Taking turns, and pauses
Lesson 4 of 6 in this module · about 7 minutes · Communication
The idea
A good conversation passes the turn back and forth, and a short neutral pause is part of it, not a problem to fix. Roughly balanced is the aim. Nobody counts words or seconds, and a long turn is fine when the other person has room to take the next one.
That a neutral pause can be left to stand, and that roughly balanced is the aim, is a course principle, not a research finding. The timing research below is about split-second gaps and does not test longer pauses.
In recorded everyday conversation, people in all ten languages studied tended to answer within a fraction of a second and avoid talking over each other, and the average gap between speakers differed across languages by only a few hundred milliseconds 1. The recordings were a small number of conversations per language, mostly informal talk. They were spoken, face-to-face and by phone, not typed and not on dates. A later review was written by an author of the original study, so the two are not independent 1.
In another paper, quicker replies from a partner went with feeling more connected, between friends and between strangers, and observers judged the same conversation as more connected when replies were quicker 2. This is Plausible: one research group, live spoken talk, and an association only. It does not show that speeding up would create connection, and it concerns fractions of a second, not a moment to think 2. This lesson does not ask you to answer faster.
A third finding comes from one undergraduate lab study, which found that in initial conversations, taking turns sharing tended to produce more liking than one person sharing while the other only listened 3. It is a single study with no dating outcome 3. It fits with handing the turn back, which is a course principle; it does not tell you how much anyone should talk.
This course does not read a pause as a message. A quiet moment might be a thought, a rest, a look at the view or the end of a topic, and the quiet alone cannot tell you which.
Why it matters
Spoken replies come quickly: in recorded everyday talk in ten languages, people tended to answer within a fraction of a second 1. Against that speed, a quiet moment can sound like a problem to fix. You may reach for a repair: a rush of words or an apology. Either hands the other person a job. A long turn with no gap can also leave the other person with no way in.
What it looks like
Example
On a car share to a friend’s fortieth birthday, you tell Thuy, 44, about your allotment for several minutes. You stop and say, “That is enough leeks. How do you know Sam?” She tells the story. Later the road goes quiet. You look at the fields, and after a while she says how green it is.
The same moment, handled the other way
Counterexample
Same drive. The road goes quiet, and you fill it at once: the traffic, the weather, a podcast you half remember, the traffic again. Thuy answers each with “Mm.” A normal quiet moment became a gap to plug, and she had no room to bring up anything herself.
The one thing to remember
The rule
Hand the turn back after a long one, and let a quiet moment stand without rushing to fill it.
Handing back can be a question, or a plain stop. A quiet moment is not a test of anyone, so you do not need to count it or wait it out. If you would like to know what the other person wants, you can ask lightly, “Would you like some music, or are you happy with the quiet?” Asking is always fine.
Try it now
Item 1 of this lesson’s set: The quiet motorway. Look at what she does, not at the length of the quiet.
In the real world (optional)
If you like, in a conversation you’re having anyway, notice once the urge to fill a pause, and let it pass without acting on it.
What this doesn’t tell you
The timing studies cover spoken talk in fractions of a second, so they say nothing about how long a pause is comfortable, about typed messages or about dates. A quiet moment can mean many things, and none of them can be read from the quiet alone. Nothing here says that silence works on anyone, or that it should be used on anyone.
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: Supported with caveatsIn recorded everyday conversation, people in all ten languages studied tended to answer within a fraction of a second and avoid talking over each other, and the average gap between speakers differed across languages by only a few hundred milliseconds.
Why this label
Several studies agree, with stated limits such as student samples or lab settings. Demonstrates: a 10-language study (Stivers 2009) found a shared pattern of avoiding overlap and keeping silence between turns short, with languages differing in average gap within a range of 250 ms of the cross-language mean; a review (Levinson 2016) describes responses as remarkably rapid. This is about gaps of well under a second in spoken talk. Marketing framing: advice that a slow or delayed answer signals confidence or keeps her chasing, for example the 'cat and the string' analogy in dating-frameworks-c12 and the warning about being 'too available' in dating-frameworks-c14; the studies here say nothing about deliberately slowing replies.
What it does not show
- Stivers 2009 compared a small number of conversations per language, mostly informal recorded talk; per-language sample sizes were not checked.
- No large independent replication was found for the cross-language gap figures.
- Spoken face-to-face and phone talk only, not typed messages or dating contexts.
- Levinson 2016 is a review by an author of the 2009 study, so the two are not independent.
Who it applies to
A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.
Sources
- Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., Hoymann, G., Rossano, F., de Ruiter, J. P., Yoon, K. E., Levinson, S. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
- Levinson, S. C. (2016). Turn-taking in Human Communication – Origins and Implications for Language Processing, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.
Evidence: PlausibleIn conversations between friends and between strangers, quicker replies from a partner went with feeling more connected, and observers judged the same conversation as more connected when the replies were quicker.
Why this label
One study, or indirect evidence from a nearby question. Demonstrates: Templeton et al. (2022) asked pairs to talk and rate felt connection; faster response times predicted connection across and within conversations, mainly through how fast the partner responded to the person, on a time scale below about 250 ms that people cannot consciously control. A third-party listening task showed the same timing difference changed judged connection. The felt-connection results are associations from live talk; only the third-party task manipulated timing. Marketing framing: reply speed as a status game, where waiting longer is said to show higher value (see dating-frameworks-c12 and dating-frameworks-c14); the study measured fractions of a second in live speech, so it cannot support that advice either way.
What it does not show
- Single paper from one research group; no large independent replication found.
- Live spoken conversation, not texting, so it does not show that minutes or hours of delay affect connection.
- Participant demographics and effect sizes were not seen in the abstract.
- Association with felt connection does not show that speeding up replies would create connection.
Who it applies to
A pattern across groups of people, not a statement about any one person.
Source
- Templeton, E. M., Chang, L. J., Reynolds, E. A., Cone LeBeaumont, M. D., Wheatley, T. (2022). Fast response times signal social connection in conversation, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
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.
More practice
The rest of the set, Taking turns, and pauses: five moments: 5 items, about 7 minutes. Say what you saw and heard, then what it supports, then the smallest sensible next step. 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.