Book Review: "Talking to Strangers" by Malcolm Gladwell

 Gladwell, Malcolm. Talking to Strangers: What We Should Know about the People We Don't Know. Little, Brown and Co., 2019.

Review

I hesitate to review this book on LinkedIn because it covers topics which dive deep into some of the darkest and most sensitive criminal cases in recent history, however I think the main takeaways from this book are relevant to the professional setting. Therefore, I will try to cover the key takeaways from this book and try to relate them back to the professional environment. The author, Malcolm Gladwell, is the host of the podcast Revisionist History and his audiobook version is excellently produced with actual audio clips from individuals discussed in the book as well as voice actors who play the role of key characters being discussed. It is an exceptional audiobook that I would recommend to anybody who has ever contemplated the following questions, “Why are humans so bad at determining if someone is lying?” “How do bad people get away with bad things for so long?” “How could I have not noticed that about that person the first time?” “What kind of idiot wouldn’t see that when it was right in front of their face?”

Key Takeaways

Default to Truth

After several case studies, in the middle of the book, Gladwell quotes the psychologist Tim Levine with the idea of “default to truth” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth-default_theory). This idea is based on the premise that as an individual we tend to believe someone because there isn’t enough evidence to tell we are being lied to.

“You believe someone not because you have no doubts about them. Belief is not the absence of doubt. You believe someone because you don’t have enough doubts about them.”

In engineering, when you have doubts about what someone is saying, I have found the most helpful action is to work with that person to clear up any of those doubts. There is rarely exactly one right answer, but it is important that everybody comes to an agreement on what is the best direction (truth) with as little of doubt as possible.

Misunderstanding Each Other

There are a lot of people (myself included) who believe that they are very good at reading people. In Part 3 of this book, the focus is on transparency and highlights just how bad we are at reading and understanding people who we have never met before. Gladwell starts his discussion by using the show Friends as an example. In the show Friends, the actors use elaborate facial expressions to illustrate their emotions making it easier for the audience to interpret. So much in fact, that a computer algorithm has been written to interpret the emotions of the actors even without audio (Jennifer Fugate, FACS). This would suggest that it is easy to interpret emotions and intentions from someone’s facial expressions, but this is far from being the case. The supporting case for this argument is that of Amanda Knox. She was wrongfully tried as guilty of murdering her roommate. Most of the supporting evidence against her was based on her mannerisms and responses during the investigation and in the court room. She was a corky individual who did not necessarily comply with social norms. As a result, people who had not met her before, could only rationalize her behavior as someone trying to hide something and therefore she was guilty. Eventually evidence emerged that she was innocent, and she was eventually freed. In a professional setting, we must be careful not to judge people too quickly and be open to the idea that some people will respond to situations differently than we might ourselves.

“The right way to talk to strangers is with caution and humility.”

Final Thoughts

While researching this book online after I had completed it, I found many critics who believe this is not representative of Gladwell’s best work. From what I derived, generally Gladwell can clearly tie his examples together and draw a clear conclusion, but in the case of “Talking to Strangers,” the conclusion is not very clear. At this point, I think I can see where the critics are coming from. I had a difficult time extracting my key takeaways from this book and even had a difficult time talking through some of the concepts with people around me. However, I think that this work shed a different perspective on some recent historical events and was thought provoking for me. This is not necessarily a book I would recommend for professional development, but for personal development.

Bonus: I started the podcast Revisionist History (Season 4) and so far, I think it is excellent. The first two episodes discuss standardized testing. Something which I have never taken time to reflect on because as an American, it is just something that is and will always be. Therefore, my time was better spent studying for it, then contemplating it. At the beginning Gladwell talks about having a nightmare in which he walks out early on the LSAT. It’s been 7 years since I last took a college exam and I still have nightmares about them.