Flirty OSA
Lesson 5 of 10 in this module · about 7 minutes · Romantic communication
The idea
In flirty OSA, you observe something she did, share something true about you, and ask a question she can answer any way, with one part carrying the warmth. Marni Kinrys’s OSA (Observe, Share, Ask) is, as she describes it, a conversation method of observing, sharing and asking a question, and she says she created it and has taught it to over 10,000 men 1. That is her own account on her own site, so this course labels it a marketing claim 1. This course uses only the three-part structure, and the flirty version is its own adaptation.
The structure overlaps with research that has its own labels. In one lab study of undergraduates in initial conversations, taking turns sharing produced more liking than one person sharing while the other only listened 2. In several studies, conversations that moved gradually to more personal topics produced more closeness than small talk 3.
A friendly OSA observes the world, shares a common experience and asks for information. A flirty one has a little more of you and of her in it. Observe something she did, said or chose in front of you, and say what it made you notice. Not her body, and nothing you could only know by watching her for a long time. Share something true that answers the observation: a reaction, a small admission, a taste. Ask something playful or personal that she can answer in any direction, or leave.
Let one part carry the warmth. If all three reach for the most personal version at once, you have changed three things and cannot tell what she is responding to. In one large survey, people reported different styles of showing romantic interest, so flirting does not look the same for everyone: say it in words you would say 4.
Four things go wrong. Questions without a share are an interview, so take turns. An invented share is deception, and a heavy confession at a first meeting gives her much to carry. The closeness studies used sessions that both people had agreed to, so they do not show that heavy unasked disclosure is welcome 3. An observation that tells her you have been watching her puts her under watch, so observe what she chose to show. And a pressing ask that demands one answer puts her on the spot.
After the ask, stop and do not fill the pause. What she does next is the return signal from lesson M13-L4. Out loud, the three parts can come in any order, and sometimes the share is all you need.
Why it matters
Questions without a share make an interview, and taking turns sharing tended to produce more liking than one person sharing while the other only listened in one lab study 2. A sentence with a little of you in it gives her something to do with it.
What it looks like
Example
At a Saturday tree-planting, Ayesha, 33, gets the stubbornest root ball into its hole without losing patience. You say, “You talked that root ball into the hole like a negotiator. I would have given up and sat on it. Where did you learn to be that patient?” She answers in a sentence and returns to her spade. You return to the planting at the same warmth.
The same moment, handled the other way
Counterexample
Same moment. You fire off three questions, one after another: how long she has lived here, what she does, where she eats. She answers each briefly.
Nothing about you is on offer, so she has nothing to build on, and it feels like an interview.
The one thing to remember
The rule
Observe what she did, share something true about you, ask a question she can answer any way, then stop.
Choose which part moves one notch and keep the others friendly. A short answer and a move on is not a no; carry on at the same warmth. A no, or a step away, ends that line, and going back to friendly is never a failure.
Try it now
Item 1 of this lesson’s set: The small painting.
In the real world (optional)
If you like, take a film or TV scene where characters meet and write one OSA turn for it, with the warmth in one part. Read it aloud and change any word you would not say.
What this doesn’t tell you
It does not tell you that flirty OSA works, or that any observation or question produces interest. The method’s own evidence is the seller’s account of it, a marketing claim. The research on sharing and closeness concerns lab conversations, usually between strangers who agreed to take part, and it measures liking and closeness, not romantic interest. Her answer decides what happens.
Why do we believe this?
Each numbered mark in the text opens the evidence behind that sentence. Every claim in this course carries one of five labels.
- Well supported
- A meta-analysis or several independent studies agree, with no serious failure to replicate.
- Supported with caveats
- Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings.
- Plausible
- One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question.
- Speculative
- An idea or argument that hasn't been directly tested.
- Marketing claim
- Something a seller says about their product, without published evidence.
Evidence: Marketing claimMarni Kinrys describes OSA as a conversation method of observation, sharing and asking a question, which she says she created and has taught to over 10,000 men.
Why this label
Something a seller says about their product, without published evidence. Creator attribution and reach are self-reported. The structure overlaps self-disclosure-questions and responsiveness, which cover reciprocal disclosure and follow-up questions.
What it does not show
- Self-reported reach, unverified
- Step-by-step detail was not on the free pages read
Who it applies to
Depends on the setting and the people involved.
Sources
- Kinrys, M. (2013). How To Talk To Women Using OSA Formula | Wing Girl Method, winggirlmethod.com.
- Kinrys, M. (2016). Effortless Approach O.S.A : A Tool That Helps You Start Conversations With Women - Marni's Wing Girl Method, winggirlmethod.com.
- Kinrys, M. (2014). Great Opener To Say To Women - Marni's Wing Girl Method, winggirlmethod.com.
Evidence: PlausibleIn initial conversations, taking turns sharing tended to produce more liking than one person sharing while the other only listens.
Why this label
One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question. Pairs of undergraduates in 12-minute interactions liked each other more when disclosure alternated than when one person did all the disclosing. This supports matching your sharing to the other person's pace rather than front-loading.
What it does not show
- Single study sample of undergraduates in a lab; no dating outcome measured.
- Abstract-level information came from a search summary; effect sizes not seen.
- A related 2015 follow-up by the same team exists but was not read.
Who it applies to
A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.
Sources
- Sprecher, S., Treger, S., Wondra, J. D., Hilaire, N., Wallpe, K. (2013). Taking turns: Reciprocal self-disclosure promotes liking in initial interactions, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.
- Collins, N. L., Miller, L. C. (1994). Self-disclosure and liking: A meta-analytic review, Psychological Bulletin.
Evidence: Supported with caveatsConversations that gradually moved to more personal topics produced more closeness, and deeper conversations felt less awkward and more connecting than people expected.
Why this label
Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. A 45-minute escalating-disclosure procedure generated more closeness than small talk, and later experiments showed strangers over-predicted awkwardness of deep talk and under-predicted partners' interest in their disclosures.
What it does not show
- Outcome in the 1997 procedure was self-rated closeness between strangers, not romantic love or attraction.
- Studies 2-3 in the same paper found no effect of attitude matching or an explicit goal of getting close.
- Lab and online samples, largely Western and student or crowdsourced.
- Sessions were structured and mutually agreed; they do not show that unsolicited deep disclosure in a first meeting is welcome.
Who it applies to
A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.
Sources
- Aron, A., Melinat, E., Aron, E. N., Vallone, R. D., Bator, R. J. (1997). The Experimental Generation of Interpersonal Closeness: A Procedure and Some Preliminary Findings, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
- Kardas, M., Kumar, A., Epley, N. (2022). Overly shallow?: Miscalibrated expectations create a barrier to deeper conversation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Evidence: PlausiblePeople report different styles of showing romantic interest, such as traditional, physical, sincere, playful and polite, so flirting does not look the same for everyone.
Why this label
One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question. Hall and colleagues' survey of about 5,000 adults supported five self-reported styles. The physical, sincere and playful styles went with more dating success; women scored higher on all styles except playful.
What it does not show
- Self-report survey of a large adult sample; country not checked
- The inventory was later revised by the same group
- Correlations with dating success cannot show that a style causes success
- Style labels describe tendencies, not what any individual's behaviour means
- Styles are self-reported; the study does not show how observers read each style.
Who it applies to
A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.
Source
- Hall, J. A., Carter, S., Cody, M. J., Albright, J. M. (2010). Individual Differences in the Communication of Romantic Interest: Development of the Flirting Styles Inventory, Communication Quarterly.
More practice
The rest of the set, Flirty OSA exercises: build it, then one notch: 2 items, about 5 minutes. Build a turn from something you notice, something you share and a question. Open the exercise set.
Go further
Outside talks, videos and pages on the topics this lesson cites. Nothing from them loads until you follow a link, and a link is not an endorsement: read the note under each one.
Vanessa Van Edwards: 10 Quirky Questions to Ask On Your Next Date
Example open-ended, curiosity-led questions to ask on a date, relevant to responsiveness and to restarting a conversation that has stalled.
Keep in mind. Light entertainment format; questions are prompts, not a technique that guarantees liking.
Vanessa Van Edwards: Why Women Never Make The First Move!
Van Edwards on who tends to initiate in courtship and the small opening signals that precede an approach; read the video before linking to confirm the claims shown.
Keep in mind. Popular-science framing; check any quoted statistic against the primary study before the app repeats it.
Vanessa Van Edwards: The 5 Flirting Styles: Which One Do You Speak?
Summary of the five flirting styles from Jeffrey Hall's research (physical, traditional, sincere, polite, playful) and how style mismatch can cause missed or misread signals.
Keep in mind. Secondary summary of academic work; the app should cite Hall's research directly.