Trends in Cognitive Sciences
ReviewUndersociality: miscalibrated social cognition can inhibit social connection
Section snippets
Social approach versus social avoidance
Being social by reaching out and connecting with others tends to increase well-being, but people are sometimes reluctant to reach out because of concerns about how another person might respond. On an airplane, you might want to talk with a friendly-looking stranger next to you, but hesitate because they have donned headphones and seem disinterested. Once talking, you would like to have a meaningful conversation but worry that it could be awkward, and decide that sticking with idle chit-chat
Social expectations versus social experiences
Identifying why people experience social approach/avoidance conflicts is relatively easy. On the one hand, human beings are the most social primate species on the planet [1,2], possess a brain that is uniquely equipped for connecting with others [3], and have a neural reward system that leaves people feeling happier and healthier after connecting with others [4., 5., 6., 7., 8., 9., 10., 11.]. On the other hand, trying to connect is potentially risky. A well-intended attempt to talk with a
Conversation
People can readily communicate their thoughts and feelings through speech, making conversation a common way of connecting. However, conversations can unfold in a nearly infinite number of ways, yielding uncertainty from beginning to end, thereby creating a complex coordination problem [27]. Nobody wants to be rejected when reaching out, to feel stumped by what to discuss, or to leave their conversation partner with a negative impression. These concerns are especially likely to arise when
Mechanisms of miscalibration
Most adults have developed a sophisticated understanding of social interactions by learning from both their own and others’ experiences [26,48]. Nevertheless, accurately anticipating the outcome of social interaction remains challenging due to at least three mechanisms that we suggest can lead to systematically biased expectations: differential construal of sociality, uncertain responsiveness, and asymmetric learning. These mechanisms apply to the evaluation of a social act, to the anticipation
Concluding remarks
Decision-making often involves weighing competing goals and interests to determine the optimal course of action. Underestimating the positive outcomes of social interaction does not imply that people should reach out and connect with others whenever possible, any more than a doctor’s recommendation to exercise more would imply quitting one’s job to start jogging nonstop. Instead, the research reviewed here suggests that several features of social cognition can tip the balance of approach and
Declaration of interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References (94)
The declining marginal utility of social time for subjective well-being
J. Res. Personal.
(2018)- et al.
Through a looking glass, darkly: using mechanisms of mind perception to identify accuracy, overconfidence, and underappreciated means for improvement
Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
(2019) The (better than expected) consequences of asking sensitive questions
Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.
(2021)- et al.
It’s surprisingly nice to hear you: misunderstanding the impact of communication media can lead to suboptimal choices of how to connect with others
J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.
(2021) Gratitude and well-being: a review and theoretical integration
Clin. Psychol. Rev.
(2010)- et al.
Communal and agentic content in social cognition: a dual perspective model
Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
(2014) - et al.
Why is conversation so easy?
Trends Cogn. Sci.
(2004) Smartphone use undermines enjoyment of face-to-face social interactions
J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
(2018)When do smartphones displace face-to-face interactions and what to do about it?
Comput. Hum. Behav.
(2021)Smartphones reduce smiles between strangers
Comput. Hum. Behav.
(2019)