A review of Jonah Berger’s “Magic Words: What to Say to Get Your Way”
In my opinion, if you enjoy playing basketball you should buy Jordans. I like mine.
If you are a basketball player, I recommend Jordans.
Which of those statements is more likely to persuade someone to buy Jordans?
In Magic Words: What to Say to Get Your Way, Wharton School professor of marketing and New York Times bestselling author Jonah Berger describes the subtle ways in which language unconsciously affects our perceptions and decision making.
You may remember the long-running tagline from the insecticide brand Raid — “Raid Kills Bugs Dead.” There is nothing ambiguous about that statement. Check out the visuals the brand used in its communication over the decades to reinforce that idea — the words and images clearly tell you exactly what the brand does.
It’s not surprising that we remember that tagline and not surprising that Raid became a market leader. Berger illustrates that consumers generally prefer concrete language like “kills bugs dead.” A more abstract phrasing like, “Raid protects your home from insects” surely would have been less memorable and less effective. The concrete words convey credibility to both the message and the messenger.
Similarly, when a customer service rep assures you that they are “fixing” a problem and trying to “get your money back,” you likely will feel more understood and feel more positively about that retailer versus an interaction where the rep tells you they are “solving” your problem and trying to “get you a refund.” The former construction uses language that is more concrete and tangible.
Berger also discusses how we can move people to action by appealing to their identity. If you are trying to increase voter participation, “Please be a voter on election day” probably will be a more persuasive message than, “Please vote on election day.” Saying “I am a Swiftie” sounds stronger and says more about you than “I listen to lots of Taylor Swift’s music.”
It is the difference between actions and identities. Seeing yourself as “a voter” or “a Swiftie” says something about who you are at your core. Therefore, to not vote or not purchase Taylor Swift’s latest release suddenly seems like almost a violation of your personal code rather than a viable choice.
Berger also examines the power of “you.” He finds that brands that use words like “you” and “yourself” in their social media posts tend to see more likes and comments than those written in third-person.
There is a flip side to many of these rules, which can make their real-life application challenging, particularly when you are speaking extemporaneously or dashing off a quick email.
- For example, although concrete language is generally preferable, there are situations when abstract language works better. Berger says startups pitching to investors are more successful when they speak less concretely because abstract language better conveys potential. Abstract language better suggests big picture ideas and a vision, which is also why people using abstract language tend to be seen as more effective leaders.
- Inviting people to think in identity terms can backfire. If your young daughter forgets to wash the dishes, a good parent probably doesn’t want to frame that feedback in identity terms. “Please wash the dishes” probably is a more constructive response to her transgression than “Don’t be such a slob.”
- Although “you” can be powerful for brands to use in advertising and social media, it probably is a word they want to minimize on customer support pages. Phases like, “You have to change the printer ink” or “If you can’t get this to work…” may unconsciously place a burden of obligation or even fault on the shoulders of the consumer.
Berger acknowledges how difficult managing these words can be, particularly when you don’t have time to map out exactly what you are about to say and what you are trying to achieve. He points to studies of police traffic stops that show officers, regardless of their own race or ethnicity, tend to speak differently to white motorists than Black motorists. In fact, 70 percent of the time people can guess the race of the driver based solely on the officer’s language.
Officers address white motorists more respectfully (e.g. “Sir” or “Ms. Jones” rather than informal terms like “Dude” or using the motorist’s first name.) They are more reassuring to white drivers and offer choices and guidance (e.g. “You could do X” or “You should do X.”) Conversely, officers ask Black drivers more questions, which tends to put people on the defensive.
Berger doesn’t think most officers do this consciously, and suspects they usually are just doing the best they can in a stressful and uncertain situation. However, more careful attention to word choice could lead to more respectful and less confrontational interactions.
Another point is that uncertain emotions like suspense or surprise encourage engagement more than “certain” emotions like anger or pride. So, I hope my question at the beginning has kept you reading.
Which statement is more likely to persuade someone to buy the Jordans?
As we have seen “a basketball player” is a stronger phrase than “enjoy playing basketball” because it speaks to a person’s identity. Also, hedging phrases such as “in my opinion” subtly diminish a speaker’s authority. And to “recommend” something seems more objective than saying that you “like” something.
In other words, the second statement is more likely to get you off the couch and headed to Foot Locker.
Berger doesn’t write like an academic, which is just about the best complement one can pay an academic. He always has a knack for making the complex seem simple, or at least clear.
And although the book’s title may suggest one of those cheerleadery, “Steve Jobs did it, now you can, too” manifestos found on the self-improvement shelves, it isn’t that at all. Berger presents marketers and copywriters with practical, scientifically-grounded tips for how they can wield language to mold the mind of the market.
James Forr is Head of Insights at Olson Zaltman
