
Want people to trust you? Try apologising for the rain - stollercyrus
http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2013/10/want-people-to-trust-you-try.html
======
derefr
Reminds me of the Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality quote: _" Of
course it was my fault. There's no one else here who could be responsible for
anything."_

Which is to say, if I hear someone apologizing for the weather, one likely
presumption would be that they're just assuming fault as a matter of
etiquette, or some latent self-hating tendency... but another, more
interesting, possibility is that they're apologizing for _not having gotten
around to the step in their world domination plans where they build a global
climate-regulation system yet._ Because they would if they could, they will as
soon as they can, and it's only their own laziness and ignorance of proper
power/wealth/intelligence-bootstrapping methods preventing them from being
there already. That, in my opinion, is precisely the type of person you
_should_ trust to Get Things Done, even when those things would seem, to most
people, to be currently "out of their hands."

In other words, _feeling_ responsibility for everything around you is a
necessary prerequisite for _agency_. You see this a lot in company owners. Why
is the founder mopping the floor while everyone else is working? Because
nobody else is doing it, it has to get done, and the buck stops with him. He's
responsible for everything, even the weather.

~~~
gadders
Or they could be British. We apologise for everything.

~~~
moocowduckquack
I think there's an official list somewhere and we are slowly working through
it. Much of it we actually did, but we add in a few apologies for the rain as
well to make it seem less damning. ;)

------
DanBC
I find it weird when they use percentages for groups that are smaller than
100. 9% of a group of 32 people makes it feel like 2 people and a torso handed
over their phone without the rain apology. (I'm aware this is my poor math
skill, and it's something I'm working on.)

I don't know if the sub has been edited, but it mentions lack of controls:

> How trustworthy are these results? The accumulated findings from several
> experiments help build a convincing case, but unfortunately the field study
> - which had the potential to provide the most persuasive evidence - is
> seriously flawed. The actor apologised for the rain then asked to borrow a
> phone, or in the comparison condition he just asked to borrow the phone.
> There was no proper control condition. This means we don't know if the
> impact of the apology was specific to making an apology or merely an effect
> of uttering any kind of ice-breaker.

It doesn't seem to mention randomization either.

EDIT:

> This is significant because past research shows how mindlessly we often act
> in social situations. For example, back in the late 70s, Ellen Langer and
> her colleagues found that people were just as likely to give way at a photo-
> copier if a queue-jumper uttered the nonsensical excuse "because I need to
> make copies" as when he uttered "because I'm in a rush."

Compare this to situations in the UK where if a shopkeeper returns nearly all
your change, but keeps a penny, the customer will often wail until they get
it, and make a fuss about it.

~~~
mistercow
>I find it weird when they use percentages for groups that are smaller than
100. 9% of a group of 32 people makes it feel like 2 people and a torso handed
over their phone without the rain apology.

I suppose it's slightly odd, but the point is to make it so you can compare
results across similar studies and also understand how it would generalize to
the general population.

>It doesn't seem to mention randomization either.

The study does (see the citation at the end). The blinding and randomization
were done in the field study by not telling the person asking the questions
what the hypothesis was, and by instructing him to alternate which script he
followed.

------
jtheory
This makes a lot of sense to me - it's not even because the apology is
logical, but because it's a gesture that shows the speaker is thinking of the
other's welfare.

There's a rule I have followed for many years when doing customer service - if
the person is upset, apologize. It doesn't matter if you can't give them what
they're asking for, or if _they_ made a silly mistake. Just - make them feel
better, then do what you sensibly can. It really works well... I don't get
many angry complaints anyway, but this tends to defuse them immediately.

~~~
Theodores
I agree with you completely regarding computer support and customer service -
put your hands up and apologise to the customer/client for whatever the hold-
up/mistake/bug is, then to get on with the matter in hand and fix things.

However, management types can discourage you from doing this as it is an
acceptance that there is some liability for whatever it is that has gone
wrong. There is a fear of unintended consequences from the instinctive
apology.

The same applies with a road traffic accident - to apologise to the other
party might be what you want to do (even if you were not entirely at fault)
however the insurance company will not be best pleased.

As a consequence we are conditioned to only apologise under duress or for
things that are inconsequential. Maybe it is this that affects how we react
when someone randomly apologises - it is quite an unusual gift worthy of
reciprocation.

~~~
DanBC
There are words that show empathy for the other person, but without putting
yourself at risk of accepting liability. They can sound a bit mechanical
sometimes, and reading from a script isn't much good.

Just letting someone know that you understand that they're stressed and
annoyed or frustrated, and that you'll try to help them makes a big
difference. At least, it does when people do it with me.

~~~
ByronT
To me, there are few things more infuriating than a Comcast representative
saying something like, "Oh, I'm very sorry to hear that. I would also be
frustrated if my cable modem were not acquiring a signal." This type of
"empathy" has disillusioned me from most empathy used in customer support.

------
bcoates
I think it's going to far to call the study seriously flawed: The core claim
presented "we find that superfluous apologies increase trust in the
apologizer" is being properly controlled (superfluous apology, acknowledgment,
or neutral greeting followed by a trust test).

Suggesting that the mechanism for that result is caused by ice-breaking
effects, or by delaying the time between the introduction and the request, or
by conforming to some unknown social norm are follow up experiments you'd want
to perform... but there's _always_ a follow up question, it doesn't make the
initial discovery flawed.

~~~
yannk
The last paragraph states:

"How trustworthy are these results? The accumulated findings from several
experiments help build a convincing case, but unfortunately the field study -
which had the potential to provide the most persuasive evidence - is seriously
flawed. The actor apologised for the rain then asked to borrow a phone, or in
the comparison condition he just asked to borrow the phone. There was no
proper control condition. This means we don't know if the impact of the
apology was specific to making an apology or merely an effect of uttering any
kind of ice-breaker."

~~~
Falling3
That's just not sufficient. I didn't even make it to the last paragraph and
many readers won't make it past the headline. Up until that paragraph, the
author seems to be building us up towards accepting the results.

Why bother writing an article on such a flawed study?

~~~
ledge
For the sake of linkbait, surely.

Blog author even calls this study "the most compelling evidence", only to
correctly recognize that it's total shit in the final paragraph.

I'm all for writing an article on a bad study (sort of like a bad album
review), but the opinion of the author should be clear from the outset.

~~~
Falling3
Yes, I did agree. But the funny part is that the article author didn't seem to
read the paper since the paper did address those control group concerns.

------
AndrewDucker
This completely ignores the fact that the word "Sorry" is not always an
apology.

"Sorry your dog died." is an expression of _sympathy_ for your dog's death,
not an admission of guilt.

In fact, the first definition on Google for "define sorry" is "feeling sad or
distressed through sympathy with someone else's misfortune"

And yes, I'd be more likely to lend my phone to someone who had shown signs of
sympathy to me first.

------
smsm42
I wouldn't even classify "sorry for the rain" as an apology. I'd understand it
as "I understand you have just suffered an inconvenience, and I express my sad
feeling about that fact, thus showing that your feelings have an importance
for me and you possess a status of an important person in my eyes". That is
not the same as taking responsibility for the fact that it rains, which
apology presumes. English is not my native language, but as far as I
understand from many years using it as a communication medium, "I am sorry" is
used in the former sense (expressing sympathy) at least as frequent, if not
more frequent, than in the latter (apology: a written or spoken expression of
one's regret, remorse, or sorrow for having insulted, failed, injured, or
wronged another).

Of course, if you express the sympathy and show that the other person is
important to you, people tend to reciprocate. I would be surprised if it
didn't happen. However, if somebody really meant it in the sense that he feels
genuine remorse or regret for the rain, I'd not trust such person - obviously
I'm dealing with a dangerously delusional person that thinks he's either
controlling the weather or should be. I'd suggest him to find a good mental
health provider.

~~~
stevewillows
It's a non-apology - - [http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-
apology_apology](http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology)

------
joshfraser
OkTrends (the awesome blog from OkCupid) showed data that suggests that using
the word "sorry" in your initial message dramatically increases your odds of
getting a response.

[http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/online-dating-advice-
exact...](http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/online-dating-advice-exactly-what-
to-say-in-a-first-message/)

------
nimble
Shouldn't the control group have had a non-apology comment about the weather
or something? Instead of comparing, "Sorry for the weather. May I use your
phone?" to "May I use your phone?", it would seem much preferable to compare
it to "Lousy weather we've been having. May I use your phone?"

~~~
tedks
From the paper:

"""

When they meet the seller, the seller greets them in one of the following
three ways: ‘‘Hi there. Oh, I’m so sorry it’s raining.’’ (superfluous
apology), ‘‘Hi there. Oh, it’s raining.’’ (acknowledgment), or ‘‘Hi there.’’
(neutral)

"""

~~~
smsm42
They should have tried "I apologize for the rain" and counted how many times
the answer would be "Oh, so you are God Almighty? Nice to finally meet you in
person".

------
pertinhower
Coupled with the many recent articles highlighting the unreliability of
studies like this, I'd say this research is worth exactly squat. Example
questions for practicing skeptics: The actor either (a) asked for a phone or
(b) apologized for the rain, then asked for a phone. Could it be that the
study simply demonstrates that saying _some other pleasant thing_ before
asking for something makes the request more effective? Must it be an apology?
Must it be about something the person has no control over?

~~~
freework
Thats what I thought when I read the article too. I feel the same percentage
of people would give their phone up if you said "So how about those [local
sports team]".

------
rickhanlonii
> How trustworthy are these results? The accumulated findings from several
> experiments help build a convincing case, but unfortunately the field study
> - which had the potential to provide the most persuasive evidence - is
> seriously flawed. The actor apologised (sic) for the rain then asked to
> borrow a phone, or in the comparison condition he just asked to borrow the
> phone. There was no proper control condition. _This means we don 't know if
> the impact of the apology was specific to making an apology or merely an
> effect of uttering any kind of ice-breaker._

This is a devastating objection to the findings of the study.

Here's a link to the study:
[http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Brooks%20Dai%...](http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Brooks%20Dai%20Schweitzer%202013_d2f61dc9-ec1b-485d-a815-2cf25746de50.pdf)

~~~
vectorjohn
The addition of "(sic)" is non-useful, as that is an accepted spelling in
British English, which is where this post comes from. Try searching, I don't
know, anywhere else on that page. It was not a mistake.

~~~
rickhanlonii
It's not uncommon to use "sic" to denote a british spelling of a word, though
the usage in that instance is debated.

------
tedks
Direct link to the original paper on the author's webpage (8pg, PDF):
[http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Brooks%20Dai%...](http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication%20Files/Brooks%20Dai%20Schweitzer%202013_d2f61dc9-ec1b-485d-a815-2cf25746de50.pdf)

------
georgemcbay
I apologize for things out of my control fairly frequently as a way of
displaying (genuine) empathy for people in bad situations. Not so much for
superficial things like everyday rain but say if someone is looking forward to
an interview and doesn't get the job, I'll say something like "Sorry you
didn't get the job".

I don't do this to build trust, but I guess it makes some sort of sense that
if someone displays a consistent level of empathy towards the problems of
others it would make them more trustworthy in general compared to someone who
doesn't.

------
keithpeter
_" Forty-seven per cent of strangers offered their phone when the actor
apologised for the rain first, compared with just nine per cent when there was
no apology."_

UK: I have never seen anyone ask to borrow someone else's mobile phone over
here. Is that a common behaviour in the US?

I have to say that if someone asked to borrow mine, I'd refuse, _especially_
if they said something inane first. That could just be my crabbed and
ungenerous nature but I think not somehow...

------
segmondy
What instead of apologising for the rain, the apologized for the annoyance,
"I'm sorry for bothering you, Can I please borrow your phone?" They should
have tried that instead. If a stranger comes up to me and just says, "Can I
borrow your phone?" without a preceding Excuse Me or Please, they will not get
it, except if they are completely in distress.

------
timthorn
> In the first, 178 students thought they were playing a financial game with a
> partner located in another room.

Really? I took part in studies like this when I was a student, and I knew full
well I was playing a computer, despite being told otherwise. You don't need to
be a psychology geek to have heard of their standard operating procedures.

------
mathattack
I had heard people say this about Reagan. He took accountability for things
that were arguably out of his control, and people later didn't blame him for
things that were.

To me the lesson is accepting blame for a problem doesn't just take "Whose
fault is this?" off of the table, but it increases the trust in finding a
solution.

~~~
comrade_ogilvy
Yes, the act of making an apology will be perceived as implying that the
speaker is more than willing to help improve the situation, regardless of how
we got there, thus what you said.

------
zupatol
Do people really understand this as an apology? Being sorry has two meanings
in english, right? It can also mean that you share someone else's pain.

If someone told me he's sorry about the rain, I would think what he really
means is that he's sorry for me having to stand in the rain.

~~~
nilved
Which probably still has a positive, if subconscious, effect on your opinion
of him.

------
michaelwww
It's about being polite. Just walking up to someone and blurting out "Can I
borrow your cellphone?" is rude. "I'm sorry to bother you, but can I ask you a
question?" gives the listener time to adjust and the opportunity to say "no"

------
suchow
The word "sorry" does not always signify an apology. For example, when a
person says "Sorry about the rain," they do not usually mean "I am sorry for
having caused the rain." Instead, they mean "The rain caused me sorrow." It's
of little surprise that recognizing a shared sorrow increases feelings of
trust.

A: "Sorry about your leg." B: "It's okay, it's not your fault."

It's sympathy, not an admission of guilt.

------
d0m
>> Crucially, for half of them he preceded his request with the superfluous
apology: "I'm sorry about the rain!" The other half of the time he just came
straight out with his request: "Can I borrow your cell phone?"

Couldn't it just be the chit-chat? I mean "Hey, how are you? Can I borrow your
phone" versus "Can I borrow your phone", would probably give better results
too :-/?

------
pmarca
That's not getting people to trust you. That's being a beta. That's getting
people to know they can dominate you.

------
hawkharris
It seems to me that this study says very little about the effects of
superfluous apologies and more about the social etiquette of greeting someone
before you ask for a favor.

The study's confederate could have said "Good morning," "Hello there" \--
anything other than simply making a request -- and achieved a better response
rate.

------
impendia
I have observed this behavior very often in others.

For example, recently I showed up to a yoga class, and there was construction
going on the street outside, so that it was mildly inconvenient to get to the
parking lot. The yoga instructor apologized profusely for the inconvenience.

I didn't understand why I'd want to be apologized to for this: not only was it
outside her control, but the inconvenience was trivial. I felt slightly _less_
at ease after such an apology.

But looking around at others, it was quite obvious that this gesture had had
the intended effect. I guess, in this regard, I am the odd one out.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
It's just a way of demonstrating that as your host for the event they are
concerned about your wellbeing and comfort.

That said I usually respond to such statements with "don't worry it's not your
fault". Reflecting that seems a bit strange too.

------
kriro
The experiment seems a little flawed. At the very least I would have expected
a third run with a chitchat sentence first (my working hypothesis would be
that chitchat sentence and apology for rain would be equally trustworthy, both
more than straight up asking).

There's quite a difference between directly asking to use someone's phone and
introducing yourself first.

The copier queue gets mentioned at the end but the article reads more like
"apologize for something that you cannot control=trust" while I'd suspect it's
really "talk about something else=trust"

------
carsongross
One wonders what the self-referential feedback loop will become when the
scientific study of practical sociopathy becomes widely understood and
adopted.

Although perhaps I'm naive to think it could be widely understood.

------
mercer
Interesting. This is quite similar to the phenomenon where asking for a favor
and giving a pointless reason increases the chance that people will do as you
ask.

I can't find the research for this, but from what I remember one experiment
involved someone going to the front of the line of people waiting at a copy
machine at university, and asking if they could go first. Simply appending
'because I need to copy some things' would increase the chance that people
would let you go first, despite the fact that it's a pointless justification.

------
ultimatedelman
tl;dr - a flawed study concluded something that may not necessarily be true

~~~
surement
what's flawed about the study?

~~~
ultimatedelman
if you read the article all the way through, at the end they mention the study
was flawed because of the lack of a control

~~~
Falling3
I said the same thing, but it appears that the article is actually flawed...
The paper for the study defines the control groups.

------
namank
Superfluous?

Ok, so the face value of "sorry" implies apology but putting the situation in
context it seems less a question of culpability and more of a shared sense of
frustration against/for a common goal.

How does it make you feel when you are peeved off at the rain and someone
comes up to you to share in the misery?

It's about a shared sense of understanding more than anything else. If some
people choose to take advantage of this for ulterior purposes - well, that's
the very definition of emotional manipulation.

------
moomin
Seriously, does that sound like an even vaguely scientific study? How do they
know the effect is due to what was said as opposed to _saying anything polite_
first?

------
slacka
When I was studying psychology we often ran into negotiating tactics like
this. Another is if you need a small favor, ask for something huge when they
turn you down, they will almost always agree to the small favor. For example,
after asking your parents for a car for your birthday, they'll be more likely
to agree to get you that game for your xbox.

------
shakingarrow
If the person you are apologizing to is an outsider who is visiting your city
or a traveler, then by apologizing for the rain, you show sympathy towards the
outsider and you look like a caring native, in this scenario it would have
good positive impact though the apology might seem random. I wonder how many
people in the sample set were outsiders.

------
dtx
Although the study is flawed as pointed out by the author itself, it's good to
see such studies and results coming out of a good test base rather than mere
spewing of opinions as seen in many articles lately.

Even if there is a minute chance that this study exhibits anything concrete,
it can't hurt to apologize to expect a positive outcome.

~~~
roryokane
It _can_ hurt to apologize just in case. Maybe not in the case of strangers,
but if you do it repeatedly with acquaintances, they could hypothetically
start hearing all of your apologies as fake, even the sincere ones.

~~~
jtheory
True, if it's a knee-jerk action.

If you get in the habit of empathizing with the people around you, though, and
you do it well, that will continue to be valuable.

------
click170
I can't help but wonder about their attire.

consider for a moment your reaction to a person in a suite and tie who asked
to borrow your phone. I posit that you would be more likely to agree and hand
over your phone if the person is in a suit and tie compared to someone who you
thought didn't look as well off.

------
bfell
There could be an element of trustworthiness associated with apologizing for
anything since you are inherently taking responsibility for something. But
also it could have been that leading in with a request (with no foreplay,
regardless of the type) may have come across as being brash.

------
latortuga
Relating this to Cialdini's _Influence_ , I'd wager this is due to
reciprocity. Whether real or not, when you apologize, you're making a
concession which triggers the "click, whirr" effect described in the book.
Persuasion is a fascinating topic.

------
hmsimha
If they _really_ wanted to test a superfluous apology, they could have the
actor lead with something more like "I'm sorry for your loss."

I suspect very few people would then loan out their phone, unless they were
under the impression they were being mugged.

------
Wgl_
Is the "useless" apology doing the job or did it work as an icebreaker ?

I remember old studies which said you have far more chance getting 20 cents
asking for the time first.

------
chatman
If you ever wondered where the tax payers' money is going, it is going to fund
Alison Brooks' "research".

~~~
tunesmith
I'm sorry about that. Can I have an upvote?

~~~
nthj
I feel manipulated but I couldn't help giving you an upvote anyway.

------
madaxe
Interesting. I apologise incessantly for everything and everyone, to everyone.
I've never put much thought into why I have this behaviour, but it's possible
I stumbled on the same phenomenon as these folks purely due to pressure.

~~~
Amadou
Excessive apologizing tends to come off as obsequious. If other people notice
that you are an over-apologizer it could easily make them dislike you.

