We’re more persuasive in person than over text, email, or even Zoom. And we can disagree more effectively, getting our point across without stoking conflict, in person. Yet we consistently underestimate the power of in-person interactions over other media.

In-person requests for help are more likely to succeed

In a study by Mahdi Roghanizad and Vanessa Bohns, experimental participants asked their friends for help using various types of media: phone, email, Zoom, and in person.

Participants expected that in-person and Zoom requests would have roughly the same level of effectiveness. Both are face-to-face, real-time methods of communication where you hear the other person’s voice and see their expressions and gestures.

In reality, while the participants’ predictions about their in-person requests for help were more or less accurate, their Zoom requests for help were much less effective than they expected. Their friends were nearly 40% more likely to help when asked in person.

As you might expect, email had the worst results. An earlier study by the same researchers found that requests made in person were 34 times more effective than email. It’s much easier to dash off a quick “no” than to say it in person. The surprising part isn’t that email is so much less effective. It’s that participants in both studies drastically underestimated how much difference it would make to ask in person, versus using any other medium. In-person communication makes a significant difference.

In-person disagreement leads to more understanding and less perceived conflict

A different study by Burint Bevis, Juliana Schroeder, and Michael Yeomans examined spoken disagreement versus written disagreement. In this study, participants exchanged opinions on controversial topics. Initially, most participants preferred the idea of disagreeing in writing. They predicted that written disagreement would produce less conflict and greater understanding, while a spoken conversation would be stressful, contentious, and unlikely to change minds.

The results of the study showed the opposite. When speaking, participants tended to be more receptive to what the other person had to say. Even though they continued to disagree, they were more likely to come to an understanding of each other’s positions and have a more positive experience with the conversation. In contrast, written communication resulted in greater perceptions of conflict and lower levels of understanding.

This result, too, should not be surprising. We’ve all seen how a political Facebook post by a relative can make us breathe fire, while a conversation with the same person on the same topic is likely to be calmer and more respectful. What’s surprising is that we continue to believe that spoken disagreements will be too uncomfortable to endure, while written disagreements will allow people to calmly take in the facts.

In-person conversations make a big difference

Talking to each other – ideally in the same physical space, but if not, using media that allow us to see and hear each other – makes a difference. It makes a difference in how likely we are to help each other, and in how willing we are to accept disagreement and listen to opposing views. Instead of shying away from a tough conversation, and opting for an email or text instead, consider engaging with the person. When we share our humanity, tough conversations can become easier.