People consistently underestimate how much they will enjoy discussing topics they consider to be mind-numbingly dull, from the intricacies of the daily commute to the comparative merits of different onions, according to new research.
The findings from a series of experiments involving 1,800 volunteers, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, suggest this miscalculation comes at a cost. By dodging potentially tedious exchanges, people miss out on the mood boost and the significant health benefits that even fleeting social connections can provide.
The Surprise of Connection
Participants in the study were asked to predict how enjoyable a conversation on a pre-designated “boring” topic—such as the stock market, vegan diets, or Pokémon—would be. They then had brief chats, either online or in person, with either strangers or friends.
Consistently, they reported finding the conversations more enjoyable than they had expected. This held true even when both participants had declared the topic to be boring beforehand. “People underestimate how interesting and enjoyable conversations about boring topics will actually be,” said Elizabeth Trinh, the lead researcher and a PhD candidate in Management and Organisations at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business.
Why Our Predictions Fall Short
The psychological mechanism behind this error is a matter of focus. According to the research team, people base their gloomy predictions almost entirely on the static, fixed components of a conversation: the perceived dullness of the topic and the identity of the other person. What they fail to account for are the dynamic elements that unfold during the interaction itself.
“What’s really more important is the engagement, that sense of connection, that you’re feeling heard, you’re responding to one another, and maybe you’re self-disclosing, or discovering details about someone else’s life,” Trinh explained. Her broader work indicates that people tend to overestimate social risks and underestimate their own capacity to navigate interactions successfully, a bias that leads to avoidance.
This miscalculation is compounded by other well-documented social biases. Nicholas Epley, a professor of behavioural science at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, has researched the “liking gap,” where people systematically underestimate how much others will like them and enjoy their company after an interaction.
Furthermore, Bruce Hood, professor of developmental psychology at Bristol University, points to “pluralistic ignorance” as a key factor. “Everyone holds the same misconceptions, which leads to inertia,” he said. “As everyone tends to hold these opinions, people are reluctant to strike up conversations, especially when society and circumstances are not conducive.”
This collective miscalculation creates a social stalemate, where everyone assumes a conversation will be awkward or dull, so no one initiates, thereby confirming the false belief.
The Broader Stakes of Small Talk
The implications of avoiding casual chat are more serious than mere missed pleasantries. A robust body of research links strong social connection to improved health, wellbeing, and even longevity. Conversely, loneliness and social isolation are associated with increased risks of conditions including heart disease, stroke, and depression.
Even superficial small talk has been shown to confer benefits, such as increased happiness. Studies on commuters found that those who chatted reported more positive journeys than those who remained isolated. This makes the common sight of London commuters absorbed in their devices a case study in pluralistic ignorance. Hood notes this behaviour is linked to a desire to avoid drawing attention in a potentially nerve-wracking situation, but that people will readily engage “when their routines are suddenly and unexpectedly disrupted forcing them out of auto-pilot.”
The instinct to avoid isn’t limited to boring topics. Research by others, such as Michael Slepian, indicates people also avoid difficult conversations due to concerns about privacy or conflict, a habit that can lead to feelings of inauthenticity and harm relationships. The new findings suggest that lowering the bar for what constitutes a worthwhile conversation could have widespread positive effects.
“Instead of thinking, will I enjoy this, maybe think, what will I learn?” Trinh suggested. Nicholas Epley, author of the forthcoming book on connection, agreed: “Just because you know where a conversation might start, doesn’t mean you know where it will end, and the process of having a conversation can often make it end up in a more interesting place than you expected.”
A Necessary Limit
The researchers are not advocating for seeking out endless tedium. “There’s a difference between lowering the bar and agreeing to have any and all boring conversations,” Trinh cautioned. “The benefits may not scale indefinitely.” The point is to overcome the initial psychological barrier that prevents connection, not to valorise boredom itself.
Ultimately, the research challenges the reflexive dismissal of small talk and so-called dull topics, which can act as bridges to more meaningful engagement. As the author Paulo Coelho once noted, “Boredom is not in the world, but in the way we see the world.” The study suggests that by shifting our perspective from the static topic to the dynamic possibility of connection, we might find more enjoyment, and better health, in the everyday chats we so often avoid.