Study: Negative People Are Way Better at Replying to Emails

The Citizen's Guide to the Future
April 29 2013 11:04 AM

Study: Negative People Are Way Better at Replying to Emails

Negative people reply to email 36% faster
This exasperated fellow is sure to respond to your LinkedIn request posthaste.

Chad Zuber / Shutterstock.com

Friendly, upbeat people are a pleasure to work with—except when they don’t reply to your emails.

The engineers at Contactually, a referral marketing platform, analyzed more than 100 million email conversations and found something surprising. People who tend to use positive, upbeat language in their messages—like “care” and “amazing”—only respond to 47 percent of their emails within 24 hours. Those who more frequently use negative words, like “missed” and “stupid,” respond to a healthy 64 percent of messages within a day. That’s 36 percent more than their shiny happy counterparts.

Advertisement

It isn’t immediately clear why this should be the case. My first thought was that negative emails take less time to write. I can say, “Sorry, not interested” in 10 seconds, whereas crafting an encouraging response takes a little more time (not to mention willpower). But Contactually co-founder Tony Cappaert told me that doesn’t seem to fully explain the trend. Negative people’s subject lines averaged 23 characters, just 8 percent fewer than positive people’s 25-character average. 

“Maybe the negative folks are more active online in general,” Cappaert’s colleague Jeff Carbonella speculated in a press release about the study. “Sort of explains Internet trolls, doesn’t it?”

Or maybe the causality works the other way, and people who spend all day replying to emails end up bitter and snippy.

The study wasn’t peer-reviewed and isn’t likely to be published in Nature anytime soon. Still, the huge sample size suggests there’s at least something to the findings. Any theories, readers? I look forward to the snide remarks that are sure to appear promptly in the comments section.

Future Tense is a partnership of SlateNew America, and Arizona State University.

Will Oremus is Slate's senior technology writer.

TODAY IN SLATE

Politics

Meet the New Bosses

How the Republicans would run the Senate.

The Government Is Giving Millions of Dollars in Electric-Car Subsidies to the Wrong Drivers

Scotland Is Just the Beginning. Expect More Political Earthquakes in Europe.

Cheez-Its. Ritz. Triscuits.

Why all cracker names sound alike.

Friends Was the Last Purely Pleasurable Sitcom

The Eye

This Whimsical Driverless Car Imagines Transportation in 2059

Medical Examiner

Did America Get Fat by Drinking Diet Soda?  

A high-profile study points the finger at artificial sweeteners.

The Afghan Town With a Legitimately Good Tourism Pitch

A Futurama Writer on How the Vietnam War Shaped the Series

  News & Politics
Photography
Sept. 21 2014 11:34 PM People’s Climate March in Photos Hundreds of thousands of marchers took to the streets of NYC in the largest climate rally in history.
  Business
Business Insider
Sept. 20 2014 6:30 AM The Man Making Bill Gates Richer
  Life
Quora
Sept. 20 2014 7:27 AM How Do Plants Grow Aboard the International Space Station?
  Double X
The XX Factor
Sept. 19 2014 4:58 PM Steubenville Gets the Lifetime Treatment (And a Cheerleader Erupts Into Flames)
  Slate Plus
Tv Club
Sept. 21 2014 1:15 PM The Slate Doctor Who Podcast: Episode 5  A spoiler-filled discussion of "Time Heist."
  Arts
Television
Sept. 21 2014 9:00 PM Attractive People Being Funny While Doing Amusing and Sometimes Romantic Things Don’t dismiss it. Friends was a truly great show.
  Technology
Future Tense
Sept. 21 2014 11:38 PM “Welcome to the War of Tomorrow” How Futurama’s writers depicted asymmetrical warfare.
  Health & Science
The Good Word
Sept. 21 2014 11:44 PM Does This Name Make Me Sound High-Fat? Why it just seems so right to call a cracker “Cheez-It.”
  Sports
Sports Nut
Sept. 18 2014 11:42 AM Grandmaster Clash One of the most amazing feats in chess history just happened, and no one noticed.