Researchers find that a simple “talking to strangers” intervention is effective | Hacker News Reader

Researchers find that a simple “talking to strangers” intervention is effective

psypost.org

142 pointssinashahandeh133 comments

I’m quite the chatterbox and I love talking to strangers. Even if I will never see them again. I do it quite often. I feel it really adds more fun and meaning as I navigate through my little town, or the big city, doing everyday things that could otherwise be quite boring. So at least to me this article rings true.

I knew people who loved doing that. One of them told me recently that conspiracism has ruined the experience. It is very hard to talk to someone today without eventually hearing a "Did you know that" followed by a baseless conspiracy theory.

In my view, I categorize conspiracy theory conversation to be the same as speaking about religion. What I mean by this is I try not to ask poking questions because I want to avoid offending the person's beliefs and I also don't want to make it seem as if I want to get sucked into their religion / conspiracy theory. For the most part though, most conspiracy theories involve faith without evidence. This approach only works when the conspiracy theory isn't tied to urgent action (maybe including inaction or noncompliance) or scapegoating.

I feel the same way about people and their media and culturally powered "truths" which are rarely substantiated as fact, and often conflict with conspiracy theories.

Although, I find talking to all sorts of people about their "factual" beliefs about "reality" to be an immensely enjoyable experience. Smart people very often hold the most interesting beliefs.

Yep, we used to have taboo topics, but the overton window is massive these days.

I find it fascinating that society can support the range of conspiracy and illogical thought out there. I'd always assumed that someone's faulty reasoning would get in their way of their Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), but apparently this is not the case. It's emperically possible to hold the wildest beliefs and still manage a daily existence.

These folks are still hold jobs, pay their bills, raise kids and then meetup with folks on the weekend who sling conspiracy theories that would have been Poe's Law material on 1990s internet.

Maybe I'm wrong in a different way, but at least that means I still have something new to learn.

But maybe it’s a good thing that people say these things out loud so we can discuss them and maybe convince them otherwise? Or learn that in some cases they might be right?

This doesn't work that well. Conspiracists won't change their mind despite any evidence. Unless you're a very good speaker, trying to argue with them will only give them a "stage" to profess their ideas.

Arguing against an irrational but skilled speaker will only benefit the unreasonable one, specially if you arguments are simple and technical: most people don't understand simplicity or technicalities; but get hypnotized by voice, fear, indignation and a feeling of "if he is that person is right them I'm screwed!"

The best way to counter conspiracists is (I think) leaving them alone and spread rationality among the ones who are still not sick or can be cured.

Ok, but there are "committed conspiracists" and "misinformed conspiracists" or people who haven't thought things through very well, and the latter group(s) may benefit from being able to speak their opinion freely and hear counter-arguments.

No it's not a good thing and you won't ever change someone's mind on their belief in a conspiracy theory, from a one off conversation. people like that have no logical basis for their belief, you can't reason with them using better logic. All you'll end up doing is wasting your time and likely pissing multiple people off. Including yourself. Not worth it.

I think it is good in a way. You're not going to convince them of anything in that ten minute bus stop conversation, not should you try. But it's good for them to have the experience of talking to someone who doesn't believe in their thing, and it's good for both of you to interact with someone you don't share a belief with but still experience them as a person. On the Internet we tend to protect ourselves from the other by replacing them with a caricature. Regardless of who's right and who's wrong that can become a pretty toxic habit.

Not really. It is not that we can convince then. And it is mostly that the world moved toward these and that they won at convincing others.

Sure, if you have patience and energy for those sorts of tug-of-war type conversations.

Woah, all different topics or what?

I also seek out interactions with people I don't know. I'm quite practiced at making it natural and unscary for the other person. Usually never see them again, and that's ok and even desired. There's something very satisfying about it, like I'm sharing a moment with the same person each time but in a different recombination of the whole of us. I strive to keep a regular flow of such interactions coming and I find myself getting ambiguously down if they start to dwindle.

Any tips? I can usually carry a conversation but hard to think of a reason to start one

A random observation à la Seinfeld is always good.

Say what you feel, be genuine. Be curious about them - including, read the situation. If they are anxiously texting, or looking otherwise like they wouldn't want to be disturbed, don't. And don't force it - there's not always something to say. It's not hard, there's no secret code; it's very basic.

Most of the problem is anxiety. As with anything new, you'll get over it as it becomes familiar. Be patient with yourself.

The bus is late, again, say 'Not again! Are the other buses always late?'

Their fingernail polish catches your eye, say, 'hey - that's great. I love the color/design/etc.'

People don't always respond, some might even look at you strangely - oh well!

> People don't always respond, some might even look at you strangely - oh well!

Why do you assume you're someone worth having a random conversation with at all? This is a sincere question.

In my experience of people trying to engage me in conversation, none of them are worth the time. At best I've had a social interaction that basically amounted to being on hold on the phone for five minutes while I struggle to work out what these people want and I'm usually left none the wiser; at worst I've had to listen to idiots segue from discussing the weather to holding forth on a variety of lunatic-fringe causes. Time wasted.

On the rare times I've tried to engage people in conversation they react like I would: impatience that I'm wasting their time, and/or blank looks.

I'd really discourage anyone trying to randomly engage people in conversation unless you're sure you really have some kind of shared interest. IE, you're at a gig, you might imagine then that you could have a meaningful conversation with someone there about the band you are both there to listen to.

Not parent, but the idea that a conversation with a stranger has inherit worth is tied to two ideas that I hold: people have inherit worth, and that can be exchanged through communication.

I find it relatively easy now to find points of commonality with most people I talk to. Some of this could be explained by the value I place on the intangible feeling of understanding and being understood might be an outlier too.

You're absolutely right too in that if you're repeatedly not clicking with someone it probably isn't worth it to keep the conversation going, but even then there are exceptions. I've seen it take several attempts before a conversation takes flight and sometimes even then it dips back into the mundane only to pick back up again a minute or two later. However, people are much less likely to try to find common points of interest if the person they speak to assumes they're an idiot.

> Why do you assume you're someone worth having a random conversation with at all?

...

> On the rare times I've tried to engage people in conversation they react like I would: impatience that I'm wasting their time, and/or blank looks.

> I'd really discourage anyone trying to randomly engage people in conversation unless you're sure you really have some kind of shared interest.

In my experience, the conversations are almost always very positive. Others report positive experiences and find it worthwhile. That suggests you are sadly missing something. The odd thing is, you seem to want to stop others from having these positive experiences.

I reject any question about my worth or anyone's 'worth'. Perhaps part of the problem is that you are thinking about 'worth', and so judgmentally and dubiously, that people don't respond well. People pick up on those signals; they respond poorly to being judged. Or perhaps you are judging your own worth, which would be sad.

I find that my attitude and emotion greatly influences how the conversations go. Especially, give people space to flourish, be curious about them, and you will be amazed at what is inside - worlds of knowledge, insight and creativity that you never imagined. They are in you too, I'm sure.

"man you do that really fast, you must do that a lot!". Typing, swiping at the checkout, asking "would you like fries with that", look to see what struggle they might be having, or what might annoy them. Get into their space and see what is going on and commiserate.

My tip: don't start.

Random people coming up to me, usually stating something perfectly obvious that doesn't need stating ("Cool Hat!/Hey it's Hot Today/How about the footy eh?"), and then trying to converse on a variety of boring subjects (the weather/politics/footy/where I bought my hat/vaccines are evil/Jesus Christ is Our Savior) is a colossal waste of my CPU time.

Don't be that annoying person. Live and let live.

I agree. Most people who do this are introverted/shy by nature unhappy with it and this is their method of proving to themselves and the world that they're not. However it ends up being just as awkward and an equal waste of time because it lacks genuine emotion. Don't say anything and be content with it unless it's something you truly want to express. I.e. whatever is natural for you is probably natural for them.

Why do you assume it lacks genuine emotion? What if someone (e.g. me) is simply unpracticed at expressing it?

Me too but when I was younger I hated it. It was definitely centered around a fear of being rejected or ridiculed. I eventually learned that my fear was unfounded. Possibly a good use of cognitive behavioral therapy.

For me my fears were richly justified by experience.

Casual conversation with strangers is both complex and subtle, and particularly requires specific face and body language. I think neurotypicals underestimate the complexity because it comes naturally to them.

These days I'm fine at it and have no fear. But getting rid of the fear took getting good at it and doing it enough to compensate for those older experiences.

I'm wary of claims that neurotypicals are somehow better at it. Seems more likely that nobody is as good as most everyone assumes they are. That is, self assessment is a known hard problem. Assessment of others would have many of the same traps.

There are well recognized patterns in specific types of ‘neuro divergents’ that are fundamental to the conditions and that make it very difficult, if not impossible, to recognize or process common social cues in useful ways. It makes them categorically have a much harder time in this area, for those categories.

What you’re saying is essentially ‘meh, don’t just assume you are hallucinating sometimes just because you’re schizophrenic’.

Maybe? but if they think they are, they very well might be right.

Fair. My wariness comes from knowing a large number of people that claim to have these complications, but are also just rude people.

Which is to say, they may be divergent. That doesn't do much to suggest that others are "better" at this. Turns out that life is hard for most everyone.

How would you expect them to present except as rude, in that situation?

That sounds like you’re complaining that said schizophrenic in the prior example just ‘seems a little crazy’, but life is tough for everyone?

I mean rude in the child sense, honestly. Kids can be seen as neuro divergent, sure. But even "typical" ones are often surprisingly rude. Very few people just "know" how to be polite.

Ok, but what would you expect it to look like otherwise, if they could not actually learn those things because their brain was not wired to be able to?

They still are going to grow up, but unlike normal folks, they can’t learn those skills - or if they do, it takes vastly more effort.

Me claim is more to be taken that you should work from the assumption it is hard for everyone. Setting yourself apart as someone that is "just bad" at it is going to reinforce that idea.

Can it be true? Of course. Some folks are also just bad at math.

If it was hard for everyone it wouldn't be such a problem, as presumably people would be more tolerant of others getting it "wrong". As it is, it seems that there's a large cadre of people who not only find it easy, but find the "correct" behaviours so self-evident that they tend to assume that people who don't notice these things (or whose natural preferences are different from the unwritten social norm) are being wilfully offensive.

It is a learned skill. And many norms are not as shared as folks assume they are. As such, I think you are understating how willing folks are to tolerate people getting it "wrong."

I say this as someone that would almost certainly be described as neuro divergent. Fake it till you make it is the norm for social interactions. That and repetition.

Is akin to thinking everyone else is a good dancer. I mean, the more practiced dancers will be better, at large. There are relatively fewer folks that can't dance, compared to those that don't dance.

You seem to be assuming they did not try because they assumed they had an incurable problem.

Why not assume that they did try (and still are), and after failing over and over when others did not, realized they have a problem and are being open about it?

You seem to be denying the problem actually can exist, and blame them for not trying - when you don’t seem to know if they are trying or not. It’s quite odd.

I can be wary of things that I know exist. To the point that I'll argue you seem to be taking my point to an obviously false position.

I'm wary of most labeling of this as normal versus otherwise in people. That is it. It presumes a lot of unfairness that, while it does happen, is often overstated, as well.

This line of questioning is interesting. Does anyone have papers on the quantification of NT inference ability in conversations?

Agreed it would be interesting to see. If you find any links, please post back.

"Don't talk to strangers!"

Having been told this over and over again as a child there is a taboo that was set up about it. It's not right obviously. As a small child of course it is can be dangerous to talk to strangers but it is the worst kind of fear-mongering.

That's not to say that kids don't need to be protected and that there isn't caution to be had for small children. But the blanket statement "Don't talk to strangers!" tends to stick with people just like riding the bike on the wrong side of the road so you can see cars coming, because that's what they were told to do as children. In practice though even that is quite dangerous.

Clearly these both have benefits in their context but unfortunately there is no expiration date given for them.

Yeah, I’m literally going to teach my kids to talk to everyone.

Don’t go with anyone we haven’t approved, but talk to everyone.

“Don’t talk to strangers” isn’t precise enough.

It’s perfectly fine for kids to approach strangers and talk to them. But if a stranger approaches a kid, the kid should be on the defensive side, since it’s more likely the stranger is a bad actor.

Eg : asking a stranger to help look for their lost puppy is ok. Having a stranger ask a kid to help stranger look got lost puppy is not ok, do not engage.

That’s the fear, but I’m pretty sure it’s not true.

Almost all crimes likes this are committed by already known people.

The stranger danger fear still exists to this day. Within my family, there are parents who have a fear of a van pulling up and abducting their 16+ year old children.

In suburban America, where people literally keep their front doors unlocked.

I think the goal is more ‘always have an exit strategy’ but for small children they can’t be expected to maintain a self awareness at all times. So the idea is to just remove the possibility entirely. Perhaps a statement of ‘don’t spend more than a few minutes talking to strangers’ or ‘don’t follow a stranger to a second location’ would be better as kids grow older.

> The researchers utilized 286 participants recruited from two universities: one in the United States and one in the United Kingdom.

The discussion here is interesting, but the research itself falls to the typical psychology research trap of using university students.

Researcher: That's odd ...

HN: Yes, in this very specific instance! Move along, nothing to see here!

It's one of those where there really isn't too much to discuss until this study is reproduced with another population segment.

No. The result is just as interesting (if not more) if it only applies to some population segments...

And American at that. America is super extroverted culture where small talk is expected. UK is close culturally. People's interpretation in other cuktire will be different

They do note it as a limitation at least, but yes.

Was my first thought as well

Since developing my hobby -- photography, I always talk to strangers. Or more accurately, they always talk to me. People are always interested in what I am photographing. My advice is take up a hobby you can do outside. Not only does it give you something to talk about, but it also makes you seem like a fun person to talk to (a person with hobbies is likely to be more healthy and normal than one without). Plus if you are doing something it likely means you are in a good mood and aren't likely to be someone to take up another person's time too much. It restricts the space of likely outcomes of a chance encounter to be mostly good outcomes.

Have You ever tried asking people to pose for You? Kinda been thinking about developing this particular skill myself...

Ah not yet. I'm a little shy to do that still. But I definitely want to try it!

It wasn't entirely clear from this article, but the intervention itself is the scavenger hunt and associated instructions. From the supplementary material: "Participants in the treatment condition were asked to talk to the person for at least a couple minutes, whereas participants in the control condition were simply asked to observe the person for at least a couple minutes". And from the related work this is based on previous research: "This suggests a promising intervention strategy: give people concentrated and repeated practice talking to strangers, so that they may realize their fears are exaggerated."

Researchers game money to people and an app so that they pick up a stranger and talk to them. They reported positive psychological outcome out of the exercise.

Is there something governments can do to make their citizens talk to strangers more often?

Society seems to be going in the opposite direction (e.g. self-checkouts at supermarkets, government services being available over the internet, online shops, online gaming, etc.)

Why would a government have anything to do with this?

But if you insist: the best thing a government can do is to have some civic service which any kind of person can be called to do (not just the unenemployed, the retired, or other such people that the govt. wants to “keep busy”). There’s nothing that bonds more (between strangers) than reluctantly having to do some task because either Nature or Government is forcing you to. ;)

Or just facilitate the creation and running of volunteer groups.

Perhaps this is not something that governments need to do.

A government doesn't actually need to be the director or curator of a country's culture, even though it is in a position of great influence.

> A government doesn't actually need to be the director or curator of a country's culture

A government, particularly local government, will strongly direct community culture whether it seeks to or not. Particularly zoning and construction planning will influence the space people do or do not have available for meeting and socializing. The trend in the US seems to be to spread people out and privatize most or all "public" social spaces. I wouldn't attribute this shift to governments intentionally trying to shift culture to being more isolated, but that is the outcome regardless. This means that the only real counter to this shift is to get governments to consider the social impact of planning and factor it into their decision making.

Perhaps the government could create vast extended families and assign them to people via last names like Daffodil-11 or Oriole-2 .

I was almost certain this was a reference to some work of fiction, and indeed it's Kurt Vonnegut's Slapstick

Absolutely: create more public spaces for people to congregate without spending money.

Something I noticed is that religion is a great "forcing function" for a lot of healthy behavior including socialization.

If your daily or weekly life involves going to a Church, synagogue, it something else- you have a built in structure for being around and interacting with people.

It's interesting for me to think about - religion declined as percentage of population in recent decades but I suspect in the long run (1/2 generations) religion provides enough antidote to things that plague secular society (isolation, depression, childlessness) that it might swing the percentages in the other direction.

> religion is a great "forcing function" for a lot of healthy behavior

And for a lot of unhealthy behavior too.

Such as? Not some crazy extreme examples, but in the mainstream?

Sexual repression, hindrance of science and education, restrictions of liberties, and wars come to mind.

How does purity culture count? Tabooisation of these topics? Strong pressure on conformity?

I had a secular upbringing and basically the dream secular life in my 20s and 30s: overeducated, single in NYC, dating a ton, traveling the world, etc.

Then I got married and had kids and realized that this "boring mainstream" life is peak experience.

In other words, it took me 20 extra years to arrive at a life that someone brought up religious would just consider the default.

Like I said, I am sure there are extreme cases and I am not talking about those. Just talking about the base case, religious folks' default life path feels healthier.

Purity culture is something else and way much more then just having a family.

It, among other things, may mean marrying at 18 to a partner you dated very shortly and never seen alone. Because anything else is sin. And then you are locked in for life.

And that is not nearly the same as marrying when mature and having partner you actually know. It can be special kind of hell.

I'm always puzzled when I read people talking about how government should do something. It might sound cynical but really it isn't: Governments are effective only at one thing and it's killing people (war). You should not expect much from government.

One overlooked factor in this article, is that some cultures consider people strange if they don’t make smalltalk between strangers, while others may consider you borderline insane if you do.

I moved from a country where these interactions are normal, to one where they never happen, and I still find it vaguely depressing.

Otoh people who’ve moved here and never noticed the discomfort of those around them when they chatter to strangers are happily oblivious to the cultural nuances.

I’d gladly be more like them.

This is what I liked about commuting in public bus during my undergrad in india. I could easily start conversations with strangers and learn so many things

The study was important, but limited in the usual way? Some 20-something college students, many paid to perform the study?

In my mind it underscores the need to introduce folks at a younger age to social situations. It's a problem that college students still can't talk to strangers.

How about a High School program of 'meet a random classmate' or some such? It's all about exposure and becoming resilient.

Does anyone know what I could say to strangers? That part trips me up.

Start with small talk! It's so valuable in establishing a baseline of "we're two humans in the same condition at heart, and the first thing I'm offering is a universally shared experience, and not talking crazy to you or starting a fight (physical or political or otherwise)"

A lot of people think it's just useless filler but it actually is so important and a valuable tool when meeting people!

Talk about the weather! I'm serious! And drop any kind of internal pretension about being too good for such an inane topic (if that applies to you). Embrace it as if you're meeting someone from a distant tribe, and you are both wary of each other, and you want to start things off on a good foot. Talking about things you know you both deal with and think about is literally perfect!

I am a pretty asocial dude. But I think I can make a decent first impression by being a "social chameleon".

- recognize the environment you are in

- what are the common ideas that are popular within that space

- wait for a cue and say something interesting that opens up to a response

- listen and contribute to the conversation

- start by almost telling a story or making a comment.

- having a friend with you will 10x your confidence in being more open to these conversation

- make sure you are not tired and you really are committed to have a discussion

Recognize the fact you can't easily have a good conversation with a random stranger. You need to have something in common with them. The less things you have in common with them the more reluctant you will feel to invest in having a casual conversation with them.

Good advice.

I'm also fairly asocial. I can be 'on' for maybe an hour before social fatigue sets in. The bigger the crowd, the smaller the half-life of my social energy.

Much to my surprise, I volunteered as a door-to-door political canvasser some years back. It's not strictly out-and-about strangers as suggested here, but these people were unknown to me and I was unknown to them. It just happened to be on their porch.

I was initially petrified, but I figured out some extremely effective tricks to establish a rapport _before_ launching into my political script.

As I'm walking up to the house, I'm looking for decorations, plants, the porchlight. Especially the porchlight.

Ring the bell, knock on the door.

"Hey, good evening! Yeah before I get into that (gesture at campaign button pinned to my chest), I noticed you have a compact fluorescent bulb out here. And right away I'm pretty sure we see eye to eye on some environmental issues."

Smirk or smile. Instant connection. Literally nobody I used that opener on, ever turned me away. Which is a heck of a statistic given the overall reception that political canvassers got that year.

Things I'm not commenting on: The car in the driveway (not sure it's theirs), the trash in the yard (don't bring up a negative), the peeling paint (not their fault, they're probably busy, etc).

So if you're looking for a way to make a connection with a stranger, look for something they did _on purpose_. Not their physique, unless they're obviously a bodybuilder or something, that's usually unintentional and many people are self-conscious about it. But they definitely picked out that funny slogan T-shirt, or the buttons pinned to their bag, or the scarf in the colors of the local sports team's rival. All those things are statements they're making _on purpose_ to the world they're walking through, and you're in the clear to comment on them.

To add to the others comments about small talk. A big blocker to being able to small talk is self-centeredness / self-consciousness. A lot of people think that if they say something to someone they will be evaluated and that's almost never the case.

Unless you look homeless or like you are selling something, and unless the other person is mentally ill, they will welcome you speaking to them.

And then in terms of content, jokes, questions, and observations work well.

For example, if someone's with a small kid, I'll ask how old the kid is. If someone's driving a family SUV (something I know about from having shopped for one last year) I'll ask how they like it. Or just comment - I like your cars, actually considered it last year.

Make a joke, even a lame one. Long line at the coffee shop? "Wow I need a coffee just to get a coffee here!" Or even dumb stuff like "that's a huge menu, I don't see coffee on it"

Etc. The main thing is - if you are coming from a place of being human, it will come across as such. Content matters less.

I think context is key: who, what, when, where, why.

If I'm picking up my daughter from school, striking up a conversation with someone (i.e. another parent) would be totally different than making chit chat with someone at the bar/club. Often, the thing that previously held me back from talking with someone was fear of rejection, something I really struggled with in my early 20s and found that as I've gotten older (mid 30s now), I'm much more comfortable under my own skin and find it easier to approach strangers. I don't think the fear will ever disappear but, does get easier (in my case) with age.

A simple comment on the situation is a great ice breaker.

After that, the simplest trick is to ask questions that get them talking about themselves. Most people are more than happy to talk about something they're familiar with, so asking something that only they can answer ("So who do you know here?", "What do you do for a living?", "What are some of your hobbies?") will get the conversation flowing.

Anything that you both see happening. For example commenting on a cute dog passing by is a great conversation starter because everyone likes cute animals but everyone has a different opinion on what makes them cute.

Some people will go for your conversational hook and jump in. Others will ignore you. That's just life and normal, don't worry about it.

If someone joins your conversation, be sure to give them plenty of space and time to talk themselves. Most people who feel shy make the mistake of filing every conversational gap and every silent minute. But that other person maybe just needs a moment to remember a funny story to tell you.

Something situational. "This is a pretty good party! X always seems to do a good job getting interesting folks together."

Start small, work up. Don't start with a long story. Maybe skip the questions, which obligates the other to come up with something, making them uncomfortable. Make a statement about something neutral, or about yourself. See if it gets a response. No? Move on.

This book by Leil Lowndes helped me a lot, I highly recommend it: How to Talk to Anyone: 92 Little Tricks for Big Success in Relationships

https://a.co/d/cinkdXJ

Specifically with cashiers at checkout, I find the question “has it been busy today?” almost always generates an enthusiastic response (“yeah, super busy!” or “no, not really!”)

I think my last conversation with a stranger started with: "you know, I thought I needed a zucchini, but after looking through these I'm not so sure".

So uh, give that one a try?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34121349

> many people fear social interactions with strangers due to worries about rejection

Actually, no, I don't initiate interactions with strangers because I'm male and a good chunk of the population would think I'm a creep if I try to interact with them.

I find it odd that nearly no one mentioned the issue that some people don't want to be talked to. Especially women tend to suffer from unwanted attention but it also applies to the general case.

Just as you don't have want advertisers to spam your email address or call you without your consent you might not want randos to try to talk to you.

Please don't reply with stochastic methods like trying to read the other person body language and other circumstances and making predictions about whether they would like to be talked to or not. These methods have a failure rate and if you are talking to a lot of strangers it means you will step on lot of toes even if you can keep the failure rate relatively low.

Having a baseline dread about talking to strangers is just being a well-adjusted adult.

Now there are social contexts like networking events where talking to stranger is encouraged and a good skill to have but I don't think people that are not good at this are necessarily defect.

I feel like the general societal trend is more in the direction of talking to stranger becoming less socially acceptable, not to mention to mention that is already very unacceptable in many countries and would be seen at outright weird.

> I feel like the general societal trend is more in the direction of talking to stranger becoming less socially acceptable

I agree with this.

> not to mention to mention that is already very unacceptable in many countries and would be seen at outright weird.

You're missing the fact that such weirdness will be overlooked if you have fun/humor, good looks or positivity to bring, or a shared perspective on the world. Two people told me as much when we were talking about psychedelics. They were like "this is weird but we're talking about really cool stuff." We even exchanged numbers.

People can change their opinion on this quite rapidly. And some can't.

> I find it odd that nearly no one mentioned the issue that some people don't want to be talked to.

People can just say they don't want to be talked to. That's how you "figure it out". If they can't, at some point the conversation becomes so boring, it'll die a natural death.

> People can just say they don't want to be talked to. That's how you "figure it out".

Or they just don't want to be rude and would play along, even if they are not really interested in that talk.

True, and for me at least, my fear for conflict would make me try to look kind and welcoming even though every sentence is painful - making you think the failure rate is lower than it is

Not sure if this is anything ground breaking. I used to have a fear of talking to strangers, but as life would have it I had not choice but to get a customer facing job, which meant approaching strangers and talking to them. It was terrifying, but after a couple of days I wouldn't even think about it. It became nothing. Then after I left that job after a couple of months the same fear has come back and it was difficult again.

Would love a website for this, timeboxed 3-5 minute chats, like chatroulette but ... just normalish people.

I’ve found that being a native english speaker and offering to have quick calls/chats with those who are learning is a great way to chat with new people. I get to meet cool people from all around the world, it’s a great experience and I haven’t had to deal with any weirdos, unlike stranger chat websites where finding someone normal is a challenge. I specifically joined an English discord server, you’ll be surprised how many people will want to contact you if you just introduce yourself as a native speaker whiling to talk.

what incentive would there be for someone to participate? "social media" like this or reddit is the closest you'd get

Omegle might be what you are looking for, you have to sift through some weirdos though

People got better at something they practiced?

> Though many people have this pervasive fear, research has shown that most strangers are perfectly happy to be spoken to, leaving this common fear unfounded.

They could be happy because it’s a nice change of pace. But what would happen if 20% of people started interacting more with other people? Would that be liked, or would people be annoyed with that?

> Social interaction is very important and has many well-documented benefits, such as increased happiness, better health, and stronger sense of belonging.

This has become yet another thing for me to worry about: how many “cigarettes worth” am I smoking by not socializing enough? Thanks, media.

I am almost never lonely alone. (Being along isn’t terribly fun but it doesn’t feel bad, either.) Only together with other people. Because I see what they have and what I don’t. Then I blame myself for my jealousy—it is mine, after all. But jealousy is a social thing too, is it not? And that’s kind of the kicker. Feeling out of place, unworthy, being bothered by the well-adjustedness of others is also part of the social game. So yeah, they get to have better blood pressure, better longevity, and so on—good for them. But I wonder: was their joy and happiness a social co-creation, while my less-than-happy disposition (again, in the proximity of other people) was self-inflicted? Because it wasn’t like I just looked at the bare facts (as presented to me) of other people’s lives and then felt bad—I was also informed, in no uncertain terms, of what was acceptable, good, wholesome, and what was deservedly labeled as miserable and degenerate.

And yet they will be happy together while my misery is almost only mine—(1) it was self-inflicted, (2) there is no one else to blame but “society”, which is too vague, and (3) being upset at others would just lower my status further.

And I also will be quiet about this to others. Because no one wants to hear about it. But I will know. And they will know. And I will say “it was fine”. And they will judge me or don’t care. And I will think that they judge me.

Re 20% more stranger interactions it depends on how you handle the interactions. I am open to chatting with strangers but if they are annoying I am also happy to share that with them.

Most of the stranger's conversations I ever overheard in the US were about rather common topics, like sports, pop culture, children & schools, etc. What if someone doesn't know much or care about such things, but still wants the "well-documented benefits, such as increased happiness, better health, and stronger sense of belonging"?

I'm new to the US and come from a different culture where the common topics have little in common with what you'd talk to strangers in the US. I'd love to talk about less common topics, like science, tech, AI, philosophy — basically what is being discussed here in HN, but in the real life. Is there a hope for me to become less lonely?

Maybe more in the context of interest-based groups than talking to random strangers.

Depending on where you are, there might be online or offline meetups around these topics that you could join to meet other people that share your interests.

My wife came here to the northern US from the south, and the relative unwillingness of strangers to speak here rubs her all sorts of wrong ways. She's cut off from her old friends, and cut off from making new friends, and socializing with friends is as essential to her existence as corn grits (also in short supply here).

There is one exception: Older women seem to enjoy having someone to talk to, so she's befriended a few in the neighborhood. Nevertheless we are considering a move.

> These results continued for at least a week following the end of the study

Speaking from personal experience, I’ve felt similar bumps in moods from bouts of intentionally talking with strangers. They are always short lived though and I always regress back to withdrawing

But the feeling I get when I am comfortable talking to strangers is unreal. It’s a completely different world when everyone around you is a potential friend, as opposed to someone just in the way that you have to navigate around

Notwithstanding the valid criticism of this being a typical "we solicited a bunch of university students to XYZ" study...

> People’s beliefs changed slowly throughout the course of the study

this is interesting: It's not just people's behavior patterns that change quickly, it's even their _beliefs_ - and even when they know they were being manipulated. An example of the extent to which "social being determines consciousness".

To get better at something, force yourself to do it more often. Exposure therapy, there's nothing new or novel here. But it is effective.

That is true, but the point of the article is a little more subtle: not only exposure helps, but most of us hold the irrational belief that strangers are not interested in talking with us, and this study shows that strangers are actually more pleasant and forthcoming than one might think they are.

I am terrible with striking conversations with random people on the street or outside of settings I know I have to meet someone. But the 3 or 4 times in my life I had to interact with complete strangers, or groups of them, it always went better than expected. Anyone that has taken a little MDMA at a party will have experienced it: when you make a point of introducing yourself to everyone, people tend to be quite friendly and open.

> Anyone that has taken a little MDMA at a party will have experienced it: when you make a point of introducing yourself to everyone, people tend to be quite friendly and open

Especially if everyone else is on MDMA as well...

During that MDMA experience of mine I was the only one tripping, and I met all people in that small club, went backstage to chat with the band, joined two ladies and smoothly started dancing and flirting with one of them (but I was too high to take it further. People on ecstasy have a rather unattractive pale look)

The next day I remember how easy it felt, and that the fear of strangers was completely irrational; Certainly, sober I make an even better impression than when I'm high as a kite.

It can be difficult for people to take that first step though.

I was extremely anxious about making conversation with strangers for years. Actually forcing myself to just do it and accept the uncomfortable feeling I always felt during and afterwards felt like an insurmountable task. I eventually did get mostly competent at it but that process of convincing myself to start and keep going probably took years.

In general, I agree. But most recently, there's one thing that's not (for me, at least) getting easier despite doing it every day: cold water exposure.

I'm someone who HATES HATES HATES cold temperature. Once, while camping in one of the Californian mountains during winter about 8 years ago, I couldn't stand the cold and I ended up stuffing heated hand-warmers in both of my shoes...accidentally fell asleep and woke up blistered feet.

Anyways, starting July 2022 (a little over six months ago), I started cold water exposure. Every morning, as early as 4:30 am, I would force myself to hop in the shower and blast myself with cold water for at least 3 minutes. Sometimes 4 minutes. Now, I've been doing this consistently, every day, since then, and .... it's not getting easier. I still hate it. Every time. But I still do it, every day. But no, definitely not getting "better" at it, I don't think.

Interesting experiment. How do you feel after or during the three minutes? Would you describe the experience as rewarding?

If not, perhaps you could change something in or after the routine to create a positive feedback?

During the 3 minutes: mildly physically painful and mentally challenged. After, though, very rewarding — the adrenaline helps wake me up and helps me transition fairly quickly into a state of focus.

> If not, perhaps you could change something in or after the routine to create a positive feedback?

You're probably right: I probably need to start incorporating some better breathing techniques (e.g. Wim Hof).

> Wim Hof

Came here to suggest him to you. First i read his book, and used the technique there. It’s described in a page or two; you don’t have to read the whole book unless you want to). Now I use his phone app. He also has YouTube videos but I haven’t watched them.

Anyway, his breathing technique really helped me. I have not done cold baths yet, just showers, but it’s been 2 years and I can take a cold shower of any duration now. Started at 10 seconds!

The breathing technique can take 20 minutes so if I’m in a hurry, I skip it and seem to do ok anyway. Not sure how or why, but maybe just by habit.

Are you focusing your attention on the feeling of the cold water on your skin, or are you trying to distract yourself from it?

Some days I’m super chatty and will talk to whoever in person or online. But I really don’t get the obsession society has at large with small talk and socializing. I’ll happily go weeks with no human contact.

People losing their shit over the pandemic lockdowns was cracking me up. “Omg can’t socialize how I want for a few months!!”

"At its heart, our intervention is simple: it involves repeatedly approaching and talking to strangers."

So... the "intervention" to help people gain confidence talking to strangers was to have them talk to a bunch of strangers. What an odd thing to make an article about.

Sometimes the solution is obvious. The real mystery is how we let folks get to college without any opportunity to practice social situations.

If I understand the article correctly, it's about the research that tested whether talking to strangers improves wellbeing.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rejection_Therapy

- https://www.rejectiontherapy.com/

I’m reading this book to help overcome my fear of talking to strangers.

How to Talk to Anyone https://amzn.to/3YKFc21

research has shown that most strangers are perfectly happy to be spoken to

This feels a lot like hand-waving. Was this research rigorous? Did it differentiate between the attractiveness of the person initiating conversation and the context in which it was initiated?

When I'm out I'm typically trying to accomplish a task and have no desire for random strangers to talk to me. I would also never presume a stranger wants it either, unless we're having a shared experience.

The actual paper says something slightly different: "Fortunately, the same research that demonstrates people's pessimism about talking to strangers also shows that this pessimism is often misplaced—strangers are more willing to talk than people anticipate (Cooney et al., 2021; Epley & Schroeder, 2014; Sandstrom & Boothby, 2021; Schroeder et al., 2021), conversations tend to go overwhelmingly better than people predict (Epley & Schroeder, 2014; Sandstrom & Boothby, 2021; Sandstrom & Dunn, 2014)"

> When I'm out I'm typically trying to accomplish a task and have no desire for random strangers to talk to me.

Depends on the context. I've heard quotes from friends like yours and then showed them things that they'd deem impossible, also impossible by me. The truth is not a lot of people have a lot of experiences on talking to strangers because it's not in their culture.

In my experience in Dutch trains: yes, most people are interested in a conversation. It really depends on how you bring it. Usually my conversations start when I see a person making themselves smaller and I tell them "oh, you don't have to make yourself smaller, take all the space you want." "Thank you, but it's fine" "Weird isn't it how that happens?" If they're open for a conversation, they'll entertain the thought. I do this on autopilot, because I believe people should express themselves how they want to, I dislike it that they're making themselves smaller.

In any case, there's a big chance you'll be skeptical, don't really believe it etc. Go up to 30 people, give them a compliment that you genuinely believe and then ask yourself whether the aggregate was the reaction you expected. Cool, now go up to 30 more people and after the compliment lead with an observation or a question. Ask yourself how many of them stayed for a conversation.

I do stuff like this, because more people should give compliments to others. Most people appreciate it, some stop for a conversation (this is the street at 2 PM). Some people look at me if I came from an insane asylum and I get the sense they're shaming me non-verbally by looking really weird at me. It's funny to see their beliefs imposed on me as I know something they don't: most like it. And for as far as people have done that stuff to me: I like to too.

"oh, you don't have to make yourself smaller, take all the space you want."

Have you considered that they're doing it because they feel crowded, not because they're overly concerned about other people feeling crowded?

…is effective for some college students in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see if it varies depending on age or in other countries.

This isn't really news; it's just exposure therapy, which is pretty well known. Habituation is everything in these domains. I do like the scavenger hunt though. That's a good icebreaker. The list is at the very end of the study by the way[1]. These seem pretty difficult for someone with social anxiety or poor smalltalking skills though.

  Al Fresco Find someone outdoors, and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  All Smiles Find someone who seems friendly and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Artsy Find someone who looks artistic and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Blue Mood Find someone who looks sad and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Bossy Pants Find someone who looks like a leader and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Caffeination Station Find a barista/server and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Coffee Break Find someone who's drinking a coffee and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Do Gooder Find someone who seems like a nice or kind person and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Fashionista Find someone who's accessorizing (e.g., wearing a scarf, hat…) and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Fun Fabric Find someone wearing stand-out print (e.g., stripes, animal-print) and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Graphic Tee Find someone who is wearing an interesting shirt and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Hot Find someone whom you find attractive and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Hungry Find someone who's eating and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Inked Up Find someone who has a tattoo and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Inside Find someone indoors and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Jock Find someone sporty and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Kickin’ It Find someone who is wearing interesting shoes and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Line Up Find someone who's waiting in a queue/line and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Manscape Find someone who has a beard/goatee/etc. and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Minion Find someone who is wearing a uniform and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Nailed It Find someone who has funky nails (e.g., unusual shade, fancy design) and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Next Gen Find someone who's from a different generation than you and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  On Top Find someone who is wearing a hat and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Ray of Sunshine Find someone who looks happy and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Sexy Find someone whose gender differs from yours and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Skin Deep Find someone whose skin tone is different from yours and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Twins Find someone wearing the same thing as you (hair style, shirt, shoes, etc.) and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Unicorn Find someone who has eye-catching hair (e.g., pink tips), dyed hair, or a cool hair style and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.
  Wild Card x 2 Find anyone of your choosing and [talk to/observe] them for a few minutes.

1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002210312...

why is america getting this strange obsession with forcing people to do shit they dont want to?

Whenever a stranger talks to me, I think they’re about to accuse me of something.

Mama Said Don't Talk To Strangers . . .

Ah yes, the buzzfeed of science journalism.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com