I must have exclaimed, “Fascinating!” 40 or 50 times while listening to Why We Click. It opened my eyes to the emerging field of social neuroscience and the study of “interpersonal synchrony.” Thanks to new technology, scientists are able to study human neurological activity during all sorts of social activities, and the findings are revelatory. Behaviors and moods are highly contagious, and the human body is a finely tuned antenna designed to sync—or not sync—with other people.
Through her exquisite writing and narration, journalist Kate Murphy has created what feels like an essential manual for understanding humans and why we behave the way we do. I chatted with Murphy about harmonizing with other people, her writing process, and what digital natives might be missing out on.
Phoebe Neidl: Can you explain what “interpersonal synchrony” is and, relatedly, how hyperscanning has allowed the field of social neuroscience to flourish in recent years?
Kate Murphy: Interpersonal synchrony is the uncanny, yet now scientifically documented, tendency of human beings to embody one another. Not only do we subconsciously mirror one another’s movements, postures, facial expressions and gestures; we also sync up our heart rates, blood pressure, pupil dilation and hormonal activity. Moreover, during meaningful conversations and shared experiences, there is an associated syncing, or coupling, of neural patterns or brain waves. You and the other person are, at that moment, of like minds.
"We tune into and sync with one another on myriad emotional, behavioral and neurophysiological levels."
We know this thanks to recent advances in technology like hyperscanning, which allows researchers to track the brain activity of multiple subjects simultaneously in real time. Also ushering in this new era of social neuroscience are a host of tiny, wearable biometric, electrodermal, and laser motion sensors along with sophisticated AI-driven analytics software that makes sense of the massive amounts of data these devices generate.
I was absolutely fascinated by so many of the studies you share in Why We Click. There are a lot of common social concepts—like “vibes” or “being on the same wavelength”—that I thought were just figurative idioms but are in fact pretty literal descriptions of physiological phenomena. What did you learn that most blew you away in the course of researching this book?
What didn’t blow me away? That’s what made researching and writing this book so satisfying. It seemed like everyday I was saying to myself, “Oh, wow!” Like you, I was fascinated that all these poetic metaphors and figures of speech used to describe attraction and affiliation—like in sync, in tune, in step, in harmony, striking a chord and on the same wavelength—are, in fact, real and measurable. We tune into and sync with one another on myriad emotional, behavioral and neurophysiological levels. And the degree and duration with which we sync determines the viability and stability of our relationships—or whether a relationship develops at all. What we used to call chemistry is actually synchrony. It’s a whole new way to think about human interactions.
The implications of interpersonal synchrony are so wide-ranging, with relevance to our romantic lives, friendships, office dynamics, social movements, you name it. Has what you’ve learned through this book changed how you interact with people at all?
Oh, absolutely. It’s made me much more aware of how people make me feel and how visceral those feelings are. I’ve gotten much better at recognizing when I am unwittingly internalizing other people’s negative energy and intentionally releasing it, if not reversing the dynamic so the other person begins syncing to me.
At the same time, I’ve become more mindful of how I’m showing up in social situations because it’s catching. How am I making other people feel? Am I carrying the negative residue of a previous encounter or experience? It’s not that you have to be unrelentingly cheerful, which is its own kind of aggravating. It’s more about wiping the slate clean before each interaction so you can be even, open, honest and accepting.
"I hope my sense of wonder and enthusiasm for this topic comes through in my narration."
You do a beautiful job narrating the book yourself, just as you did your first book, You’re Not Listening. How is that process for you, and do you feel like it further deepens your understanding of your own work at all?
Thank you so much for saying that. I was hesitant to do it because I cannot count the number of times I’ve stopped listening to an audiobook solely because I didn’t like the narrator. But I hope my sense of wonder and enthusiasm for this topic comes through in my narration. Interpersonal synchrony explains so much about how we are and who we are in the world. There’s solace and also power in understanding yourself better.
As for the process, I recorded the book in a studio in Houston where many of the top local rap artists record their albums, which made it super fun. And one of my favorite sounds now is that suction-y noise the door to the sound booth makes when it closes. Narrating my book didn’t deepen my understanding of my work so much as re-introduce me to it. I would often read a section and think: “Who wrote that?” Writing is a funny thing. At least for me. It’s as if some other force takes over sometimes. I suspect it relates to synchrony and neural rhythms and flow in some way but I haven’t figured it out yet. I am not sure I want to. I don’t want to spoil the magic and mystery of it.
Understanding just how powerful, dynamic, and complex in-person interactions are puts a whole new light on how hollow digital interactions can be in comparison. What do you think are the most important avenues for future research in social neuroscience, especially as it relates to humans living in an ever-more digital-dominant world?
That is a great and very important question. I would love to see researchers tackle the extent to which digital dependence degrades one’s ability to sync with others in real life and whether digital natives have a harder time syncing than generations who did not grow up shackled to their phones. I would also like to see more investigation of, and limits imposed on, tech companies’ access to and use of our neural and biometric data.
In the end, though, it’s up to all of us to be intentional about seeking synchrony with those around us. It’s a whole-body, in-the-moment experience involving more senses than the five we take for granted and cannot be achieved in its truest, most exquisite form in the digital realm. When it happens, you feel it to your core, and that affirming moment of connection is the best part of being human.
