After finishing this book in March of 2023, I wrote,

 

"The power of 'because.' Why 'don't " is better than 'can't.' Why 'helper' is better than 'help.' I know a lot about the power of words. And I learned a lot from this book."

 

My clippings below collapse a 256-page book into 6 pages, measured by using 12-point type in Microsoft Word. 

​

See all my book recommendations.  

​

Here are the selections I made:

​

But the two approaches, while similar, had vastly different effects. Adding the word “because” boosted the number of people who let the researcher skip the line by over 50 percent.

 

Saying you “recommend” rather than “like” something makes people 32 percent more likely to take your suggestion. Using the word “whom” in online dating profiles makes men 31 percent more likely to get a date. Adding more prepositions to a cover letter makes you 24 percent more likely to get the job. And saying “is not” rather than “isn’t” when describing a product makes people pay three dollars more to get it. The language used in earnings calls influences companies’ stock price, and the language used by CEOs’ impacts investment returns.

 

Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count, or LIWC, as it is often known, became my favorite new research tool.*

 

Specifically, we’ll discuss six types of magic words: words that (1) activate identity and agency, (2) convey confidence, (3) ask the right questions, (4) leverage concreteness, (5) employ emotion, and (6) harness similarity (and difference).

 

Discover why using nouns rather than verbs can help persuade others, how saying no the right way can help us achieve our goals, and how shifting just one word in the question we ask ourselves when we get stuck can help us be more creative. Why talking about ourselves in third person can reduce anxiety and make us better communicators, and why a simple word like “you” helps some social interactions but hurts others.

 

Why people prefer confident financial advisers, even when they’re more likely to be wrong, and why saying a restaurant “has” rather than “had” great food will make others more likely to go there.

 

And while certainty is beneficial some of the time, I’ll show you when uncertain language is more effective. Why expressing doubt about controversial topics can encourage the other side to listen and when acknowledging limitations can make communicators seem more trustworthy.

 

Why asking for advice makes people think you’re smarter and why asking more questions make daters more likely to get a second date.

 

Which words show listening and why talking about “fixing” rather than “solving” a problem improves customer satisfaction.

 

Why knowledge can be a curse; and why talking about a “gray T-shirt” rather than a “top” increases sales. And lest you think it’s always better to be concrete, I’ll show you when it’s better to be more abstract. Why abstract language signals power, leadership, and helps startups raise funding.

 

Rather than asking the kids to “help,” the scientists asked them to be a “helper” instead.

 

Rebecca goes running, and Fred is a runner. Who do you think likes running more?

 

Category labels often imply a degree of permanence or stability. Rather than noting what someone did or does, feels or felt, category labels hint at a deeper essence: Who someone is. Regardless of time or situation, this is the type of person they are. That they will always be that way.

 

When arguing for leniency for a client, for example, a lawyer may say, “He’s not a criminal; he just made a bad decision.” Similarly, a sports fan may say, “I watch some games, but I’m not a fanatic.”

 

Describing our coworkers as innovators rather than as innovative should have positive effects on how they’re perceived.

 

Rather than asking for help cleaning up the blocks, for example, try using a noun instead: “Can you be a helper and clean up the blocks?” This simple shift turns what was previously just an action (i.e., helping) into something more profound.

 

Want people to listen? Ask them to be a listener. Want them to lead? Ask them to be a leader. Want them to work harder? Encourage them to be a top performer.*

 

Indeed, research finds that rather than saying “Don’t cheat,” saying “Don’t be a cheater” more than halved the amount of cheating.

 

The candy bars looked delicious. Indeed, around 75 percent of people who practiced saying “I can’t” ended up picking one. But among people who practiced saying “I don’t,” the number of people picking the candy bar was cut in half. Saying “I don’t” rather than “I can’t” more than doubled people’s ability to avoid temptation and stick to their goals.

 

Saying “I can’t” often implies that we want to do the thing but something or someone else is getting in the way. Some external constraint (e.g., a doctor, spouse, or something else) is stopping us from doing what we’d like to do.

 

Saying “I don’t” helped people avoid temptation because it made them feel empowered.

 

Rather than black and white, or either/or, could encouraged people to realize that there might be alternate paths. Rather than irreconcilable choices between saving

 

Foster a could mindset. Rather than thinking about what should be done, ask what could be done instead. Doing so encourages us and others to take agency, consider new paths, and turn roadblocks into opportunities.

 

Rather than referring to themselves using “I” or “me,” they were encouraged to talk to themselves like someone else would, using words like “you,” their name, or “he” or “she” instead.

 

Rather than complaining or stressing themselves out even more, it encouraged them to provide support and advice: “Jane, you can do this. You’ve given a ton of speeches before.”

 

When someone sees a post titled “5 tips to save money” it’s not clear whether it’s relevant to them or not. But add the word “you” e.g., “5 tips you can use to save money,” and suddenly the post seems much more personally relevant.

 

On customer support pages, however, drawing attention isn’t as necessary because people are already there. They went to the support page because they have a question, or a problem they’re trying to solve, so their attention is already focused on the content.

 

Further, though the use of “you” can suggest that information is personally relevant to the reader, it can also suggest responsibility or blame. Compared to saying “If the printer isn’t working . . .” saying “If you can’t get the printer to work . . .” suggests that the printer’s not working is somehow the user’s fault.

 

Similarly, compared to more passive voice (“Space can be freed up by . . .”), active voice (“You can free up space by . . .”) suggests that the user needs to do the work. And the more times the word “you” is used, the more work the user has to do.

 

Questions like “Did you feed the dog?” or “Did you check when the paperwork is due?” can feel accusatory. The intent may be benign, just a request for information, but they can easily be interpreted negatively. Who said it was my responsibility, or why wouldn’t I have taken care of it? A subtle shift in phrasing (“Has the dog had dinner?”) is less likely to generate blowback. By focusing on the action rather than the actor, it removes any suggestion of reproach. I’m not suggesting that it’s your job, I just want to find out whether it happened so I can do it if it hasn’t. The same goes for statements like “I wanted to talk but you were busy.”

 

The statement may be true. We wanted to talk, and the other person was busy. But phrasing it that way suggests that the other person is to blame. That not only is it bad they were busy, but it’s their fault the conversation didn’t occur. Dropping the “you” and switching to something like “I wanted to talk, but now didn’t seem like the best time,” avoids any finger-pointing.

 

When first-person pronouns are dropped, opinions can seem like they are being stated as fact. “This isn’t right” or “Dinner isn’t yummy” suggests that something is objectively bad. But adding “I” clarifies that the comment is meant to be stated as an opinion rather than fact.

 

When presenting the results of a project, for example, someone could say either “I found X” or “The results show X.” “I found” makes it clear who did the work. The person speaking put the effort in and they should get credit.

 

But saying “I found” also makes the findings seem more subjective. Sure, you found something, but would anyone else have found the same thing, or are your findings based on the choices you made while conducting the project? Consequently, whether to use pronouns or not depends on how we want to assign credit or blame, and how subjective or objective we want what is being said to seem.

 

Turn actions into identities. Asking for help or trying to persuade someone to do something? Turn that verb (“Will you help?”) into a noun instead (“Will you be a helper?”). Framing actions as opportunities to confirm desired identities will encourage people to go along. Change can’ts to don’ts. Having trouble sticking to your goals or resisting temptation? Rather than saying “I can’t,” try saying “I don’t” instead (e.g.,“I don’t eat sweets right now”). Doing this increases our feeling of empowerment and makes us more likely to achieve our goals. Turn shoulds into coulds. Want to be more creative or come up with a creative solution to a tough problem? Rather than asking what we should do, ask what you could do instead. This encourages divergent thinking and helps us get out of that rut. Talk to yourself. Nervous about a big presentation or trying to psych yourself up for a big interview? Try talking to yourself in the third person (“You can do it!”). It distances us from tough situations, reducing anxiety and increasing performance. Pick your pronouns. And whether trying to get someone’s attention, or not fight with a spouse, think carefully about how to use pronouns like “I” and “you.” They can draw attention and take ownership, but they also suggest responsibility and blame.

 

Four ways to speak with confidence are to: (1) ditch the hedges, (2) don’t hesitate, (3) turn pasts into presents, and (4) know when to express doubt.

 

People often unconsciously preface things by saying “I think,” “In my opinion,” or “It seems to me.” But while qualifying statements can be useful in some cases, they often make the subjectivity of what we’re saying unnecessarily explicit.

 

To convey confidence, then, ditch the hedges.

 

Examples of Definites Definitely Guaranteed Unambiguous Clearly Irrefutable Unquestionable Obviously Absolutely Essential Undeniable Everyone Every time DON’T

 

When someone says “uh,” “um,” or “er” a lot, it suggests they don’t know what they’re talking about. That they’re not really an expert.

 

In fact, a “lower-status” speaker who didn’t hesitate was perceived more positively than a “higher-status” speaker who did. Style trumped status.

 

Even in music, though, we found the same result. Music reviews that used more present-tense verbs were more persuasive.

 

Saying that a book was a fun read, for example, suggests that the opinion is based on a particular personal experience, that when the reviewer read the book, he or she enjoyed it.

 

Present tense, in contrast, suggests something more general and enduring. Saying something works well suggests not only that it worked well in the past, but that it continues to work well and will continue to do so in the future.

 

Rather than a subjective opinion based on a particular person or experience, present tense suggests something more stable.

 

Saying a diet helps, rather than helped, people lose weight should make dieters more inclined to try it.

 

Consequently, when trying to win over the other side, being too direct can backfire, leading the other person to become even more convinced of their initial opinion. Indeed, rather than being convincing, persuasive messages actually led a decent chunk of study participants to shift their opinions in the opposite direction.

 

This is why expressing doubt can help. Showing that we’re conflicted or uncertain makes us seem less threatening. Expressing doubt about one’s own view acknowledges that conflicting beliefs are valid, making the other side feel validated and more willing to listen.

 

Ditch the hedges. When the goal is to convey confidence, avoid words and phrases like “may,” “could,” and “in my opinion,” which suggest that things, and the people saying them, are uncertain Use definites. Rather than hedging, use definites instead. Words like “definitely,” “clearly,” and “obviously,” which suggest whatever was said isn’t just an opinion, it’s an irrefutable truth. Don’t hesitate. Ums and uhs are natural parts of speech, but too many of them can undermine people’s confidence in us and our message. So cut the fillers. To decrease hesitations, plan what to say in advance or pause to collect your thoughts when needed. Turn pasts into presents. Using the present tense can communicate confidence and increase persuasion. So to signal certainty, rather than using past tense (e.g., “I loved that book”), use present tense (e.g., “I love that book”) instead. 

 

Know when to express doubt. While seeming to be certain is often beneficial, if we want to show we’re open minded, receptive to opposing viewpoints, or aware of nuances, expressing doubt can help.

 

If asking for advice makes people seem less competent, participants should have thought worse of partners who did so. Asking should have made them seem dependent on others or inferior. But the opposite was true.

 

So asking for advice can make us look smart because it strokes the advice giver’s ego. Rather than thinking we’re not capable or are stupid for asking, advice givers draw a very different conclusion: “Of course my opinions are valuable, so this person is smart for asking for them.”*

 

Four strategies for asking better questions are to: (1) follow up, (2) deflect difficulties, (3) avoid making assumptions, and (4) start safe, then build.

 

Rather than disclosing that they owned another painting in the series, or saying that they didn’t want to answer, they responded by asking something like “when were those other paintings made?” Or “are those for sale as well?”

 

They responded to a difficult question with a related question of their own. It’s hard to trust people who seem like they are hiding something. Consequently, explicitly declining to answer a question, even an unfair one, often has negative consequences. But while hiding information is usually frowned upon, seeking information is not. In fact, just the opposite.

 

Questions, though, are like spotlights: They shine attention on a particular topic or piece of information. So by responding to a difficult question with a relevant question of our own, we move the spotlight away from us and on to something else.

 

In negotiations, for example, when asked what the highest amount is that we’re willing to pay, we can respond by asking “Is there a number you had in mind?” Or when asked in an interview what the salary of our last position was, we can respond by asking “Can you share a bit more detail about the salary range for this position?”

 

To work, deflection requires sticking close to the topic at hand.

 

Even without realizing it, questions like “It doesn’t have any problems, does it?” presume that there aren’t any issues.

 

But another way to ask about potential problems is to flip the assumption. To presume that problems exist rather than don’t. Questions like “What problems does it have?” do exactly that. Rather than implicitly assuming no issues, they assume there are some and want to root them out.

 

When making presentations or teaching complicated ideas, people often say things like “You don’t have any questions, do you?” But swapping that out for “What questions do you have?” will encourage more people to follow up if they don’t understand.

 

In the late 1990s, the Arons built and tested an approach to encourage the formation and strengthening of social bonds. A technique to create closeness with anyone, anytime, anywhere. And this approach, at its core, relies on asking the right questions.

 

FIRST SET OF QUESTIONS Given the choice of anyone in the world, whom would you want as a dinner guest? Would you like to be famous? In what way? Before making a telephone call, do you ever rehearse what you are going to say? Why? What would constitute a “perfect” day for you? When did you last sing to yourself? To someone else? If you were able to live to the age of 90 and retain either the mind or body of a 30-year-old for the last 60 years of your life, which would you want? Do you have a secret hunch about how you will die? Name three things you and your partner appear to have in common. For what in your life do you feel most grateful? If you could change anything about the way you were raised, what would it be? Take four minutes and tell your partner your life story in as much detail as possible. If you could wake up tomorrow having gained any one quality or ability, what would it be?

 

SECOND SET OF QUESTIONS If a crystal ball could tell you the truth about yourself, your life, the future, or anything else, what would you want to know? Is there something that you’ve dreamed of doing for a long time? Why haven’t you done it? What is the greatest accomplishment of your life? What do you value most in a friendship? What is your most treasured memory? What is your most terrible memory? If you knew that in one year you would die suddenly, would you change anything about the way you are now living? Why? What does friendship mean to you? What roles do love and affection play in your life? Alternate sharing something you consider a positive characteristic of your partner. Share a total of five items. How close and warm is your family? Do you feel your childhood was happier than most other people’s? How do you feel about your relationship with your mother?

 

Make three true “we” statements each. For instance, “We are both in this room feeling . . .” Complete this sentence: “I wish I had someone with whom I could share . . .” If you were going to become a close friend with your partner, please share what would be important for him or her to know. Tell your partner what you like about them; be very honest this time, saying things that you might not say to someone you’ve just met. Share with your partner an embarrassing moment in your life. When did you last cry in front of another person? By yourself? Tell your partner something that you like about them already. What, if anything, is too serious to be joked about? If you were to die this evening with no opportunity to communicate with anyone, what would you most regret not having told someone? Why haven’t you told them yet? Your house, containing everything you own, catches fire. After saving your loved ones and pets, you have time to safely make a final dash to save any one item. What would it be? Why? Of all the people in your family, whose death would you find most disturbing? Why? Share a personal problem and ask your partner’s advice on how he or she might handle it. Also, ask your partner to reflect back to you how you seem to be feeling about the problem you have chosen.

 

Just a single forty-five-minute interaction between two people who had previously been strangers. Nowhere near the weeks and months it usually takes to form social bonds. And yet, this interaction, built solely on questions, had a huge impact.

 

Even between partners with different values and preferences or different political leanings, the questions helped make them feel closer and more connected.

 

Since then, this so-called Fast Friends technique has helped create emotional bonds between thousands of strangers.

 

Ask for advice. Not only does it garner useful insights, it makes us seem smarter as well. Follow up. Asking questions makes us look good, and facilitates positive interactions, but follow-up questions are particularly useful because they show we’re interested and care enough to learn more. Deflect difficulty. When someone asks an unfair question, asking a related one back allows us to direct the conversation in a different direction, showing interest while keeping personal information private. Avoid assumptions. When trying to get people to divulge potentially negative information, be careful of questions that assume things away. Start safe, then build. Deep self-disclosure requires social connection. But to get to that point, people need to feel safe first. So to deepen social relationships, or turn strangers into friends, start simple and build from there, encouraging reciprocal self-disclosure. Knowing what to ask, and when, can help us make better impressions, collect useful information, and foster more meaningful connections with those around us.

 

what’s known as linguistic concreteness. Three ways to apply it are to: (1) make people feel heard, (2) make the abstract concrete, and (3) know when it’s better to be abstract.

 

Using concrete language significantly increased customer satisfaction.

 

You find a T-shirt you like but can’t find the gray color you’re looking for, so you ask two employees for help. One employee says, “I’ll go look for that,” and the other says, “I’ll go search for that T-shirt in gray.” If you had to pick one, which employee would you say did a better job of listening to what you said?

 

Listening is important, but if the goal is making others happy, showing we’re listening is often just as key.

 

In fact, linguistic concreteness even affects parole board decisions. When prisoners apologize for their actions, those who give more concrete explanations for their transgressions are more likely to be granted parole.

 

Below are some more examples of more and less concrete language and check out http://textanalyzer.org/ to measure concreteness in any text.

 

But is concrete language always good? Or might there be some situations in which abstract language is better?

 

Rather than focusing on ride hailing per se, which is much narrower in scope, calling Uber a “transportation solution” taps the broader problem Uber is trying to solve. That, in turn, increased investment because it made the potential market seem much larger. A ride-hailing app? I can think of a few people who might need that or a few situations in which it might be useful. But a transportation solution? Wow, that seems a lot broader. Lots of people and companies could use something like that, and it seems to have lots of applications.

 

Want to help people understand a complex idea, feel heard, or remember what was said? Using concrete language is going to be more effective. Using verbs that focus on actions (e.g., walk, talk, help, or improve), for example, rather than adjectives (e.g., honest, aggressive, or helpful). Talking about physical objects or using evocative language to help them see what we’re saying.

 

Want to be more concrete? Focus on the how. How does a product meet consumer needs? How does a proposed new initiative address an important problem? Thinking about how something is or will be done encourages concreteness. It focuses on the feasibility and helps generate concrete descriptions. Want to be more abstract? Focus on the why. Why does a product meet consumer needs? Why does a proposed new initiative address an important problem? Thinking about why something is good or right encourages abstractness. It focuses on its desirability and helps generate abstract descriptions.

 

Make people feel heard. Want to show someone you’re listening? Be concrete. Give specific details that show we paid attention and understood. Be concrete. Don’t just pick things that sound good, use words that listeners can see in their minds. It’s a lot easier to imagine a red sportscar than ideation. Focus on the How. Thinking about the nuts and bolts of how something will happen, and focusing on specific actions, makes things concrete. But while concrete language is often useful, if our goal is to come off as powerful, or make something seem like it has growth potential, using abstract language is better. In those cases: Focus on the why. Thinking about the reasoning behind something helps things stay high level and communicate that big picture.

 

Growing up in West Covina, California, Guy Raz dreamed of becoming a journalist.

 

The study revealed that mistakes themselves are neither good nor bad. Their impact hinges on the broader context. When incompetent people made mistakes, it just reinforced other’s already negative impressions. It was more of the same. When competent people made mistakes, though, it had the opposite effect.

 

The pratfall effect shows that imperfections can be an asset.

 

But it’s actually just one example of a much larger phenomenon. And that is the value of employing emotion. Four ways to do that are to: (1) build a roller coaster, (2) mix up moments, (3) consider the context, and (4) activate uncertainty.

 

Take commercials. Most people hate them, so removing them should make shows or other entertainment more enjoyable. But the opposite is true. Shows are actually more enjoyable when they’re broken up by annoying commercials.6 Because these less enjoyable moments break up adaptation to the positive experience of the show.

 

And this unpredictability makes the ride more stimulating and increases liking. Indeed, when we analyzed thousands of movies, we found that volatility made stories better. Audiences are dialed in to find out what will happen next, and, as a result, enjoy the experience more.

 

Because while emotionality is good for hedonic things, it’s bad for more utilitarian ones. When picking and using hedonic products and services, emotion is a deciding factor.

 

But when picking and using utilitarian products and services, evoking emotion isn’t really the goal. People want glue that hardens quickly, gas that is inexpensive, and a toaster that easily makes toast. Utilitarian things are often bought to do a job, and people pick them because their thoughts (rather than emotions) suggest they will do that job well.

 

When marketing a product, service, or experience, for example, is it more hedonic or more utilitarian? Are people buying it for pleasure or enjoyment, or more functional or practical reasons?

 

And that is where less emotional, more cognitive language becomes important. Indeed, when customer service agents used more emotional language at the beginning of conversations, and more cognitive language in the middle, customers were more satisfied with the interaction and purchased more afterward. Don’t just solve. And don’t just connect. Connect, then solve.

 

Highlight the hurdles. As long as we’re already seen as competent, revealing past shortcomings can make people like us more, not less. Build a roller coaster. The best stories blend highs and lows. So to increase engagement, know when to go negative. Talking about all the failures along the way makes the successes evermore sweet. Mix up moments. The same intuition applies to moments as well. Smooth rides are easy, but not the most engaging, so to hold people’s attention, mix it up a bit. Consider the context. When trying to persuade, it’s not just enough to say something positive. Emotional language can help in hedonic domains like movies and vacations, but backfire in more utilitarian domains like job applications or software. Connect, then solve. Solving problems requires understanding people. So rather than jumping into solutions, connect with the person first. Starting with warmer, more emotional language helps set things up for the more cognitive, problem-solving discussions that come later. 

 

Activate uncertainty. The right words can make any topic or presentation more captivating. Evoking uncertain emotions (e.g., surprise) will keep people engaged.

 

Signal similarity. When familiarity is useful or fitting in is the goal, similar language can help. Paying more attention to how our colleagues are using words, for example, and adopting some of their mannerisms should help us thrive at the office. Drive difference. But similarity isn’t always good; there are also benefits to differentiation, particularly if you’re doing a job in which creativity, innovation, or stimulation is valued, standing out might be better. Plot the right progression. Further, when drafting presentations, writing stories, or crafting certain types of content, think about the progression of ideas. Start slowly to make sure the audience is on board before speeding up to increase excitement, particularly when entertainment is the goal. But if your goal is to inform, slowing down but covering more ground is the better way to go.

 

The researchers also identified which words or phrases best differentiated between repayers and defaulters. Repayers were more likely to use words and phrases related to their financial situation (e.g., “interest” and “tax”) or improvements in financial ability (e.g., “graduate” and “promote”). They also used words and phrases that indicated their financial literacy (e.g., “reinvest” and “minimum payment”) and were more likely to discuss topics such as employment and school, interest rate reductions, and monthly payments. Defaulters, on the other hand, used distinctly different language. They were more likely to mention words or phrases related to financial hardships (e.g., “payday loan” or “refinance”), for example, or hardship more generally (e.g., “stress” or “divorce”), as well as words and phrases that tried to explain their situation (e.g., “explain why”) or discuss their work state (e.g., “hard work” or “worker”). Similarly, they were more likely to plead for help (e.g., “need help” or “please help”) or touch on religion. In fact, while people who used the word “reinvest” were almost 5 times more likely to repay their loan in full, those who used the word “God” were almost 2 times more likely to default.

 

In other cases, repayers and defaulters talked about similar topics but in different ways. Both used time-related words, for example, but defaulters seemed to focus more on the near term (e.g., the next month) while repayers focused on the longer term (e.g., the next year).

 

Similarly, both talked about people, but while repayers talked about themselves (e.g., “I’d,” “I’ll,” and “I’m”), defaulters tended to talk about others (e.g., “God,” “he,” or “mother”). In fact, when defaulters did include themselves in t...

This highlight has been truncated due to consecutive passage length restrictions.

 

Person 1 Person 2 I am a hardworking person, married for 25 years, and have two wonderful boys. Please let me explain why I need help. I would use the $2,000 loan to fix our roof. Thank you, God bless you, and I promise to pay you back. While the past year in our new place has been more than great, the roof is now leaking, and I need to borrow $2,000 to cover the cost of the repair. I pay all bills (e.g., car loans, cable, utilities) on time. But Person #2 is more likely to pay the money back. While Person #1 might have seemed more compelling, they’re actually around 8 times more likely to default. 

 

Even controlling for all those aspects, though, the results still held. Officers spoke to Black community members with less respect. Even considering someone who was the same age and gender and stopped in the same part of town for the same type of issue, officers’ language was more respectful when the person was White. And the difference wasn’t driven by just a couple of rogue officers. Among hundreds of officers, whether White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, or other, the pattern persisted: Black motorists were treated with less respect.

 

As one researcher noted, “If we just look at the words that were used by the officer, we can predict the race of the person that they were talking to about two-thirds of the time.”

 

Here are two that are easy to play around with. https://liwc.app/: A great resource for scoring texts on a variety of psychological dimensions http://textanalyzer.org/: A useful tool for scoring other dimenions and extracting basic topics or themes.