and then look away in the middle of a conversation. I don't want to spend 20 minutes or half the day wondering how I came across in the conversation. I definitely don't want my time dictated by others. I had a friend actually get mad at me when I said I would ignore someone who struck a conversation with me on BART, he felt I was obligated to respond to not make that person feel shitty, but maybe that person should just have noticed that my body language is all about being left the fuck alone.
Not that you should feel obliged to be other than you are, but if you don't like the social anxiety you can work on that. I have, and now I generally find small talk with strangers quite pleasant. It wasn't easy, but I'm glad I made the change.
What did you do to work on your social anxiety, if you don't mind my asking.
My first thought, an anxious one, was that it was scary to talk about this in public. Which it is, but fuck it.
A really valuable part was booking regular appointments with a therapist. One of the subtle things about anxiety is that it often naturally leads to avoidance. Deciding to be regularly accountable for my progress kept me from just sweeping it back under the rug.
Other than that, I did a lot of experimenting to see how to keep my general stress and anxiety levels low. Diet, exercise, sleep schedule, and home environment all made important differences for me. With a more chill baseline, the social stuff was easier to deal with.
Another chunk was recognizing how self-reinforcing anxiety can be. When anxiety makes an experience worse, it trains us that the experience is bad, which triggers more anxiety next time. Learning to slowly undo that process was helpful. (That might have come out of Hallowell's Worry, but I no longer recall.)
Meditation was definitely helpful. Partly because a big part is practice in quieting one's thoughts and emotions. And partly because it let me more closely observe anxiety and related mechanisms.
And from there, it was mainly practice. Which kinda sucks, but in the same way that training for a sport sucks. The individual moments are often painful, but I do fine as long as I keep my focus on how I'm gradually improving over time.
A really valuable part was booking regular appointments with a therapist. One of the subtle things about anxiety is that it often naturally leads to avoidance. Deciding to be regularly accountable for my progress kept me from just sweeping it back under the rug.
Other than that, I did a lot of experimenting to see how to keep my general stress and anxiety levels low. Diet, exercise, sleep schedule, and home environment all made important differences for me. With a more chill baseline, the social stuff was easier to deal with.
Another chunk was recognizing how self-reinforcing anxiety can be. When anxiety makes an experience worse, it trains us that the experience is bad, which triggers more anxiety next time. Learning to slowly undo that process was helpful. (That might have come out of Hallowell's Worry, but I no longer recall.)
Meditation was definitely helpful. Partly because a big part is practice in quieting one's thoughts and emotions. And partly because it let me more closely observe anxiety and related mechanisms.
And from there, it was mainly practice. Which kinda sucks, but in the same way that training for a sport sucks. The individual moments are often painful, but I do fine as long as I keep my focus on how I'm gradually improving over time.
Isn't this the point of the article though? that most people thought just like you, that the interaction would be miserable and a waste of their time, yet they were enriched by it?
[deleted]
Hi how you doing? Do you post here often? How about this weather huh?
Can't you see I'm reading?! (your comment)
Preach it, brother.
I would personally find it really awkward and unpleasant if every time I got on a train or bus some random tried to engage me in conversation. Just leave me alone so I can enjoy being by myself!
I would personally find it really awkward and unpleasant if every time I got on a train or bus some random tried to engage me in conversation. Just leave me alone so I can enjoy being by myself!
Yeah, I think that too. Random train-strangers aren't going to be as interesting as my book I wouldn't think.
But then the article reckoned everyone in their experiment also thought that, and yet turned out to be wrong, their predictions of their own reaction were mistaken.
Guess the only way to be sure our predictions of our own reactions are correct is to test 'em now and then.
But then the article reckoned everyone in their experiment also thought that, and yet turned out to be wrong, their predictions of their own reaction were mistaken.
Guess the only way to be sure our predictions of our own reactions are correct is to test 'em now and then.
I think the reason it could be as interesting as some other activity we do in transit because the random conversation is a rare occurrence, and that kind of serendipity is kind of special in some way.
> In Japan it's very much frowned upon to talk on the train, at least in Tokyo. I kind of like that system.
My experience was different. Random people started conversations with me, including a coy girl on the shinkansen, even though her English was as good as my non-existant Japanese. I'm pretty sure it depends on how inviting you look for conversations. I mostly had a dumb smile on throughout my trip, so I guess they liked that.
My experience was different. Random people started conversations with me, including a coy girl on the shinkansen, even though her English was as good as my non-existant Japanese. I'm pretty sure it depends on how inviting you look for conversations. I mostly had a dumb smile on throughout my trip, so I guess they liked that.
I would say riding a local commuter train (ie. on the JR Yamanote-line in Tokyo) versus long-distance (ie. the bullet train/shinkansen) might be a sufficient different environment that talking is more accepted.
As long as one isn't overly loud, of course.
If you're outside of one of the "quiet zones" (like the local commuter trains or the subway); I find that people are really warm and friendly and doesn't mind talking for a while or helping you out a bit. I guess it helped a lot that I spoke some bare minimal Japanese (to the point where some started talking English to me, as the conversations approached more medium/advanced territory).
As long as one isn't overly loud, of course.
If you're outside of one of the "quiet zones" (like the local commuter trains or the subway); I find that people are really warm and friendly and doesn't mind talking for a while or helping you out a bit. I guess it helped a lot that I spoke some bare minimal Japanese (to the point where some started talking English to me, as the conversations approached more medium/advanced territory).
> Why? I'm just not friendly.
Maybe the problem isn't with other people.
Maybe the problem isn't with other people.
Why? He clearly doesn't enjoy talking to people. I'd say it's the other people forcing him to talk to them as having the problem. If someone doesn't look like they want to talk, then why don't you give them the courtesy of simply not bothering them?
> If someone doesn't look like they want to talk, then why don't you give them the courtesy of simply not bothering them?
I've had bad days before where I've been cheered up by complete strangers. I don't plan on assuming everyone who reads a book or looks distant has a debilitating fear of human interaction. That would be a disservice to the rest of society.
But doesn't it seem odd to expect common decency from strangers while not extending it? If OP is truly okay with not being friendly, I'm perfectly fine reciprocating.
I've had bad days before where I've been cheered up by complete strangers. I don't plan on assuming everyone who reads a book or looks distant has a debilitating fear of human interaction. That would be a disservice to the rest of society.
But doesn't it seem odd to expect common decency from strangers while not extending it? If OP is truly okay with not being friendly, I'm perfectly fine reciprocating.
Reading your book is a strong signal that you don't want to be disturbed. Most people would respect that.
I believe the article was more referring to people falling into activities as an icebreaker avoidance behaviour than as a legitimate need to concentrate. :-)
I believe the article was more referring to people falling into activities as an icebreaker avoidance behaviour than as a legitimate need to concentrate. :-)
And that is just fine, too - one thing you (and everyone) should remember is that not everyone is or wants the same socially, and not everyone responds the same way about social interaction.
see also: Extrovert Ideal.
see also: Extrovert Ideal.
I wonder how this would vary between countries. Generally the cultural norm in the Nordic region isn't positive on striking up conversation with random people; it's seen as a bit of a violation of people's personal space (exceptions apply to bars). There's some kind of joke I don't fully remember about people who start conversations with strangers, which has the punchline: "he's either drunk, insane, or foreign".
The article says that those are "commuter norms" in Chicago also, but my own experience is that Americans are much more likely to strike up a conversation in public, even at places like a bus stop or in a grocery check-out line, which would be considered very weird in Denmark or (especially) Finland. When I lived in Santa Cruz, California, on the other hand, it was seen as a bit weird not to at least exchange a little small-talk in some of those situations.
The article says that those are "commuter norms" in Chicago also, but my own experience is that Americans are much more likely to strike up a conversation in public, even at places like a bus stop or in a grocery check-out line, which would be considered very weird in Denmark or (especially) Finland. When I lived in Santa Cruz, California, on the other hand, it was seen as a bit weird not to at least exchange a little small-talk in some of those situations.
Yes, and no. People who observe people striking up a conversation are likely to react in that way, but in my experience people who are approached are almost always friendly even in Northern Europe when approached by a stranger.
In a way, striking up a conversation with strangers in Northern Europe is easier than in the US, as nobody expects it. "Everyone" will wait to hear you out. No matter how awkward and nervous you sound, people will tend to lap up the attention, because it is so rare.
I'm quite introvert, and a few years ago I decided that I was isolating myself too much, and decided to make some very basic changes. For starters, I decided to greet people as much as possible, and to aim to get eye contact. Not with every random stranger, but e.g. cashiers in a shop; bus drivers etc. or other situations where there was "natural" contact.
What I didn't expect was the outcome: Within a couple of weeks, the cashiers at the shop I used to buy my lunch in were pouring out their life stories to me, after I'd been going there for months without even recognising any of their faces before. If there was a queue, they'd rush past me and motion me to their till and open it. One of the bus drivers that had been on my route for years without me ever recognising him, approached me when he suddenly recognised me at the gym, and we now chat whenever we see each other.
I've since occasionally chatted up total strangers in the street too, and the worst reaction I've ever had was a single time when a girl just kept walking and told me "not interested".
Frankly, a bar is a far more brutal environment. For anyone that fear rejection that wants to talk to strangers, random passers-by on the street will be far easier than a bar or a club even in Northern Europe.
I think the mindset both in the Nordic countries - I'm Norwegian - and England where I'm now, is that other people will think I'm weird if I talk to them, while at the same time because of that, people see it almost as a compliment if they're approached by people that show a genuine interest in them (e.g. in London my experience is that you'll get a positive response from pretty much any random stranger on the street unless you come across as representing a charity; in England there's a word for people collecting for charities on the street: chugger - a contraction of "charity" and "mugger").
In a way, striking up a conversation with strangers in Northern Europe is easier than in the US, as nobody expects it. "Everyone" will wait to hear you out. No matter how awkward and nervous you sound, people will tend to lap up the attention, because it is so rare.
I'm quite introvert, and a few years ago I decided that I was isolating myself too much, and decided to make some very basic changes. For starters, I decided to greet people as much as possible, and to aim to get eye contact. Not with every random stranger, but e.g. cashiers in a shop; bus drivers etc. or other situations where there was "natural" contact.
What I didn't expect was the outcome: Within a couple of weeks, the cashiers at the shop I used to buy my lunch in were pouring out their life stories to me, after I'd been going there for months without even recognising any of their faces before. If there was a queue, they'd rush past me and motion me to their till and open it. One of the bus drivers that had been on my route for years without me ever recognising him, approached me when he suddenly recognised me at the gym, and we now chat whenever we see each other.
I've since occasionally chatted up total strangers in the street too, and the worst reaction I've ever had was a single time when a girl just kept walking and told me "not interested".
Frankly, a bar is a far more brutal environment. For anyone that fear rejection that wants to talk to strangers, random passers-by on the street will be far easier than a bar or a club even in Northern Europe.
I think the mindset both in the Nordic countries - I'm Norwegian - and England where I'm now, is that other people will think I'm weird if I talk to them, while at the same time because of that, people see it almost as a compliment if they're approached by people that show a genuine interest in them (e.g. in London my experience is that you'll get a positive response from pretty much any random stranger on the street unless you come across as representing a charity; in England there's a word for people collecting for charities on the street: chugger - a contraction of "charity" and "mugger").
> (e.g. in London my experience is that you'll get a positive response from pretty much any random stranger on the street unless you come across as representing a charity; in England there's a word for people collecting for charities on the street: chugger - a contraction of "charity" and "mugger").
More generally, I think people just dislike being engaged in conversation by people with obvious ulterior motives.
It devalues the whole exchange when you know it's only being conducted because the other person wants to relieve you of your money.
More generally, I think people just dislike being engaged in conversation by people with obvious ulterior motives.
It devalues the whole exchange when you know it's only being conducted because the other person wants to relieve you of your money.
Yeah. Here in SF there are a variety of friendly people who hang out on busy sidewalks and try to start conversations. They are doing it to raise money for various charities. They will look miffed if you ignore their polite opening lines. Now any time somebody chats with me on the street I have to do a quick what-do-they-want evaluation.
I dislike them for it; it seems to me that they're strip-mining politeness. Each time they bug me, I get a little less polite to strangers, a little more wary. I think it's especially ironic when they're begging for environmental charities, saving natural resources by spoiling human ones.
I dislike them for it; it seems to me that they're strip-mining politeness. Each time they bug me, I get a little less polite to strangers, a little more wary. I think it's especially ironic when they're begging for environmental charities, saving natural resources by spoiling human ones.
Absolutely. I brought up the "chuggers" because of the contrast, mainly - Londoners have an uncanny ability to play deaf/mute/blind while walking whenever passing certain categories of people, and people often think that's the reaction they'd get if they approach someone here to talk to them too.
As a Brit, everytime I go to the US I experience interesting social differences. Two fun ones I can recall:
1. Americans are so quick to give up their name whereas there are people I've "known" (as in, I can have a conversation with them and we know who each other is) here in the UK for years and I do not know their names (e.g. people at the corner store, people at user groups). This is not unusual either.
2. Talking in elevators. This rarely happens in the UK but I'd say 50% of the time I'm in a hotel elevator in the US, people say "hi", "good morning" or even try to start a conversation. While I find this unsettling at first, I usually coming away from it thinking it's cute.
1. Americans are so quick to give up their name whereas there are people I've "known" (as in, I can have a conversation with them and we know who each other is) here in the UK for years and I do not know their names (e.g. people at the corner store, people at user groups). This is not unusual either.
2. Talking in elevators. This rarely happens in the UK but I'd say 50% of the time I'm in a hotel elevator in the US, people say "hi", "good morning" or even try to start a conversation. While I find this unsettling at first, I usually coming away from it thinking it's cute.
Funny! I remember from my visits to Edinburgh that people seemed to be much more likely to strike up a conversation with me than at home (Netherlands). Though maybe I just had this open "happy holidays" vibe coming from me.
Actually now that I think about it, it was during the Edinburgh festival weeks, which probably accounts for a lot of the openness. In the Netherlands you're much more likely to chat with a random stranger when it's a national holiday and everyone is out on the streets anyway.
My experiences with Danes, however, is a lot more reserved. At some point I noticed one cashier didn't even make eye contact at the checkout, and I'm just going to assume it was all confirmation bias from there :) but at the end of the week I was mildly creeped out :) :)
Actually now that I think about it, it was during the Edinburgh festival weeks, which probably accounts for a lot of the openness. In the Netherlands you're much more likely to chat with a random stranger when it's a national holiday and everyone is out on the streets anyway.
My experiences with Danes, however, is a lot more reserved. At some point I noticed one cashier didn't even make eye contact at the checkout, and I'm just going to assume it was all confirmation bias from there :) but at the end of the week I was mildly creeped out :) :)
Actually now that I think about it, it was during the Edinburgh festival weeks, which probably accounts for a lot of the openness.
Yeah, that would have a huge impact. The Britons open up a lot during cultural events. The Olympics being a big recent example. I have a sense the further you get from London, the better things get too.
I had similar experienced to you in Denmark, although as an introvert I rather liked it. It felt even more pronounced in Norway on a recent trip to Oslo. It was more a friendly silence than an antagonistic one though.
Yeah, that would have a huge impact. The Britons open up a lot during cultural events. The Olympics being a big recent example. I have a sense the further you get from London, the better things get too.
I had similar experienced to you in Denmark, although as an introvert I rather liked it. It felt even more pronounced in Norway on a recent trip to Oslo. It was more a friendly silence than an antagonistic one though.
Here in the Netherlands it's not a popular thing to do either, though most people don't mind it, they just would rather not in case someone minds, but they usually don't.
I'm in luck that my commute - both to university and work - includes the train from the Amsterdam airport to the central station, so I'm among tourists all the time there. It generally does seem easier to strike up a conversation with them. But I wonder if that's because they're from a different culture, or just because they're on holiday rather than on their daily commute.
I'm in luck that my commute - both to university and work - includes the train from the Amsterdam airport to the central station, so I'm among tourists all the time there. It generally does seem easier to strike up a conversation with them. But I wonder if that's because they're from a different culture, or just because they're on holiday rather than on their daily commute.
I'm Dutch and my girlfriend is Russian, and she was absolutely amazed at how often and easily we make a little smalltalk with complete strangers here in the Netherlands. It may not seem to be a popular thing to do here, but compared to Russia we're very chatty and friendly with strangers.
I had a colleague who did the Trans-Siberian line once, she shared a cabin with some Russians who broke out the vodka and shared - they had a blast, :p
I'm from Boston. I saw spontaneous group conversations break out among strangers fairly often. Certainly, I would not think twice if it happened there. In eight years in Seattle, I have never seen it happen, not even once.
I once talked with someone from Seattle about our similar experiences riding the train in D.C. In mine, I was looking around too much for the young professional seated next to me. He removed an earbud to ask me if I had a problem, I said "no, just my first time riding the train here... So what do you do?" His response was scathing, "I mind my own damn business." She remembered being scowled at for offering another passenger a piece of gum (a girl with an iPod, earbuds, and newspaper).
Being from the midwest, I've taken the train in Chicago many times, without ever having an experience like I did in DC. I would say that commuters in Chicago tend to be comfortable exchanging glances with one another and making smalltalk, quite unlike DC.
Being from the midwest, I've taken the train in Chicago many times, without ever having an experience like I did in DC. I would say that commuters in Chicago tend to be comfortable exchanging glances with one another and making smalltalk, quite unlike DC.
DC public transportation does seem to have an ethic of space--the other week a guy moved when I sat down next to him--and reserve. That said, I haven't seen a lot scowling when one is intruded on. I will not myself initiate a conversation unless the person is next to or across from me and there is obvious reason to--reading matter or possible recognition.
The context people operate in around DC is that there are more unpleasant people that ride public transportation than you'd expect. I've seen my fair share around here in DC, and someone in my unit has plenty of stories to tell about late night shenanigans of passengers (he's a bus driver).
I visited Seattle last year and went to several coffee shops. It seemed weird that nobody would look up if someone came in. Everyone seemed deeply absorbed in their book or smart phone or tablet.
I lived in the greater Seattle area for a dozen years or so, ending around 2003. Even early into that adventure, I remember hearing about how cold and unfriendly Seattle people were. I recall an article in a local rag, probably the Stranger, lamenting that people were lonely in Seattle because nobody would talk to strangers.
One small contrary datapoint: on my first visit to Seattle from Boston where I was living, I was walking on a downtown city street, uncrowded at the time, and an ordinary passerby made eye contact and said "hi". I almost stopped in my tracks, that interaction would have never happened in Boston at the time. There, it seemed that all strangers in public were to be perceived as threats (probably beggars) unless there was evidence to the contrary. This sort of (perceived) general friendliness was partially what motivated me to move there, that along with the mountains+water and being able to drive 20 minutes from downtown and being in the country. Yeah, Seattle folks, it really was like that on the highways once, not too terribly long ago.
One small contrary datapoint: on my first visit to Seattle from Boston where I was living, I was walking on a downtown city street, uncrowded at the time, and an ordinary passerby made eye contact and said "hi". I almost stopped in my tracks, that interaction would have never happened in Boston at the time. There, it seemed that all strangers in public were to be perceived as threats (probably beggars) unless there was evidence to the contrary. This sort of (perceived) general friendliness was partially what motivated me to move there, that along with the mountains+water and being able to drive 20 minutes from downtown and being in the country. Yeah, Seattle folks, it really was like that on the highways once, not too terribly long ago.
Good point; I was thinking of variance between countries, but countries aren't monolithic either. There might even be interesting variation city-to-city, or between urban/suburban/rural areas, or different socioeconomic areas.
I have the opposite second-hand report, though: a friend from California tried introducing himself to his new neighbors in Boston and basically got no response, as if introducing yourself to your neighbors was a weird thing to do. His general impression is that Bostonians tend to socialize, but grouped along very specific location/class lines, where you're a "foreigner" if you're from even as far as Somerville, let alone California.
I have the opposite second-hand report, though: a friend from California tried introducing himself to his new neighbors in Boston and basically got no response, as if introducing yourself to your neighbors was a weird thing to do. His general impression is that Bostonians tend to socialize, but grouped along very specific location/class lines, where you're a "foreigner" if you're from even as far as Somerville, let alone California.
I've lived in Seattle 7 years and have seen (and participated in) conversation with strangers on the bus. It's not impossible though it does seem rare here.
Coffee shops and dog parks on the other hand are prime stranger conversation spots. Oddly not bars though in my experience. I'll be moving to Cambridge in a few months so it's good to hear people there are more approachable.
Coffee shops and dog parks on the other hand are prime stranger conversation spots. Oddly not bars though in my experience. I'll be moving to Cambridge in a few months so it's good to hear people there are more approachable.
Yeah, everyone is friends at the dog park.
I hear this all the time, yet when I was in Denmark and Iceland I found that folks never seemed to be weirded out if I started a conversation with them (when ordering food, waiting for a bus, or out in a bar for example) in fact they'd often happily chat and even sometimes invite me along to where they were going next if they were out partying/drinking. Danes and Icelanders struck me as an incredibly friendly bunch. I've even had several people strike up conversations with me in both countries.
That being said when I was in Copenhagen I did notice that this openness didn't seem to be nearly as present amongst the Swedes who came over from Malmö. Come to think of it during my travels in Denmark and Iceland the only time Finns or Swedes ever struck up conversation with me was when they were drunk.
That being said when I was in Copenhagen I did notice that this openness didn't seem to be nearly as present amongst the Swedes who came over from Malmö. Come to think of it during my travels in Denmark and Iceland the only time Finns or Swedes ever struck up conversation with me was when they were drunk.
That's the local stereotype also, that Swedes and Finns are more reserved than Danes [1]. I think it's still pretty uncommon (almost taboo) for Danes to start up conversations with other Danes on public transit (or in grocery stores), though, especially during regular hours on a weekday. There are usually 6-10 people at the bus stop in Copenhagen I wait at most mornings, and nobody is ever saying anything to anyone! The bus ride is usually near-silent as well. When I was in California this would usually result in at least something spoken, a few minutes of conversation about the weather or the timeliness of public transit if nothing else.
Things are more social on weekend evenings where people are on their way "out", though, that's true. And I think starting conversations with foreigners is also done more readily than with Danes, because it sort of suspends some cultural norms. Once you hear someone speak English (or another language) there's an assumption they're probably interested in talking to locals, whereas the assumption is that the average (Danish) commuter doesn't want to be bothered. Plus there's a range of easy intro lines: "where're you from?" or "what brings you to Copenhagen?" or "hey are you guys Australian?"
But to give an example of the kind of thing that was normal in California but which I've never seen in Denmark: checking out at a Trader Joe's and the clerk starting a conversation by asking some random question about what I'm buying. If I'm buying tomatoes & avocadoes, he or she might ask if I'm making guacamole, and mention they did that last weekend and then share a tip about their favorite recipe. Or if I'm buying a bottle of gin, asking if I like it in gin & tonics or in martinis. Or comment on things like, "hey man you look pretty tired, long day eh?" It can start interesting conversations (or sometimes, awkward ones), but either way that kind of interaction in a grocery line would be seen as super-weird and an intrusion on privacy in Denmark.
[1] Informative and somewhat amusing: http://folk.uio.no/geirthe/Scandinavian_images.html
Things are more social on weekend evenings where people are on their way "out", though, that's true. And I think starting conversations with foreigners is also done more readily than with Danes, because it sort of suspends some cultural norms. Once you hear someone speak English (or another language) there's an assumption they're probably interested in talking to locals, whereas the assumption is that the average (Danish) commuter doesn't want to be bothered. Plus there's a range of easy intro lines: "where're you from?" or "what brings you to Copenhagen?" or "hey are you guys Australian?"
But to give an example of the kind of thing that was normal in California but which I've never seen in Denmark: checking out at a Trader Joe's and the clerk starting a conversation by asking some random question about what I'm buying. If I'm buying tomatoes & avocadoes, he or she might ask if I'm making guacamole, and mention they did that last weekend and then share a tip about their favorite recipe. Or if I'm buying a bottle of gin, asking if I like it in gin & tonics or in martinis. Or comment on things like, "hey man you look pretty tired, long day eh?" It can start interesting conversations (or sometimes, awkward ones), but either way that kind of interaction in a grocery line would be seen as super-weird and an intrusion on privacy in Denmark.
[1] Informative and somewhat amusing: http://folk.uio.no/geirthe/Scandinavian_images.html
> checking out at a Trader Joe's
I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on Trader Joe's. Their cashiers are friendly and quirky in that same manner around Boston as well. I wonder how they sustain that kind of culture; maybe the pay is better? Some unique interviewing process?
I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on Trader Joe's. Their cashiers are friendly and quirky in that same manner around Boston as well. I wonder how they sustain that kind of culture; maybe the pay is better? Some unique interviewing process?
Ditto in my little backwater of Spokane, WA. I hadn't thought of it before but I have had fairly in-depth conversations with cashiers at the store, probably much to the annoyance of the people behind me. A few months ago I got into a discussion about travel with a 20-something TJs cashier as she bagged my groceries. She told me about her volunteer work in Europe to help the Roma. I asked about all the Roma scammers I'd encountered in tourist spots in .de, and she gave me some political/cultural background about that. Now that you mention it I wouldn't be surprised to find that all the chatting adds a bit of pleasure to the shopping experience that encourages people to shop there again, and that management encourages it. I have to believe that the propeller-heads back at HQ have this all figured out.
One striking difference between American and German shopping is that in the latter, the staff would rather die than help you shop. I've never been approached by an employee asking "Are you finding everything OK?" for example. Nichts when cashing-out either, you'll be lucky to get a "hallo". I wonder if there's a "don't talk to strangers" principle at work with that? Maybe they simply don't care - not their job - or think you should be able to find stuff on your own if you're not an idiot?
One striking difference between American and German shopping is that in the latter, the staff would rather die than help you shop. I've never been approached by an employee asking "Are you finding everything OK?" for example. Nichts when cashing-out either, you'll be lucky to get a "hallo". I wonder if there's a "don't talk to strangers" principle at work with that? Maybe they simply don't care - not their job - or think you should be able to find stuff on your own if you're not an idiot?
It depends, I think on the whole it probably is a positive bit depending on the store can be off putting to certain people. For example with clothes shopping I have avoided shops which in the past have tried to be overly helpful. I much prefer to browse and try things on on my own and then if I do need help have someone to ask.
I can see two different types of scenario where this would happen. One is where the staff actually are interested in what you want to buy for a reason, the other where they have been told to make conversation.
I go to a kayak shop and I can have a genuinely interesting conversation with the guy over designs and why certain ones would suit certain types of paddler, or river. Someone I have never met before, but we share a common passion.
Then again, when I have visited the States, then it seems to be the opposite. You go to any restaurant, the waiter wants to know your name, tell you his, asks if you are having a nice day. It just comes across as false / and fishing for tips (IMHO its crazy that a rich country like the States has such a backward system for compensating employees baked into its culture).
I go to a kayak shop and I can have a genuinely interesting conversation with the guy over designs and why certain ones would suit certain types of paddler, or river. Someone I have never met before, but we share a common passion.
Then again, when I have visited the States, then it seems to be the opposite. You go to any restaurant, the waiter wants to know your name, tell you his, asks if you are having a nice day. It just comes across as false / and fishing for tips (IMHO its crazy that a rich country like the States has such a backward system for compensating employees baked into its culture).
Yeah true, I guess it is more that I have no interest in having a conversation about clothing, whereas talking about a hobby to someone who actually has an interest in it is very different.
I also feel awkward where anyone is coming across as fake in their customer service interactions, I feel much more comfortable if they just don't do any routine. I would note though that there are places where people have a script but still implement it in a way that shows they genuinely care, which is nice.
I also feel awkward where anyone is coming across as fake in their customer service interactions, I feel much more comfortable if they just don't do any routine. I would note though that there are places where people have a script but still implement it in a way that shows they genuinely care, which is nice.
Performance reviews at Trader Joe's heavily weight customer interaction. Employees who don't engage customers very well will receive smaller raises, and eventually leave.
Source: I used to work at TJ's.
Source: I used to work at TJ's.
I don't know, all it takes (imo) is a healthy culture, something that's taught to people when they start in a few bullet points about culture / values, and then further encouraged by the team (with probably a supervisor encouraging it if the staff doesn't pick it up themselves).
[deleted]
I live in a small town in the Bay Area called Pacifica, and its pretty rude to not chat up the cashiers at the grocery store here. They get bored without human contact, their job is pretty repetitive. Over time you get to know them. Its kind of cool, and why I like Pacifica.
I had a conversation about this exact thing while on a business trip with some colleagues recently. I'm from Ireland while my colleagues were from Finland, Italy and France. In Irish culture, we talk a lot and seeing strangers conversing on public transport, with the cashier at the check-out or just waiting at a bus stop is quite normal. However, my Italian and Finnish friends said that this was one of the weirdest things they had to get used to when in Ireland. In their respective countries it's just considered common courtesy to not start up conversations with strangers and just grant them their personal space.
This social experiment is very interesting, but the results would probably be very different depending on what country you're in.
This social experiment is very interesting, but the results would probably be very different depending on what country you're in.
As a Canadian who is in the United States (California, Redwood City) for long periods of time, I get used to a somewhat greater social distance. It's not obvious, until you come back home to Canada (In my case, Vancouver, Coquitlam, Burnaby) - and it seems like every Canadian wants to be chatty with you to the point of distraction.
What's weird about this, is if you had asked me while I was in Canada, I would have said there is somewhat of a convention of social distancing - but, there is clearly a spectrum.
What's weird about this, is if you had asked me while I was in Canada, I would have said there is somewhat of a convention of social distancing - but, there is clearly a spectrum.
Clearly a spectrum, for example the comfortable distance. In Germany, for example, people on public transport will generally seat themselves to maximize overall spacing. In other countries, people clump together.
My social studies teacher once told a story about this: putting north americans and south americans together at a cocktail party can be fun, because the accepted social distance is different. So the south american will move in in order not be rude, while the north american will move back in order not to be rude. This can lead to little groups chasing each other through the room :-)
My social studies teacher once told a story about this: putting north americans and south americans together at a cocktail party can be fun, because the accepted social distance is different. So the south american will move in in order not be rude, while the north american will move back in order not to be rude. This can lead to little groups chasing each other through the room :-)
I think it might be a city thing as well. I grew up/currently live in Toronto and talking to strangers outside of specific areas/events is often met with distrust or a feeling that you/they are invading personal space.
> I wonder how this would vary between countries.
Sure, it does - cultures vary.
The thing is this:
"Culture" expresses the maturity of our species. And maturity is an ongoing and never-ending process. Which means: you can/shoud always be asking "what must still be improved?" (on a personal and then societal level).
Every culture contains (sometimes very) unhealthy elements. And it's our job to root those out.
Behavioral norms promoting social isolation is one of those immature elements of certain cultures.
Sure, it does - cultures vary.
The thing is this:
"Culture" expresses the maturity of our species. And maturity is an ongoing and never-ending process. Which means: you can/shoud always be asking "what must still be improved?" (on a personal and then societal level).
Every culture contains (sometimes very) unhealthy elements. And it's our job to root those out.
Behavioral norms promoting social isolation is one of those immature elements of certain cultures.
And how exactly do you decide what 'maturity' is?
I really hate when people talk to me on the trains. I usually have a book I'm reading, computer to work on, etc.. Yet it's not polite to tell them I don't want to talk. Often short one word answers aren't enough to clue them in either. The article claims we should sit down and talk to strangers, but what if the stranger is similarly forced to respond and doesn't want to?
I agree with you.
For reasons I've never understood, people try to talk to me on trams in my city once or twice a week. Maybe I look more welcoming than I feel.
Some of these conversations are awkward for abnormal reasons (the other person has some kind of mental or dependency issues) but even when the other person is normal: I don't like it.
Simply: I don't like idle chatter. I would rather sit in silence.
Yes, I could simply tell people I don't want to talk. I've done this but unless you actually have a book to hide behind you're likely to endure the rest of the journey being regularly glared at like you're the worst person they've ever met.
This doesn't apply to people with actual questions. That's fine – you can answer the question, be helpful and follow up on the topic or not at your choosing.
But for random unsolicited conversation, I think the cultural norm of avoiding idle chat with strangers is helpful and positive.
For reasons I've never understood, people try to talk to me on trams in my city once or twice a week. Maybe I look more welcoming than I feel.
Some of these conversations are awkward for abnormal reasons (the other person has some kind of mental or dependency issues) but even when the other person is normal: I don't like it.
Simply: I don't like idle chatter. I would rather sit in silence.
Yes, I could simply tell people I don't want to talk. I've done this but unless you actually have a book to hide behind you're likely to endure the rest of the journey being regularly glared at like you're the worst person they've ever met.
This doesn't apply to people with actual questions. That's fine – you can answer the question, be helpful and follow up on the topic or not at your choosing.
But for random unsolicited conversation, I think the cultural norm of avoiding idle chat with strangers is helpful and positive.
The usual solution is headphones. And if you're not the type of person who enjoys constantly listening to music, well--the headphones don't necessarily have to be plugged into anything (besides your pocket.)
> Yet it's not polite to tell them I don't want to talk. Often short one word answers aren't enough to clue them in either.
It's perfectly fine to say "excuse me but I really need to get back to my work in this computer".
Way more polite than trying to "clue them in" using short one-word answers, anyway.
You're never "forced to respond" any more than the simple courtesy of politely informing them you have no time or wish to chat.
It's perfectly fine to say "excuse me but I really need to get back to my work in this computer".
Way more polite than trying to "clue them in" using short one-word answers, anyway.
You're never "forced to respond" any more than the simple courtesy of politely informing them you have no time or wish to chat.
> It's perfectly fine to say "excuse me but I really need to get back to my work in this computer".
That only works if what you're doing is (at least plausibly) something you need to be doing, though.
That only works if what you're doing is (at least plausibly) something you need to be doing, though.
Yes, communication only works if the thing you try to communicate is actually the thing you want to communicate.
So, if the thing you're doing is not something you need to be doing, do not use the word "need".
For instance:
"Excuse me, but I would really like to get back to reading my book."
"If you don't mind, I'd really prefer listening to my iPod during this trip."
It's simple. Just politely communicate your feelings, preference and/or needs.
Ironically, this is the sort of thing you tend to learn by ... talking to people.
Unsurprising that people who don't talk to talk to other people seem to
So, if the thing you're doing is not something you need to be doing, do not use the word "need".
For instance:
"Excuse me, but I would really like to get back to reading my book."
"If you don't mind, I'd really prefer listening to my iPod during this trip."
It's simple. Just politely communicate your feelings, preference and/or needs.
Ironically, this is the sort of thing you tend to learn by ... talking to people.
Unsurprising that people who don't talk to talk to other people seem to
That isn't "simple". Let's say your preference is "I don't want to talk to this person." That cannot be said politely! Notice instead to make it polite you had to recast it -- "I would rather be doing X rather than talking to this person." That is not an obvious transformation, and it's not helpful to go around saying that it's "simple". Instead you could give explicitly the advice that you've given implicitly: Take your preference not to talk to the person, and recast it as a desire to do X (where X doesn't include talking to the person).
Now, you may point out that these two preferences are extensionally equivalent. But we're working with mental representations here, so the distinction is important.
Also, this approach is not bulletproof. E.g.: You're not doing anything but watching the walls of the subway tunnel go by. "Sorry, I'm trying to...?" This leaves you with a lack of things to say. It also has the general problem of excuse-making (because that is what you are doing when you recast your preferences like that), namely, the person may try to engage you along those lines. ("I'm trying to solve this puzzle." "Oh, yeah? What sort of puzzle is it?" Sure, there's are potential replies to that (e.g. "It's a masyu puzzle, but please leave me alone." or "It would take too long to explain, sorry".) My point is it is not as simple as "just politely communicate your feelings, preferences/and or needs", often because doing so is impossible without violating other social constraints. (Notice how "It's a masyu puzzle, but please leave me alone" is more explicit and less polite in its "go away" -- but this is OK in this context because you've already told the person to leave you alone once. These sorts of things have to be accounted for.)
Now, you may point out that these two preferences are extensionally equivalent. But we're working with mental representations here, so the distinction is important.
Also, this approach is not bulletproof. E.g.: You're not doing anything but watching the walls of the subway tunnel go by. "Sorry, I'm trying to...?" This leaves you with a lack of things to say. It also has the general problem of excuse-making (because that is what you are doing when you recast your preferences like that), namely, the person may try to engage you along those lines. ("I'm trying to solve this puzzle." "Oh, yeah? What sort of puzzle is it?" Sure, there's are potential replies to that (e.g. "It's a masyu puzzle, but please leave me alone." or "It would take too long to explain, sorry".) My point is it is not as simple as "just politely communicate your feelings, preferences/and or needs", often because doing so is impossible without violating other social constraints. (Notice how "It's a masyu puzzle, but please leave me alone" is more explicit and less polite in its "go away" -- but this is OK in this context because you've already told the person to leave you alone once. These sorts of things have to be accounted for.)
Certainly this article was a bit heavy handed in its recommendations -- in my experience, there is a spectrum of people, with a spectrum of feelings about random interactions (some of which can even change from day to day, depending on mood). Those personal boundaries should definitely be respected if tested and the stranger does not want to talk.
I have seen times when those boundaries have been crossed (particularly when alcohol is involved). It is odd the author did not go into any detail about unwanted interaction, and only focused on extra interaction which supported her hypothesis, without warning for situations which may turn uncomfortable and worse off for the stranger.
I have seen times when those boundaries have been crossed (particularly when alcohol is involved). It is odd the author did not go into any detail about unwanted interaction, and only focused on extra interaction which supported her hypothesis, without warning for situations which may turn uncomfortable and worse off for the stranger.
I find this particularly problematic on planes myself. If you're next to a "talker" for 8+ hours who doesn't get the hint, it can be really annoying. You can usually escape it by going to sleep (or pretending), but good luck trying to read a book or work on your computer without fielding questions about what you're doing...
On shorter trips I don't really mind, either we'll have an interesting conversation or not, then if it gets awkward I'll get off soon anyway.
On shorter trips I don't really mind, either we'll have an interesting conversation or not, then if it gets awkward I'll get off soon anyway.
I think it's okay to first be or painfully obvious, as in, "excuse me I'm trying to read / work here, can you please stop talking to me", and later to either become rude ("stfu!11one"), or mature and request to be reseated if possible.
Because getting the hint is an art, and few have the empathy to catch hints about not wanting to talk (and/or it's assumed everyone loves to talk)
Because getting the hint is an art, and few have the empathy to catch hints about not wanting to talk (and/or it's assumed everyone loves to talk)
I have to wonder - is this a Starbucks promotional piece? Why is a Starbucks gift card so effective? Why is a Starbucks cafe the perfect place to study these kinds of interactions? Is the Starbucks brand something that we, as readers, need to connect in our minds with the core company concepts of conviviality and happiness? Would sponsoring a scientific study help with this? Or am I just too cynical for this world? Maybe I need a latte to calm down.
I assumed that the study was targeting people who have the routine of commuting and getting a takeaway coffee near the workplace.
I could be wrong but it should equally apply to any other coffee shop in a location near offices and public transport (like a metro).
I could be wrong but it should equally apply to any other coffee shop in a location near offices and public transport (like a metro).
> By the end of the train ride, commuters who talked to a stranger reported having a more positive experience than those who had sat in solitude.
Explanation 1: Either there are more extraverts than introverts in Chicago, or more extraverts volunteered to participate in the experiment (selection bias).
Explanation 2: When it comes to deriving pleasure from short, shallow interaction with a random stranger, there's not much difference between extraverts and introverts. Hell, I'm officially diagnosed with Asperger's and I still enjoy those quick interactions. I just happen to be not very good at it.
As the article itself suggests:
As an autistic introvert, I'm still capable of deriving pleasure from talking with strangers from time to time, but the need to put on a happy face and consciously maintain it also puts a great strain on me. Too much mask-wearing makes me exhausted. At the end of the day, I no longer even have the energy to conjure up a passable mask, so I return to my usual cranky self. In other words, the momentary burst of happiness has a significant energy cost, and the ROI for introverts may be much lower (or even negative) than it is for extraverts.
Explanation 1: Either there are more extraverts than introverts in Chicago, or more extraverts volunteered to participate in the experiment (selection bias).
Explanation 2: When it comes to deriving pleasure from short, shallow interaction with a random stranger, there's not much difference between extraverts and introverts. Hell, I'm officially diagnosed with Asperger's and I still enjoy those quick interactions. I just happen to be not very good at it.
As the article itself suggests:
The great thing about strangers is that
we tend to put on our happy face when we meet them,
reserving our crankier side for the people we know and love.
As an autistic introvert, I'm still capable of deriving pleasure from talking with strangers from time to time, but the need to put on a happy face and consciously maintain it also puts a great strain on me. Too much mask-wearing makes me exhausted. At the end of the day, I no longer even have the energy to conjure up a passable mask, so I return to my usual cranky self. In other words, the momentary burst of happiness has a significant energy cost, and the ROI for introverts may be much lower (or even negative) than it is for extraverts.
I suspect that these studies have the limitation, that only more extroverted people agree to do such things for a $5 gift card, while the introverts just say no (I'm using the terms extrovert and introvert loosely here).
And yeah, of course the extroverts would feel happier when talking to people, while those who wouldn't feel so rarely even participate in the study [if my suspicion is right].
And yeah, of course the extroverts would feel happier when talking to people, while those who wouldn't feel so rarely even participate in the study [if my suspicion is right].
It's possible these atypical experiences were like candy: a great treat if rare, but you'd prefer never having it to having it for every meal.
That's a great hypothesis. Also, I often enjoy having short conversations on the BART if someone strikes them up with me, but I'm not so sure I want to spend the whole ride talking.
This happens often enough if you read because people often remark on the book you're reading. It's okay to then have a short conversation that starts off from that so long as it's occasional.
If every single time I got on the train someone wanted to talk to me, I might wear sunglasses and plug earphones in.
This happens often enough if you read because people often remark on the book you're reading. It's okay to then have a short conversation that starts off from that so long as it's occasional.
If every single time I got on the train someone wanted to talk to me, I might wear sunglasses and plug earphones in.
I've started doing this. I've never had a negative experience, and it's usually been a lot of fun. If someone isn't interested, it's obvious, and you stop.
I highly recommend trying it. Lots of smiles on both sides.
I highly recommend trying it. Lots of smiles on both sides.
"One group was asked to talk to the stranger who sat down next to them on the train that morning. Other people were told to follow standard commuter norms, keeping to themselves. By the end of the train ride, commuters who talked to a stranger reported having a more positive experience than those who had sat in solitude."
What about the passengers they accosted? The no talking norm on public transit isn't meant to protect the shy from having to initiate conversations, since that's easy not to do. It's to protect people from strangers who want to but in. I'm sure every loudmouth who tried to strike up a conversation seated next to me on an airplane thought it was a fine idea, but I would have been happier to be left alone.
What about the passengers they accosted? The no talking norm on public transit isn't meant to protect the shy from having to initiate conversations, since that's easy not to do. It's to protect people from strangers who want to but in. I'm sure every loudmouth who tried to strike up a conversation seated next to me on an airplane thought it was a fine idea, but I would have been happier to be left alone.
It’s covered in the article:
"The benefits of connecting with others also turn out to be contagious. Dr. Epley and Ms. Schroeder found that when one person took the initiative to speak to another in a waiting room, both people reported having a more positive experience. Far from annoying people by violating their personal bubbles, reaching out to strangers may improve their day, too."
"The benefits of connecting with others also turn out to be contagious. Dr. Epley and Ms. Schroeder found that when one person took the initiative to speak to another in a waiting room, both people reported having a more positive experience. Far from annoying people by violating their personal bubbles, reaching out to strangers may improve their day, too."
> What about the passengers they accosted?
Speaking to a stranger != accosting. Welcome to the internet, where you can be bold enough to bash well meaning strangers who spoke to you, yet not bold enough in real life to simply decline a conversation.
Speaking to a stranger != accosting. Welcome to the internet, where you can be bold enough to bash well meaning strangers who spoke to you, yet not bold enough in real life to simply decline a conversation.
The difference is that, on the Internet, you can ignore people and not feel awkward about it. Ignoring some loudmouth next to you is much more difficult. Suggesting you want to be left alone is awkward but afterwards it's even worse because that person is still there. Worse still, suppose they react badly. Urgh. Better to just mind your own business.
Ignoring someone to indicate you don't want to talk is actually a very rude thing to do, in most normal day-to-day interactions.
I don't often get talked to on transit. However, I do often get ranted at. The drunk and the mentally ill ride the subway too--and, unlike in other places, you can't get away from them there.
The etiquette against talking to people on mass transit is a bit like the prohibition most religions have on murder: something you don't need to tell most people, because it's covered by their internal compass--but which is instead intended to suggest an orthogonal reason for holding back to the people for which that compass is broken.
The etiquette against talking to people on mass transit is a bit like the prohibition most religions have on murder: something you don't need to tell most people, because it's covered by their internal compass--but which is instead intended to suggest an orthogonal reason for holding back to the people for which that compass is broken.
Please note that the article does not, in fact, advocate to get drunk and/or brain-damaged and start ranting at strangers.
Similarly, while smiling is found to make a person more likeable, grinning like a maniac, probably less so.
Similarly, while smiling is found to make a person more likeable, grinning like a maniac, probably less so.
Isn't it the nature of etiquette to be implied to most people, like a moral compass? It would seem that the drunk and the mentally ill would ignore these social guidelines anyway.
"Speaking to a stranger != accosting."
It is if they clearly make it obvious that they don't want to be talked to.
I almost never chat with people on transit, but while commuting via bicycle I've often had conversations with fellow riders. I wonder what the difference is that encourages conversation. I guess maybe the likely shared interest in bicycles is a good conversation starter?
Interesting. I can't imagine having a conversation whilst cycling, but then I do tend to go fairly fast a lot of the time, so I am concentrating on not hitting anything.
Though I did think something similar reading these comments. Living in a city with lots of people it is rare to interact. As soon as you leave the city, and do some outdoor stuff, hiking / mountain biking / kayak, its normal to speak to stranger, and kind of rude if you don't even acknowledge them.
Though I did think something similar reading these comments. Living in a city with lots of people it is rare to interact. As soon as you leave the city, and do some outdoor stuff, hiking / mountain biking / kayak, its normal to speak to stranger, and kind of rude if you don't even acknowledge them.
Be careful what you ask for.
If you ever get the chance to travel Indian railways, say, in a non-airconditioned class (which is cheaper and hence has more "average" people), you will inevitably end up chatting about politics (typically with the older generation), railway route trivia (I seriously don't know why that is SO interesting to my dad's generation), movies/cricket and everything else under the sun.
And if you are a foreigner, god help you. By the time you disembark, you'll have a group of 5-6 people who just digged your life history including how much money you make, out of you.
Except shitty toilets (no pun intended) and general hygiene issues, it is a very interesting way to travel.
If you ever get the chance to travel Indian railways, say, in a non-airconditioned class (which is cheaper and hence has more "average" people), you will inevitably end up chatting about politics (typically with the older generation), railway route trivia (I seriously don't know why that is SO interesting to my dad's generation), movies/cricket and everything else under the sun.
And if you are a foreigner, god help you. By the time you disembark, you'll have a group of 5-6 people who just digged your life history including how much money you make, out of you.
Except shitty toilets (no pun intended) and general hygiene issues, it is a very interesting way to travel.
I still suck at talking to strangers, the concept scares me greatly, I've never been entirely sure why. Anxiety maybe?
My biggest breakthrough was realizing in college, that I could go to a coffee shop and order a cup of coffee and talk to the cashier, and they were usually very friendly. So, now when anyone is serving or helping me (waitress, barista, security guard, guy who empties the trash cans, whatever) I say hi and ask "how's it going". It's not a deep interaction, and it's not huge, but considering the number of days I used to go without saying anything to anyone, it's a nice improvement.
My biggest breakthrough was realizing in college, that I could go to a coffee shop and order a cup of coffee and talk to the cashier, and they were usually very friendly. So, now when anyone is serving or helping me (waitress, barista, security guard, guy who empties the trash cans, whatever) I say hi and ask "how's it going". It's not a deep interaction, and it's not huge, but considering the number of days I used to go without saying anything to anyone, it's a nice improvement.
I used to frequent the bay area around 2000 when I worked for a Singapore based startup who setup their HQ there. As I didnt have a driving license, I used to take public buses from San Mateo to Burlingame, and make train trips to SF.
I was given the standard cautionary rules by many, but I have to say that in all that commuting, I never felt threatened even once. Normal folks commuted by bus too. However, there were also quite a few who we were "challenged" in various ways, but still had regular jobs at cafes and such. Since my commute schedule was fixed, I became familiar with them and realized that though there wasn't much conversation going on, the regulars were all familiar with each other.
On one occasion, one guy sat next to me and poured his heart out about how his girl friend ditched him years ago and how upset he's been over it for many years. Then, when a stop came, he wordlessly walked out the door and held it open for one of the regulars. This lady had her eyes to the floor the whole time and after she'd got down, said "bye" to him. He returned a "take care", came back to his seat and resumed his story with me.
I admit I was somewhat uneasy on the bus commutes initially, but this incident totally changed me. Actually, I'd never seen this quality of spontaneous kindness among "normal" folks during my stay there .. and was humbled greatly myself.
I always recall this incident (and all those commutes) fondly. I now think most "normal" city folks who curse each other on every misstep, cant tolerate a couple of seconds delay on the road, who never seem to get a thought to extend themselves out of their pitifully small and limited bodies to someone else; as the folks who are "challenged".
So, coming back on topic, at least start a conversation with the regulars on your commutes.
I was given the standard cautionary rules by many, but I have to say that in all that commuting, I never felt threatened even once. Normal folks commuted by bus too. However, there were also quite a few who we were "challenged" in various ways, but still had regular jobs at cafes and such. Since my commute schedule was fixed, I became familiar with them and realized that though there wasn't much conversation going on, the regulars were all familiar with each other.
On one occasion, one guy sat next to me and poured his heart out about how his girl friend ditched him years ago and how upset he's been over it for many years. Then, when a stop came, he wordlessly walked out the door and held it open for one of the regulars. This lady had her eyes to the floor the whole time and after she'd got down, said "bye" to him. He returned a "take care", came back to his seat and resumed his story with me.
I admit I was somewhat uneasy on the bus commutes initially, but this incident totally changed me. Actually, I'd never seen this quality of spontaneous kindness among "normal" folks during my stay there .. and was humbled greatly myself.
I always recall this incident (and all those commutes) fondly. I now think most "normal" city folks who curse each other on every misstep, cant tolerate a couple of seconds delay on the road, who never seem to get a thought to extend themselves out of their pitifully small and limited bodies to someone else; as the folks who are "challenged".
So, coming back on topic, at least start a conversation with the regulars on your commutes.
Since 6 weeks now I'm saying Hello ("Bonjour", since I'm in Quebec) to at least one
stranger every day. During the first days it was really difficult for me to break the ice,
and it sometimes felt awkward and eventually (after
1-2 weeks) it became a second nature. I smile all the time when I'm outside and
look at people more easily, in order to ease a non-awkward "Bonjour".
I still have some people ignoring me or just mutter a barely recognizable
response and avoiding me, but it feels good every time I'm done for the day (having saluted 1 person).
It's an efficient habit to overcome shyness I think. My next goal: starting a conversation with at least one stranger everyday.
And like the article says, it kind of forces me (the smiling, eye contact, etc) to not just look happy but actually feel happier. And just overcoming the fear of talking to strangers is liberating.
It's an efficient habit to overcome shyness I think. My next goal: starting a conversation with at least one stranger everyday.
And like the article says, it kind of forces me (the smiling, eye contact, etc) to not just look happy but actually feel happier. And just overcoming the fear of talking to strangers is liberating.
It seems to me that it would be difficult talking with strangers on public transport considering most people have smart phones. I've noticed this with younger people. Some cannot sit down for more than, say, 10 minutes without having to look at their phone.
My rank of unpleasantness:
1. Being conversed to badly.
2. Being around people who ignore you.
3. Being conversed to pleasantly.
4. Not being around people that might potentially converse to you badly.
The trouble with this research is that it compared being around people who ignore you with being around people with positive interaction (that turned out almost always ok).
It didn't compare being around people who ignore you and being around people that converse with you pleasantly with not being around people.
Also it failed to take into account how slightly pleasant interactions tend to fade away, but unpleasant interaction tends to burn a scar in ones memory that can hurt for years.
The trouble with this research is that it compared being around people who ignore you with being around people with positive interaction (that turned out almost always ok).
It didn't compare being around people who ignore you and being around people that converse with you pleasantly with not being around people.
Also it failed to take into account how slightly pleasant interactions tend to fade away, but unpleasant interaction tends to burn a scar in ones memory that can hurt for years.
I suspect this would only work with men. I'm told that for women, every interaction with a random stranger could be the start of a physical assault. Then again, the author of the article is named Elizabeth, so I'm kinda confused.
"By the end of the train ride, commuters who talked to a stranger reported having a more positive experience than those who had sat in solitude."
And what about the people who had conversation thrust upon them by a stranger during the train ride?
And what about the people who had conversation thrust upon them by a stranger during the train ride?
Near the end of the article:
"The benefits of connecting with others also turn out to be contagious. Dr. Epley and Ms. Schroeder found that when one person took the initiative to speak to another in a waiting room, both people reported having a more positive experience. Far from annoying people by violating their personal bubbles, reaching out to strangers may improve their day, too."
"The benefits of connecting with others also turn out to be contagious. Dr. Epley and Ms. Schroeder found that when one person took the initiative to speak to another in a waiting room, both people reported having a more positive experience. Far from annoying people by violating their personal bubbles, reaching out to strangers may improve their day, too."
This seems to ignore the fact that some people are more introverted than extroverted (meaning how people "recharge" -- either via "alone time" or by talking to others, respectively). I am more introvert than extrovert, and when I've worked at jobs where I've commuted back and forth, I loved the alone time I had on the bus or train to and from work -- it really helped me regain some mental energy before and after work. If someone started talking to me it would just drain that away, and I'd much rather save that energy for coworkers or loved ones.
[deleted]
I recently moved from Christchurch, New Zealand to Melbourne Australia. Christchurch has a population of about 350,000 and the only form of public transport is busses (which I have almost never needed to take). Melbourne has a population of about 4,500,000 with trams, busses and trains.
On week days my commute involves a half hour train ride and a 5 minute bus trip either way. While most people are glued to their phones, I purposely avoid using mine as much as possible. I just try to be as friendly as possible.
On week days my commute involves a half hour train ride and a 5 minute bus trip either way. While most people are glued to their phones, I purposely avoid using mine as much as possible. I just try to be as friendly as possible.
When I fly, about half the time I end up in conversation with a seat mate. I have never regretted any of the conversations I've had. And it sure does make the flight go faster. I don't ever force it and it's obvious when someone doesn't want to talk - fascinating in those circumstances that I can sit next to someone for 5 hours with nary a word passed between us.
I just can not keep quite. even worse, i end up exchanging cell numbers. And the experience is like, I am on my college bus, traveling with my fellow mates for a picnic trip. where everyone would secretly wish that the journey just does not come to an end and we keep having fun.
I am baffled they needed a 'scientific' research to figure this out.
I am baffled they needed a 'scientific' research to figure this out.
I frequently strike up conversations with strangers, cashiers, clerks, etc. I offer to take group photos so the cameraperson can be in the shot, like, several times a month. Why? I've never really thought about it, but it's probably for the very reason revealed in the study. It's just a habit that makes me a happier person.
Another interesting article: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D05E4DF1130F...
'Excuse Me. May I Have Your Seat?'; Revisiting a Social Experiment, And the Fear That Goes With It
That was an interesting article indeed. I figured I'd just post the title so people have some idea what they're clicking on.
That was an interesting article indeed. I figured I'd just post the title so people have some idea what they're clicking on.
That is a fascinating article and experiment, although it doesn't surprise me that most people gave up their seats. If I were on a subway and somebody asked for my seat, my highest-probability hypotheses are that they have a physical condition that isn't immediately obvious, or that they're just weird. In the first case I should obviously get up, and in the second case it's not worth trying to determine if they'll have a negative reaction if I refuse.
"The great thing about strangers is that we tend to put on our happy face when we meet them, reserving our crankier side for the people we know and love."
This is so true. It is such an irrational behavior on our part, yet we all seem to do this.
This is so true. It is such an irrational behavior on our part, yet we all seem to do this.
Evo-psych enthusiasts would probably tell us it's adaptive: you know what responses to expect from people you know. Frown at a complete stranger, and he might beat you up.
I'd say for us "nerds", this knowledge is so central.
But I also think it really starts to apply to everybody now, as we learn to stay glued to our various electronic devices, wherever we are, whatever we do, whomever we're with.
But I also think it really starts to apply to everybody now, as we learn to stay glued to our various electronic devices, wherever we are, whatever we do, whomever we're with.
I have a theory that there is more harmony in cities where everyone takes public transport. It breaks down the divide between classes as people have the opportunity to interact with someone different to them every day.
way too tired to bother with people attempting to communicate while communing.
thats why people talk on planes or longer range trains, etc.
you'd really want to feel required to talk to stranger every day of the week, morning/evening?
Not me.
thats why people talk on planes or longer range trains, etc.
you'd really want to feel required to talk to stranger every day of the week, morning/evening?
Not me.
The study actually accounted for your opinion. It said that people thought they would prefer to sit alone, then had an improved experience by talking.
You may still be right, but empiricism would suggest you should test your belief by making small talk with a stranger and see if you feel better or worse.
You may still be right, but empiricism would suggest you should test your belief by making small talk with a stranger and see if you feel better or worse.
I found occasional unexpected chat with strangers is usually pleasant. However, I also avoid places where such chats happen often, because they become tiring pretty quickly.
First short talk in waiting room for doctor was pleasant. When it turned out they are too frequent, I started to look for isolated places. I guess it is different if you are lonely and need to talk, but I was not lonely at the time. My need to read or being lost in my own thoughts was much higher. Essentially, if I had to spend that visit (they were long) by small talks, I was tired in the evening and preferred to watch tv and be alone. If I could be left alone, I found it much easier to interact with family and real friends in the evening.
The second mode makes me much happier in the long term (plus I get to keep long term relationships).
I think that this is the biggest problem of these studies. They measure short term happiness burst from isolated events. It is like going on a short ski trip, finding it pleasant and then assuming you would be happier skiing on the very same hill every day all year. Maybe yes, but most likely not.
First short talk in waiting room for doctor was pleasant. When it turned out they are too frequent, I started to look for isolated places. I guess it is different if you are lonely and need to talk, but I was not lonely at the time. My need to read or being lost in my own thoughts was much higher. Essentially, if I had to spend that visit (they were long) by small talks, I was tired in the evening and preferred to watch tv and be alone. If I could be left alone, I found it much easier to interact with family and real friends in the evening.
The second mode makes me much happier in the long term (plus I get to keep long term relationships).
I think that this is the biggest problem of these studies. They measure short term happiness burst from isolated events. It is like going on a short ski trip, finding it pleasant and then assuming you would be happier skiing on the very same hill every day all year. Maybe yes, but most likely not.
yeah occasional is fine. forced-due-to-social-rules isn't.
[deleted]
Yes, but in the study they were being paid to talk.
Also: (i) the conversations were once-offs; (ii) they were part of a study, which might have altered the perceived well-being of the participants (for Science! huzzah! etc.).
Tired? Sounds like a symptom to me really; do you get enough sleep? Caffeine dependency?
Alternatively, maybe you meant "tiring", i.e. it costs a lot of energy to engage in conversations / social interactions, depending on where you stand on the introvert / extrovert scale.
Alternatively, maybe you meant "tiring", i.e. it costs a lot of energy to engage in conversations / social interactions, depending on where you stand on the introvert / extrovert scale.
Is this behind a paywall for anyone else?
Yes, but you can usually get around the paywall by visiting the site through Google News. Just go to Google News and search for the title of the article.
You can also just disable javascript on that page, since the text is hidden _after_ the site is laid out.
Alternatively, you can "view source" to get the plaintext, which has the full article.
You can also open the page in a "private window" on firefox. I haven't tried in chrome but I assume you would get the same result.
You could also just pay, if you find yourself on nytimes often enough to hit the paywall. Crazy, I know.
Though there would also be something tiresome about an article-aggregation site like HN that just links through to a bunch of paywalls. Sort of a different thing, then.
Last summer I took the Rejection Therapy[1] challenge. For anyone unaware of what that is, it's a game where you're supposed to get rejected by someone in person for 30 days consecutively.
So I'm on a crowded bus, sitting beside a middle age woman with a severe look on her face. I still had to get rejected that day, so I opened up a can of salted cashews that was in my grocery bag and nervously offered her some.
She seemed startled at first and declined (I got my rejection), but then thanked me in a thick German accent.
She said she immigrated from Germany to Canada 11 years ago and did not have any friends here. She also lived at the same house all this time and not once did her neighbors introduce themselves or say hello. She said it was rare that a stranger would be kind to her.
Her intense expression was gone and we chatted for the rest of the ride. I'm glad I got out of my comfort zone and made contact with this random stranger. It made her happy and me happy too.
If you want a way to meet new people, Rejection Therapy is ideal. Many of the rejection cards require interacting with strangers.
[1] http://rejectiontherapy.com
So I'm on a crowded bus, sitting beside a middle age woman with a severe look on her face. I still had to get rejected that day, so I opened up a can of salted cashews that was in my grocery bag and nervously offered her some.
She seemed startled at first and declined (I got my rejection), but then thanked me in a thick German accent.
She said she immigrated from Germany to Canada 11 years ago and did not have any friends here. She also lived at the same house all this time and not once did her neighbors introduce themselves or say hello. She said it was rare that a stranger would be kind to her.
Her intense expression was gone and we chatted for the rest of the ride. I'm glad I got out of my comfort zone and made contact with this random stranger. It made her happy and me happy too.
If you want a way to meet new people, Rejection Therapy is ideal. Many of the rejection cards require interacting with strangers.
[1] http://rejectiontherapy.com
I'm glad I got out of my comfort zone and made contact with this random stranger. It made her happy and me happy too.
Apropos, this wonderful Thai commercial that is making the rounds - http://youtu.be/cZGghmwUcbQ
Apropos, this wonderful Thai commercial that is making the rounds - http://youtu.be/cZGghmwUcbQ
Did it change how you feel about interacting with people in general?
This is the first time I've heard of "rejection therapy". It interests me but maybe it approaches the problem in a destructive/negative way (that is, keep doing something uncomfortable until it isn't)? I've learned to deal with rejection by reminding myself that people have their own problems and embarrassing histories; they aren't really that different from me. Thinking about it in a humanistic way like that, instead of a negative/destructive way, lets me get over things immediately.
This is the first time I've heard of "rejection therapy". It interests me but maybe it approaches the problem in a destructive/negative way (that is, keep doing something uncomfortable until it isn't)? I've learned to deal with rejection by reminding myself that people have their own problems and embarrassing histories; they aren't really that different from me. Thinking about it in a humanistic way like that, instead of a negative/destructive way, lets me get over things immediately.
Did it change how you feel about interacting with people in general?
I'm more at ease initiating conversations and making small talk. The change over how I used to be is huge.
I'm more at ease initiating conversations and making small talk. The change over how I used to be is huge.
Thanks for sharing this, this seems like a great experiment!
At grave risk of downvoting: eponysterical much?
Relevant username.
This might work well in theory but in practice this is how it will work:
Target - female, attractive, youngish
Initiator - male, single, below average attractiveness
Target - female, attractive, youngish
Initiator - male, single, below average attractiveness
“to be looked at as though air." Occasionally I'm a grammar/spelling nazi so I feel honored to find a typo in such a great piece of writing.
Being a journalism student in the South at the time, I thought, "Hey, that sounds like a fun experiment." A group of friends and I started an informal club called Map Dart. The premise was to toss a dart at a map, travel to wherever it landed and talk to strangers in the city or town to capture their stories.
We received a lot of negative feedback from people who weren't interested in journalism. Mostly, they seemed to predisposed to think that the strangers in rural Georgia and northern Florida would shoe us away from their properties. Some even joked that we would be shot.
The truth was something much different. Sure, the trips were initially awkward. We would arrive at a small-town diner, look around, sigh and think, "Okay, who's going to break the ice..." But once we got talking, the strangers were always welcoming. The owners of a tobacco farm and a turpentine factory even showed us around their properties. [1]
For me, the experiences of MapDart validate the research in this story. The unpleasantness of interacting with strangers almost always has to do with that initial "ice breaking" moment. It's relatively smooth sailing once the ice is broken.
[0] http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/413/g... [1] http://matadornetwork.com/bnt/the-secret-to-growing-older/