Five studies. None of them says your meeting is decided in sixty seconds.

Impressions of faces in a tenth of a second

Across five experiments, trait judgments made after a 100 millisecond look at an unfamiliar face photograph matched judgments made with no time limit.

What it does not say

• People judged still photographs of strangers, not a person walking into a room.
• The traits were perceived attractiveness, likeability, trustworthiness, competence and aggressiveness.
• It measured agreement between fast and slow impressions. It did not measure whether the impressions were right, or whether they lasted.

"In one study, people formed impressions of unfamiliar faces after just a tenth of a second. That tells us how quickly impressions can start. It does not tell us whether they are right."

Willis, J., and Todorov, A. (2006). First Impressions: Making Up Your Mind After a 100-ms Exposure to a Face. Psychological Science, 17(7), 592 to 598. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01750.x

Six silent seconds of a teacher

Strangers rated teachers from short silent video clips. Their combined ratings were related to evaluations from students or supervisors who knew the teachers. The shortest condition used three two second clips per teacher, six seconds in total.

What it does not say

• The clips came from teaching, not from the opening of a meeting.
• The teacher samples were small and the observers were a narrow group.
• The criterion was evaluation ratings, not measured learning.
• It is wrong to say one two second clip decided a teacher's outcome.

"In a classic teaching study, strangers' ratings from three silent two second clips were related to evaluations from people who knew the teachers."

Ambady, N., and Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a Minute: Predicting Teacher Evaluations From Thin Slices of Nonverbal Behavior and Physical Attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(3), 431 to 441. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.3.431

The first five minutes of a negotiation

Computer measured speech features from the first five minutes predicted 30 percent of the variance in individual negotiation points.

What it does not say

• The setting was a simulated employment negotiation with first year MBA volunteers, 100 people in 50 pairs.
• The same model did not significantly predict joint outcomes.
• It found a pattern inside the study. It did not show that changing how you speak causes a better result.

"In a simulated employment negotiation, speech patterns in the opening five minutes predicted 30 percent of the variation in individual outcomes. It does not mean 30 percent of every negotiation is decided in five minutes."

Curhan, J. R., and Pentland, A. (2007). Thin Slices of Negotiation: Predicting Outcomes From Conversational Dynamics Within the First 5 Minutes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 802 to 811. doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.802

Weak ties and moving jobs

Randomized changes to LinkedIn's connection recommendations, covering more than 20 million members over five years, gave causal evidence that weaker ties can increase job mobility.

What it does not say

• The outcome was job mobility. Not sales, friendship, event networking or first impressions.
• Effects varied with how weak the tie was and with the industry.
• It does not mean the weakest tie is always best, or that strangers beat close contacts.

"A large LinkedIn experiment found that weaker connections can help people move jobs. The effect depended on how weak the tie was and the industry."

Rajkumar, K., Saint-Jacques, G., Bojinov, I., Brynjolfsson, E., and Aral, S. (2022). A Causal Test of the Strength of Weak Ties. Science, 377(6612), 1304 to 1310. doi.org/10.1126/science.abl4476

Asking questions and being liked

In get to know you text conversations, people told to ask more questions were liked more by their partners. Follow up questions went with feeling heard.

What it does not say

• The conversations lasted fifteen minutes between strangers getting acquainted.
• The speed dating evidence was observational.
• It does not show that one question, or a set opening script, changes a professional outcome or revenue.

"In experiments with strangers getting to know each other, people instructed to ask more questions were better liked by their conversation partners."

A 2025 correction reports minor reporting errors found in an independent audit. The notice says the substantive results and conclusions did not change and gave no reason to doubt the data collection. Correction notice

Huang, K., Yeomans, M., Brooks, A. W., Minson, J., and Gino, F. (2017). It Doesn't Hurt to Ask: Question-Asking Increases Liking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 430 to 452. doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000097