NEW YORK, United States — What if the truth someone desperately needs to hear is the very thing everyone around them is afraid to say?
A revealing psychology experiment suggests that people can be remarkably reluctant to speak up, even when sharing an uncomfortable truth could spare someone embarrassment or help them correct a simple mistake.
In a 2022 study, researchers found that just 2.6% of participants told a survey administrator about a visible smudge on their face.
That means more than 97% stayed silent in that particular experiment, despite having an opportunity to point out something the person would likely want to know.
The findings raise an uncomfortable question: If people hesitate to mention something as minor as lipstick or food on someone’s face, how much harder is it to confront a friend, partner, colleague or family member about a serious problem?
Psychologists say the answer involves more than politeness. Fear of embarrassment, social rejection and emotional conflict can make people avoid conversations that could ultimately benefit everyone involved.
But research suggests that staying silent isn’t always the kindest choice.
Why People Avoid Telling the Truth — Even When It Could Help
Cornell University professor Vanessa Bohns, a social psychologist specializing in social influence and human behavior, has spent years examining why people hesitate to speak up.
Her 2026 book, Should I Say Something? The Science of What to Share—and What to Keep to Yourself, explores how people can decide whether to voice difficult opinions, offer constructive criticism or remain silent.
In an article originally published by The New York Times and republished by CNA Lifestyle, Bohns explained that uncomfortable honesty often creates an emotional dilemma.
People may recognize that someone needs feedback but worry that delivering it will hurt that person’s feelings.
That fear can become powerful enough to override their willingness to help.
Yet the evidence reveals a striking disconnect between what people expect and what others actually want.
Research reported by the American Psychological Association in 2022 found that people consistently underestimate how much others value constructive feedback.
In other words, individuals may avoid providing information because they assume it will be unwelcome, even when the recipient would appreciate knowing.
The implication extends beyond minor social embarrassments.
At work, silence can prevent employees from discovering problems that undermine their performance.
In relationships, avoiding difficult discussions can allow misunderstandings and resentment to grow.
The challenge is determining when honesty becomes helpful rather than unnecessarily hurtful.
Related: Psychologist Reveals Simple Trick That Can Stop Couples’ Arguments Before They Explode
The 97% Silence Experiment: What Researchers Actually Found
The widely discussed experiment was part of research investigating why people underestimate others’ desire for constructive feedback.
During a pilot study, researchers placed a noticeable smudge, such as chocolate, lipstick or a red mark, on the face of someone administering a survey.
Participants had an opportunity to alert the person.
But according to the American Psychological Association, only four out of 155 participants spoke up.
That translates to approximately 2.6%.
The overwhelming majority remained silent.
However, the result should not be interpreted as proof that 97% of people routinely conceal important truths.
The experiment involved a particular situation, and the findings cannot automatically be generalized to every workplace, friendship or romantic relationship.
Its significance lies in demonstrating just how uncomfortable giving unsolicited feedback can be.
Researchers found broader evidence that feedback providers underestimate recipients’ willingness to hear useful criticism.
The discovery challenges a common assumption: that remaining silent is necessarily more considerate than telling someone about an easily correctable problem.
Four Questions Psychologists Recommend Before Sharing a Difficult Truth
Bohns and University of Chicago behavioral science professor Emma Levine identify practical considerations for deciding when and how to communicate uncomfortable information.
Their guidance offers a more thoughtful alternative to either brutally honest criticism or complete silence.
1. Will Telling the Truth Actually Help the Person?
Before speaking, consider whether the information will benefit the recipient.
Will it allow them to correct a mistake?
Could it prevent future embarrassment?
Might it improve their performance, relationships or well-being?
If the feedback offers a meaningful benefit, a difficult conversation may be justified.
A useful test is to reverse the situation.
Would you want to know if you were making the same mistake?
For example, an employee repeatedly interrupting colleagues during meetings may not recognize how the behavior affects teamwork.
Pointing out the pattern respectfully could help that person become a better communicator.
By contrast, commenting negatively on someone’s appearance when nothing can reasonably be changed may offer little benefit.
The distinction matters because honesty alone does not automatically make criticism constructive.
2. Would the Feedback Still Be Important If Someone Else Delivered It?
Another useful question involves removing your personal discomfort from the equation.
Imagine that someone else—perhaps a trusted colleague or skilled communicator—could deliver the information instead.
Would you still believe the recipient should know?
If the answer is yes, the information may genuinely be important.
This approach helps people distinguish between legitimate concern and their own anxiety about confrontation.
It can also reveal the opposite problem.
Sometimes, people feel compelled to speak because they are angry, irritated or eager to prove themselves right.
If criticism would serve mainly to release frustration rather than help another person, reconsidering the conversation may be wiser.
The goal is not to win an argument.
It is to communicate information that can make a positive difference.
3. Is This the Right Time to Have the Conversation?
Even valuable advice can become counterproductive when delivered at the wrong moment.
Emma Levine, who studies honesty and communication at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, emphasizes the importance of timing.
A person experiencing emotional distress may struggle to absorb criticism immediately.
Someone already overwhelmed at work might be more receptive to feedback after an urgent deadline has passed.
When circumstances allow, asking permission before offering advice can make the discussion more respectful.
For example:
“There’s something I’ve noticed that might help. Would you be open to hearing it?”
This gives the recipient an opportunity to prepare for the conversation.
It also reduces the likelihood that the discussion will feel like an unexpected personal attack.
However, not every situation permits delay. Urgent safety concerns, harassment or serious misconduct may require timely intervention through appropriate channels.
The important distinction is between respecting someone’s readiness and using timing as a permanent excuse to avoid necessary action.
4. Can the Person Actually Do Something With Your Feedback?
Perhaps the most important test is whether the feedback is actionable.
Constructive criticism should identify a specific issue and offer a realistic opportunity for improvement.
Consider the difference between telling someone:
“You’re terrible at communicating.”
And saying:
“During our last meeting, several people couldn’t finish explaining their ideas. Giving everyone time to speak might help us make better decisions.”
The second message identifies observable behavior and suggests a practical change.
It avoids reducing a person’s character to a negative label.
Harvard Business School’s guidance on effective feedback similarly recommends focusing on specific actions, explaining their impact and allowing the recipient to contribute their perspective.
When feedback offers no realistic path forward, its emotional cost may outweigh its value.
Why Honest Communication Matters in the Workplace
The debate is especially relevant to modern offices, where employees and managers must balance performance expectations with psychological well-being.
Workers need constructive feedback to improve their skills, understand expectations and recognize problems.
But managers often struggle with how directly to criticize employees.
Some delay uncomfortable conversations until performance issues become impossible to ignore.
Others deliver feedback so harshly that employees become defensive or disengaged.
Neither approach guarantees improvement.
Research and management guidance suggest that better feedback focuses on specific behavior and provides opportunities for learning.
For younger workers, expectations surrounding communication and management style are also changing.
As previously explored by WWC ONE MEDIA in its report on Gen Z burnout and workplace management, employees may increasingly expect clearer guidance, meaningful feedback and healthier workplace boundaries.
That does not mean managers should avoid difficult truths.
It means the way those truths are communicated can influence whether employees learn from criticism or simply feel attacked.
The lesson is particularly important for leaders responsible for employee development.
Honesty and empathy are not necessarily competing values.
When communicated appropriately, they can reinforce each other.
How Difficult Truths Can Affect Romantic and Family Relationships
Workplaces are not the only environments where people struggle with uncomfortable conversations.
Romantic partners, parents, adult children and close friends regularly face situations that require honesty.
A partner might avoid discussing financial worries because they fear starting an argument.
An adult child may hesitate to confront a parent about a recurring boundary violation.
A friend may notice troubling behavior but worry that raising the issue will damage the friendship.
These concerns are understandable.
However, avoiding every uncomfortable subject can leave important problems unresolved.
Research-based communication advice generally emphasizes addressing specific behavior, acknowledging the other person’s perspective and choosing an appropriate setting.
The principle also applies to disagreements between generations.
As highlighted in WWC ONE MEDIA’s coverage of grandparents challenging parents’ household rules, conflicts over childcare and family expectations can become more complicated when relatives struggle to communicate boundaries.
Difficult conversations do not automatically strengthen relationships.
Some criticism is unfair, poorly timed or unnecessarily aggressive.
But carefully expressed concerns can create opportunities for greater understanding.
The challenge is making the discussion about addressing a problem rather than assigning blame.
The Hidden Cost of Staying Silent
There is another side to the psychology of difficult conversations.
People who avoid sharing constructive feedback may believe they are protecting others from discomfort.
But silence can sometimes deprive individuals of information they need to improve.
An employee who repeatedly makes the same mistake may never realize why colleagues are frustrated.
A friend who unknowingly crosses a boundary may continue the behavior because nobody explains the problem.
A manager who receives only praise may assume their leadership style is effective even when employees have serious concerns.
Over time, these information gaps can become more damaging than the uncomfortable conversations people initially avoided.
This does not mean every negative opinion deserves to be spoken.
An important difference exists between constructive feedback and unsolicited judgment.
Useful feedback focuses on information the recipient can reasonably act upon.
Unhelpful criticism may simply communicate dislike, frustration or personal preference.
Learning to recognize that difference is essential.
What Harvard Business School Research Adds to the Debate
The findings discussed by Bohns are consistent with broader research into communication and performance.
Harvard Business School Online recommends that effective feedback should be direct, specific and connected to the impact of the behavior being discussed.
Its guidance also emphasizes giving recipients an opportunity to explain their perspective.
Similarly, Harvard Business Review has explored why the timing of feedback matters.
A 2023 article explained that requesting feedback before a project is finished can provide a better opportunity to make improvements.
This points to a broader lesson.
Feedback is often more valuable when it arrives early enough to influence an outcome.
Waiting until a problem becomes irreversible can reduce the usefulness of even well-intentioned advice.
The same principle can apply outside professional settings.
When people provide timely, respectful and practical information, the recipient has a greater opportunity to respond constructively.
Could Being Too Honest Also Cause Harm?
There is an important warning against treating honesty as an excuse for cruelty.
Not every uncomfortable observation needs to be shared.
And not every person offering criticism is acting in the recipient’s best interest.
Comments about sensitive personal characteristics, private experiences or circumstances outside someone’s control may produce emotional harm without providing meaningful value.
Repeated unsolicited criticism can also undermine trust.
The real objective is not to eliminate social filters or express every negative thought.
Instead, it is to recognize when remaining silent prevents someone from receiving information that could genuinely help.
Bohns’ four-question approach offers a practical way to evaluate that decision.
The underlying message is straightforward: before giving difficult feedback, examine both your motivation and its likely consequences.
Why This Psychology Research Matters More Than Ever
In workplaces, families and online communities, communication increasingly takes place through messages, social media platforms and digital meetings.
These environments create additional opportunities for misunderstandings.
A short message can sound harsher than intended.
A public comment can turn private feedback into an embarrassing confrontation.
And a conversation postponed indefinitely can allow resentment to deepen.
The principles identified by communication researchers remain relevant across these settings.
Before speaking, consider whether the information is useful.
Before criticizing, assess whether the person can do anything about the problem.
Before choosing the moment, consider how the message will be received.
And before staying silent, ask whether your reluctance reflects genuine concern for the other person—or simply a desire to avoid personal discomfort.
These questions can help turn difficult conversations into opportunities for constructive change.
The Bottom Line: Truth Without Empathy Can Hurt, But Silence Can Also Carry a Price
The 2022 research highlights a surprising feature of human behavior.
People may want constructive criticism more than others realize, yet those around them often hesitate to provide it.
The pilot experiment in which only 2.6% of participants pointed out an obvious facial smudge is a vivid example of that reluctance.
But the larger lesson is not that everyone should become brutally honest.
It is that useful honesty requires judgment, empathy and timing.
From marriage and friendship to corporate leadership and family relationships, the most effective communication often involves difficult truths delivered with care.
And as psychologists continue studying the reasons people avoid uncomfortable conversations, one question remains especially relevant:
If speaking up could help someone become better, safer or more informed, could staying silent sometimes be the more harmful choice?
