Why We Think People Liked Us Less Than They Did

Ryan Halloran

So, I- I- I was driving home from this networking dinner last Tuesday, and my brain was, uh, it was basically running a high-def replay of every single thing I said. Like, "Why did you explain that coaching framework so slowly?" or, "That joke about the spreadsheets totally- totally bombed." It’s that, um, that post-social hangover, you know? You’re just dissecting your own performance under a microscope.

Dr. Maya Chen

Oh, absolutely. The post-social hangover is incredibly common, Ryan. But what’s fascinating is the asymmetry there. We- we look at our own stumbles through this giant magnifying glass, but when we’re listening to someone else, we’re not auditing them like that. We’re actually incredibly forgiving.

Ryan Halloran

Right! We- we don't care if they stutter or misspeak, but we think they're judging us for it. And it turns out there's actual, like, solid Yale research on exactly this. Erica Boothby and her colleagues—Margaret Clark, Gillian Sandstrom, and Gus Cooney—published a landmark paper back in 2018. They coined this term: the "liking gap."

Dr. Maya Chen

The liking gap. It’s such a perfect term for it. And their methodology was really elegant. They brought unacquainted strangers into the lab, paired them up for conversations that lasted anywhere from, uh, 2 to 45 minutes, and then asked them to rate two things. First, "How much did you like your partner?" and second, "How much do you think your partner liked you?"

Ryan Halloran

And what did they find? I mean, I- I assume people were way off.

Dr. Maya Chen

They were systematically off. The paper literally states, "We found that following interactions, people systematically underestimated how much their conversation partners liked them and enjoyed their company." It didn't matter if they talked for two minutes or forty-five. The gap was always there.

Ryan Halloran

That's wild. So, why- why do we do this to ourselves? What is the actual, like, cognitive glitch happening in our brains?

Dr. Maya Chen

Well, psychologists point to something called "thought valence." When we try to guess what someone else is thinking about us, we don't actually have access to their brain, obviously. So, we use our own internal monologue as a proxy. But our internal thoughts during a social interaction are overwhelmingly self-critical. We're thinking, "Oh, I sounded so boring," or, "I shouldn't have brought up that weird hobby." Because our internal thoughts are negative, we project that negativity onto them.

Ryan Halloran

Ah, so we assume their thoughts about us are just as critical as our thoughts about ourselves. But meanwhile, we're completely ignoring what the researchers call "neglected signals," right? Like, the actual, physical warmth they’re showing us.

Dr. Maya Chen

Exactly. They’re smiling, they’re nodding, they’re leaning in, asking questions. Independent video coders in the Boothby study watched the tapes and could easily see these positive signals. But the participants themselves were totally blind to them because they were so wrapped up in their own internal critic.

Ryan Halloran

It’s like we’re playing a game with a completely different rulebook. And actually, Maya, from a clinical perspective, is some of this tied to comparing ourselves to some... I don't know, some perfect version of ourselves?

Dr. Maya Chen

Yes, we call that "ideal-self comparison." You have this rehearsed, polished, flawless version of the conversation in your head. When the real, messy, human conversation inevitably falls short of that ideal, you feel like you failed. But the other person? They don't have access to your script! They only hear what you actually say, and to them, it just sounds like a normal, engaging chat.

Ryan Halloran

Oh, that makes so much sense. I- I actually saw this with an executive client of mine, let's call him Sarah. She had this big informational interview with a senior VP she really admired. She called me right after, totally convinced she’d completely blown it. She was like, "I rambled, I lost my train of thought, it was a disaster." But then, literally three hours later, she forwards me this enthusiastic follow-up email from the VP saying how much they enjoyed her insights and asking to connect her to a hiring manager. She was stunned.

Dr. Maya Chen

That is the liking gap in action, Ryan. We are our own worst audience.

Dr. Maya Chen

But, you know, it’s not the exact same for everyone. Recent research has started looking at individual differences. A 2024 study published in Scientific Reports found that the magnitude of the liking gap was greater for participants with more exposure to peer victimization, but not social anxiety.

Ryan Halloran

Wait, wait. Let me make sure I- I got that right. So, if you were bullied or experienced peer victimization as a kid, your liking gap is wider, but just being generally socially anxious doesn't widen it?

Dr. Maya Chen

Exactly. Isn't that fascinating? It suggests the liking gap isn't just about general nervousness or shyness in the moment. It’s actually deeply sensitive to real, past social trauma. If you’ve been burned before, your social thermostat is essentially recalibrated to expect rejection, so you misinterpret neutral or even positive signals as negative.

Ryan Halloran

Wow. That's a really heavy, but important distinction. It’s like a protective shield that’s just calibrated way too high. And, I mean, does this get any better when we’re online? Like, does texting or being on Zoom take the edge off this bias?

Dr. Maya Chen

You'd think so, right? Maybe having a screen gives us some safety. But a 2024 study in Computers in Human Behavior actually looked at this. They tested text-chat, audio-only, and video-chat. And the exact finding was that "the liking gap was present across all settings with no significant differences between them."

Ryan Halloran

No differences at all? So, whether I’m texting, on a Zoom call, or meeting in person, my brain is still telling me the exact same lie that they don't like me?

Dr. Maya Chen

Yep. The digital medium doesn't cure our self-doubt. We pack our internal critic with us wherever we go online.

Ryan Halloran

Okay, so if this is basically a law of human psychology, how do we actually fight back? Because as a coach, I want to give people something they can actually do tomorrow morning to fix this.

Dr. Maya Chen

Well, we can start with a "20% Recalibration Rule." It’s a three-step experiment. First, you have to shift your focus externally. When you catch yourself in that post-social replay loop, actively force your brain to look at the evidence. Did they smile? Did they ask questions? Recall their external cues, not your internal feelings.

Ryan Halloran

Okay, shift to the data. I like that. What’s step two?

Dr. Maya Chen

Step two is the math: consciously add 20%. If your brain tells you a conversation was a 6 out of 10, treat the liking gap like gravity. It's a constant bias. Force yourself to adjust that estimate up to an 8. Just assume you are 20% more liked than you think you are.

Ryan Halloran

I love that. It’s like correcting for a windy day when you’re aiming. And step three?

Dr. Maya Chen

Step three is the "24-Hour Connection Anchor." Because the liking gap makes us hesitate to follow up—we think we’re annoying them—make it a rule to send a low-friction text or email within 24 hours. Keep it simple and reference one specific detail they shared. Like, "Hey, loved that podcast recommendation you mentioned, I’m queueing it up." It bypasses the overthinking.

Ryan Halloran

That's incredibly practical. And, you know, this is especially critical during major life transitions—starting a new job, moving, networking—where our threat-detection systems are already on red alert. Interestingly, Boothby did a longitudinal study of college suitemates, and she found that this liking gap can actually persist for up to nine months before people finally feel secure enough for the bias to fade.

Dr. Maya Chen

Nine months! That’s a long time to carry around that doubt.

Ryan Halloran

It really is. It makes you wonder how many potential friendships or professional connections we just... leave on the table simply because we trust our harsh inner critic instead of the positive signals right in front of us.

Dr. Maya Chen

Absolutely. Well, next time you're driving home dissecting a conversation, remember the 20% rule. Alright, good chatting, Ryan, talk soon.

Ryan Halloran

Talk soon, Maya.