If we’re trying to persuade a skeptical audience to believe a new message, the reality is that we’re fighting an uphill battle against a lifetime of personal learning and social relationships. It would seem that there’s nothing much we can do to affect what people believe. But if we’re skeptical about our ability to affect belief, we merely have to look at naturally sticky ideas, because some of them persuade us to believe some pretty incredible things.

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.

This is why expressing doubt can help. Showing that we’re conflicted or uncertain makes us seem less threatening. Expressing doubt about one’s own view acknowledges that conflicting beliefs are valid, making the other side feel validated and more willing to listen. It recognizes that issues are complicated or nuanced, which increases receptiveness.

Uncertainty signals an openness to other perspectives. So particularly when issues are contentious or people are dug in, expressing a little doubt can actually be more persuasive.

The lesson here is critical: The purpose of a pitch isn’t necessarily to move others immediately to adopt your idea. The purpose is to offer something so compelling that it begins a conversation, brings the other person in as a participant, and eventually arrives at an outcome that appeals to both of you.

Questions, whose potency we’ve seen in both interrogative self-talk and in pitching effectively, change the rules of engagement and therefore the nature of the interaction itself. The conversation becomes more of a dance and less of a wrestling match. That’s something that Fuller Brush founder Alfred Fuller intuited years before improv was ever invented. “Never argue,” he wrote. “To win an argument is to lose a sale.