%20(1).webp)
When I wrote Book Yourself Solid in 2005, I had no idea how much it would enhance my speaking career. Soon after its publishing, hundreds of thousands of people had read my book and I started getting speaking invitations for events around the world. When Entrepreneur Magazine invited me to do a speaking tour for my Book Yourself Solid speech at dozens of cities across the country, I readily accepted.
During a panel discussion on the event tour, an event attendee asked one of the panel guests a question: “Starting a business is hard. How can we deal with the overwhelmingness and stress of it all?”
The other panel guest—now a very successful author in the self-help space—took a long pause, then responded: “You know, all business problems are personal problems in disguise.”
I looked up, shocked to hear my very own words come out of the other panel guest’s mouth. After the event ended, while chatting with the other panel guest, I asked him if he had come up with that little line about business problems all by himself.
He sputtered a response along the lines of: “Uhh, me? No, umm, I'm not sure, I don't think so. No, actually, I think I heard it, umm, last week, or—recently, at a different event where this one speaker said it onstage.”
Turns out, a few weeks prior, I was on a call with “that one speaker,” where I mentioned that very line. He, in turn, ended up using it in his speech (without citing me). Later, the panel member shared it (without citing the other speaker or me).
Of course I didn’t give either of them any grief for what happened. Now, I chuckle about things like this because it’s to be expected. (At least I think these were my own words, but what if they were actually from someone else?) But it did reveal to me what these individuals thought (or understood) about intellectual property at the time.
As I mentioned, this is par for the course in the speaking world. Speakers accidentally forget to cite somebody or simply don't remember who said it. In fact, it happens to me a lot—but whenever I can’t remember who said what, I usually just say: “I can't remember who said it first, but I know it wasn’t me” before sharing the information. Then I go back and try to find the information so I can cite it properly in the future.
Of course, you know that investing the time necessary to research and fact check the information you share as a speaker or author is essential. Ensuring your message is free of erroneous misinformation doesn’t just build your credibility, it saves you from embarrassment too (after all, you never know who might be listening).
Because when inaccurate information spreads, it goes far, fast. Most of the time, it’s unintentional. Misquoting a study, forgetting to fact check, or repeating and accidentally spreading false information can happen to all of us.
But once the erroneous information is shared, the ripple effect is hard to contain.
Fact or Fiction? Five Commonly Misinterpreted Studies
Correcting misunderstood research isn’t so simple. Myths and incorrect information, when shared repeatedly, can become commonly held beliefs. A 2018 study found that “prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news.” That’s why, unless a statement is extremely implausible, the more a person hears it or sees it, the more likely they are to believe it’s true.
That may be—in part—why these commonly misinterpreted studies spread so fast.
“People fear public speaking more than death.”
Perhaps the most commonly known “fact” about public speaking is this: people fear public speaking more than death. Countless articles, podcasts, and videos use this argument as their opening statement to introduce their speaking advice or their methodology to overcome stagefright. But is this actually true?
No.
In 1973, R. H. Bruskin Associates conducted a survey about common fears. While the methods used in the original study have been questioned, the real problem stems from the misinterpretation of the study results.
What the study actually found was that public speaking was the most commonly reported fear—but not necessarily more intense than the fear of death.
However, when the London Sunday Times published an article about the study, they said that 41 percent of Americans “listed speaking before a group as their greatest fear.” A total of 14 fears were listed, and lower down on the list appeared “death.” Speaking teachers, authors, and consultants started to quote the Sunday Times story, and the idea that people fear public speaking more than death spread for years and years.
Researchers and other individuals have tried to set the record straight, but with minimal success. A 2012 study titled “Is Public Speaking Really More Feared Than Death?” investigated the original Bruskin study and found that it “involved telephone representatives, who read from a list of 14 fears and asked participants to indicate if the item was a fear.” The fears were not ranked and surveyors didn’t ask participants their top fear.
Many people still quote this misinterpreted study and accept it as true. Because yes, a large number of people do fear public speaking; but if given the choice between death and giving a speech, I think most people would start talking.
“Ninety-three percent of communication is nonverbal.”
This percentage originates from studies done in the 1960s by Albert Mehrabian, a Ph.D. professor and psychologist. His findings mention what has become known as the “7%-38%-55% rule.”
But does it really mean that in any type of communication, your message is conveyed primarily by nonverbal communication? Not quite.
What people think it means: In communication, seven percent of your message is conveyed through words, while 38 percent is conveyed through your tone and voice, and 55 percent through facial expressions and body language.
What Mehrabian says it really means: This equation is specific to how people judge the feelings of others. For example, when determining whether someone likes or dislikes another person, people often use vocal clues and facial attitudes more than words.
While nonverbal communication and body language are important in communication, Mehrabian’s findings were never meant to reflect all types of communication.
Mehrabian himself has tried to clear things up. On his website he states: “Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like-dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable.”
“It takes just 10,000 hours of practice to master a skill.”
This concept, popularized by Malcolm Gladwell in his book Outliers, is originally from Anders Ericsson’s research paper, “The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance.” The idea caught on fast—10,000 hours of practice guarantees mastery in any field. But it turns out there’s a lot more to it than just putting in the time.
In the original 44-page research document, that number—10,000 hours—is mentioned just once. And the violinists that Malcolm Gladwell referred to in his book didn’t all accumulate 10,000 hours of practice. This number was an average number of hours practiced at the age of 20—and the report also lists the average number of hours practiced from the ages of four to 19 as well. And although some of these “best young violinists” had accumulated 10,000 hours of practice, and did have bright futures in music, they were not yet experts.
Of course, as the research shows, extensive practice is crucial for expert performance. But it’s not the only determinant; many other factors—like the quality of practice, intrinsic motivation, and expert feedback—also play significant roles in developing mastery.
“Students only retain five percent of what they learn in a lecture.”
This statistic stems from a pedagogical model called the “Learning Pyramid.” The figure has seven different tiers that represent different learning methods. The top of the pyramid is learning through lecture, followed by reading, audio-visual, demonstration, discussion, practicing, and teaching others.
Each tier has a specific percentage that represents the amount of information retained from a specific type of teaching method. It claims that students retain 90 percent of what they learn when they teach someone else, but only five percent of what they learn during a lecture.
This statistic could be disheartening for speakers—will your audience really only retain five percent of what you say?
Maybe you don’t have to be too worried. Turns out the origins of the pyramid are unclear, and the percentages lack empirical support. In fact, the National Training Laboratories Institute—who supposedly developed the model—said, “While we believe it to be accurate, we no longer have—nor can we find—the original research that supports the numbers.”
Of course, learners do benefit from a variety of teaching methods. But with the original research nowhere to be found, it seems the learning pyramid is more myth than method.
“As Albert Einstein said, ‘If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough.’”
This quote is often shared within the realm of teaching and learning, but it’s unlikely the brilliant physicist Albert Einstein actually said this.
There is no substantial evidence that he did. It’s not mentioned in The Ultimate Quotable Einstein, “the most comprehensive collection of Einstein quotes ever published.” Most likely, this is either a paraphrase or a misattribution.
Simple Strategies for Sharing Accurate Information
The tricky thing about each and every one of these myths is that they are believable, especially when spoken from a figure of authority. Perhaps, in part, that’s why they’ve been shared in textbooks, articles, social media posts, and speeches time and time again. But just because it’s believable doesn’t mean it’s true.
Speakers and authors can verify the accuracy of their messages, including the validity of quotes, research studies, and scientific claims using these three simple research steps:
- Choose your sources carefully. If possible, study the original research paper or source of information. This can prevent many misquotations and misinterpretations. And always assess the credibility of secondary sources.
- Keep it within the intended context. Worthwhile studies almost always establish certain limitations to their findings. Applying findings out of context can lead to misinterpretation and inaccuracies (as with Mehrabian’s findings about communicating emotions).
- Stay updated and keep investigating. New research findings are constantly being released to the public—some discount previous research or clarify common misunderstandings. Dedicating time to continuous learning can help you share an accurate and up-to-date message.
Keeping an open mind and willingness to correct previously held misconceptions is essential for accuracy and integrity in the thought leadership space. As speakers, authors, and leaders stay transparent about what they know—and what they don’t know—they’ll build trust with their audiences and contribute more authentically.
.svg)
%20(1).webp)
%20(1).webp)
