In this episode of the Hidden Brain podcast, the discussion centers around the psychology and social pressures behind agreeing to requests against one's wishes. Vanessa Patrick, an expert guest, explores how the fear of damaging relationships and appearing incompetent often compels us to say "yes" despite our reservations. She reveals that contrary to expectations, reluctant consent can breed resentment and frustration, potentially harming the very relationships we aim to protect.
Patrick then offers strategies for effectively saying "no," such as developing personal policies aligned with one's identity and values. She advocates for framing refusals as definitive statements in line with one's principles, rather than excuses. By reserving "yes" for truly meaningful commitments, one can focus efforts productively and honor individual priorities.
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
As Vanessa Patrick explains, the fear of damaging relationships and appearing incompetent drives our consent to unwanted requests. The desire for inclusion and harmonious ties, along with concerns over how we're perceived, compel us to say "yes" even in contexts like group settings. The "acquaintance trap" exemplifies how even casual connections pressure us to agree.
Though we expect saying "yes" will make us feel good, Vanessa Patrick's research reveals it often leaves us resentful and angry. Her examples of missing a celebration and harboring annoyance at a friend illustrate how forced agreement can damage relationships and rapport.
As Vanessa Patrick advises, developing decision frameworks based on values and beliefs allows definitive "no" responses that honor individual standards. Framing refusals as "I don't" instead of "I can't" signals an unassailable position. Reserving "yes" for truly meaningful, value-aligned requests - Patrick's "hero's journey" - focuses efforts productively.
1-Page Summary
Understanding why we often consent to requests against our wishes is a complex matter, intertwined with our innate desire to maintain social harmony and uphold our reputations.
Vanessa Patrick explains that as inherently social beings, we aim to uphold strong bonds and harmonious ties, which propels us to acquiesce to requests we'd rather decline. The fear of being excluded, disliked, or ejected from our social groups is a strong motivator and casts saying "no" as a potentially disruptive act that could jeopardize our relationships.
The anxiety involved in how we are perceived by others further fuels our tendency to accede to demands. Vanessa Patrick highlights the egocentric bias, where we overestimate the attention our actions receive, thereby magnifying the perceived impact of refusing a request. This can be especially potent in social settings; for instance, an experiment showed that in a group setting with multiple onlookers, individuals were more likely to relent to a request they wished to reject as opposed to when they were approached one-on-one.
Shankar Vedantam underscores the weight of social reputation through the example of World War II kamikaze pilots. The fear of social shame was so overwhelming that it led individuals to prefer death over potential disgrace. Vanessa Patrick also reflects on gender differences, noting that women are more inclined to say "yes" to work-related tasks, driven by societal expectations of communality and nurturing, which affects thei ...
The psychology and social pressures behind saying "yes" when you want to say "no"
Agreeing out of reluctance or obligation often results in negative feelings like resentment and unhappiness. This discordance between action and desire can lead to a significant emotional toll on the individual.
Shankar Vedantam emphasizes that contrary to what people might expect, saying "yes" when one wants to say "no" typically results in negative emotions. Vanessa Patrick’s study found that people think they will feel good about saying “yes,” but they actually end up feeling very resentful, angry, and frustrated. Vanessa Patrick advises that when one says "yes" when they want to say "no," it is beneficial to dwell on the feeling and to learn from that experience to avoid repeating the mistake.
For example, Vanessa Patrick felt negative emotions, like being "shell shocked" and "stunned," after following her boss's instructions, which resulted in her missing her own birthday celebration. The implications of saying "yes" include being left with feelings of disappointment and possibly resentment, as seen when only Vanessa's grandmother remained at the party when she arrived.
Vanessa Patrick’s study also demonstrates that saying "yes" when we want to say "no" can not only make us grumpy and resentful towards others but also damage our relationships. An example includes Vanessa Patrick's personal experience where she felt resentment towards her friend—and their friendship was subsequently affected—after being asked to pick up groceries. When she did the errand, only to see her friend's husband, who could have done it himself, relaxing at ...
The negative consequences of saying "yes" when you want to say "no"
Creating personal rules and basing refusals on one's identity can empower people to decline requests more effectively, guard their time, and honor their priorities.
Personal policies, as Vanessa Patrick suggests, provide a structure that helps individuals avoid the mistake of saying "yes" when they really want to say "no." These policies are built around one's values, priorities, preferences, and beliefs, shaping how they live and make decisions. For example, Isabel Allende has a structured policy of starting her writing projects on the 8th of January each year, which everyone respects, limiting requests that would interfere with her work.
Vanessa Patrick notes that refusals based on identity and values carry greater conviction. Using "I don't" instead of "I can't" conveys a refusal that stems from personal standards rather than temporary circumstances. This signals an unassailable position, which shuts down discussion or negotiation as it is a statement of the individual's being.
Patrick also introduces the concept of strategic postponement, suggesting avoiding pressured decisions in the moment, giving time to align the decision with personal policies.
Patrick encourages being selective in comm ...
Strategies and techniques for saying "no" effectively, including the use of personal policies and identities
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser