SEARCH

Search

Explore

Blog
Podcast
Free Live Event
Self-Assessment
Manifesto
Book

Work with me

Connect

SUBSCRIBE

Search
Close this search box.

A Myth is a myth is a … truth?

“Only 7% of communication relies on the actual words that are spoken.”

This is the Mehrabian myth. It’s a widespread piece of “conventional wisdom” that gets repeated over and over again.

Which doesn’t make it true.

In fact, it’s wrong (at least in the common representation cited above).

Why then do so many people believe the myth?

Part of the reason is that it gets repeated. Over. And over. Again. Unfortunately, repetition increases the perceived truth of an information. It turns out that people are more likely to believe a statement when they hear it repeatedly. And that’s regardless of whether they’re dumb or super smart. Even smart and critical thinkers are more likely to believe a statement when they hear it repeatedly.

Let me repeat this: Even smart and critical thinkers are more likely to believe a statement when they hear it repeatedly.

Of course … advertisers love this. Propagandists, too. That’s why they keep repeating their statements over and over again (and over and over and over and over …). They intuitively understand that drip by drip it’ll increase the likelihood that people believe it (within certain limits, of course).

Which doesn’t make their statements any more true.

It’s important to keep that in mind when reading a message repeated frequently: No, a repetition doesn’t make it any more true.

The Mehrabian myth is still a myth.

Fixed worldviews

When we listen to someone, a basic process that happens in our brains (in very simplified terms) is that we compare what we hear with what we know and then – if necessary – adapt.

Yet, there are two extremes in how people do this:

On the one extreme are people who fit what they hear to what they know. These people will default to adapt new information to confirm what they already believe. If people like this believe that their business partner is cheating on them, everything they learn about that new deal will reinforce this perspective.

On the other extreme are people who fit what they know to any new information. These people will frequently adapt what they believe to new information. If an “expert” offers them her opinion, they will frequently adapt this as a fact.

Both, of course, have an utter deficit in critical thinking. The former judge any information by their existing worldview – it’s what ideologies are made of. The latter shy away from trusting their own assessment and avoid any judgement of their own.

What’s surprising at first sight (at least to some) is that the former group is just as easy to manipulate as the latter. Demagogues excel at this. They manipulate their followers by attaching to people’s beliefs. Knowing that these people will approve of anything that reinforces their worldviews, demagogues craft their story in a way that does exactly that.

The way to react to this is not by trying to convince these people that their worldview is wrong. They will dismiss any attempt at this simply because their worldviews are closed. Any new information will be judged against these worldviews. The way to react – probably the only one – is to acknowledge their worldview, understand it on a deeper level, and then – if possible – attach to it in a way they can approve. You need to speak their language, give them a feeling of being heard and seen and of being in control.

As someone being capable of critical thinking, ask yourself: What’s right from their perspective? Why do they believe what they believe? What might have led them to believe it? What do they really care about on a deeper level? What are they afraid of? How can I acknowledge their fears? What would need to be true for them to accept a fact or a point of view while staying true to what matters to them?

It’s easy to dismiss different perspectives. It’s easy to laugh at people who just seem to not get it. It’s easy to rant about this or that worldview. But it doesn’t help very much. It’s much more helpful to acknowledge different perspectives, try to understand them, and act accordingly – not by manipulating but by offering a balanced, ethical perspective to attach to.

Zu schön, um wahr zu sein

Umstrittene Julia-Roberts-Kampagne von L’OréalWeil sie zu stark ge-photoshoped war, musste der französische Kosmetikkonzern L’Oréal in der letzten Woche eine Werbeanzeige mit Julia Roberts zurückziehen. Die Abgeordnete Jo Swinson hatte sich über diese (und eine weitere) Kampagne bei der britischen Werbeaufsicht beschwert.

Das beworbene Produkt „Lancôme New Teint Miracle“ solle „natürliches Licht“ herstellen, das „von schöner Haut komme“. Swinson reklamierte jedoch, die Bilder seien digital manipuliert und „nicht repräsentativ für die Ergebnisse, die das Produkt erzielen könne“. Der Einschätzung schloss sich die Werbeaufsicht an.

Ehrlichkeit in der Werbung

Swinsons Beschwerde ist Teil einer größeren Kampagne ihrer liberaldemokratischen Partei. Sie will Bildmanipulationen, die zu perfekte und unrealistische Bilder erzeugen, aus der Werbung verbannen, insbesondere wenn sie sich an Minderjährige wenden. „Wir müssen ein wenig Ehrlichkeit in Werbung bringen“, sagte Swinson, nachdem ihre Partei den entsprechenden Beschluss verabschiedet hatte.

L’Oréal steht natürlich nicht allein auf weiter Flur, eher im Gegenteil. Pech für den Konzern, dass sein Model, Julia Roberts, so berühmt ist und das Verbot dementsprechend hohe Wellen geschlagen hat.

Gold zum Glänzen bringen

Für mich ist es ein hervorragendes Beispiel dafür, wie wenig es lohnt, wenn man versucht, sich mit Blendeffekten und Übertreibungen in ein besseres Licht zu rücken. Ehrlichkeit zahlt sich aus, insbesondere, wenn im Falle einer Präsentation Sie selbst vorne stehen und mit Ihrem Namen für Ihren Vortrag einstehen.

Für gutes Marketing, und dazu gehören eben auch Präsentationen, braucht man zuallererst ein tolles Produkt. Das kann man durch eine spannende Story, beeindruckende Bilder oder Visualisierungen und einen packenden Vortrag auch überzeugend präsentieren.

Fehlt die Substanz und wollen Sie deshalb tricksen, um Ihr Publikum zu blenden, dann setzen Sie damit ihre Glaubwürdigkeit auf’s Spiel.

Verwandte Artikel

Diesmal kannst du mir wirklich glauben
Über Verantwortung
Tückische Wissenschaft: Stimme und Körpersprache

Spread the Word

Picture of Dr. Michael Gerharz

Dr. Michael Gerharz