© Andres Rodriguez
A new article featured on the Inc website suggests that small movements that you make–movements you probably aren’t aware of–could be the key to whether others trust you–or not.
The article features the work of Dr. David DeSteno, a Professor of Psychology at Northeastern University. The details of the study is outlined in this video.
Through their research, DeSteno and his team found that 4 specific gestures were associated untrustworthiness. Those gestures are:
1. Hand-Touching
The article suggests that hand-touching can make you look tentative and nervous, which could cause observers to think you are hiding something or not being honest, or that you lack confidence. Clasping your hands together may also be interpreted as a closing-off gesture: It could look as if you were putting up a fence between yourself and the people you’re speaking with.
2. Touching your own face
Touching your own face is a common gesture that signals you are thinking. But what you are thinking is unknown to those who are trying to determine if you can be trusted. And if they don’t know you well, the safe choice might be to decide that you’re up to no good.
3. Crossing your arms, and
Crossing your arms is a classic closing gesture. Crossing the arms tends to communicate that your true feelings will remain undisclosed, and that you are not open for collaboration.
4. Leaning Away
We like people who like us. When you lean in, you express the desire to be close. When you lean away, you could very well be seen as someone who is running away, disengaged, or avoiding contact–you’re aloof on the balcony, not moshing on the dance floor.
Those of us in any relationship, be it personal or professional, need to earn the trust others. With a little practice, you can avoid touching your hands and face, crossing your arms, or leaning away from people you’re conversing with.
This summer was a whirlwind! After an unusually heavy amount of travel in the first half of the year. I was looking forward to no airports or hotels until I began making the rounds for fall sales training. All of that changed when I made it known to the head of State Auto’s claims division that I was available if he needed my help. To be honest, I thought he might invite me to sit in on a few meetings in our home office and share my expertise in influence. Instead he asked if I would travel to each of our claims offices to give an overview of persuasion to all of our claim reps.Six cities and two-dozen sessions later I concluded with a presentation to the senior leaders in our claims division. As I fielded questions at the end of the talk I was reminded about the need to choose my words carefully. If anyone should be aware of this it should be the guy who teaches influence for a living! Having said that, we can all slip at times and I’m no exception. During the presentation, I shared about a particular application of the principle of reciprocity. This principle of influence alerts us to the reality that people feel obligated to give back to those who first give to them. The particular application I shared that day had to do with concessions. That is, when we concede a little by taking a step to the middle, quite often people feel obligated to take a step towards the middle in response to our first move.As I spoke about this I shared a story from Robert Cialdini, Ph.D., that shows how powerful concessions can be. Dr. Cialdini had some of his graduate assistants spread out across the campus of Arizona State University to randomly ask people this question:“Hi, I’m from the juvenile county detention center and we’re looking for people who would be willing to chaperon a group of juvenile delinquents on a day trip to the zoo. Would you be willing to volunteer?”As you might imagine, spending a day at the zoo with juvenile delinquents didn’t sound appealing so not too many people offered up their time. In fact, only 17% agreed to be chaperons.At a later time, to test the theory of concessions the graduate assistants started with a much bigger request then retreated to a smaller request upon hearing no. It went something like this:“Hi, I’m from the juvenile county detention center and we’re looking for people who would be willing to be a big brother or big sister for some juvenile delinquents. Generally we like people to commit a few hours every weekend and we ask that people sign up for two years. Would you be willing to be a big brother or big sister?”As you might imagine, nobody said yes because that’s a huge commitment but as soon as that offer was rejected the graduate assistants retreated to a smaller request, the one they’d asked people days before:“If you can’t do that, would you be willing to be a chaperon on a day trip to the zoo for some kids in need?”The response in that case was a 50% volunteer rate. That’s triple the initial request even though it was the same time commitment – one day at the zoo!You might not have caught the subtlety in how I shared that second request but someone from our legal department pointed out that the second request for the day trip to the zoo wasn’t exactly like the first request because dealing with “juvenile delinquents” is different than helping some “kids in need.” It’s probably easier for people to say yes to “kids in need” versus spending all day with “juvenile delinquents.”It was a good reminder for me about how powerful words are! The reality was both requests were identical in the study but I got lazy when I shared the story that particular day. In the study both requests were to spend a day at the zoo with some juvenile delinquents so it was an apples-to-apples comparison. This post isn’t so much about the power of reciprocity by way of concessions, as it is to remind us that we need to choose our words carefully because they matter. Frank Luntz, a conservative pollster, brilliantly shows this in his book Words that Work. I highly recommend the book because it will open your eyes to scripting used by political parties. For example: Taxes. If you’re against taxing inheritances passed down to family members you’ll talk about the “death tax” but those in favor of taxing inheritances will refer to it as the “estate tax.” Each description conjures up very different images and feelings.Immigration. If you’re for opening up immigration you might refer to people already here as “undocumented workers” but those against it call these same people “illegal aliens.” Again, each word choice creates very different mental pictures and feelings. These are just two examples of how word choice describing the same thing can make a very big difference in people’s perception of the issues. Remember, what you say and how you say it can make all the difference when it comes to hearing “Yes” or “No.”
Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”. 
When I work with students in the Principles of Persuasion workshop we talk about three kinds of persuasion practitioners: bunglers, smugglers and detectives. Here’s a quick synopsis of each:Detectives are folks who understand the principles of influence and look for genuine opportunities to use them in order to create a win for themselves as well as the person or people they seek to influence.Smugglers are individuals who also have some understanding but they look for shortcuts through manipulation. They find it easier to distort the truth or lie outright in their use of the principles of influence so they can get what they want no matter the cost to others. Bunglers are people who don’t understand the persuasion process or principles and therefore miss opportunities to be more effective when it come to persuasion. Or, they might intuitively know a few things about the principles but don’t understand how to effectively use them. Unfortunately the vast majority of people fall into this category and they make predictable mistakes.In this post we’ll look at some of the most common mistakes people make when trying to persuade others. No offense, but if you find yourself doing these things, you’re bungling away persuasion opportunities.Validating undesirable behavior. There’s a lot of bad stuff that happens in society. For example; too many kids try cigarettes and cheat in school; far too many people don’t vote; violent behavior seems to be on the rise, etc. When you talk about what many people are doing – consensus – you tend to validate the bad behavior. This can cause more people to do the very thing you’re preaching against! Instead, you want to point out good behavior you want people to emulate. This approach was validated in the last two presidential elections where people were told to get to the polls early because record turnouts were expected. Those turnouts materialized. Highlighting gain instead of loss. I’ve shared in recent posts about homeowners who, when told about energy saving recommendations, were informed they would either save $180 by implementing the energy saving ideas or that they would lose $180 if they failed to implement the ideas, the latter of which is an application of the principle of scarcity. Everyone I share that study with correctly guesses more people in the “lose” group made the necessary changes. And they’re correct — 150% more people in the lose group chose to incorporate the energy saving ideas. Despite intuitively knowing this, most people still go out and talk about all the things someone will gain, or save, by going with their idea. Perhaps they fear coming across as negative but they’re failing to apply the most persuasive approach and they won’t hear yes as often.Confusing contracts with reciprocity. Reciprocity explains the reality that people feel obligated to return a favor. In other words, if I do something for you you’ll feel some obligation to want to do something for me in return. An example would be; I’ll do A and I hope you’ll do B in return. This is very different than entering into a contract – I’ll do A IF you’ll do B. Quite often you can engage reciprocity by doing or offering far less and still get the same behavior in return. Mixing up positional authority with perceived authority. Believing you’re an authorityis far different than other people perceiving you to be an authority. Sometimes others need to know your credentials. When people rely solely on their position to gain compliance it will never be as effective as it could be if they engaged people in the persuasion process by highlighting their credentials. It’s one thing for me to do something because the boss says so versus doing the very same thing because I see the value in doing so because an expert convinced me.Failing to connect on liking. Effective persuasion has a lot to do with relationships built on the principle of liking. It’s not always enough that someone likes your product or service. Quite often the difference maker is whether or not they like you. It doesn’t matter if you’re a salesperson, manager or someone else, spending too much time describing ideas, products, services, etc., without getting the other person to like you is going to make persuasion harder. And here’s the gem – make sure you create time to learn a bit about the other person so you come to like them and you’ll be amazed at the difference it can make!Telling instead of asking. Telling someone what to do isn’t nearly as effective as asking because asking engages consistency. This principle tells us people feel internal psychological pressure as well as external social pressure to be consistent in what they say and do. By asking and getting a “Yes” the odds that someone will do what you want increase significantly. In the POP workshop we talk about a restaurant owner who saw no shows fall from 30% to just 10% by having the hostess go from saying, “Please call of you cannot make your reservation” to asking, “Will you please call if you cannot keep your reservation?” The first sentence is a statement but the second is a question that engages consistency. Failure to give a reason. When you want someone to do something, giving a reason tagged with “because” can make all the difference. As I’ve share with State Auto claim reps, “Can you get me your medical records?” will not be as effective as “Can you get me your medical records because without them I cannot process your claim and pay you?” This approach was validated in a copier study where 50% more people (93% up from 60%) were willing to let someone go ahead of them in line when the person asking gave them a reason using the word “because.”So there you have some of the most common persuasion mistakes. By pointing them out hopefully you’ll change your ways if you’ve made these mistakes before. If you’ve not bungled like this then hopefully you’ll avoid these mistakes now that you’re aware of them.
Brian Ahearn, CMCT® Chief Influence Officer influencePEOPLE Helping You Learn to Hear “Yes”.