BRAxIUMLabs

Credits and sources

BRAxIUM Labs uses techniques that coaches share for free, described in our own words and credited by name, plus published research. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by anyone listed here.

Coaches

  • Vinh Giang: his free talk “13 years of communication skills knowledge in 53 minutes”. Free source · 9 techniques in the Library
  • Julian Treasure: his TED talk “How to speak so that people want to listen”. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Chris Voss: his free interviews on mirroring, labeling and the late-night FM DJ voice. Free source · 5 techniques in the Library
  • Roger Love: his free article on the building blocks of voice. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Matt Abrahams: his Stanford podcast, Think Fast, Talk Smart. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Vanessa Van Edwards: her free articles and videos at Science of People. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Patsy Rodenburg: her teaching on the three circles of energy. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Jefferson Fisher: his free videos on calm, direct conversations. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Tony Robbins: his free videos on changing your state and his morning priming routine. Free source · 2 techniques in the Library
  • Mel Robbins: her free TEDx talk “How to stop screwing yourself over”. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • James Clear: his free articles on habits at jamesclear.com. Free source · 4 techniques in the Library
  • Kristin Neff: her free self-compassion break at self-compassion.org. Free source · 1 technique in the Library
  • Gabriele Oettingen: WOOP, the free method she shares at woopmylife.org. Free source · 1 technique in the Library

How we grade evidence

  • Strong evidence A meta-analysis, randomized trial, or a finding replicated across several studies.
  • Good evidence Several experiments in one peer-reviewed paper.
  • Early evidence One study, a small sample, or measured on audio only.
  • Coach’s method A technique a coach teaches for free, credited. Not tested in a study we know of.
  • BRAxIUM exercise An exercise we designed to practice a technique. It is not itself a tested finding.

Research

  • Huang et al. 2017 (Harvard). People who ask more questions, especially follow-up questions, are liked more, because they come across as responsive. Caveat: The speed-dating study in this paper was later reanalysed with different conclusions; the lab studies stand.
  • Yeomans et al. 2020 (Harvard). Acknowledging the other view before answering made people seen as better partners, and it lowered conflict later in the conversation.
  • Curhan & Pentland 2007 (MIT). In a practice negotiation, measurable patterns in the first five minutes (speaking share, turn-taking, vocal emphasis, mirroring) predicted about 30% of the outcome.
  • Benki et al. 2011 (University of Michigan, 1,380 calls). Moderately fast talkers did best on phone calls. Callers who never paused did worst; about four or five pauses a minute sounded natural.
  • Itzchakov, Kluger et al. 2017–2018 (PSPB). Being listened to well lowered speakers’ anxiety and defensiveness.
  • Chen et al. 2013 (Harvard Kennedy School). Eye contact made listeners who disagreed more resistant to persuasion. It only helped with listeners who already agreed. Caveat: Tested on political topics; applying it to sales is an extrapolation.
  • Lieberman et al. 2007 (UCLA). Putting a feeling into words reduced the brain’s alarm response.
  • Van Zant & Berger 2020 (Rutgers and Wharton). Speakers who varied pitch, raised volume or paused changed more minds, because they sounded more sure of their point, without seeming less sincere.
  • Schroeder & Epley 2015 (Chicago Booth). Recruiters who heard a pitch rated the candidate smarter and more hireable than recruiters who read the same words.
  • Ambady et al. 2002 (Harvard). Twenty seconds of voice tone, with the words filtered out, was enough for listeners to pick up dominance and concern.
  • Brooks 2014 (Harvard). Saying “I am excited” before a speech, instead of “I am calm,” led to longer speeches rated more persuasive, competent and confident.
  • Antonakis et al. 2011 (University of Lausanne). Managers trained in stories, contrasts, rhetorical questions, gestures and vocal animation were rated more effective by coworkers three months later.
  • Erickson et al. 1978 (Courtroom study). Testimony without hedges and hesitations was rated more credible.
  • Roche 2023; Tomlinson & Fox Tree 2011 (Frontiers in Psychology). Statements that rose at the end were rated less confident than the same words landing down.
  • Kluger & DeNisi 1996 (607 effects). Feedback helped on average, but over a third of feedback made performance worse, mostly when it pointed at the person instead of the task.
  • Hattie & Timperley 2007 (Review of Educational Research). Useful feedback answers three questions: where am I going, how am I going, and where to next.
  • Cepeda et al. 2006 (Psychological Bulletin). Practice spread out over days beats the same practice crammed together.
  • Gollwitzer & Sheeran 2006 (Meta-analysis). Plans in the form “when X happens, I will do Y” help people follow through.
  • van Ginkel et al. 2015 (52 studies). Presentation skills grow with clear goals, real tasks, examples, practice, timely feedback and self-review.
  • Hoque et al. 2013 (MIT Media Lab). A week with an automated conversation coach improved expert-rated interview performance; the control groups didn’t improve.
  • Shaikh et al. 2024 (Stanford). Practicing against a simulated partner cut escalating moves by 67% in a real conflict afterwards, compared with a lecture.
  • Kestin et al. 2025 (Harvard). A carefully structured AI tutor beat an active-learning class: students learned more in less time.
  • Wilson et al. 2019 (Nature Communications). A mathematical analysis found learning is fastest when practice is hard enough that you succeed about 85% of the time. Caveat: Derived for learning algorithms; it fits some animal and human learning, so treat it as a guide.
  • Bjork & Bjork 2011 (UCLA). Practice that feels a little hard (spaced out, mixed up, testing yourself) builds longer-lasting skill than practice that feels easy.
  • Ranehill et al. 2015 (Psychological Science). Power poses changed how powerful people felt, but the hormone effects didn’t replicate.
  • Kross et al. 2014 (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, seven studies). Talking to yourself by name or as “you”, instead of “I”, before a stressful social task helped people feel less distress and perform better, and they saw the task more as a challenge than a threat.
  • Wood, Perunovic & Lee 2009 (Psychological Science). Repeating a broad positive statement like “I’m a lovable person” made people with low self-esteem feel worse, and helped people with high self-esteem only a little.
  • Hatzigeorgiadis et al. 2011 (Perspectives on Psychological Science, 32 studies). Across 32 studies, self-talk improved sport performance by a moderate amount, most of all on precise tasks and on skills that were still new. Caveat: Measured on sport and motor tasks. Using cue words in conversation is an extrapolation.
  • Cohen & Sherman 2014 (Annual Review of Psychology). Writing briefly about values that matter to you can lower defensiveness and stress before a threatening situation; in some settings the benefits lasted months. Caveat: A review of many studies. Effects vary by person and setting, and some have been smaller in later work.
  • Boothby et al. 2018 (Psychological Science, five studies). After a first conversation, people liked their partner more than they thought their partner liked them. The gap was larger for shy people. Caveat: Studied getting to know someone, not romantic interest.
  • Epley & Schroeder 2014 (Journal of Experimental Psychology: General). Commuters who talked to a stranger had a better trip than those who sat alone, though they predicted the opposite. People wrongly assumed strangers wouldn’t want to talk.
  • Flynn & Lake 2008 (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology). People asking for help underestimated, by as much as half, how many others would say yes to a direct request.
  • Balban et al. 2023 (Cell Reports Medicine, Stanford). In a month-long randomized study, five minutes a day of cyclic sighing (two breaths in, one long breath out) improved mood and slowed breathing more than the same time of mindfulness meditation. Caveat: One study, compared with meditation rather than with doing nothing.
  • Gollwitzer & Sheeran 2006 (Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, meta-analysis). If-then plans (“When X happens, I will do Y”) helped people follow through on their goals, with a medium to large effect across many studies.
  • Lally et al. 2010 (European Journal of Social Psychology, UCL). Daily habits took from 18 to 254 days to feel automatic, around 66 on average. Missing one day did not set people back in a meaningful way; skipping often did. Caveat: 96 people, and automaticity was self-reported.
  • Breines & Chen 2012 (Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, four experiments). After a failure, people who wrote to themselves with self-compassion were more motivated to improve, and studied longer after a failed test, than people given a self-esteem boost.
  • Kappes & Oettingen 2011 (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, four studies). Picturing an ideal future, on its own, lowered people’s energy to go after it.
  • Wang, Wang & Gai 2021 (Frontiers in Psychology, meta-analysis of 21 studies). Picturing the outcome, then the obstacle, then an if-then plan for it (mental contrasting with implementation intentions) helped people reach goals, with a small to medium effect. Caveat: The authors note publication bias, so the true effect may be smaller.
  • Emmons & McCullough 2003 (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology). People who regularly listed things they were grateful for felt better about their lives and more upbeat than people who listed hassles.
  • Titze; National Center for Voice and Speech (Voice science). Humming and lip trills partly close the mouth, which lets the voice vibrate with less effort.

What we left out on purpose

  • Power-pose hormone claims: the hormone effects didn’t replicate (Ranehill et al. 2015).
  • The “7% words, 38% voice, 55% body” rule: it came from studies of single words about feelings, not communication in general.
  • Anything that claims to read emotions, honesty or personality from a face or voice.