Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection by Charles Duhigg

Supercommunicators: How to Unlock the Secret Language of Connection Reviews

• 
  Liong

  This book shows us how to become Supercommunicators.
  
  Supercommunicators are individuals who consistently excel at conveying their ideas and connecting with others.
  
  We should ask ourselves 3 important questions in most of the conversations:
  
  1. What's this really about?
  
  2. How do we feel?
  
  3. Who are we?
  
  Specific techniques and approaches are discovered, offering practical strategies to improve communication.
  
  This book is a valuable resource for anyone seeking to enhance their communication skills.
  
  I need Daniel Kahneman's System 2 thinking to digest this book.
• 
  Megan Vick

  Synopsis: Supercommunicators looks at what makes some people exceptional at connecting with others. Executives, politicians, community leaders, and CIA operatives were all interviewed and highlighted in Supercommunicators to prove that communication is more about listening and making others feel heard rather than speaking.
  
  Why does this book beguile? After his book, The Power of Habit, I was incredibly excited to get Duhigg's’ latest book as an ARC. I love learning about communication and ways to communicate better and more effectively. Supercommunicators is a great book if you’ve never explored material around empathy, listening, or communication. If you’re looking for a first book to launch you into the world of more effective communication, Supercommunicators will help you immensely.
  
  However, if you’ve read books like Dare to Lead by Brene Brown or Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss, most of this material will repeat what you’ve read. Because I’ve studied this material for a while, I found nothing groundbreaking or noteworthy. There were many good reminders of principles already learned, but nothing revelatory. I also feel strongly this book can be 100-150 pages shorter. Some of the anecdotes went on for far too long and felt disjointed from the point trying to be made.
• 
  Nilguen

  This is my first book by Charles Duhigg. I have heard so much about his previous books around adjusting your habits to reach your goals. For years I have obsessively read business books and articles related to my field of work. Communication has always been pivotal in reaching goals in a corporate environment. This book is elaborating the various communication styles based on the following three elements:
  
  "What´s this really about?"
  "How do we feel?"
  "Who are we?"
  
  Training your amygdala NOT to take over a conversation with sudden emotions, but rather manage your conversation styles according to the above elements is easier said than done.
  Therefore, I really loved the examples and consequences that Duhigg elaborated, when the conversation is not led in style. The examples vary from convincing agents in the CIA right the work culture of Netflix and to private households.
  
  Obviously, asking questions as well as listening are major skills that a human being needs to master to lead an effective and efficient conversation.
  
  I also love the the win-win approach instead of the outdated approach to come out of a conversation as a so called "winner" whilst making your counterpart feel as a "loser".
  
  Communication is a field that I always see room for improvement in my work as well private environment. Hence, I feel lucky to have read this ARC. Thanks to NetGalley and Charles Duhigg.
  
  Crystal-clear recommendation for everyone who seeks to improve their conversation style as well as manage difficult conversations.
  
  
  Find me on instagram
• 
  Meike

  Duhigg's book is so fun because it explains scientific findings with real-life examples, which renders the text entertaining and the findings easy to remember. At its core, the message is that we should analyze all communication regarding whether it's practical (positions vs. goals, much like in mediation), emotional (issues vs. feelings), and social. I especially want to emphasize that Duhigg employs the factor of identity as a chance to talk about what connects us, not what divides us, and I wish all participants in the great identity politics discussion would see the merit in this: Listening and bridging gaps creates the opportunity to find common ground and be heard in return.
  
  These three areas are illuminated in a whole variety of situation, from the discussion around vaccines to the marriage counselor to the courtroom and many other environments. I listened to the audiobook, and the language of this pop science book is excellent, as it allows laypeople in the field of psychology (like me) to learn and have fun while being taken seriously. Actually, I assumed that Duhigg was a psychologist himself, but as it turns out, he's a journalist who does his job of explaining relevant issues to the public exceptionally well.
  
  This is how popular non-fiction should be.
• 
  Anita Pomerantz

  I never really read books that I would consider "self-help", but this title spoke to me, and I grabbed it on NetGalley.
  
  Duhigg's advice on how to connect with others seems pretty straightforward and in some ways, intuitive, but he uses fascinating examples to illuminate the lessons. I like case studies, and Duhigg doesn't boil them down to the point where all you get is a synopsis. These cases really do show the reader the pitfalls of not being more conscious, more thoughtful about how you communicate.
  
  I found the afterward to be the best part of this book. Duhigg shares a story about a longitudinal study that tracked people over a lifetime, and he selects two people's lives to highlight the importance of relationships to happiness. This beautiful afterward reminds us why communication is so critical to our lives and why being more cognizant about how we do it can be life altering.
• 
  Wick Welker

  Decent book about how to connect with someone and understand what kind of conversation you're having with people. Is it a problem solving conversation? Or is simply about emotional connection, venting or talking about identities? These are difficult things to tease out if you're not aware of the tells in a conversation and you can walk away talking with someone with complete and utter befuddlement. Don't problem solve when someone only wants to be heard. Listening isn't just closing your mouth and looking at someone, it's much more active. You can easily and unwittingly attack someone's identity simply by making casual talk with them. This was a nice and brief read that everyone should check out. Another similar book I enjoyed was How to Know a Person by David Brooks.
• 
  India M. Clamp

  Not a bore. It’s a vital toolbox filled with the methodologies to improve, augment and illuminate relationships via communication. This book is on the “New York Times” best seller list. Face to face communications are best---given 90% of communication is non-verbal. This was a fun read.
• 
  Bkwmlee

  As I’ve mentioned in previous reviews, books classified under the “self-help” category can be very much a hit or miss for me. This is partly because overall, it already takes me longer to read nonfiction books and with so many books on my TBR, the time pressure can be quite palpable. More significantly though, when the book contains a “self-help” element, I feel even more pressure to actually “get” something out of the book in order for me to feel like it was worth my while to read. This last part depends a lot on how the “self-help” element is presented, which could go in either the “yes, this resonates with me” or “no, most of this doesn’t apply to me” direction (of course I always hope for the former).
  
  In this case, Charles Duhigg’s newest book Supercommunicators definitely fell into the “resonant” category for me, even though I will admit that I was a tad hesitant about the subject matter at first. I actually decided to pick up this book not because of the subject (believe me, as an introvert with social anxiety who prefers to be alone rather than be around others, reading about how to better communicate is the last thing I want to do, lol), but rather because I had really enjoyed Duhigg’s The Power of Habit (which was massively popular when it first came out in 2012) and so was hoping to find more of the same. While I have to say that this book turned out to be quite different from the habit book in terms of scope and topic, there were some similarities that made it as enjoyable and interesting a read as that one. First and foremost, I like that the book is written in a straightforward, easy to understand way, with practical, real world examples that felt both realistic and familiar. I also like how he formatted the book (similarly to his habit book) where he would structure each chapter around a case study and present details that tied the study to the particular concept he was discussing. Most of all though, I like the journalistic format where it felt at times that I was reading a series of well-written articles (the type of long-form story-like narratives often found in newsmagazines) — of course this is not surprising given that Duhigg is a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter / journalist (and yes, he writes for newsmagazines in addition to newspapers).
  
  For me, one of the things that can be a “deal-breaker” when I read self-help books is the author’s tone, which comes across in their style of writing. Personally, I can’t stand self-help books that make me feel like I’m being lectured or talked down to or that subtly imply that I’m missing out if I don’t apply the concepts from the book right then and there. I’m the type of person who needs to let concepts and ideas sink in slowly and gradually before I can derive meaning from them, so I’m not keen on books that feel pushy or overly-preachy. Duhigg writes in a way where his enthusiasm for the subject shines through, but there’s also enough neutrality and restraint where it doesn’t feel like he’s trying to push me toward one direction or another (at least not overtly anyway, lol). He also writes with a sense of humor, which I always appreciate, especially in nonfiction books.
  
  Even though some of the concepts covered in this book I felt wouldn’t necessarily apply to me, there was plenty that I resonated with…and to me surprise, one of the concepts that Duhigg advocated in the book was something I was already doing for years — I guess I was applying “super communicator” techniques without even knowing it!
  
  This is a book that fans of Duhigg’s works will undoubtedly enjoy. Even if you’re not a fan though, there’s still plenty to enjoy. If you’ve read The Power of Habit , the structure of the book will definitely be recognizable (and if you liked that one, most likely this one will appeal as well). I just found out that Duhigg also wrote a book on productivity and few years after the habit one — I’m definitely interested in checking that book out at some point!
  
  Received ARC from Random House via NetGalley.
• 
  Ted Richards

  I'm not too sure what I think of this one.
  
  Charles Duhigg seems like a smart guy and is a good writer. Supercommunicators is well researched for what it is, and Duhigg has clearly put a lot of work into the book. As a whole, it is well written, easy to follow along with and helpfully provides an accompanying pdf with the audiobook, which is always a plus.
  
  Duhigg outlines four tips to 'having better conversations': (1) figure out what type of conversation you all want, (2) treat every conversation as a negotiation, (3) determine the emotions underneath the conversation and (4) address any identities at play within the conversation. Duhigg outlines these strategies very well. It is clear from the start of each chapter what the message is. His stories are convincingly told and everything is kept light enough that these tips feel more like signposts than cast iron rules.
  
  To address the elephant in the room, this is a self-help book. I'm fundamentally opposed to the idea of 'self-help', or anything that might possibly improve me as a person on purpose. But I try, at least once a year, to dip into the pool of the second most popular type of writing behind romance. Duhigg's book is a fine example of the genre. It is intentionally vague and full of impressionist sentiment that sounds good on paper but has no practical or specific application. This is frustrating. Particularly in points (2) and (3), Duhigg's "advice" would make fortune cookies, greeting cards and horoscope writers blush. Moreover, the whole use of the term 'supercommunicator' is redundant, not simply because Duhigg himself stops using the term very much after the first couple of chapters.
  
  I could go on. But there is a more interesting debate here. Halfway through I noticed that I was growing increasingly dismissive of Duhigg's reliance on research and studies. This was primarily because they were studies attempting to quantify relationships and communication, which are as difficult to measure as the emotions of an octopus. My intuition is I won't be the only one who turns their nose up at such studies, and that took me down a wondering about why we put so much stock into scientific research compared to sociological research. Duhigg's reliance on studies and experiments is no more egregious than popular science books that rely on university papers and novel laboratory work.
  
  The final part is the most effective. Duhigg explores the reasons why conversations around identity are tough to navigate. It is here where he actually offers something that might practically benefit a wide part of the population. The arguments were strongly made and, despite still turning into a over juiced watercolour at the end, generally stuck to the points Duhigg wanted to make. I'd cautiously recommend the book for the final point alone, if only becasue it actually offers something worthwhile to the wider issues of identity politics today. Still, maybe check if you can rent it from a library, or borrow it off your pal who uses Huel.
  
  In all seriousness, I am conflicted on this. A big part of it is my own prejudice against self-help book and Duhigg's writing has put me in a slight dilemma. I do not rate the vague platitudes or reductionist platitudes. But somewhere amongst the miasma of nothingness there are some genuinely interesting discussions happening. Duhigg's skill in making it just vague enough so that any incorrect application of these 'skills' cannot backfire specifically on him is also pretty appealing.
  
  On the whole, if you like self-help books and are interested in communication, there are plenty of worse books out there. Otherwise, spend your income on things that actually help you; booze, takeaways and donating to charity.
• 
  Amanda

  Supercommunicators is a fascinating exposition on the art of communicating well. From the first page, the book is both informative and entertaining as Charles Duhigg weaves storytelling and science to build the case for effective communication.
  
  The book opens with the explanation that within every conversation is three distinct discussions that move fluidly from one to the next: analytical, emotional, and identity based. In the following chapters, he walks the reader through conversational pitfalls, and then he breaks down how to recognize each type of conversation and tips on navigating that discussion thoughtfully. In order to drive the points home in each chapter, he chooses hot button topics affecting the world today to demonstrate how a super communicator might engage in tricky discussions without alienating- these topics include: gun control, vaccines, political party, race and prejudice, parenting minefields, and one very fascinating Birds Eye view into a jury room discussion, etc.
  
  This book is a must read for humans. So many thought provoking insights packed into one succinct, very approachable book.
  
  I’d like to thank Random House Publishing Group and NetGalley for the eARC in exchange for my honest review. All thoughts and opinions are my own.
• 
  Lisa Konet

  ****UNPOPULAR OPINION***
  
  I really wanted to like this and I tried. Let me explain my issues with this book:
  
  First off, with the caliber of writing that Charles Duhigg had with his book "The Power of Habit," I expected more more. His anecdotes, reasoning were messy.
  
  If this was meant to help people be "supercommunicators" the content would have been better and made more sense for people who struggle with good communication (ex: an 40-something female with Aspergers). Instead this was tailoered to executives and people in the legal field. This book IS NOT EVERYDAY PEOPLE!
  
  Just like another reviewer, I too feel his "three kinds" and "rules of four" were contradictory and also amateur.
  
  I struggled reading this. Very glad it was a library book because I would have been pissed off wasting money on this.
  
  Cannot recommend. Do not waste your time. There are better books on communication.
  
  1/2 star.
• 
  Sebastian Gebski

  No star rating, as this clearly was NOT a book for me (I wasn't aware of that when reaching out for it).
  
  Why not for me? This is a book about American communication for Americans. It relies on American culture and social patterns common to American society. While some general concepts are universal enough to apply in other geographies, the majority of "tactical advice" described in this book would not work in the EU (or Middle East, or Far East, or ...). For example: if you encounter someone in a professional situation, a person who you do not know privately, if such a person starts "opening itself" or asking you about private stuff ("Where is your favorite vacation place?") - the effect will be completely different in US and let's take: Nordic or Slavic countries.
  
  Some of the chapters were actually quite interesting (e.g. the one about Big Bang Theory or Netflix), but there were also some controversies - mostly in the final chapters about the identity. I was literally rolling my eyes reading through the chapter about identity's impact on test results (pure speculation, effect can be attributed to many actual causes, there are many counter-examples).
  
  TBH, I also disagreed a lot with the thesis presented in the Netflix chapter. It was supposed to be about communication, but it ended up being about snowflake-like fragility, an outrage mindset, and a lack of logical thinking (throwing a senior guy out because he has QUOTED a racist word, c'mon). Anyway, feel free to judge it for yourself.
  
  The main concept of this book - to communicate with someone, you need to be able to empathize with them - is absolutely correct. But I didn't learn much beyond that obvious fact here. Sadly.
• 
  Katherine

  Overall this was good, it just took me forever to read because I kept getting a little bored reading it. There isn’t anything in here I didn’t already know, although the examples were interesting. The chapters were also a little too long and made it hard to commit to reading through onto the next one.
• 
  Andrea

  I built my entire career around fostering communication. It’s that important. Connecting meaningfully to others with understanding and compassion IS EVERYTHING.
  
  This book, along with Never Split The Difference by Chris Voss, offered me new perspectives. Both are incredible!
• 
  Emily

  4.5 stars. This is my third book by Charles Duhigg, and probably my favorite. While I found it interesting and the information useful, I also admit to having a bias toward books that help improve communication and relationships. This one teaches the skills necessary to be a “supercommunicator”—the type of person whose interest and communication style makes you feel better after engaging with them. He discusses how to hear more clearly and create more meaningful, connecting conversations. I liked learning about neural entrainment, when we click with someone and our brain activity synchronizes. I also loved the response “Do you want to be helped, hugged, or heard?” to help understand what people are looking for. True connections, the ones that heal, bring joy, and improve health, require deep questions, vulnerability, and reciprocity. Lots of good information that I will note below. Would recommend.
  
  Notes/Quotes:
  
  -Groups with a dominant leader had the least amount of neuro synchrony
  
  -Supercommunicators adjust their communication to match their partner’s; the happiest couples mirror each other’s speaking styles
  
  -Perspective-taking versus perspective-seeking by asking the right questions
  
  -Importance and power of vulnerability; deep questions that allow us to truly open up to really see and be seen; effectiveness requires reciprocity/matching vulnerabilities
  
  -Successful conversations ask each other the kinds of questions that draw out needs, goals, beliefs, and emotions. How they feel about life, as opposed to facts about life; draw out values and experiences; ask someone how they feel about something and then follow up with questions that reveal how you feel; ask people how they feel and reciprocate the vulnerability they share with us
  
  -A good question after loss: After losing his dad he would have loved if someone asked him: “What was your dad like?” Instead nobody asked because they weren’t sure what to say.
  
  -Connecting during conflict; prove you’re listening; convince them it’s safe to tell their story; sharing personal stories is the key
  
  -Happy couples control themselves, the environment, and the boundaries of the conflict--things they can control together, vs trying to control each other
  
  -“It’s a complicated world. You need friends that are different if you want to figure it out.”
  
  -Communicating with people you disagree with—the aim is not winning, but understanding:
  1-Looping for understanding
  2-Find specific points of agreement
  3-Temper your claims
  
  -4 Rules to improve online communication:
  1-Overemphasize politeness
  2-Underemphasize sarcasm
  3-Express more gratitude, deference, greetings, apologies, and hedges
  4-Avoid criticism in public forums
  
  -Who are we--pros and cons of social identities; Don’t just view the world through one of our identity lenses--Remember we all contain multitudes; Focus on identities we share
  
  -How to make the hardest conversations safer:
  1-Prepare for conversations
  2-Just because you are worried about a conversation doesn’t mean you should avoid
  3-Least power begins
  4-Avoid generalizations and speak from personal experiences
  
  -Compromise is not always possible, often the best we can hope for is understanding
  
  -Explore if identities are important to this discussion
  
  -Research into successful conversations reveal:
  1-Paying attention to someone's body alongside their voice helps us hear them better
  2- How we ask a question sometimes matters more than what we ask
  3-We're better off acknowledging social differences rather than pretending that they don't exist
  4-Every discussion is influenced by emotions, no matter how rational the topic at hand
  5-When starting a dialogue, it helps to think of that discussion as a negotiation where the prize is figuring out what everyone wants
  6-The most important goal of any conversation is to connect
  
  -Key ideas to improve communication:
  1-“Many discussions are actually three different conversations--There are practical decision-making conversations that focus on what's this really about. There are emotional conversations which ask how do we feel? And there are social conversations that explore who are we?” We need to identify which conversation we are having so we can utilize that set of logic and skills and communicate effectively.
  2-“Our goal for the most meaningful discussions should be to have a learning conversation. Specifically, we want to learn how the people around us see the world and help them understand our perspectives and turn.”
  
  -“The most important difference between high centrality participants and everyone else was that the high centrality participants were constantly adjusting how they communicated in order to match their companions. They subtly reflected shifts in other people's moods and attitudes. When someone got serious, they matched that seriousness. When a discussion went light, they were the first to play along.”
  
  -4 basic rules for meaningful conversations:
  1-Pay attention to what kind of conversation is occurring
  2-Share your goals and ask what others are seeking
  3-Ask about others feelings and share your own
  4-Explore if identities are important to this discussion
  
  -Looping for understanding:
  1-Ask questions
  2-Summarize what you heard
  3-Ask if you got it right.
  **Repeat this loop again and again until everyone agrees that we all understand
  
  -“Sometimes people don't know how to listen…They think listening means debating, and if you let someone else make a good point, you're doing something wrong. But listening means letting someone else tell their story, and then, even if you don't agree with them, trying to understand why they feel that way.”
  
  -“These identities nudge us and others to make assumptions. They can suddenly cause us to exaggerate the differences between groups and overemphasize the similarities of things in the same group. As one researcher from the University of Manchester wrote in 2019, ‘Our social identities push us unthinkingly to see people like us, what psychologists call our Ingroup, as more virtuous and intelligent, while those who are different, the outgroup, are suspicious, unethical and possibly threatening.’ Social identities help us relate to others, but they can also perpetuate stereotypes and prejudice.”
  
  -“The most important variable in determining whether someone ended up happy and healthy or miserable and sick was how satisfied they were in their relationships.”; good relationships improve physical health, mental health, and longevity.
• 
  Brittany Shields

  “whether we call it love, or friendship, or simply having a great conversation, achieving connection—authentic, meaningful connection—is the most important thing in life.”
  
  This is a really insightful book on how we can better communicate with others. Duhigg uses lots of research studies and real life examples from places like Netflix, a jury room, The Big Bang Theory, NASA, and the CIA to show the principles in action.
  
  By looking at typically controversial conversations on topics like gun control, vaccines, and race, we can see how employing these principles really changes the dialogue and allows people who normally disagree to understand each other and bring meaningful connection where we desperately need it.
  
  With the increase of internet use we see a decrease in civil discourse. Everywhere you look you see hatred, people talking past each other, and a complete disregard for people’s humanity, values, and experiences. It’s all about winning, shaming, or forcing belief assimilation by threatening social reputation calamity if you don’t.
  
  I think every human should read this book. We may not be able to change the world, but it will do a lot to make our relationships better and stronger and will help us be people who desire and can put into practice peace and consideration in our conversations in a highly polarized environment.
  
  (Plus it’s just really interesting!)
  
  
  That’s why Duhigg ultimately wrote this book.
  
  “Why was it that, at times, I had so much trouble hearing what someone was trying to tell me? Why was I so quick to get defensive, or to glide past the emotions people were clearly trying to share? Why, sometimes, did I talk so much and listen so little? Why hadn’t I understood when a friend needed comfort rather than advice? How could I put my kids aside when they so clearly wanted to be with me? Why did I struggle to explain what was inside my own head? These struck me as meaningful questions, worthy of exploration, and I wanted answers.”
  
  Research that studied people over decades of time (that has been replicated in other studies) shows that one of the main factors correlated to a long and happy life is deep connections with family and friends.
  
  How do deep connections happen but in meaningful conversations and communications.
  
  
  The biggest takeaway from this book is to use these principles to make deeper connections and to see the humanity and hear the experiences of those we disagree with.
  
  
  “Over the past two decades, a body of research has emerged that sheds light on why some of our conversations go so well, while others are so miserable. These insights can help us hear more clearly and speak more persuasively.”
  
  The principles he talks about in this book are not just for familial relationship or just for the workplace. They can be universally applied. Some of them were new to me and others I’ve read in other books or heard from my own therapist and I can attest that they do make a difference when I use them.
  
  The principles can be broken down into three major areas:
  
  - What’s This Really About? (practical, decision-making conversations)
  - How Do We Feel? (emotional conversations)
  - Who Are We? (social conversations that involve our identities)
  
  Conversations are fluid so these may overlap in a conversation as you get deeper. But if we aren’t ‘in’ the same conversation as the person we’re talking to, we’re not going to make a connection and we’re not going to get very far before things start to devolve.
  
  
  It’s no surprise that to communicate well requires listening, asking questions, and talking about our feelings.
  
  “to become a supercommunicator, all we need to do is listen closely to what’s said and unsaid, ask the right questions, recognize and match others’ moods, and make our own feelings easy for others to perceive.”
  
  In this book Duhigg gives some guidelines on what kinds of questions are helpful and what kinds aren’t. For example:
  
  “Questions about facts (“Where do you live?” “What college did you attend?”) are conversational dead-ends. They don’t draw out values or experiences. They don’t invite vulnerability. However, those same inquiries, recast slightly (“What do you like about where you live?” “What was your favorite part of college?”), invite others to share their preferences, beliefs, and values.”
  
  We may hear ‘share our feelings’ and bristle about what that means or looks like, but when you read the examples in the book it’s not so bad and it turns conversations of small-talk (which no one really likes) into conversations that actually move someplace.
  
  I also liked that after each chapter he included a section called ‘A Guide to Using These Ideas’ that reiterated the points he had made earlier and what it would look like in real conversation. There were often graphs to illustrate as well.
  
  The flow of the book was easy to follow and I thought he used a lot of really interesting research studies and case-studies to exemplify each point which keeps those engaged who don’t typically enjoy psycholgoical concepts.
  
  
  
  There are aspects of this topic that feel borderline manipulative, especially when we think of negotiations or persuading someone. One example he uses is about vaccinations (which may put some people off). He talks about a doctor who had patients that were anti-vaxxers and he struggled with communicating to them the reasons and data as to why they should vaccinate their children.
  
  He realized it wasn’t necessarily about the facts, but about their mistrust of doctors or their resistance to government control. He found that when he made personal connections and they were able to see him as a father too, not just a doctor, and when he set aside his tendency to think or talk in a way that says ‘I’m smarter than you’, they were more willing to hear his advice.
  
  I get that, but I also feel like knowing someone is figuring out the best way to persuade you also makes you feel distrustful about their motivations. Which is why, though I’m not anti-vax, I opted not to do the Covid vaccine.
  
  They claimed data, but it was still new and long-term data was not available. Not only was the ‘choice’ framed in a way that made it seem like taking the vaccine was the only choice and the absolute right choice, but that anyone who chose not to didn’t care about humanity.
  
  While I’m willing to consider that the vaccine may have helped, I’m not convinced. And the sheer force and condescension that went along with it does not help someone trust but feels rather like manipulation.
  
  I admit that distrust is often hard to overcome and not all persuasion is manipulation or immoral, but I just think that some of these conversations might start to feel that way. Playing to emotions to convince someone to trust you.
  
  So an essential component to all of this is genuine care and concern and desire to know someone, not creating a good communication as a means to an end.
  
  
  
  This labeling of groups of people (as above) is another major component of communication. And I think that comes into play most prominently in political discourse.
  
  I think this tactic has been employed by both right and left-wing groups and only keeps people polarized.
  
  “Over the last decade, the number of Americans who say they are “deeply angry” at the other political party has increased sharply, to almost 70 percent of the electorate. Roughly half the nation believes those with differing political beliefs are “immoral,” “lazy,” “dishonest,” and “unintelligent.””
  
  It goes like this: you think that one thing? Then you are this kind of person and all these other things are true about you.
  
  For example: I saw on a book review Facebook group a person shared the book
  Irreversible Damage by Abigail Shrier and commented that they thought it was a thought-provoking and alarming book. I read the book and think the same thing, but I knew the comments section would have some dissenters. I was shocked by the things people were saying about the person who shared it. They called the person hateful, demanded they be blocked, that this person was what was wrong with the world and more of the same vitriol. They placed this person in a group called ‘Hateful, evil bigot’ simply because they shared their opinion of a book that happens to contain beliefs they don’t share. They didn’t know anything about this person’s values, emotions, or experiences.
  
  And to offer an example from ‘the other side’: Someone shares that they believe abortion should be a legal right. You will see people commenting that that person is a murderer and that they hate Jesus and don’t believe in the sanctity of human life. That also puts them in a group without any knowledge of that person’s values, emotions, or experiences.
  
  Good communication is not really about proving yourself right, but about seeing the people you’re talking to as human beings with their own values, emotions, and life experiences that we should seek to understand. It diffuses a controversial conversation and helps you see them as the complex and nuanced person they are, not a one-dimensional caricature or stereotype.
  
  “Identity threats typically emerge because we generalize: We lump people into groups (“Lawyers are all dishonest”) or assign them traits they loathe (“Everyone who voted for that guy is a racist”). These generalizations take us—our unique perspectives and complicated identities—out of the conversation. They make us one-dimensional.”
  
  Tribal mentality and in-group, out-group psychology is proven stuff and hard at work in our cultural climate. We can’t help but group and label people, trusting and thinking highly of those who share our beliefs or look like us and mistrusting and looking down on those who do not.
  
  
  Duhigg shares an experiment people conducted to see if people on both sides of the gun control debate could be in a room and have civil conversation. Long story short- they could! When they shared about vulnerable parts of their lives and heard and saw each other as human beings, even though they didn’t change their minds, they changed HOW they communicated with one another. The other side was no longer ‘evil’ but were good people just like us that wanted good things too. There was just disagreements on how those good things would come to be.
  
  “They think listening means debating, and if you let someone else make a good point, you’re doing something wrong. But listening means letting someone else tell their story and then, even if you don’t agree with them, trying to understand why they feel that way.”
  
  
  I do think there are some limitations here. In a lot of conversations decisions have to be made and laws need to be written. At some point we have to come to an agreement. We have to determine what is true or right.
  
  If we’re just making connections with people to gain understanding and learn about them, there are no stakes or decisions. But we still have to make decisions about who can own guns or who can get married and not all viewpoints are equal.
  
  This is where I start to have questions. As I read this book I pondered-
  
  What is ‘understanding’?
  
  I would argue that understanding doesn’t require agreement but I think perhaps we operate out of a different definition of understanding than we think. I think a lot of people don’t feel understood unless someone ends up agreeing with them- ‘They must have misunderstood me or I must have said it wrong if they still don’t agree with me, because if they really understood, they would see why I’m right or why this is true.’
  
  What does it look like to come to an understanding when the topics being discussed are identity conversations and the disagreeing parties are approaching the topic with very different worldviews and standards of morality?
  
  How do we move forward in good conversation if we listen to people’s feelings but their feelings are based on lies?
  
  And I think I’m reaching outside the scope of this book, especially since I am trying to look at this information through a biblical lens which is not what the author was attempting to do. But definitely gives you some things to think about.
  
  
  
  A couple things that stood out to me because I’ve used them in my own marriage are looping and narratives.
  
  A woman enrolled at Harvard Law school shared that she realized that the purpose of talking about conflict wasn’t about winning but determining “why this fight has emerged and what is fueling it, as well as the stories they are all telling themselves about why this conflict persists.”
  
  ‘The stories they are telling themselves’ is such a big but subtle thing. An example from my personal life- My husband looks at the dinner I made and says ‘is this what it usually looks like?’
  
  The story I tell myself, which is rooted in my own insecurities about being a good wife, is that my husband is criticizing the meal I worked hard to make and doesn’t appreciate what I’ve done and thinks it’s a bad meal. That’s the narrative I tell myself and then respond from. Is that going to go well? No.
  
  I have to realize that I’ve created that narrative and need to evaluate if it’s true or reasonable. Turns out, he was not feeling any type of way about me making a good or bad supper but was genuinely wondering what was different about it. The conversation looks a lot different, right?
  
  Paired with this is the importance of looping which is listening and then proving we have listened by repeating back to them what they just told us but in our own words.
  
  This brings clarity and understanding and gets everyone having the same conversation. It also builds trust because the person won’t feel like the ‘listener’ was just trying to come up with their own rebuttal but was genuinely processing what they were hearing so that they are all dealing with the right information and feelings.
  
  If I had used this method with the above example (which I didn’t), it could have looked like this: “What I’m hearing you say is that you don’t like what I made and you’re frustrated that I don’t make you better meals.” Then he can say, “No, I really appreciate that you’ve made supper and it looks good, I just thought it looked different and wondered if there was a different ingredient in it.”
  
  Hopefully looping looks more accurate then this, but even though I wasn’t hearing what he was really saying, by telling him what I heard, he can correct my understanding. Plus I’ve shared my feelings which alerts him that we’ve moved from a practical conversation to one that deals with both feelings and identities and we need to adapt and address those things because the meal isn’t really what the conversation is about.
  
  
  
  A Couple Other Takeaways
  
  He offers four things to keep in mind when communicating online and these should pop up every time someone opens up a comment box:
  - Overemphasize politeness.
  - Underemphasize sarcasm.
  - Express more gratitude, deference, greetings, apologies, and hedges.
  - Avoid criticism in public forums.
  
  
  We could also get into a conversation about freedom of speech and tolerance. I can’t help but plug the book
  “The Coddling of the American Mind” which talks about that very subject on university campuses where people were not allowed to come speak on campus because students thought their beliefs were hateful.
  
  If communication requires being heard then we have to allow for freedom of speech. Diversity in thought is a good thing to have healthy and intelligent debate. If we were all homogeneous in our beliefs it would probably mean we were under Communist rule and not allowed to believe anything different.
  
  Understanding does not require agreement in belief. It requires the ability to be heard; it requires a sense of humility; and it requires a tolerance for another’s differing beliefs.
  
  
  When conversations start to devolve it is often as a result of one person trying to control it too much by making spoken or unspoken rules about what the other person is allowed to say, feel, do. They tried to control their language and their behavior- ‘don’t use that tone, don’t roll your eyes, don’t walk away, etc.’
  
  “If we focus on controlling the right things in an argument—if we focus on controlling ourselves, our environment, and the conflict itself—fights morph into conversations.”
  
  Self-control and self-awareness are key to good communications.
  
  
  And lastly, though it’s been said, it bears repeating- ask questions. Good questions. Questions that tap into someone’s values, emotions, or experiences.
  
  
  
  Recommendation
  
  I recommend this book for all people.
  
  It will help you have more meaningful conversations and avoid small-talk. It will help you ‘argue’ with your spouse or siblings better. It will help you diffuse controversial conversations. And it will help you start to see people as complex human beings who desire to be heard and considered rather than ignored and talked over or denied entrance altogether.
  
  It’s not going to solve all the disagreements, convince people to change their minds, or establish world peace, but it will hopefully change your perspective of conversations and your part in them.
  
  [I would also recommend this book to authors who write about negotiators because I think it would help flesh out a character study and dialogue options for conversations in the book.]
  
  It’s pretty short so it’s a quick read as well!
  
  
  
  **Received an ARC via NetGalley**
  
  
  Book Review Blog |
  Facebook |
  Pinterest | StoryGraph
• 
  Catie Parker

  This was easily one of the best nonfiction books I have ever read. “Supercommunicators” looks at the scientific reasons why we “click” with some people and demonstrates how we make this occur more frequently. Notably, it is not necessarily the leaders or funniest people who can create these instant connections, but rather the people that can tune into emotions and uplift what others have to say. To become a supercommunicator, you must first acknowledge that every single conversation is rooted in emotion. Our emotions can hijack conversations, even when we deny that we are influenced by them. Acknowledging and communicating with others how you really feel is the first step in overcoming conflict and rebuilding connection.
  
  
  Most powerfully, the book explains that genuine, deep connections are the most important indicator of a satisfying life. Not romantic love, but rather platonic, friendship, and familial love! How beautiful, to be human with friends and family is all we need to be happy.
• 
  Katherine Bentsen

  Didn’t feel like there was anything groundbreaking in this.
• 
  Martin Baggs

  I am not a supercommunicator but would love to be. Duhigg, author of The Power of Habit, makes the case in his new book that we can all learn to be one, and he attempts to show us how.
  
  The book is based on the premise that there are three conversations (and mindsets) and four rules. The three conversations are: a) what's this really about (decision-making mindset), b) how do we feel (emotional mindset), and c) who are we (social mindset). And the four rules are: 1) pay attention to what kind of conversation is occurring; 2) share your goals, and ask what others are seeking; 3) ask about others' feelings and share your own; and 4) explore if identities are important to this discussion. Sounds simple, right?
  
  Much of this sounds familiar. I am sure I have come across this before, in other books on communication (and that's why I rated the book a 4 and not a 5). But what I really like about this book are the numerous stories to highlight each of the rules or tools. From NRA debates to Netflix culture to NASA interviews, Duhigg takes us on a delightful journey of supercommunicators.
  
  Another thing I like about this book are the tools he provides. Each chapter is filled with figures that provide simple tools for us to use. And then, if that is not enough, he summarizes each of the main sections with a short guide to using the ideas shared. If you didn't want to take notes in the narrative chapters, these are perfect.
  
  Will I become a supercommunicator as a result of reading this book? Well, like all self-help books, it depends on whether I commit to adding the tools into my toolbox and putting them into practice. I sure will try. Time will tell.
  
  Many thanks to the publisher and NetGalley. I received an advanced reader copy of this book in return for an honest review.
• 
  Rick Wilson

  The first half is quite good. About people who facilitate communication. Sort of well done Pope psychology review of asking questions and having open body language and some interesting examples of that. The first half provides good specific examples and strong frameworks of the things discussed.
  
  Second half is not very good. I guess it tries to extrapolate those concepts into larger, social structures, and just by the way that the concepts were presented they don’t really fit into that one to one. I think the author is thesis is boiled down to “if we could all just communicate better the world would heal and we would all sing Kumbaya” but instead of providing specific examples, there’s a lot of discussion of town halls and conversations that are never actually extrapolated from beyond a phrase or two to like “yeah, I hear you, that must be hard”
  
  this part meanders, bouncing all over the place with examples. tries to use modern examples that don’t seem very well done, at one point a chapter is spent on Netflix and their DEI programs. The overlap and I thought the it’s about identity and facilitating conversation. Interesting but the overall gist of the examples was kind of bland. Seemed a bit like a PR job.
  
  Overall, it’s a clearly written pop psychology book. Easy read. Even if my sentiment is one of disappointment.
• 
  Jeff

  Interesting read on understanding the different parts of a conversation, “who we are” discussions, and relationships.
  
  The best part was in the afterward where he talked about a Harvard study that followed people for decades to determine the attributes for success, health and happiness. The most critical and defining lifelong factor? Love.
• 
  Zachary Crowley

  This book has genuinely good advice about communicating with other people, but is mired by deference to the CIA, corporate DEI, and the neoliberal idea that we can solve structural problems with civil conversations. Reads very NY Times op-ed/pop psychology.
• 
  Ella

  I am certainly someone who values open and honest communication, and won’t shy away from a deep or difficult conversation, but having the tools to make sure I am not only communicating but listening properly was something I was really interested in, hence picking up the book. I really liked the variety of case studies and how concise the book was in relaying the art of conversation and the different types of conversations we have, from the logical to the emotional. Duhigg’s writing was informative and entertaining and I especially liked the afterword, highlighting just how important conversation and connection truly is in our lives. I would say I am a communicator, but would love to get closer to being a super communicator!
• 
  T

  if the couple from
  ANATOMY OF A FALL had this book, maybe one of them wouldn't have ended up dead, js
  
  thinking abt this book in the context of that film, I'm reminded of my belief that the burden of listening and being empathetic seems always to fall to one person. even if sandra had approached samuel more sympathetically by asking questions and attempting to understand his POV instead of "imposing" her POV on him (controversial), would he have been receptive to it? he was determined to rile her up and get the content he needed. if samuel had approached sandra emotionally with his insecurities, would she have heard him? she was determined to tell him who he was and how to move forward. these communication techniques operate under the assumption that the person you're speaking with also has some kind of investment in the conversation, but when ur conversation partner is determined to mishear or misunderstand you, is there anyway to break through?
  
  I think
  Charles Duhigg and the authors of
  Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes are High would say, yes, absolutely, because, if you make your goals for a conversation clear and establish guidelines for emotional conversations that keep both parties safe, people will match and reciprocate whatever energy you're giving off. the human inclination is to mirror, and so asking questions to understand and connect emotionally will lead to the other person feeling understood and known, which will result in connection and understanding. maybe it's the pessimist in me, but I'm not so sure, really. in some ways, I think Duhigg acknowledges this when he talks about the how companies cull fully competent but emotionally unresponsive candidates. and I guess in some ways these ideas apply more to personal relationships than to professional ones, and I guess in some ways that makes me feel better about some of the things I struggle with and in other ways makes me feel worse.
  
  anyway, I think if you've read one book on communication, you've read them all. typically, it boils down to: establish a purpose for/the type of conversation you're having, clarify guidelines for a safe conversation, and ask questions to understand and connect. I liked that this book broke down questioning techniques and ended with an outline of how to apply the strategies. it also had way more interesting and contemporary examples. generally, I thought this was more approachable than some of the professional books I've read about communication. it was anecdotal without coming off as navel-gazing and research-based without feeling like a textbook. maybe I should have put this at the top instead of making you read through my ANATOMY OF A FALL analysis and short pseudo-diary entry, lol. my reviews are just not the fun, unhinged material of early 2023 anymore, y'all, pour one out for them :(
  
  an aside, talking about connection always makes me think of this: For now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I have been known.
• 
  Dannie Lynn Fountain

  Short, well paced, and well written from a technical standpoint. However, all of the examples of "supercommunicators" felt shallow and repetitive, never really presenting innovative solutions posited in the blurb. Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for the free advance copy.
• 
  Bailey T. Hurley

  I picked up this book because I like this author and I love communication practices—this book nails it! I appreciated that the author didn’t shy away from difficult topics and uses quality research to point to tips we can all apply to our different conversations. St the height of an election year; everyone should read this book. Hand it out like candy.
  
  Finally, my favorite is the afterward; a nod to the important of meaningful relationships which is fostered by good communication. Together is a beautiful place to be is what I like to say!
• 
  Gijs Limonard

  Expected more from this; some useful concepts, for example the multiple layers of meaning in a conversation; the three H’s; a request for; helping, hugging or hearing? As so often in these kind of ‘one concept’ books; the message should be condensed into half or one third the actual length.