Charm Upgrade

Learn · Everyday conversation

Starting a conversation

Lesson 1 of 6 in this module · about 6 minutes · Communication

The idea

An opener is one remark about what you are both seeing or doing; whether the conversation goes on is decided by what the other person does with it.

That a remark about the shared situation makes a good opener, and what “taking it up” looks like, is a course principle, not a research finding.

This lesson is not a task to approach anyone. It is for the moments when you already share a place, such as a queue, a garden workday or a bench, and you would like to say something, or when someone speaks to you first. Staying quiet is always allowed.

Here is what taking it up looks like: she adds something of her own, asks something back, or turns toward you. Not taking it up looks like a short polite answer and a return to what she was doing, earphones going back in, or a turn away. Both are fine answers. The second is her answer, not a failure of your remark.

Some research explains why the first sentence feels hard. In experiments, people predicted that talking to a stranger would be less pleasant than solitude, but commuters assigned to talk with a stranger reported a more positive trip than commuters assigned to sit alone 1. The experiments come from one lab, with commuters in a few US cities and a waiting-room sample, and the contact was brief and not romantic 1. People were assigned to talk, so the findings do not show how people who choose to approach strangers fare 1.

A second finding concerns how people judge a conversation afterward. After a first conversation, people tend to underestimate how much their partner liked them 2. The samples were lab strangers, students and workshop attendees, and the finding measures general liking, not romantic interest 2. It is a tendency across many people. It does not tell you what any one person thought, but it does mean a sense afterward that a conversation went flat is weak evidence on its own.

Why it matters

Without a plain way to start, you may let a chance to talk pass, or reach for a stock line that has nothing to do with the moment. In one lab’s studies in a few US cities, people predicted that talking to a stranger would be less pleasant than solitude, yet commuters assigned to talk reported a more positive trip 1. In this course, a remark about what you both see is the plainest way to start.

What it looks like

Example

In a slow hardware-store queue, you say to Mariko, 41, “This queue has not moved since I joined it.” She laughs, says she has counted the paint cans twice, and asks whether your job is big or small. You answer and listen.

The same moment, handled the other way

Counterexample

Same queue. Mariko says, “Yes,” and looks back at her phone. You add a second remark, then a third. A short answer and a return to her phone is a complete answer, and the extra remarks ignore it.

The one thing to remember

The rule

Say one thing about the situation you share, then let the reply decide whether the conversation goes on.

One remark is the whole opener. If the reply adds something, you can follow it. If the reply is short and polite, thank her, or say nothing more, and let the moment be what it was.

Try it now

Item 1 of this lesson’s set: Ten minutes in the queue. Look for what she does after your remark, not for what the remark was.

Open the exercise set

In the real world (optional)

If you like, notice once when you want to start a conversation and don’t, and what in the situation you shared you could have remarked on.

What this doesn’t tell you

No remark works every time, and nothing here shows that an opener leads to a conversation, to liking, or to anything else. The studies are about brief talk between strangers in labs and on commutes, not about who should speak to whom or when. Whether to speak at all is your choice.

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.
  1. Supported with caveatsPeople predict that talking to a stranger will be less pleasant than solitude, but when commuters were assigned to talk with a stranger they reported a more positive trip, and no less productive, than commuters assigned to stay alone.

    Why this label

    Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. Demonstrates: Epley and Schroeder (2014) ran experiments in trains and buses in which people assigned to connect reported a more positive experience than those assigned to stay disconnected, while separate people predicted the reverse; the authors attribute the gap partly to underestimating strangers' interest in talking, and a lab waiting-room study found being talked to was as positive as being told to talk. Marketing framing: none common. Kardas et al. (2022) found a similar underestimate for deeper conversation with strangers; see self-disclosure-questions-c3.

    What it does not show

    • Several experiments in one paper from one lab; no large preregistered replication was found in this check.
    • Commuters in a few US cities and a waiting-room lab sample; stranger contact was brief and not romantic.
    • Participants were assigned to connect, so the findings do not show how people who choose to approach strangers fare.
    • Self-reported mood, not independent ratings.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Sources

  2. Supported with caveatsAfter a first conversation, people tend to underestimate how much their partner liked them.

    Why this label

    Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. The 'liking gap' appeared in several settings: strangers in a lab, first-year dorm mates, and members of the public at a workshop. It lasted across conversation lengths and for months in new dorm relationships. Being liked more than you think is a common situation, not a sign of rejection.

    What it does not show

    • Samples were lab strangers, college students and workshop attendees, not dating contexts; it measures general liking, not romantic interest.
    • Reported mainly from one research programme; independent replication was not checked here.
    • A population-level tendency: it does not mean a particular partner is secretly interested.

    Who it applies to

    A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.

    Source

More practice

The rest of the set, Starting a conversation: five moments: 5 items, about 9 minutes. Say what you saw and heard, then what it supports, then the smallest sensible next step. Open the exercise set.