The question that most people ask themselves as they walk into their boss's office to negotiate their salaries is likely some variant of "What am I going to say?" But according to hostage negotiator Chris Voss, that might be the least important thing to keep in mind when negotiating.

Voss, now an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's McDonough School of Business, spent 24 years at the FBI. It was as an FBI agent that he started to get interested in hostage negotiations.

At the time, a supervisor told him to start by volunteering at a suicide hotline to gain the set of listening abilities that a hostage negotiator needs. By 1992, he was training at the FBI's school for negotiators, and from 2004 to 2007, he was the FBI's lead international hostage negotiator. After retirement, Voss founded The Black Swan Group to bring negotiation know-how to the business world.

I recently spoke with Voss about how to use negotiation strategies to better ask for raises at work. The transcript of our conversation has been edited for clarity.

Bourree Lam: Is there a disconnect between what people commonly think a negotiation is and what it actually involves?

Chris Voss: Absolutely. The most dangerous negotiation is the one you don't know you're in. We use that at my company. People typically only believe they're in a negotiation when dollars are involved. And maybe sometimes they're smart enough to see if there's a commodity that you can count being exchanged. And of course the commodity that we most commonly exchange is money.

In reality, every single negotiation involves another commodity that's far more important to us which is time—minutes, hours, our investment in time. So even if you're talking about dollars, the commodity of time is always there because there has to be a discussion about how the commodity of dollars is moved ... This is what I learned in hostage negotiation, a ransom demand is irrelevant. Trying to get the money is the challenge ... Price is only one term in any negotiation. In a job negotiation, your salary is only one term. And typically you could take almost any price, or any salary and make that a great deal or a lousy deal depending on the terms.

Lam: How to get the money is a little more straightforward in a salary negotiation as opposed to a hostage negotiation. So what terms are we talking about in a job negotiation?

Voss: In a job negotiation, the implementation of that deal is your success that also causes the company to succeed. Most people just say, "Hey look, just pay me a high enough salary and I'll be a superstar." Or "I'm so good, as long as you pay me enough I'm going to be worth it." Two things: What if the position you're taking doesn't give you any sort of authority or influence? Something as small as the job title. You can't implement anything you want to do if you don't have the authority beyond soft power, based on your position to get people to listen to you. You can't be successful without that, and that's one of many terms.

Lam: What are the basics of negotiation strategy and can you describe what we should pay attention to? For example, what's tactical listening?

Voss: You have to have an understanding of what you're listening for, and it's much more important to have thought that out in advance ... one of the key issues in this is listening for a future between you and the other party ... For a hostage negotiator, when I've got a guy barricaded in a bank or I've got fugitives barricaded in the 27th floor of a high rise apartment—which I've had—the first thing I want to say to him is: "I'm here to make sure you get out alive."

Lam: That's interesting because when most people go into salary negotiations, they're often overly focused on what to say—the script—and not listening.

Voss: Yeah exactly, they're focused on what to say and they're really focused on one objective. Everybody's very focused on getting a good salary, and so then the problem with those two things are the more focused you are, the more you have blinders on. We like to say that the key to flexibility is don't be so sure of what you want that you wouldn't take something better. If you're focused on the number, you're not seeing the other possibilities.

We'll get back to how you can push that number higher. One of the ways is to talk about other things. The more pleasant you are in an interaction ... there's some data out there that says that people are six times more likely to get what they want if they're likable. So you put yourself in a position to push very hard the more likable that you are. People most of the time think that in order to push very hard, "I gotta be tough." In reality it's the opposite: The nicer you are, the harder you can push.

Lam: I think most people struggle with that because those two things seem to work against each other. How do you put those two things together, being nice and pushing hard?

Voss: First thing is understanding that it works. Once you know that then it's easy to have confidence in the approach. If I say something to you with a smile, I know you're more likely to collaborate than if I'm being really direct ... that's exactly what a hostage negotiator does. The more easy we are, the more reassuring we are, the harder we can push.

Lam: What do you mean by pushing?

Voss: It's reminding the other side of what you would like, and what's also very important are calibrated questions. Every question you ask anyone impacts them on two levels: an emotional and an intellectual level. We construct and calibrate every question to have an emotional impact; most people only think of the intellectual impact. We want to have an influence on what that emotional impact is.

Lam: Can you give me an example?

Voss: So if someone says, "Let's revisit your raise in 3 months," what you want to do is not let that go. Put them in a position that makes them sound like that's an unacceptable response. You ask this question and in this way: "How am I supposed to do that?" You have to use those exact words. There are two or three possible answers to that, and you want to be prepared for all three. One is "You're right, you can't." The very worst possible answer that everyone imagines is "Because you have to." How bad is that? The reality is that there's no downside to that answer, and that's maybe 20 percent of the time.

Lam: Why is that not bad? My instincts say that's bad.

Voss: First of all, you found out they're not going to budge, which makes you 10 times smarter than you were 60 seconds ago. Part of the purpose of what we said is to diagnose whether there's any room in their position. That's critical to how you move forward. Is there any room and can I navigate it? So now you've just found out there's no room, which makes you smarter. And now you can make an informed decision, you know for sure there's only one or two choices—and that's walk away or agree.

Lam: When you hear something you don't want to hear in a negotiation, is it important to stay calm and realize you're "smarter"?

Voss: Yes, the real way to do that is the more you're focusing on how the other side is reacting the less you react. It's like a magic trick of keeping your own emotions under control. By listening very intently to the other side and also maintaining a positive external demeanor, that moves you from the very emotional side of your brain into the very rational side. That automatically helps you stay calm.

Lam: What about other kinds of deflections? What if your manager says, "It's not a good time," or "We don't negotiate," or "We don't have the budget"? Is there anything you can say to find out if that's really their position?

Voss:  The first is the question. The second is to say the statement: "It seems like there's nothing you can do." People do not like to feel powerless, what it does is it makes the other side feel like they might be somewhat powerless. They're going to want to search for answers. And certainly for someone higher than you in the hierarchy, the last thing they want to look to you, a subordinate, is to look powerless. It threatens their identity and authority. They're not going to be comfortable saying yes to that ... The key to any negotiation with the people you work for is deference, there's great power in deference. So you can make a statement if you're being very deferential. All you're doing is making an observation about the environment, you're not accusing them directly of that. You're not making a judgement.

Lam: How much research should a person do before negotiation?

Voss:The important thing is context. The research is helpful, but it may or may not have any impact on your company's ability to pay you that. You have to understand market prices, but you also have to understand a market price does not impact a buyer's ability to pay. Your employer might not be able to pay the price you're looking for ... they actually want to see you not give in and be very pleasant at the same time because they know that's how you're going to deal with them in a continuing basis as you work with them. And they don't want a colleague who gives in, but they also don't want a colleague who's a jerk.

Lam: What do you think about mentioning competing offers during a salary negotiation? There's a feeling that it's hard to know one's market price without a competing offer, or that not having a competing offer means not having any bargaining chips. Is it seen as uncooperative? Is it better to just focus on performance and goals?

Voss: You never want the other side to feel like you're taking them hostage. And so a lot of people have really ruined their opportunities by trying to create an auction, and the other side feels very manipulated by that, and that's very problematic. And especially if they don't have the ability to pay. They might not have the ability to give you the salary you're looking for. And so now you kind of take them hostage, and they're going to resent that as well. I don't counsel that. The thing that I most frequently coach current and former students ... we just don't talk about competing salaries because the other side is going to resent it. It's a lot more important to talk about the abilities that they have and the goals for the future that they have.

Lam: What's the most useful thing to keep in mind for negotiation that you've heard from your students?

Voss: The most useful thing to keep in mind really is this is a bit of an audition for how you're going to interact with these people if you make the team. So they want someone who is pleasant and doesn't give in. That's what they're hoping for because at some point in time, you're going to be their champion, and they're going to want you to be able to stand up for them the same way that you stand up for yourself and maintain good relationships. Then, within that context, you've got a lot of latitude.

Once you can do those two things, you've now got an awful lot of latitude to be able to pleasantly persist, if you will, because people are going to want to collaborate with you. They're going to want to find solutions, especially if you want to invest in their future as well. How do you turn this from being all about you to being about us? Because now they want to take a chance on you. They want to give you more latitude if it's about us. It becomes us when you start talking with them about 'how do we prosper together? How can I be involved in making sure this company prospers?'

Lam: What do you recommend with respect to anchoring? One nightmare for employees negotiating salary is when a company asks you to name a price. What's a good way to deal with this tricky question?

Voss: The first thing to do is say, very gently, "Are you making me an offer, or are you fishing for information?" That's the first response, and you have to wait to see how they respond from that point forward. Now, understand that in any negotiation, and this is a negotiation like any other, they've got a range of numbers in mind to begin with, and what they're trying to do is they're trying to collect information so that they properly categorize you, and then you land in that range. Now, the harder that you force to get to the top of that range, the less give there's going to be on other issues that might be more important, so it's generally not a good idea to get to the absolute top of that range.

But the next thing to ask is, after you've asked a couple of times and you say to the other side, "Alright, I'm sure you have a range in mind." And people are a lot more comfortable responding with a range than responding with a given number. They're much more likely to respond. So what you've done is, you want to continue to be responsive to their question, but you're not putting yourself in a position where you're going to get cornered over a number. And this is not the same thing as stalling. This is responding to different things within what they've said as opposed to ducking the answer entirely. And then, what you should do is, if you know the market, if they're still pushing you, pushing you, pushing you, pushing you and they still haven't thrown a number out, what you need to do then is throw out a range yourself, and it's got to be a high range.

Lam: What's the role of empathy in negotiations?

Voss: I view it as being critical. It's critical to negotiations. Typically what people think is, "I either have to be assertive or I have to be empathetic." So what that means is, in order for me to try to push even harder for what I want, that means I have to be less understanding of their position, which, when you put it like that, it makes absolutely no sense ... That sounds like nonsense when you put it like that, but nobody realizes that's what they're saying. "I want to push harder for what I'm going to get, so I need to push harder instead of being understanding." And we've actually taken a bit of a spin on empathy, and we refer to it as a 'proactive empathy.' Because now that you begin to recognize that everything you say is going to have an emotional impact on the other side, and most of these impacts are imminently predictable, what you now do is you begin to navigate these emotions before they even occur, if that doesn't sound like too much mumbo-jumbo.

Lam: That actually just sounds hard to do.

Voss: It takes some practice, and I think you had a question about preparation as well. And that's exactly the issue. Most people only prepare for the numbers, they don't prepare for the emotional dynamics that the negotiation is going to engage in. So this is just simply adding in your preparation, adding a little bit more preparation to understand the emotional dynamics. Like if I ask you for more money than you can pay, you're obviously going to become uncomfortable with that. You don't have to be a genius to know that. It's effectively a proactive application of emotional intelligence.

Lam: Research has shown that women negotiate starting offers at a much lower rate than men. In Lean In, Sheryl Sandberg recommends that women use "we" and communal language to negotiate in order to avoid social costs. What do you think of that approach?

Voss: It's a good approach in that what you're trying to do there is you're trying to create the collaborative relationship there. What I would do is take it a step farther. You know, the hostage negotiator, from the very beginning, "I want to talk about how I'm going to help you with your future. I'm here to make sure that you live." That's all about me salvaging your future. So let's take the Sheryl Sandberg and take it the next level up to the hostage negotiator approach. Sheryl Sandberg is about here and now. Let's be partners now. And a hostage negotiator is: Here's a vision of the future that we both exist in. So that's taking what she's talking about a step farther. How do you hire me in a way that your company flourishes because you hired me? And all of a sudden, the other side, the emotional impact there is, "Wow, you want me to flourish. You're not here just to make you well and happy, you want to make me wealthy too by our collaboration."

How is you giving me what I want a path to what you want? Everybody's interactions is we all say to ourselves, what's in it for me? Why should I do this for this person? Well, it gets me what I want. And what's the thing that we can all agree to begin with. In business, we can all agree that we want to be wealthy. A hostage negotiator's agreement with the guy who's barricaded is, "I want you to live." So if my approach to you is, "I want you to be famous for hiring me. I want your promotions in many cases to come because I was so successful because you hired me, working for you. I propelled your career as a great hire." You want to say things that make the other side stop and think and then rethink their position. And they'll only rethink that position if it benefits them. So that's how you take, in an employment negotiation, you want them to rethink their position where they're thinking of you as being a critical component of their future success.

Lam: Is the bottom line to keep everybody feeling good?

Voss: It is because the profitability of any agreement, the success of any agreement, comes from implementation. And you need happy partners because you need them to implement. So you only find out if you make your money after the agreement when you go to implement it. And if they're mad at me, if they're unhappy with me, then that implementation is horrible. Every chance they get to not do something, they're going to cut a corner, or they're going to deny me a benefit because they're going to be mad about how I got them into the agreement. They're going to remember how I got them into the agreement. I know they're going to remember how we got into it. I need them to remember it in a positive way.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This ‘Shark Tank’ investor once made a $5 million mistake

Long-term relationships involve effort and compromise. Feelings of love often wax and wane over the long haul, and need to be rekindled.

But they're worth the work.

Here are some of the personal benefits you can reap as a result of being in a committed and loving relationship. 

1. You'll internalize your partner's positive judgments of you.

Let's say you've always been sensitive about your belly. However, your partner loves it. Over time, you're likely to see it less negatively, as a result of your partner's perception. (This effect might not bring about a complete transformation of your self-perception, but it should at least deliver a shift in the right direction.)

Of course, this principle also applies to inner qualities and skills, like your perceptions of your own likability, or your cooking — it applies to any domain in which your partner/spouse sees you more positively than you see yourself.

2. You can reap the benefits of "health behavior concordance."

Spouses and partners tend to pick up on each other's health habits: If one visits the dentist once a year, the other spouse is more likely to start doing the same. This effect is part of the reason why it's important to pick a conscientious mate(link is external).

But what if your spouse's health behaviors are poor? Then you take the lead. If you make changes, your spouse will probably pick up on at least some of them, even if only subtly. Many of these processes occur outside of conscious effort or awareness. It's similar to when you hear someone singing a song, find yourself singing it later, and wonder why.

3. You'll feel a sense of attachment security.

When you feel a sense of a secure and permanent bond with a spouse or partner, you can try new things and know you've got a "soft place to fall" (or land) if what you try doesn't work out.  

Also, people in long-term relationships often go through crises together, such as health crises. From these experiences, you'll learn that your partner will be there for you — and this can reduce anxiety even for those who are prone to it.

4. You can savor shared memories.

Looking back on positive experiences you've shared with your partner is an effective strategy for personal (and relationship) happiness. Your shared memories might be a vacation, or something as simple as talking about how much a tree in your garden has grown since you first planted it.

5. You can correct each other's thinking biases.

The more experiences you've shared, the more you learn what each other's thinking biases are. For example, your partner might rush into decisions when they're feeling flustered or hungry — or tend to jump to negative conclusions prematurely.  

When you know each other's thinking style intimately, you can help each other "catch" when the other is falling into a characteristic pattern. In a loving long-term relationship, your present and futures are so intertwined that you can trust your partner has your best interests at heart.

SEE ALSO: A couples therapist explains the 4 relationship killers that end marriages

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 'Dog Whisperer' Cesar Millan: How I lost everything and got it all back in three years

Writing a dating profile is much like writing an article or a novel — if I haven't grabbed you by now, you've already swiped left and clicked to the next best thing to read. 

On Saturday, author and editor Dave Eggers helped San Franciscans increase their chances of a lifelong match by editing their online dating profiles at a National Independent Bookstore Day event at Books Inc. in the Castro district.

Eggers became famous with his 2000 autobiography, "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius," and in 2013 wrote "The Circle," a dystopian novel based loosely on life at Silicon Valley tech companies like Google and Facebook. 

Eggers wouldn't let Business Insider sit in on the editing, but we spoke to a few attendees about what Eggers said they should do. Here's what he told them:

Be specific. One attendee had "Eating and drinking with friends" listed as some of her favorite activities. Eggers suggested that she list a restaurant where someone could find her, or a specific cocktail at a bar, as a better conversation starter.

Make sure it's congruent. If you list consuming cocktails as an activity but then say in response to "what's your ideal Friday night?" that you actually prefer Saturday mornings, you may be sending mixed signals, as Eggers pointed out to one person. And you probably don't want to be sending mixed signals to someone before you even start dating them.

End on a "Zing." If you have a joke, save it to be the last part of the answer so that's what people remember. And if the last question is "why you should message me," make sure you sound inviting so people want to message you.

Be honest with what is a cliché (and try to avoid them)."Recognize when you're repeating something that you've heard," said Dan, one of the attendees, and then try to eliminate it from your profile. Don't say you like comedy or like to laugh. Show it. 

Make your self-summary feel like the first line of a novel. It needs to be the "hook." The "about" section is where you can sound most generic, Eggers told Dan, so make sure you hook people in like you would in a book. Don't have them glaze over the section about who you are because it reads like everyone else's. 

SEE ALSO: Meet the San Francisco dating coach who earns up to $20,000 a month teaching introverted men how to be successful with women

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Psychologists Discovered How To Make People Like You

Championship golfer Tiger Woods and Olympic skier Lindsey Vonn have ended their relationship after nearly three years of dating, the former couple announced separately Sunday night.

Vonn, 30, wrote on her Facebook page:

After nearly three years together, Tiger and I have mutually decided to end our relationship. I will always cherish the memories that we've created together. Unfortunately, we both lead incredibly hectic lives that force us to spend a majority of our time apart. I will always admire and respect Tiger. He and his beautiful family will always hold a special place in my heart.

Woods, 39, took to his personal website:

Lindsey and I have mutually decided to stop dating. I have great admiration, respect and love for Lindsey and I'll always cherish our time together. She has been amazing with Sam and Charlie and my entire family. Unfortunately, we lead very hectic lives and are both competing in demanding sports. It's difficult to spend time together.

The couple first announced they were dating via a Facebook post by Woods in 2012:

This season has been great so far and I'm happy with my wins at Torrey and Doral. Something nice that's happened off the course was meeting Lindsey Vonn. Lindsey and I have been friends for some time, but over the last few months we have become very close and are now dating. We thank you for your support and for respecting our privacy. We want to continue our relationship, privately, as an ordinary couple and continue to compete as athletes.

Since then, the two were frequently spotted at each other's events.

As recently as last month, Vonn accompanied Woods to the Masters Tournament at Augusta National Golf Club, where she was seen doting on Woods' son, Charlie, and daughter, Sam.

In February, Woods supported Vonn after she crossed the finish line of the giant slalom in Red Tail Stadium at the FIS Alpine World Ski Championships in Beaver Creek, Colorado.

He was also by her side at the Audi FIS Alpine Ski World Cup Women's Downhill in December 2013 in Val d'Isere, France.

In July 2013, Vonn went with Woods to the 142nd Open Championship at Muirfield.

They first made their debut as a couple at the Met Ball in May 2013.

The relationship was Woods' first since his many affairs were revealed in 2009.

Vonn filed for divorce in November 2011, according to TMZ, and it was finalized in January 2013.

SEE ALSO: Lindsey Vonn put a real squirrel on Tiger Woods' neck

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here Are The Handicaps For A Bunch Of Celebrity Golfers

Gandhi said, "The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others."

And one of the most effective ways to serve is through small acts of kindness developed into everyday habits.

They may seem like little things, but most of us can recall a time when a seemingly little thing — a kind word, a helping hand — has made a memorable mark and a big difference.

Here are some simple ideas on how you can leave your mark:

1. Give your undivided attention. Be present and available to those you're with.

2. Be a problem solver. Become known as a person who has solutions and answers — or who knows where to find them.

3. Remember people's names. It makes them feel valued and leaves a great impression.

4. Ask "How can I help?" Be the person who is always willing. Just the offer communicates that you value someone.

5. Set high standards. Let others always see you doing and giving your best.

6. Make your contribution greater than your reward. Always give a little more than you get.

7. Lead with integrity, no matter how much it costs. It's the right thing to do in any case, but it also makes it easier for those who see you to do the same.

8. Smile. A smile is an invitation to connect.

9. Compliment the person in the first 30 seconds of the conversation. Pick something specific and personal. It will make the person feel valued.

10. Make people feel good about themselves. Acknowledge their gifts and talents.

11. Listen silently. Listen is an anagram of silent. Try to listen without interrupting.

12. Make eye contact. As the saying goes, the eyes are the window to the soul. When you can look someone square in the eye, you are saying you value the person and want to connect.

13. Show respect. It's the bottom-line due of every person you meet.

14. Share the credit. When something important has been accomplished, share the credit. Remember, nothing great was ever accomplished alone.

15. Talk with people, not at them. Engage people by truly connecting with them.

16. Send it. When you discover an article, blog post, or book that you think someone can benefit from, send it with a personal text or note. Forward information that adds value and brings benefit to others, and let them know why you thought they would find it helpful.

17. Dream big for others. Instill a passion in them that they can be more and do more.

18. Stay away from toxicity. Help others learn what is toxic in their lives and how to avoid it.

19. Don't hesitate. Try to be the first person to reach out to someone when you think the person might need help.

20. Keep a positive attitude. Attitude is contagious, so spread only good feelings.

21. Celebrate special occasions. Remember people's birthdays and anniversaries; make a point of sending them a note or a card, giving them a call. Even a quick text is thoughtful. Use technology to help you remember.

22. Help people focus on their strengths, not their weaknesses. Point out their strengths and unique qualities, and gently help them with the parts they are struggling with.

23. Send handwritten notes. It's much more personal and shows you have invested time in expressing yourself.

24. Give without being asked. As long as you know it's appropriate, do something helpful without being asked.

25. Always bring something to the table. Resources, ideas, opportunities — even an article or a good quote can communicate your interest and investment.

26. Give people your trust. It is the foundation of all great relationships.

27. Communicate appropriately. Adapt your communication to fit the time, place, and person. Not everything deserves the same attention.

28. Highlight what may be overlooked. Make a point of noticing the things that others may not notice.

29. Make meaningful connections. Don't always talk about work; ask about something personal that is meaningful and appropriate.

30. Be on time. When you are on time, you show respect for others.

31. Go the extra mile. If you're already in the habit of performing small acts of kindness, think of ways to go further. Extra effort makes people feel extra good.

32. Be a sounding board. Be available if someone wants to run ideas or think things through. Offer help when blind spots occur or new ideas are needed. Help take someone else's thinking to a new level.

33. Give someone a special task and watch the person accomplish it. Let people know you believe in them by making them stretch. Valuing someone goes a long way.

34. Express deep appreciation for the ways that people add value to your life. People often have a hard time taking compliments, but acknowledging their strengths and work is a concrete way of making them feel good.

35. Renew confidence. Everyone struggles; find ways to bolster someone's confidence.

36. Treat people the way you want to be treated. This is the most fundamental rule of being with others.

37. Be sincere in your sincerity. It's not something you can fake.

38. Pay it forward. Model generosity and kindness always.

39. Offer constructive feedback. Feedback is a gift when it's presented positively.

40. Delegate. It makes people feel valued and empowered.

41. Catch people doing something right. And then praise them for it or otherwise show that you noticed.

42. Invite people to be part of a cause that is greater than they are. Invite them to dream big and play even bigger.

43. Don't keep score. Give because you want to give and not because you're adding up the tally.

44. Make it win-win. Supporting others isn't a zero-sum game.

45. Don't let people down. Keep your promises and commitments.

46. Bring your best. Give everything you do your best effort. It matters.

47. Meet people halfway. There is always a way to work through a conflict.

48. Add value constantly. It takes discipline and sacrifice, but it's worth the effort.

49. Start a movement. Inspire others to inspire others.

50. Live every day like it was your last. Show that you cherish your life and those around you.

Imagine what could happen if we spend our time bringing value to others — even if we do one thing on a daily basis. Remember, the smallest gesture can make a big difference and leave the deepest mark.

SEE ALSO: 7 Pieces Of Life Advice You Can Implement Today

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This showering trick will make you more energized for the workday

There's no doubt about it — friends with benefits (FWBs) sometimes turn into complicated situations, often because one person ends up wanting more from the relationship than the other.

As a result, it is perhaps not surprising that the development of unreciprocated feelings is one of the most commonly cited concerns people have about starting FWB relationships. So what can you do to reduce the odds that this will happen? A growing body of research suggests that the key to a successful FWB is up-front communication.

For starters, this means clarifying what the relationship is and is not from the very beginning. These relationships tend to become complicated because people often have different goals and expectations for them. For instance, although some people have FWBs just for the sex, others see them as a way to become closer to another person with the hope that a romance will develop later on.

To the extent that you can clarify things and get on the same page at the outset, the risks of someone getting hurt are lower. Stating your intentions and expectations as clearly as possible and periodically reiterating them will help to ensure that your partner does not see you as sending mixed signals.

Beyond clarifying what the relationship is (and is not), it is also worth setting some ground rules. Most people who have FWBs fail to establish rules or boundaries, which is another reason so many complications arise. For instance, make it clear whether you are going to be having sex with other people. Don’t make assumptions about your partner’s sex life, because that's one way that people end up getting hurt.

Also, you both need to know what the sexual arrangement is so that you can take appropriate safer-sex precautions (e.g., using condoms, getting tested for STIs, etc.). Some people may also find it helpful to establish rules about sleeping over, how often they will see one another, and how they will greet the other person in public (e.g., no kissing hello or goodbye).

There are empirical benefits of communication in FWB relationships. Indeed, longitudinal researchhas found that the more people communicate about the ground rules of their FWB early on, the more likely they are to stay on positive terms with their partner in the future. This same study also reveals that if you're going into a FWB situation hoping for romance, you may want to think again. FWBs appear to have a relatively low likelihood of transitioning into romances — people tend to be much more successful in attaining their FWB goals to the extent that they aren't looking for love.

In addition to communicating, make sure that you go into these relationships with realistic expectations. There are no hard and fast rules for navigating FWBs, and even if you take a lot of precautions, there’s no guarantee that you'll be happy with the outcome. You can’t always predict how sex will impact a given friendship. The best thing you can do is to communicate honestly and recognize that the best laid plans don’t always turn out to be the best way to get laid.

SEE ALSO: Your friends have a surprising amount of influence on your relationship

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The 6 basic elements of a thriving relationship

Dr. Ramani Durvasula was sitting in the sofa department of IKEA when she realized the Swedish furniture store was filled with arguing couples.

“I could see all the room displays, and I was watching couples go through and I would say almost half of them were bickering,” Dr. Durvasula, a professor of psychology at California State University Los Angeles and therapist in San Diego, told Business Insider. “And I thought ‘Wow, this place is really bringing out the worst in relationships.’”

It was right then that she was inspired to have couples in counseling build IKEA furniture together as therapy.  

“What I see is when you work with a couple, we talk this big game about communication, collaboration, and respect, but it’s often hard to build that into a task, especially one that’s manageable,” she told us. “Furniture assembly is a metaphor for what we need to be able to do in a relationship.”

Now, Dr. Durvasula uses IKEA furniture as a tool to help her clients work through relationship roadblocks and build skills such as listening, communication, and consideration. 

When one of her couple clients is looking for a new piece of furniture, Dr. Durvasula will encourage them to buy something to assemble together. Since most of her clients are young, they usually tend to be on the market of IKEA pieces, which according to Dr. Durvsaula is perfect since the Swedish furniture company requires assembly as well as collaboration.

The couples then return and describe to Dr. Durvasula how it went — did someone storm off, insult the other person, or make commands? Or did they laugh and work together?

“If I had my way honestly, I would love to be in their house, but that’s not something ethically that’s possible for a therapist,” she told us. “But if I were actually observing them, they’d be on their best behavior. The nice thing about not being there is that they’re being themselves, and they usually are pretty honest.”

Dr. Durvasula told Business Insider the most challenging pieces of furniture couples can build together include the PAX wardrobe with its unwieldy drawers and big doors, king-sized beds since they all require two people working in tandem, and called the heavy LIATORP entertainment center a “divorcemaker.”

“It’s such a great metaphor for a relationship: You get those dowels in, you get those screws in, and everything has to line up and fit together before you start,” Dr. Durvasula told Business Insider. “If you don’t, it can crack the furniture and it will always be off kilter, which is so beautiful because that’s exactly what a relationship is — getting everything lined up and then getting the timing right before everything comes into place."

If you’re building furniture with your significant other, these are the signs Dr. Durvasula said to watch out for:

Insults or disrespect: No one likes to be disrespected, but off-handed insults such as “You don’t know what you’re doing” or “Are you an idiot?” can speak to bigger problems in a relationship. 

“These are what I call the reflexive insults, which we tend to do when we’re frustrated,” Dr. Durvasula said to Business Insider.

Storming off: Tossing the instructions on the ground and walking out of the room are not an effective way to communicate. Dr. Durvasula said this was a major problem and demonstrated a lack of confronting issues and communicating effectively.

Making commands: Ordering your partner to do something can be both bossy and disrespectful, even if you have the best intentions. 

“Instead of saying ‘Do that,’ they should say ‘Would you like me to help with that?’ which becomes a more helpful bounds of communication,” Dr. Durvasula said.

Denial of the other’s reality: IKEA furniture can be challenging to put together, but it can be even harder when you’re not seeing things from your partner’s perspective. Accusing your significant other of holding something wrong, too tight, or in the wrong place can lead to fighting as you both angle to be the most “right.”

“The denial of the other person’s reality happens a lot in everyday life,” Dr. Druvasula told us. “That’s really unhealthy for couples." 

And these are the things to strive for while building IKEA furniture as a couple:

Mindfulness: Putting together IKEA furniture is going to be frustrating, but taking time to check in with your partner can make all the difference. 

“Building IKEA furniture forces couples to work on mindfulness,” Dr. Druvasula said. “Always take that millisecond pause before you say something because an insult cannot be taken back.”

Back-and-forth: Having a dialogue, asking questions, and checking in with each other are all signs that you are communicating effectively. Ask your partner how they’re doing and what they need from you to stay on the same page and keep channels of communication open. 

Listen, listen, listen: In addition to having a solid dialogue with one another, it’s important to listen to what your partner is actually saying. 

“Sometimes we don’t hear things right because we hear what we want to hear,” Dr. Druvasula said. “But when you’re building furniture, the consequences are immediate. If you say ‘I’m going to lift this piece up, I’m going to need you to yours next,’ and the other person isn’t listening, then you just broke a piece of furniture.”

Laughter:“In a moment when things aren’t going right, being able to laugh about it is important,” Dr. Druvasula said. Making mistakes happens, but instead of leading to a larger argument, the key is to find the humor, and move on.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Ikea Says Its New Furniture Takes Only 5 Minutes To Assemble — Here's The Truth

Whether or not we like to admit it, we all tell lies.

While confronting — and being able to deliver — the truth is important in most situations, there are certain times when the truth is better left unsaid.

We sifted through a Quora thread that asked users, "When is lying good?" and highlighted our favorite responses. 

Whether you're dealing with a coworker, first date, or family member, here are a few instances where a white lie might be the best course of action.

1. When you want to get out of a social event

Quora user Dan Holliday is known for being "brutally honest," but even he admits to lying "to escape an uncomfortable situation." Not interested in that team happy hour followed by karaoke? "Oh, I have an appointment." And if someone calls and Holliday doesn't feel like chatting with them, rather than bluntly saying so, he will drop something like: "I'm expecting a client call. Can we talk later?"

2. When someone gives you a dreadful gift

"You just don't tell a close relative their gift sucks. Period,"writes user Natalie Heng. 

3. When someone cooks for you (poorly)

"The first date is not the time to educate your man about the difference between a clove and bulb of garlic," says Quora user Jessica Moorhouse. Rather, smile and politely ask for seconds.

4. When someone asks, 'Does my butt look big in this?'

"The answer is always no," says Moorhouse. "Her bottom may look like the rear end of a rhino, but the answer is still no. Hesitate at your peril."

5. When a parent asks how cute their baby is 

"Sometimes there are no words. Just smile and pretend not to be afraid,"Moorhouse says.

6. When someone asks, 'How old do you think I am?'

"If someone asks you this question, they are never as old as they look,"warns Moorhouse. "Go eight years younger and make their day. Don't forget to employ your 'shocked face' when they disclose their actual age."

7. When anyone asks you to comment on the bride

"When you're at a wedding and someone asks within earshot of the bride, 'Isn't she beautiful?' and she doesn't quite measure up to your personal standards of beauty, lie,"writes Quora user Jim Heaphy. 

SEE ALSO: Science says people are more likely to lie and cheat in ambiguous situations

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what happens when you get bitten by a black widow

Not many 20-somethings want to be "tied down" before 30, but many of us also crave something less superficial than a series of one night stands.

This balancing act — of having fun while still learning how to connect meaningfully with other human beings — is a unique challenge faced by our generation of unmarried and exploratory twenty-to-30 year-olds.

While traveling everywhere from West Africa to Central Asia, I've found that pursuing fulfilling yet usually non-committal relationships is a universal phenomena faced by sophisticated young people of every background and nationality.

And dating in countries spanning the globe, which inevitably involves a tricky maneuvering across linguistic, cultural, and geographical barriers, has taught me firsthand a few things that make my relationships of all kinds work better.

I think if more people played by these simple rules, we would all be much happier and engaged in more fulfilling modern dating scenarios.

1. Make the first move.

Don't waste time wondering if he or she is interested or if he will intimidated by a girl approaching him first. Own your self-confidence, aim for the hottest, smartest guy or girl in the room and unapologetically put yourself out there. You'll never know what would have happened if you don't try, and 99% of people appreciate someone genuine and forthcoming. "Hi, my name is …" is universal.

2. See different kinds of people.

Keep an open mind and date around. Date someone from another country or culture. Experiment with someone who has crazy career ambitions or vastly different interests from you. I once went out with a professional tap dancer from Taiwan. Why not? Now is the time to explore and learn new things from interesting relationships.

3. Don't play games.

You're either interested or you're not, so why pretend otherwise? If she calls and you want to talk, answer. If he asks you out and you're not feeling it, kindly say so. If you're "with" someone, don't try to make her jealous.

There's something to be said for fostering a genuine connection with a girl or guy, regardless of how serious the end goal is. We're not teenagers anymore, so let's date like men and women, not boys and girls.

4. Don't mix business and pleasure.

If you have a professional working relationship with someone, keep it that way. Things will inevitably end and it WILL be awkward. Declare your career a personal boundary for dating relationships and defend it at all costs.

5. Always preserve your independence.

No matter how into someone you are, always have your own friends, hobbies, and career securely clenched in both fists. Your heart might turn topsy-turvy, but your big-picture priorities should always be dead straight.

How many times have you seen a girl or guy isolate themselves from their group of friends, only to come crawling back after a break-up, enduring the realization that they invested entirely too much of themselves in the other person? Or how many times has someone given up a job or educational opportunity for the sake of staying together, only to regret it later when their relationship falls apart?

6. Administer these tests of true character.

There are two things you can do to evaluate the character of a prospective partner: How does he/she treat (and speak about) his/her mother, and how does he/she treat (and speak with) complete strangers?

If he is adoring of his mother, he will likely be the same way toward you. If she is kind to people who have no direct bearing on her life other than holding the door for her at a hotel or bringing her a coffee, it is a tremendous insight into this person's true nature.

7. Evaluate your partner's energy.

When a relationship gets complicated, it's easy to get bogged down in the details.

When you're feeling confused about someone, evaluate the situation at a high level by asking yourself: Generally speaking, does this person bring positive or negative energy to my life? Does he enrich me, teach me new things, and make me better? Or does he drain my energy, cause me stress, and hurt my feelings?

8. Don't over-analyze after it ends.

When things are over, don't waste time trying to figure out the other person's motives or seeking a detailed explanation. It may mean a lack of closure, but putting your foot down and closing that chapter sooner rather than later will help you ultimately move on.

Often 20-something romances end due to a cocktail of external factors, which play a huge role in someone's openness to a given relationship. Most of the time it really is them, not you. You will drain yourself trying to figure it all out, so respect a person's decision to conclude a relationship and get busy moving on.

9. Reflect on your experiences.

Good or bad, ensure that you learn something valuable from every fling and/or serious relationship. Treat each one as an opportunity to see how that person makes you feel, what they help you understand about yourself and the world, and how they fit into your life. Note the things you liked, but especially pay attention to what you didn't like and why.

10. Practice for the future.

No matter if we are talking about a long-term relationship or a one-night stand, every interaction depends on mutual respect. Have fun, but remember that the way you treat other people now and how you engage in relationships when you're a 20-something will manifest itself in your life down the road.

Relationships of all kinds are built upon interpersonal habits, so let's practice being good to one another while we are young so we create a solid foundation for the future, as individuals and as a generation.

SEE ALSO: Over 50% of American singles had casual sex in 2014 — here's why that's good for their relationships

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here’s the real reason why 'Shark Tank' investors get impatient

Tinder shot to fame as a dating app for tech-savvy single people. Except, as it turns out, a big chunk of its users may not be single after all.

That's according to the research firm GlobalWebIndex (GWI), which released some figures on Tinder from its latest survey of more than 47,000 internet users around the world that suggest the app has a wider demographic.

In fact, the research claims that 30% of Tinder users surveyed are married, while another 12% are in a relationship. Fifty-four percent classed themselves as single, while 3% were divorced or widowed.

Tinder may also be a digital stomping ground for married men, judging by GWI's claim that 62% of its users are male and 38% female.

The research also shows, unsurprisingly, that Tinder's users are a relatively young crowd, with 38% aged between 16 and 24, and 45% between 25 and 34.

Thirteen percent are aged 35 to 44, 3% are 45 to 54, and 1% are 55 to 64 — though if reports in late 2014 that Tinder had 50 million active users were true, that would still indicate half a million people in that oldest age category surveyed.

Tinder recently launched a premium Tinder Plus option, enabling people to subscribe for extra features for £3.99 a month if they were younger than 28 and £14.99 a month if they were older.

GWI's data suggests that Tinder Plus could become a good money-spinner for the company, which is owned by the online dating giant Match. Its survey found that 24% of Tinder users had paid for an online dating service in the past month, compared with 14% of dating site users surveyed.

The company also asked Tinder users for their views on a range of issues to judge their attractiveness to advertisers as well as potential dates.

Eighty-five percent agreed with the statement "I look after my appearance/image," unsurprisingly, while 82% "always like to try new products." Sixty-three percent like to keep up with the latest fashions, while 58% consider themselves to "be much more affluent than the average."

Sadly, GWI neglected to include "I send unsolicited penis snaps to single women when my wife isn't looking" as one of its survey's statements. Maybe next time.

What about all those married and in-a-relationship users of Tinder, though? It would be rash to label them as "cheaters."

Some may have open relationships, others may be just browsing, and some in the second category may have only recently started their relationship — perhaps even with someone they met on Tinder — and haven't uninstalled the app.

Tinder might prefer another explanation: that people are using its app to meet new people for platonic friendship rather than just romance. It's a use case that the company has regularly suggested in media interviews.

"We never intended it to be a dating platform. It's a social discovery platform, facilitating an introduction between two people," Justin Mateen, then Tinder's chief marketing officer, told the Guardian in February 2014.

"As the product evolves, we're moving into different uses for it, doing little things that will allow people to interact socially in ways other than dating."

Tinder has contacted the Guardian to disagree with GWI's figures — or at least, the stats focused on their ages.

"Those statistics are completely inaccurate. I'm not sure how they sampled that specific group of people, but it does not represent Tinder's user base," a representative said. "More than 50% of Tinder's user base is age 18-24. And altogether, 85% of our users are age 18-34."

GWI's claim that 83% of Tinder users are aged 18 to 34 nearly matches the latter stat, but its finding that only 38% are aged 18 to 24 is more puzzling — though it is possible that part of the difference is explained by users taking a few years off their age when registering.

Tinder's statement did not address the marital status of its users, though it is difficult to see how it would have accurate figures even if it asked them when signing up.

The company did stress that it had "hundreds of success stories emailed to us every week about a new engagement or marriage," and it reiterated its status as more than a dating network.

"Tinder is a social network and these are many use cases for it — not just dating. People are using it to make new friends, to network, and they use it when they travel to meet new people in the area," the representative said.

"With tens of millions of users in all 196 countries, Tinder has quickly become the most prominent way people connect with others. Tinder has already made more than six billion matches globally."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: If you're over 30, you're going to have to pay more for Tinder's new sub service

A new relationship — whether personal, romantic, or professional — is a lot like buying a new car. Driving it off the lot is pure bliss.

As you look around, you can scarcely take it all in.

Everything smells, sounds, and looks terrific. You coast through weeks or months — maybe even years — of happy driving before you're aware of anything that needs fixing.

And like a car, when a relationship breaks down, it's overwhelming; you're left stuck on the side of the road wondering what went wrong.

A trained eye knows when a car is in trouble. From the sound of the idle to the color of the exhaust exiting the tailpipe, there are telltale signs of distress. The same is true of relationships, and you can be your own mechanic.

Researchers at the University of Washington discovered four clear indicators of relationship failure (dubbed "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse") so profound that they predict the future success of a relationship with 93% accuracy.

The researchers in Washington conducted their studies with married couples, and their accuracy rate for predicting divorce has held up for more than 14 years after watching couples interact.

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse

The Four Horsemen reveal problems for relationships of all types. They represent the counterproductive acts we can easily fall victim to when our emotions get the better of us.

As you read each of the Horsemen and consider its relevance in your relationships, remember that conflict itself is not a problem. Conflict is actually a normal and (ideally) productive part of two people with different needs and interests working together.

The researchers in Washington found that the amount of conflict between two people had no bearing on the success of the relationship. It's how conflict is handled that determines a relationship's success, and the Four Horsemen's presence means conflict is not being dealt with constructively or productively.

Follow the strategies provided for overcoming each of the Four Horseman, and your relationships are bound to be successful.

Related: 12 Ways Successful People Handle Toxic People

The 1st Horseman: Criticism

Criticism is not to be confused with delivering feedback or otherwise seeking improvement or change in another person. Criticism becomes, well, criticism when it isn't constructive ("This report is terrible.").

Criticism, in its most troubling form, focuses on the individual's personality, character, or interests rather than the specific action or behavior you'd like to see changed ("You are terrible at writing. You're so disorganized and tangential."). It's one thing to criticize without being constructive; it's another to go after someone for something they are unable to change.

Overcoming Criticism:

If you find yourself criticizing when you planned on being constructive, it's best if you don't deliver your feedback and commentary unless you've planned ahead. You'll need to think through what you're going to say and stick to your script in order to remain constructive and avoid criticism.

It's also best if you focus your feedback on a single specific behavior, as your reactions to multiple behaviors at once can easily be perceived as criticism. If you find that you cannot deliver feedback without generalizing to the other person's personality, you're better off saying nothing at all.

The 2nd Horseman: Contempt

Contempt is any open sign of disrespect toward another. Contempt often involves comments that aim to take the other person down a notch, as well as direct insults. Contempt is also seen in indirect and veiled forms, such as rolling of the eyes and couching insults within "humor."

Overcoming Contempt:

Contempt stems from a lack of interest in the other person. When you find that you don't enjoy or admire someone — perhaps there are things about him or her that used to be interesting or charming and now they've lost their luster — contempt can surface unexpectedly.

If your disinterest is unavoidable and the relationship is one that isn't going anywhere, such as a family member or coworker, then you need to focus on managing the relationship itself. People who manage relationships well are able to see the benefit of connecting with many different people, even those they are not fond of.

Common ground, no matter how small, is a commodity to be sought and cherished. In the immortal words of Abraham Lincoln, "I do not like that man. I must get to know him better."

Related: Why Leaders Lack Emotional Intelligence

The 3rd Horseman: Defensiveness

Denying responsibility, making excuses, meeting one complaint with another, and other forms of defensiveness are problematic, because they prevent a conflict from reaching any sort of resolution. Defensiveness only serves to accelerate the anxiety and tension experienced by both parties, and this makes it difficult to focus on the larger issues at hand that need to be resolved.

Overcoming Defensiveness:

To overcome defensiveness, you have to be willing to listen carefully to the other party's complaint, even if you don't see things the same way. This doesn't mean you have to agree with them.

Instead, you focus on fully understanding the other person's perspective so that you can work together towards resolving the conflict. It's critical that you work to remain calm. Once you understand why the other person is upset, it's much easier to find common ground than if you dismiss their opinions defensively.

The 4th Horseman: Stonewalling

Stonewalling is what happens when one person shuts the discussion down by refusing to respond. Examples of stonewalling include the silent treatment, being emotionally distant or devoid of emotion, and ignoring the other person completely. Stonewalling is problematic, because it aggravates the person being stonewalled and it prevents the two from working on resolving the conflict together.

Overcoming Stonewalling:

The key to overcoming stonewalling is to participate in the discussion. If you're stonewalling because the circumstances are leaving you feeling overwhelmed, let the other person know how you're feeling and ask for some time to think before continuing the discussion.

Maintain eye contact and a forward posture and nod your head to let the other person know that you are engaged in the discussion and listening even when you don't have something to say. If you stonewall as a matter of practice, you need to realize that participating in discussions and working together to resolve conflict are the only ways to keep your relationships from crumbling.

A version of this article first appeared on TalentSmart.com.

SEE ALSO: A couples therapist explains the 4 relationship killers that end marriages

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here are 8 steps to follow if you want to be a millionaire

Seduction, persuading a person to yield to your advances, isn't used only in the pursuit of a love interest. Influencing others is how we get jobs and promotions, win negotiations, sell products, and gain notoriety.

In "The Art of Seduction," popular author Robert Greene explores the ruthless tactics of some of history's greatest seducers, from Cleopatra to Casanova.

We've summarized Greene's 24 rules of seduction below, adapting them to situations you may run into in your career:

1. Choose the right victim.

Your target may be a hiring manager, a potential client, or a boss in a position to promote you. He or she should be someone "for whom you can fill a void," Greene says. Don't try to get the most out of those who are too eager to please you, because they are usually looking to get something in return; instead, find those who give subtle hints, like shyness in your presence, that they are open to your influence.

2. Create a false sense of security — approach indirectly.

If you want to network with an influential executive or potential client, for example, you risk forcing them to raise their guard if you approach them and immediately ask for something. Before making a proposal, reach out to them via a third party, or develop a neutral or friendly relationship before making it about business.

3. Send mixed signals.

Once you've got someone hooked, give yourself an air of mystery to keep that person's interest. When meeting someone with a professional network that you want to access, for example, try making yourself appear intellectual and sophisticated but throw in a sarcastic comment or two that adds depth to your character.

4. Appear to be an object of desire.

In the same way that millions of people lust over the most popular celebrities, clients and customers will be drawn to the hottest companies and executives. Don't make a fool of yourself, but don't be humble when you're trying to win someone over. Show off your most important connections and successes.

5. Create a need — stir anxiety and discontent.

People cannot be seduced if they're content. Sell yourself by illustrating ways in which the other party is lacking in some respect and then reveal how you can make up for that deficiency. Perhaps you illustrate for a business the many ways in which it is wasting its money, and then how a few changes could transform the company.

6. Master the art of insinuation.

If you're too straightforward with people you're trying to influence, you may scare them away or even turn them against you. The best way to get people to work in your favor, Greene says, is by subtly dropping hints over time without revealing your true intentions. That way you can make your target think he or she is acting on his or her own initiative.

7. Enter their spirit.

If you're trying to change someone's mind and bring that person to your side, first play by his or her rules. If you want to do something like using a meeting to get a client to invest in your company further, begin by becoming a mirror, behaving as he or she behaves, and that person will open up to you.

8. Create temptation.

Determine what your target's weakness is, and play to it. Find an ideal that this person is trying to realize "and hint that you can lead them to it," Greene writes.

9. Keep them in suspense.

The moment people think they know what to expect from you is when your hold over them is broken. Keep their interest in you with the occasional surprise.

10. Use the power of words.

If you are giving a presentation, for example, goad the audience onto your side by telling them what they want to hear. Make your argument convincing by making it enjoyable.

11. Pay attention to detail.

Entice your target by making painstaking decisions look effortless. For a job interview, pay attention to every detail of how your present yourself, down to your smartphone case in the event that you use it in their presence. Follow up with a formalized thank-you note to complete the image you're trying to sell.

12. Poeticise your presence.

You will not win people over if you are a nagging constant in their lives. Associate yourself with enjoyable experiences so that your target misses you when you're gone. To use the hiring example, make sure each interaction shines, but don't overdo it by following up your thank-you note with another email or phone call the next day.

13. Disarm through strategic weakness and vulnerability.

Rather than overpower your target, set aside your ego and communicate how the other side is in a dominant position, even if it isn't exactly true. You will not rise through the corporate hierarchy by appearing arrogant to your superiors.

14. Confuse desire and reality — the perfect illusion.

"Remember: people want to believe in the extraordinary," Greene writes. Make whatever you're trying to sell, whether an idea or an actual product, sound dramatic yet rooted in reality.

15. Isolate the victim.

People are most vulnerable when they are shut off from everything around them. When you are applying to a job, write and speak as if that job is the only one you ever wanted to apply for; when pitching your services, make your client feel as if he or she is the only one who matters.

16. Prove yourself.

If your target begins to become insecure and pulls back from you, demonstrate your value by going out of your way to help him or her in some way.

17. Effect a regression.

No matter what relationship you are trying to strike, whether with a boss, employer, client, or anyone else, your target will have had similar relationships that worked well for him or her. Figure out what this person liked most about these previous experiences with your predecessor and do things to evoke memories of them.

18. Stir up the transgressive and taboo.

Even the most clean-cut people have a curiosity of the forbidden. You do not need to be doing anything wrong to make the other side feel as if he or she is working in a nebulous area — that can mean something as simple as hinting that a deal you are offering someone is so great that it is unprecedented and needs to be kept secret.

19. Use spiritual lures.

You run the risk of cheapening your words if they all lead to a singular goal, whether that be getting a job or selling a product. Supplement them with moral ideals that make your aim seem more important than it is. For instance, you could connect the prospect of a job with a company as the logical next step in your professional journey, or align your company's mission with a higher purpose.

20. Mix pleasure with pain.

In a business situation, this means that you should avoid being overly polite with your target, which can have the unintended consequence of making you seem insincere and insecure. Mix complimentary language with blunt, straightforward insight.

21. Give them space.

When the other side is on your side but has become used to you, re-create interest by taking a step back and having him or her chase you. If you have been going for a promotion and get a job offer from a competitor, for example, bring it to your boss as if you are strongly considering leaving, even if you are not interested.

22. Use physical lures.

Keep your target focused on you by making yourself as attractive as possible, dressing nicely, smiling, and speaking with confidence.

23. Master the art of the bold move.

When your target has demonstrated that he or she is definitely interested in you, make a final offensive move, stating your intended goal. End with a natural, bold finish, rather than awkwardly or timidly avoiding what you really want. State outright how you would be a great fit for the company to which you're applying; tell your client that he or she needs your services to beat the competition. 

24. Beware of the aftereffects.

Once you have succeeded in your seduction, employ variations of the above tactics to certain degrees to keep the other side from taking you for granted and making you disposable.

SEE ALSO: 33 War Strategies That Will Help You Win In Business

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Scientists figured out how to avoid making a bad first impression

If you’re in a long-term relationship, you probably remember the early “honeymoon period”—those first few months when you couldn’t get enough of each other (and maybe couldn’t keep your hands off each other). But, if you’re like most couples, your sex life has changed between then and now.¹ 

In fact, it’s likely that there are (more) times in your relationship when one of you wants to have sex, but the other is not in the mood.

In a new set of studies,² my colleagues and I looked at how couples manage these situations when partners have different sexual interests in ways that are satisfying to both romantic partners.

We were specifically interested in this topic because desire discrepancies between partners are common in relationships—in one of our studies, 80% of people had experienced a desire discrepancy with their partner in the past month; in other study, couples reported some degree of desire discrepancy on 5 out of 7 days a week. And we know from past research that disagreements related to sex can be very difficult to resolve successfully.³

Given that differing sexual interests are common in relationships and can be challenging to resolve, we conducted three studies to examine how people make decisions about having sex when their partner is interested in sex but their own interest is low, and to test whether certain people would be able to navigate these situations with greater success.

Our first study was an experimental study where we asked half of our participants to complete a writing exercise to temporarily increase their motivation to meet partner’s sexual needs, then we asked all of participants to imagine themselves in a situation in which their romantic partner wanted to have sex, but they were not in the mood.

In our second study, we asked people to tell us about the most recent time when their partner was in the mood for sex, but the participant was not. In our final study, we recruited both members of romantic couples to report on their desire and their motivation to engage in sex and not engage in sex each day for 21 days.

Across all three studies we found that a person’s motivation to meet their partner’s sexual needs, termed sexual communal strength⁴ (also discussed here and here) plays an important role (a) in the decision to engage in sex in these situations and (b) in the maintenance of both partners’ sexual and relationship satisfaction.

People who are high in sexual communal strength—those who are motivated to meet their partner’s sexual needs without the expectation of immediate reciprocation—were less concerned with the negatives of having sex -- such as feeling tired the next day. Instead, these communal people were more focused on the benefits to their partner of engaging in sex, such as making their partner feel loved and desired.

In turn, these motivations led the communal people to be more likely to engage in sex with their partner in these situations and also led to both partners feeling more satisfied with their sex life and relationship. This means that even though they engaged in sex to meet their partner’s needs, they reaped important benefits for themselves. In fact, communal people maintained feelings of satisfaction even in these desire discrepant situations.

Our findings suggest that if one partner is interested in having sex, but the other partner isn’t in the mood, being motivated to meet a partner’s sexual needs can benefit both partners. It is very important, however, that this motivation to meet a partner’s needs comes from a place of agency, where people feel that they are able to meet their partner’s needs, and a delight in seeing ones partner happy.

Situations that involve coercion or where a person ignores their own needs in the process (termed unmitigated communion) do not lead to the same benefits. In fact, an important part of communal relationships is that both partners are attuned to and responsive to each other’s needs. At times this may also mean understanding and accepting a partner’s need to not to engage in sex.

In short, this research tells us a little bit more about how, as sexual desire waxes and wanes over the course of any relationship, some people are able to navigate tricky situations with greater ease and success when one partner wants sex but the other does not. Being mutually responsive to each other’s sexual needs in a relationship can help couples to maintain sexual satisfaction long after the honeymoon period ends.

¹Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E. (1999). Passion, intimacy, and time: Passionate love as a function of change in intimacy. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3, 49-67. 

²Day, L. C., Muise, A., Joel, S., & Impett, E. A. (2015). To do it or not to do it? How communally motivated people navigate sexual interdependence dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Advance online publication.

³Rehman, U. S., Janssen, E., Newhouse, S., Heiman, J., Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Fallis, E., & Rafaeli, E. (2011). Marital satisfaction and communication behaviors during sexual and nonsexual conflict discussions in newlywed couples: A pilot study. Journal of sex & marital therapy, 37(2), 94-103.

⁴Muise, A., Impett, E. A., Kogan, A., & Desmarais, S. (2013). Keeping the spark alive: Being motivated to meet a partner’s sexual needs sustains sexual desire in long-term romantic relationships. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 267-273.

If you’d like to learn more about our book, please click here (or download it here). Interested in learning more about relationships? Click here for other topics on Science of Relationships. Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter to get our articles delivered directly to your NewsFeed.

SEE ALSO: The foremost academic expert on 'Fifty Shades of Grey' tells us why the movie is truly horrible

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How To Keep The Spark In A Long-Term Relationship

In her new book "No One Understands You and What To Do About It," Heidi Grant Halvorson tells readers a story about her friend, Tim.

When Tim started a new job as a manager, one of his top priorities was communicating to his team that he valued each member’s input.

So at team meetings, as each member spoke up about whatever project they were working on, Tim made sure he put on his “active-listening face” to signal that he cared about what each person was saying.

But after meeting with him a few times, Tim’s team got a very different message from the one he intended to send. “After a few weeks of meetings,” Halvorson explains, “one team member finally summoned up the courage to ask him the question that had been on everyone’s mind.”

That question was: “Tim, are you angry with us right now?” When Tim explained that he wasn’t at all angry — that he was just putting on his “active-listening face” — his colleague gently explained that his active-listening face looked a lot like his angry face.

To Halvorson, a social psychologist at Columbia Business School who has extensively researched how people perceive one another, Tim’s story captures one of the primary problems of being a human being: Try though you might to come across in a certain way to others, people often perceive you in an altogether different way.

These kinds of misunderstandings lead to conflict and resentment not just at work, but at home too. How many fights between couples have started with one person misinterpreting what another says and does? He stares at his plate at dinner while she’s telling a story and she assumes he doesn’t care about what she’s saying, when really he is admiring the beautiful meal she made.

She goes to bed early rather than watching their favorite television show together like they usually do, and he assumes she’s not interested in spending time with him, when really she’s just exhausted after a tough day at work.

Most of the time, Halvorson says, people don’t realize they are not coming across the way they think they are. “If I ask you,” Halvorson told me, “about how you see yourself — what traits you would say describe you — and I ask someone who knows you well to list your traits, the correlation between what you say and what your friend says will be somewhere between 0.2 and 0.5. There’s a big gap between how other people see us and how we see ourselves.”

This gap arises, as Halvorson explains in her book, from some quirks of human psychology. First, most people suffer from what psychologists call “the transparency illusion” — the belief that what they feel, desire, and intend is crystal clear to others, even though they have done very little to communicate clearly what is going on inside their minds.

Because the perceived assume they are transparent, they might not spend the time or effort to be as clear and forthcoming about their intentions or emotional states as they could be, giving the perceiver very little information with which to make an accurate judgment.

“Chances are,” Halvorson writes, “how you look when you are slightly frustrated isn’t all that different from how you look when you are a little concerned, confused, disappointed, or nervous.

Your ‘I’m kind of hurt by what you just said’ face probably looks an awful lot like your ‘I’m not at all hurt by what you just said’ face. And the majority of times that you’ve said to yourself, ‘I made my intentions clear,’ or ‘He knows what I meant,’ you didn’t and he doesn’t.”

The perceiver, meanwhile, is dealing with two powerful psychological forces that are warping his ability to read others accurately. First, according to a large body of psychological research, individuals are what psychologists call “cognitive misers.” That is, people are lazy thinkers.

According to the work of the Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, there are two ways that the mind processes information, including information about others: through cognitive processes that Kahneman calls System 1 and System 2. These “systems,” which Kahneman describes in his book "Thinking Fast and Slow," serve as metaphors for two different kinds of reasoning.

System 1 processes information quickly, intuitively, and automatically. System 1 is at work, as Halvorson notes in her book, when individuals engage in effortless thinking, like when they do simple math problems like 3 + 3 = 6, or when they drive on familiar roads as they talk to a friend in the car, or when they see someone smile and immediately know that that person is happy.

When it comes to social perception, System 1 uses shortcuts, or heuristics, to come to conclusions about another person. There are many shortcuts the mind relies on when it reads others facial expressions, body language, and intentions, and one of the most powerful ones is called the “primacy effect” and it explains why first impressions are so important.

According to the primacy effect, the information that one person learns about another in his early encounters with that person powerfully determines how he will see that person ever after.

For example, referring to research conducted about the primacy effect, Halvorson points out that children who perform better on the first half of a math test and worse on the second half might be judged to be smarter than those who perform less well on the first part of the test, but better on the second part.

The two students would have performed objectively the same, but one would benefit from the way the primacy effect biases the mind. “The implications of findings like these for late bloomers,” Halvorson writes, “or anyone who struggles initially only to excel later, are terrifying.”

In comparison to the biased and faulty System 1 style of thinking, System 2 processes information in a conscious, rational, and deliberative manner. System 2 is at work, for example, when an individual does more complicated math problems, like algebra, when he is driving on foreign roads, or when he is trying to figure out what his supervisor meant when she left a cryptic note on his desk saying “call me immediately.” Unlike System 1, where thinking is automatic and effortless, System 2 thinking is effortful.

The important point about System 2 is that it can correct System 1 by evaluating, for instance, whether the first impression recorded by System 1 — that Johnny is bad at math — should continue to determine how the perceiver sees Johnny. If there is overriding evidence saying that the first impression needs to be updated — Johnny is scoring consistently well on his other math tests — then the perceiver can engage in System 2 thinking to update his impression of Johnny.

But System 2 demands a lot of effort and mental energy. According to Halvorson, people have to be really motivated to engage in System 2 thinking. For example, the teacher might only feel the need to reevaluate Johnny’s performance after Johnny or his parents complain that he’s not being graded fairly or if Johnny has suddenly and unexpectedly emerged as the star of the class.

Halvorson points out that because most people are cognitive misers, content to trade off speed for accuracy in thinking about others, perception usually ends with System 1.

These two systems of reasoning lead individuals to perceive others in two distinct stages — a fast but flawed stage, and a reflective and deliberative stage. One study by the psychologist Dan Gilbert of Harvard University and his colleagues sheds light on how perception occurs in two phases.

Participants came into a lab and watched seven video clips of a woman speaking to a stranger. In five of the clips, the woman appeared to be stressed out and anxious. Though the video was silent, there were subtitles indicating the topics that the woman and the stranger were talking about.

Gilbert and his colleagues wanted to see what the research subjects thought of this woman’s personality. In one condition, participants were told that the woman and stranger were talking about neutral topics for all seven clips, like restaurants and books.

In the other condition, participants were told that in the five clips in which the woman appeared anxious, she was talking to the stranger about touchy subjects, like sexual fantasies, personal secrets, and life failures. Gilbert also asked some of the participants to memorize the discussion topics that appeared in the subtitles. The point of that task was to keep those participants mentally busy so that they could not enter the second phase of perception, which corresponds with Kahneman’s System 2.

At the end of the experiment, the participants were asked whether or not this woman was an “anxious person.” When the participants were not distracted by the memorization task, they rated her in an expected way: They thought she was anxious when she was discussing neutral topics and acting stressed out, and they rated her as not anxious when she was discussing stressful topics and acting stressed out.

These research subjects were able to enter the second phase of perception by taking the woman’s situation into account. Anyone asked about her sexual fantasies would likely feel uncomfortable. But those who were kept mentally busy came to a very different conclusion about this woman’s personality. Regardless of what situation she was in, they concluded that she was indeed an “anxious person.” For these people, acting anxious equaled being anxious.

Perception is also clouded by the perceiver’s own experiences, emotions, and biases, which also contributes to misunderstandings between people. As Halvorson puts it, everyone has an agenda when they interact with another person. That agenda is usually trying to determine one of three pieces of information about the perceived: Is this person trustworthy? Is this person useful to me? And does this person threaten my self-esteem?

How a perceiver answers those questions will determine whether she judges the other person in a positive or negative way. Take self-esteem. Researchers have long found that individuals need to maintain a positive sense of themselves to function well.

When someone’s sense of herself is threatened, like when she interacts with someone who she thinks is better than her at a job they both share, she judges that person more harshly. One study found, for example, that attractive job applicants were judged as less qualified by members of the same sex than by members of the opposite sex. The raters who were members of the same sex, the researchers found, felt a threat to their self-esteem by the attractive job applicants while the members of the opposite sex felt no threat to their self-esteem.

Given the many obstacles to accurate perception, what do people have to do to come across they way they intend to?

One study hints at an answer. In the study, published in 1998 in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, research subjects came into the lab to conduct a mock negotiation with one other person. Each party chose a specific goal for the negotiation, like “gain the liking of the other person” or “hold firm to my own personal opinions,” which they went into the negotiation trying to achieve, but weren’t necessarily trying to reveal to the other person.

After the negotiation, each party was asked what the other person’s goal was, which was an indication of how transparent the other person was. In the study, research subjects only guessed the goal of their partner correctly 26 percent of the time. Meanwhile, more than half of them thought that they were clearly relaying their goals and intentions to the other person. The lesson of this study is that people may think that they are being clear, but they’re not.

“If you want to solve the problem of perception,” Halvorson says, “it’s much more practical for you to decide to be a good sender of signals than to hope that the perceiver is going to go into phase two of perception. It’s not realistic to expect people to go to that effort.

Can you imagine how exhausting it would be to weigh every possible motivation of another person? Plus, you can’t control what’s going on inside of another person’s mind, but you can control how you come across.”

People who are easy to judge — people who send clear signals to others, as Halvorson suggests people do—are, researchers have found, ultimately happier and more satisfied with their relationships, careers, and lives than those who are more difficult to read.

It’s easy to understand why: Feeling understood is a basic human need. When people satisfy that need, they feel more at peace with themselves and with the people around them, who see them closer to how they see themselves.

SEE ALSO: Psychologists say that power does 4 crazy things to your mind

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This simple exercise will work out every muscle in your body

As good as it feels, it is common knowledge that flattery is not always genuine.

Some people even pride themselves on their ability to detect insincerity.

But can you? Even if you suspect ulterior motives, can you prevent yourself from responding to the flattery?

In Without Conscience, Dr. Hare recalls one of his female interviewers describing how one of the men she interviewed in prison made her feel unusually pretty by the end of the interview, through complimenting her on her appearance.

Describing herself as usually able to "spot a phony," she commented afterward that she couldn't believe she had fallen for the prisoner's lines.

He describes another psychologist, with a great professional reputation but no social life, who ran off with one of her psychopathic patients. Within two weeks, this man had stolen all her money and discarded her like trash. In retrospect, in explaining her horrendous lapse in judgment, she admitted that she simply surrendered to his promises and sweet talk.

It is not only psychopaths who are adept at fooling others with flattery. Machiavellians use flattery in a way that is both calculated and manipulative. Speaking of manipulation, there are plenty of otherwise "normal" people who resort to flattery in pursuit of sex, advice, training, financial prosperity, or career advancement.

How do you know when flattery is genuine? One preliminary factor to consider is whether the flatterer intends for you to hear the compliment. "If you really want to learn the ropes, watch the master at work," declares one of your coworkers loudly, motioning toward you. That puts a smile on your face.

But it could be even better.

That same compliment made out of earshot and shared with you by someone who overheard it is clothed with authenticity because it is now more likely that the speaker's goal was not merely to flatter you.

In other words, it is evidence that the person really believed what they said. This type of compliment is much more satisfying, and perhaps even one you might share with your family.

In addition, consider who is delivering the compliment. We often value praise from strangers more than praise from friends. Yet it is often friends and associates who successfully manipulate us through inauthentic affirmation.

Consider the following scenario.

A new employee at a department store constantly compliments her manager on her mastery of store procedures, remarking at how lucky she is to be "learning from the best."

As time goes on, however, this employee continues to ask her boss about the location of even easy-to-find items, and for help in minor tasks. Her boss continues to indulge her, enjoying the regular dose of positive reinforcement.

It isn't until a coworker brings to the manager's attention that the new employee is spending more time on Facebook than helping customers, that the manager realizes her role as an enabler.

Why would the new employee need to learn anything when she can just ask her boss for help? The time the manager has been spending indulging her complimentary new employee is time that could have been spent managing the store.

Can we relate to this? Who needs an employee-recognition plaque to hang on your wall when you can be inundated with positive reinforcement all day long? How rewarding is that?

Often rewarding enough to ignore the signs of inauthenticity.

While some employees are just lazy, flattery in the workplace can be motivated by darker personality traits. Psychopaths size others up as a potential source of money, power, influence, or sex, and use flattery as goal- directed behavior to get what they want.

And you do not need to be at the top of the food chain to be targeted. Using other people to fulfill their goals, psychopaths not only manipulate those in powerful positions, but they also use people with informal power, which includes connections and assets the psychopath considers to be useful.

This could mean buttering up the boss's scheduler or secretary, or having someone in the mailroom pull strings to ensure a package is sent out earlier than scheduled. More often than not, the people enjoying the affirmation have no idea they are being used.

So how do you separate friends from frenemies? Examine the focus of the friendship.

Consider whether some "friends" are only complimentary and affirming when they have something to gain.

Whether they need a favor, a party date, a ride, or an introduction to someone you know, be wary of individuals who view you as an instrument or an intermediary instead of a friend.

On the other hand, you may have friends and family members for whom you are the main event.

Their focus is on you, not on what you can do for them. As far as they are concerned, spending time with you is a goal in itself.

Not surprisingly, with friends like this, friendship itself is a valuable source of affirmation.

Linked with well-being and happiness, genuine friendships fulfill fundamental human needs.

Friendship is even affirming on a basic level, because the simple act of spending time with someone conveys an appreciation of value.

Friendship also involves affirmation through social support — which plays a fundamental role in cultivating and maintaining intimate relationships.

Social support expresses affection through providing assistance, elicits feelings of comfort and warmth, and creates intimacy.

Emotional support in particular leads to fulfilling personal relationships.

From RED FLAGS: How to Spot Frenemies, Underminers, and Toxic People in Your Life. Copyright © 2015 by Wendy L. Patrick and reprinted by permission of St. Martin's Press, LLC.

SEE ALSO: SCIENTIST: Here's how to spot a psychopath

Join the conversation about this story »

Marc Andreessen, cofounder of Andreessen Horowitz, is one of the most famous and powerful venture capitalists in Silicon Valley.

In 2006, he married Laura Arrillaga-Andreessen, daughter of real estate mogul John Arrillaga.

Many credit Arrillaga with creating the modern Silicon Valley office landscape.

According to a New Yorker profile of Andreessen, the prominent venture capitalist met his future wife at a New Year's Eve party hosted by an investor in eHarmony.

They talked for six and a half hours, and the next day, he sent her a total of seventeen emails. 

After asking her, "What's your ideal evening?" she replied, "Stay home, do e-mail, make an omelette, watch TV, take a bath, go to bed." 

Before they went on their second date, Andreessen delivered a speech that sounds a lot like a pitch a startup founder might make to an investor.

As Arrillaga-Andressen described it to the New Yorker, it was "a twenty-five-minute monologue on why we should go steady, with a full intellectual decision tree in anticipation of my own decision tree."

Obviously it worked — the couple was married nine months later. They currently live in a modern, 9,000-square-foot home in Atherton, just a few minutes away from the Andreessen Horowitz offices.

SEE ALSO: The founders of one of the most famous VC firms in the world 'fight like cats and dogs, then forget about it'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: BEN HOROWITZ: I Asked My Employees To Work 7 Days A Week For 6 Months And They Loved It

Couples hoping that having more sex will improve their relationships should think again after a new study found that it does not boost happiness levels.

Although countless research and self-help books insit that injecting more sex into a flailing love life can bring back the spark, psychologists found that it could make the problem worse.

In fact increasing the frequency of sex actually led to a drop in desire and enjoyment.

Carnegie Mellon University researchers asked 64 couples aged between 35 and 65 to take part in an experiment to discover if more sex improved their relationships over three months.

Half were told to keep their love lives the same as normal, while the other half were asked to double episodes of intercourse. They were questioned about their happiness levels and how much they had enjoyed sex during the period.

The couples instructed to increase sexual frequency did have more sex but over the period their happiness levels fell. The researchers found that couples instructed to have more sex reported lower sexual desire and a decrease in sexual enjoyment. It wasn't that actually having more sex led to decreased wanting and liking for sex. Instead, it seemed to be just the fact that they were asked to do it, rather than initiating on their own.

"Perhaps couples changed the story they told themselves about why they were having sex, from an activity voluntarily engaged in to one that was part of a research study,” said Professor George Loewenstein, the study's lead investigator.

“If we ran the study again we would try to encourage subjects into initiating more sex in ways that put them in a sexy frame of mind, perhaps with baby-sitting, hotel rooms or Egyptian sheets, rather than directing them to do so.”

Despite the results, Prof Loewenstein continues to believe that most couples have too little sex for their own good, and thinks that increasing sexual frequency in the right ways can be beneficial.

And another study's designers, Tamar Krishnamurti, suggested that the findings may actually help couples to improve their sex lives and their happiness.

“Instead of focusing on increasing sexual frequency to the levels they experienced at the beginning of a relationship, couples may want to work on creating an environment that sparks their desire and makes the sex that they do have even more fun," he said.

The research was published in the Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation.

SEE ALSO: Here’s the best way to handle a ‘friends with benefits’ relationship

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Scientists Discovered The 2 Personality Traits For Lasting Relationships

Toxic individuals are completely exhausting to be around and they can have a negative impact on your forward momentum.

Entrepreneurs need to remain laser focused — the distractions and stress that toxic people bring into your life act as unnecessary obstacles, so it is best to avoid them.

You probably know a few toxic people — they might work for you, you might be friends with some or you might even live with someone toxic.

The sooner you remove them from your life, the better. Here are eight toxic types of people you should steer clear of.

1. Those who are judgmental

Judgmental people will find a way to criticize anything and everything they come in contact with. You could take the time to explain something to them in great detail but it goes in one ear and out the other.

They come to their conclusions before they hear any facts — they don't listen well and are horrible at communicating. Asking for advice or feedback from a judgmental person is a complete waste of time.

Related: 12 Ways Successful People Handle Toxic People

2. Those who are envious 

Being an entrepreneur can be a very bumpy journey filled with highs and lows — while it's important to have a strong group of supporters in your corner during the low times it's also important to have supporters that are there to congratulate you when you hit the high points. Envious people will not be happy for you — ever. They feel that it should happen to them and nobody else. 

3. Those who are control freaks

Control freaks don't ever want to listen — they don't have to, because according to them they know everything and they know the best way to do everything. While this type of person can be a nuisance in your personal life, they are a complete nightmare to deal with in a business environment.

A successful business structure requires team members that will listen to and follow instructions. If you have control freaks on your team it can cause a "too many cooks in the kitchen" problem.

4. Those who are arrogant

Don't confuse confidence with arrogance — confident people inspire, while arrogant people intimidate and annoy. Someone with an arrogant attitude feels he or she is better than everyone around them. In a personal setting this can be annoying, while in a professional situation this can create an uncomfortable environment.

5. Those who are victims

The constant victim will always make excuses and blame others for their mistakes and wrongdoing. They are some of the most toxic people to be around — they will never accept responsibility and always point the finger, which causes a domino affect of the blame game in a work setting. Flush them out of your business and eliminate that headache. 

Related: 5 Ways to Tell If Your Workplace Is Really Toxic

6. Those who are Negative Nancies

Someone who is always negative will drain your positive energy immediately — they thrive on bringing everyone down around them. You will never receive any words of encouragement from a Negative Nancy. They will discredit every idea you have and instead of being supportive they will go out of their way to point out every possible way you could fail, rather than focus on possibilities and potential. They are a major energy-suck.

7. Those who are liars

To be successful you have to surround yourself with other successful individuals that you can trust and count on to be there for you. You can't trust liars and it's hard to count on them because you never know if they are lying or telling the truth. That type of uncertainty will wear you out quickly — eliminate them from your life and you won't have to wonder if you are being lied to.

8. Those who are gossipers

People gossip because they are insecure — they don't know how to separate fact from speculation and when truths get twisted, the wrong information is conveyed, feelings get hurt and enemies are born. Having a gossiper within your business can be very destructive — they are cancers and can quickly create a negative environment.

If any of these ring a bell, then there is a good chance you are being exposed to toxic individuals. You should consider removing them from the equation, allowing you to remain 100 percent focused on reaching your goals without unnecessary distractions. 

I vowed to remove all toxic people from my personal life and business in 2015, and by doing so I have created a much better environment for myself and my company.

SEE ALSO: 10 Toxic People You Should Avoid ​At All Costs

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This showering trick will make you more energized for the workday

Imagine you just discovered that someone you know has committed infidelity. Would you keep this information to yourself, or would you share it with others?

A new study just published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior suggests that there is no simple answer to this question.

One’s decision to expose others’ infidelity is complex and depends upon many factors.

In this study, 487 college student participants (67% female, age 19 on average) completed an online survey in which they were given the following instructions:

Please imagine that you know someone who is in a relationship (Person A). You find out that A’s partner (Person B) has had penile-vaginal sexual intercourse with someone else (Person C). Please indicate how more or less likely you would be to tell Person A about the event. Please judge each item individually and independent of anything else.

Participants were then given information about the victim of infidelity, the person who committed infidelity, the third party, and the circumstances surrounding the infidelity. Each piece of information was rated separately on a 5-point scale in terms of whether it made participants more or less likely to report the act.

Results revealed an overall trend for people to be more likely to expose infidelity when given any additional pieces of information about the situation in question. Indeed, for 89% of the contextual items provided, participants said they were more likely to report the infidelity; however, some items made people more likely to expose infidelity than others.

For one thing, your relationship to the cheater mattered. For instance, people were more likely to report infidelity when a close relative or one of their own children was being cheated on compared to when a close relative or child was doing the cheating. Likewise, people more inclined to report cheating when a close friend’s partner had committed infidelity than they were when their close friend was the one who cheated.

Second, the characteristics of the cheater mattered too. For example, people were more likely to report cheaters who were being financially supported by their partners compared to cheaters who were providing financial support. In addition, people were more likely to expose a cheater who had a long history of cheating or who was abusive to their partner than they were to inform persons with these characteristics that they were being cheated upon.

Third, the nature of the cheater’s relationship and the circumstances surrounding the infidelity also mattered. People were more inclined to expose cheating when the cheater’s relationship was on the brink of an important transition (e.g., when they were about to get engaged), when the cheating behavior was ongoing, and when the third party was known to have a sexually transmitted infection (STI). Indeed, these three factors were rated as being the most influential of all in terms of making participants more likely to reveal infidelity.

Of course, these factors do not provide a full accounting of all possible reasons people might decide to expose or not expose infidelity. For instance, people who hold certain religious beliefs very strongly may make fewer distinctions among the circumstances surrounding infidelity. Moreover, the results could be very different in a more diverse sample. Perhaps individuals who are older or who have more personal experience cheating or being cheated upon would have differing opinions on the matter.

This study also defined infidelity in relatively narrow terms (i.e., as penile-vaginal sex). It is possible that when infidelity involves other sexual acts (e.g., oral sex, mutual masturbation, kissing) or when cheating occurs among partners of the same sex, people may view it differently.

That said, this study at least provides a preliminary look into some of the myriad reasons people might decide to expose infidelity or not and suggests that some instances of cheating are more likely to be exposed than others.

Want to learn more about Sex and Psychology ? Click here for previous articles or follow the blog on Facebook (facebook.com/psychologyofsex), Twitter (@JustinLehmiller), or Reddit (reddit.com/r/psychologyofsex) to receive updates.

To learn more about this research, see: Kruger, D. J., Fisher, M. L., & Fitzgerald, C. J. (in press). Factors influencing the intended likelihood of exposing sexual infidelity. Archives of Sexual Behavior.

SEE ALSO: Science says lasting relationships come down to 2 basic traits

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This 13-year-old found the math formula for capturing the sun's energy

Use these scientific strategies to step up your game and attract the objects of your desire more effectively. 

Produced by Graham Flanagan

Follow BI Video: On Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »