The Liking Gap in Conversations: Do People Like Us More Than We Think?
Boothby, Cooney, Sandstrom & Clark (2018) · Psychological Science, 29(11)
We use this paper in 7 places in the academy · 3 stated limits
What the study found
In five studies, people underestimated how much the person they talked to liked them. This is called the liking gap. The number you give yourself in the moment is not a measurement.
After conversations between strangers, people regularly underestimated how much the other person liked them and enjoyed their company. This is called the liking gap. In a study of people who had just met, it lasted for months.
In five studies, after talking with someone new, people regularly underestimated how much the other person liked them and enjoyed their company. This is the liking gap. In one group of new roommates it lasted for several months.
After conversations, people regularly underestimated how much the other person had liked them. Among first-year students getting to know their roommates, the gap lasted several months.
See 1 more ways we describe the same finding
With strangers in the lab, dorm-mates over several months, and workshop participants, people underestimated how much the other person liked them and enjoyed their company.
What the study cannot prove
The studies used conversations between strangers and new acquaintances, mostly students. They show that people underestimate how much they were liked. They do not show that correcting for this error changes how the next conversation goes.
Limits we note on the exercises
The participants were strangers and new acquaintances, mostly students. The studies show that people's estimate is too low. They do not show that saying the sentence changes the answer.
The studies measured live conversations, not months of silence. They justify one honest message. They do not say that the silence was not an answer. Sometimes it was, and that is when you delete the thread.
The studies measured the gap. They did not test what a follow-up message does. Using the gap as a reason to write first is our own step.
Where we use it
We use this paper in 7 places in the academy. If the paper turned out to be wrong, we would have to change everything in this list. Some of the exercise instructions below are part of Gold. You can read every finding for free.
In the topics · 5
10 — Re-rate at forty-eight hours
Topic 12 · A Room of People05 — Assume they liked you more than you think
Topic 17 · The First Date09 — One sentence at the door
Topic 18 · The Unanswered Message10 — Re-contact, or delete
Topic 19 · Making Friends07 — Follow up within two days
Other papers used in the same places
These papers are used in the same topics and videos as this one. That does not mean the papers agree with each other. It only means that the same exercises use both.
It Doesn't Hurt to Ask: Question-Asking Increases Liking
Huang, Yeomans, Brooks, Minson & Gino (2017)Mistakenly Seeking Solitude
Epley & Schroeder (2014)If You Need Help, Just Ask: Underestimating Compliance With Direct Requests for Help
Flynn & Lake (2008)Overly Shallow?: Miscalibrated Expectations Create a Barrier to Deeper Conversation
Kardas, Kumar & Epley (2022)Post-Event Processing in Social Anxiety
Rachman, Grüter-Andrew & Shafran (2000)Beautiful Mess Effect: Self–Other Differences in Evaluation of Showing Vulnerability
Bruk, Scholl & Bless (2018)Research
A real study. We tell you what it found, how many people were in it, and what it can't prove.
You are free to read, link to and quote this page. If we claim more than this paper shows, please tell us at contact@suaviq.com. We read every correction, and corrections help us more than any other email.