Should you share a weakness upfront (or hide it)? | Nudge Newsletter


Sharing Weaknesses

Read online


In the 1970s, researchers Jones and Gordon¹ from Duke University played people a recording of a man (really a stooge) talking about his life.

During the tape the man explained he had not completed a school semester because he had been caught cheating and had been expelled.

The researchers edited the tape so that:

1️⃣ Half of the participants heard this bombshell toward the beginning

2️⃣ Half of the participants heard it toward the end.

Did the timing of the weakness change perception?

Yes. Dramatically.

According to Richard Wiseman²:

"When the cheating was mentioned toward the start of the tape, the man appeared far more likeable than when it was mentioned toward the end."

There's evidence that this occurs with court cases too.

Lawyers are judged as having a stronger case³ when they acknowledge a weakness in their argument at the start of a trial.

And many smart brands leverage the same bias. They share their weakness upfront.

  • Avis – “We’re No. 2. We try harder.”
  • Marmite – “Love it or hate it.”
  • Buckley’s – “It tastes awful. And it works.”
  • Guinness – “Good things come to those who wait.”
  • Listerine — “The taste you hate. Twice a day.”
  • Stella Artois — “Reassuringly expensive.”
  • KFC — “FCK. We’re sorry.”

So, if you have a weakeness and it's bound to come out.

Don't hide it.

Present it first.


Interested in more marketing ideas?

The fantastic team at Alt Marketing School runs a brilliant newsletter sharing quick marketing wins, campaign deep dives, and tactics you can actually use. It's one of the few marketing emails that consistently teaches something useful.

Subscribe today →


Cheers for reading!

Phill

P.S. I'm publishing my favourite podcast episode of the year on Monday—don't miss it.

¹Jones, E. E., & Gordon, E. M. (1972). Timing of self-disclosure and its effects on personal attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24(3), 358–365.

²Wiseman, R. (2009). 59 seconds: Think a little, change a lot. Pan Macmillan.

³Williams, K. D., Bourgeois, M. J., & Croyle, R. T. (1993). The effects of stealing thunder in criminal and civil trials. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 597-609.

As a behavioural science practitioner, I believe in the peak-end rule.

Tune into Nudge | Advertise with Nudge | Unsubscribe

Nudge Newsletter

I spend 18 hours each week turning marketing psychology into readable newsletters.

Read more from Nudge Newsletter

The Halo Effect Read online The World Cup is here, and England's kit looks a bit naff. Cole Palmer wearing a shirt that looks 2x too big. The kit seems ill-fitting; it looks far too baggy around the shoulders, and the neck is too wide. If Nike surveyed my opinion for their market research, I'd give it a 1/5. But my opinion could change very soon. Success shifts perception. In 2019, researcher Gerd Nufer¹ asked 3,178 football fans to rank the quality of their club's kits. For the study, six...

Specific Number Bias Read online I stumbled across this Reddit post a few weeks back. Everest surveyors added two feet to their measurement to appear accurate. Rather than listing the exact measurement of 29,000, the British Royal Geographical Society declared Mount Everest's elevation at 29,002. Clearly, the surveyors thought that rounded numbers seem less believable. Something that numerous studies have since proven. Can You Spare 17 Cents? In 1994, Santos, Leve and Pratkanis asked three...

The AI Contradiction Read online I just generated an image in the style of Monet using AI. Have a look, and think about what makes this inferior to a real Monet painting. Made with AI* A few weeks back, X user "SHLOMS" did the same. SHLOM's post on X. 1,300 people responded. Most said this AI art was pure crap.They said it lacked "coherent composition". The colours were an "incoherent muddle". Some said it was "trying too hard". Others called it "obvious AI slop". Replies to "SHLOMS" included...