But in this context, it turned out that the exact opposite occurred. Expressing doubt about a contentious issue actually increased persuasion. Particularly among people who already had strong beliefs, hearing someone else wasn’t sure about their opinion encouraged them to change their mind in that direction.

The more emotional language an article used, the more likely audiences were to keep reading.

... sustaining attention is less about making people feel good or bad, and more about opening up a curiosity gap that makes them want to learn more. Uncertain emotions, or uncertain language more generally, keeps people engaged.

But those two or three words made a big difference. Rather than hurting their motivation, praising the students’ process, or how hard they had worked, encouraged them to keep going.

Sometimes this difference is not even substantive. Sometimes it is a shift internally that the listener cannot see, but the thinker can feel. Sometimes it is a new emotional relationship with the thought.

So I have become impressed by those thinker-‘repetition’ moments, now understanding that, yes, it matters what the thinker says, but it matters more what happens for them because they say it.