The Quantum Physics of Persuasion

We are all engaged in persuasion of one sort or another. Whether it is selling our ideas or products, bringing a work colleague to our point of view, or discussing the next holiday with our partners. In order to be polite and considerate, we are likely to ask the person we are talking to what they think about the matter.

“Where would you like to go on holiday?” Or,

“What do you think should be our next product development initiative?”

More often than not we will get a reply, and this reply will be different from the answer that we hoped for. We would then engage in, what we hope is, a persuasive dialogue aimed at changing the other’s point of view and bringing it closer to our own. Sounds simple, right? Well, it is not. We all know from our experience, that this may result in a confrontational engagement that may not lead to a meeting of minds.

Learning how to engage in a persuasive dialogue effectively, without conflict, is an important life skill. How can we bring another person to our point of view without ending up with a massive argument? And how possibly can quantum physics be helpful in this process?

Both excellent questions and I will attempt to answer both.

Quantum Physics is the physical theory that describes the foundations of matter. Without going into too much detail, at its basis lies the insight that in order to describe fundamental particles, for example, electrons, it is necessary to use what is known as a wave function. This is a mathematical way of measuring what is the probability of finding a particle at a specific point in space at a specific time. Furthermore, traditional quantum physics claims that until the actual properties of the particles have not been measured, all possibilities coexist. That is the basis for the infamous Schroedinger’s Cat paradox: the cat can be both dead and alive at the same time. There are some other approaches that resolve this but they are not part of the mainstream of quantum physics.

When the location of the particle is measured, quite naturally, the probability of finding the particle anywhere else collapses to zero. This is called “the collapse of the wave function”. In the last decade a new way of measuring quantum properties has been developed. These new measurements are called Weak Measurements. They are based on the idea that it is sometimes possible to probe the properties of the system lightly in a way that may disturb it a bit, but not collapse it to a specific outcome. If done enough times, a set of measurements, called an ensemble, can give us the information we need about the state of the system without collapsing it.

Although it may not be initially obvious, persuasion is a similar process. We have all experienced the human tendency to become recalcitrant when we form an opinion. You may not know what you want to order in a restaurant after you have looked at the menu and decided to order a specific item, you develop a desire for it. If the kitchen says that your dish is no longer available, you feel disappointment. The same attachment to an opinion occurs if you ask your partner, for example, about their preferred holiday destination. Once they looked at the alternatives and set their mind on a specific location, they are likely to stick by it, although a few moments earlier going on holiday in general may not have been on their mind at all. You see, forming an opinion is similar to measurement in quantum physics. Until the point where a person verbalises their opinion publicly, all alternatives are possible in their head. The moment we say what we want, all other alternatives collapse to zero and it becomes much harder to change our minds.

This is where the idea of weak measurements comes to the rescue. The trick is to understand what the other person wants without having them say it explicitly. If we can discover what is on their mind without a “measurement” that comes from expressing it directly, we may be able to persuade them to alter their opinion without the need to a more forceful interaction. Looking at weak measurements as a metaphor, what we need to do to persuade someone is to ask them questions around the issue without ever asking them to answer directly. In this way we will identify their internal belief, but not activate the stubbornness that may be attached to changing it once expressed.

When we understand what is the internal stance of the other person we can choose whether we need to persuade them to change, or leave it be, and return another time to the same discussion. The key to change is not to have them tell us what they think, but, once we understand their internal opinion, engage separately with the rationale behind it.

Using the example of a holiday, if you would like to go hiking in the mountains, and your partner would like to lie on a beach, then your strategy may be, once you establish that indirectly as described above, to extol the virtues of fresh air, exercise, and the spiritual benefits of being in nature, without even mentioning the beach. At the same time mention the possible negative impact of a beach holiday, like exposure to the sun, weight gain, and boredom. The idea is to create positive associations with what we want, and negative ones with the unexpressed desire, without discussing the actual outcome. This does not guarantee that your partner will change their minds, but done well, will make it much easier for them to at least understand your point of view.

In summary, when we verbalise what we think publicly, it changes our mental state in such a way as to support our opinion irrespective of evidence. To make persuasion easier, avoid this at all costs. Of course, ideally, we would like others to see our point of view without needing to revert to any persuasion strategy, but that unfortunately, is not the human experience.