Study shows: Voice reveals potential for conflict

A few days ago, I was invited to a preliminary talk for a routine operation that has been pending for some time. Not really exciting thing, minimally invasive, after a night in the clinic I should go home again.

As an enlightened patient, I prepare myself well, study the current treatment methods. I am fascinated by the idea that the doctors operate a robot in this operation, whose fine instruments perform the procedure. Brave new world.

A conversation with aftermath

In the clinic, after a short examination, the head surgeon explains to me about possible consequential damage on the basis of a form. A short exchange with the anesthesiologist and three signatures later, I'm already back in the car.

Surprisingly, I wake up two days in the morning with dystopian dreams. Irritated, I notice how much the inconspicuous 30 minutes in the hospital have obviously subliminally unsettled me.

Voice betrays potential for conflict

I have a Harvard University study in the mind I had researched for my first book. In it, the authors describe how precisely the risk of medical malpractice lawsuits can be read from the tonality of initial patient consultations.

How do you research something like that?

Incomprehensible 10-second snippets from audio recordings of doctor-patient conversations were played to uninvolved persons using a questionnaire.

They evaluated four criteria:

• Heat
• Anxiety
• hostility and
• Dominance

Result:

If you want to avoid claims for damages, or generalize something, do not want to lose your customers, pay particular attention in communication

• Donation
• Eye level
• Empathy
• Serious interest in the other

What conclusions I have drawn from all this, and what recommendations I give for even more success in delicate conversations, you will find out in the podcast.