You’ve probably heard the story (heck, I have been perpetuating it myself!): tell the right kind of story, and you’ll release dopamine, oxytocin, or endorphins in your audience’s brains. Create suspense for dopamine. Show empathy for oxytocin. Add humor for endorphins. Mix your “Angel’s Cocktail” and watch your audience transform.
It’s a compelling narrative - David JP Phillips’ TEDx talk on this has millions of views, and his book High on Life builds an entire system around it. And you know what? The techniques absolutely work. They were taught to me early in my speaking career, and while accepting them as very much an oversimplification, I didn’t dive into the science - until now. What I want to share with you is what I found about why they work - an understanding that can make you even more effective as a speaker.
Let’s talk about what’s actually happening when you use these storytelling techniques, and how you can use this knowledge to become a better speaker.
What the Research Actually Shows #
There IS research showing that narratives can affect neurochemicals. Neuroscientist Paul Zak’s research demonstrates that character-driven stories with dramatic arcs can cause oxytocin release and affect behavior.[1] The simplified “hormone cocktail” story captures something real.[2][3]
But the mechanisms are richer and more interesting than a simple cause-and-effect relationship. Understanding what’s really happening gives you more tools to work with.
Here’s what we know with solid evidence:
Dramatic Arcs Are Real and Universal #
A 2020 study analyzing approximately 40,000 narratives found strong, highly consistent evidence for three primary narrative processes: staging, plot progression, and cognitive tension, with coherent patterns across genres and story lengths.[4] This effect is measurable across thousands of stories.
Suspense Changes How We Pay Attention #
Research shows that suspenseful content is associated with motivated attention and psychological tension, with measurable physiological changes.[5] Brain imaging studies reveal that reading suspenseful text activates areas related to social cognition and predictive inference.[6] Your audience isn’t just passively listening: their brains are actively trying to predict what happens next.
You may have heard that suspense “releases dopamine” in a simple cause-and-effect way. The reality is more nuanced: dopamine is involved in reward prediction and motivational salience. What we can control as speakers is creating the conditions - uncertainty, anticipation, emotional engagement - that make information memorable. The specific neurochemical dance happening in your audience’s brains is complex, but the practical outcome is clear: suspenseful moments enhance attention and memory encoding.
Unfinished Stories Stick in Memory #
The Zeigarnik effect, discovered in the 1920s, demonstrates that people remember unfinished or interrupted tasks better than completed ones.[7] This is why cliffhangers work - our brains hate open loops and will work to close them.
What This Means For You As A Speaker #
Instead of thinking about hormones, focus on what you can actually design and control: attention, cognitive engagement, and memory.
1. Use Cognitive Tension (Not Drama for Drama’s Sake) #
The research shows that effective narratives create “cognitive tension” - moments where characters (or you, or your case study companies) must process scenarios, resolve conflicts, and form new understanding.
What this looks like in practice:
- Present a problem before the solution. Don’t open with “Here’s how we reduced costs by 30%.” Open with “We were hemorrhaging money and couldn’t figure out why.”
- Show the struggle. When I talk about diving into Spark, I don’t just say “I learned Spark.” I talk about the frustration, the failures, the moment of breakthrough.
- Let the tension build before the resolution. Don’t give away the answer in your first slide.
2. Leverage Predictive Processing #
Research on suspense shows that our brains constantly generate “outcome spaces”: predictions about what might happen next.[8] You can harness this.
What this looks like in practice:
- Set up expectations, then subvert them. “You’d think the solution would be to hire more people. We did the opposite.”
- Use the power of “what if” scenarios. Don’t just present data, instead make your audience wonder about the implications.
- Create information gaps strategically. Pose questions you’ll answer later. This keeps your audience’s cognitive machinery engaged.
3. Exploit the Zeigarnik Effect #
That cliffhanger effect works because incompleteness creates mental tension that demands resolution.
What this looks like in practice:
- End sections with unresolved questions that you’ll address later
- When telling a story, pause at the moment of highest uncertainty: “And then the email arrived…” (beat) “From the CEO.”
- Reference callbacks to earlier unfinished threads: “Remember that problem I mentioned at the start? Here’s where it gets interesting.”
4. Structure for Attentional Focus #
EEG studies show that different phases of a dramatic arc have distinct neural signatures and affect engagement differently.[9] Suspenseful moments narrow attentional focus,[5] making your audience more receptive to key information.
What this looks like in practice:
- Place your most important points during high-tension moments, not during exposition
- Use staging (setting the scene) at the beginning, but keep it brief
- Build to your main point - don’t bury it in the middle where cognitive tension is still low
- Follow intense moments with breathing room for the information to land
5. Make Your Opening Count (For the Right Reasons) #
I’ve written before about ditching the biography trap - don’t open with credentials. The reason is attentional economics.
Analysis shows that staging (scene-setting) occurs at its highest at the beginning of stories, followed by a rise in plot progression and cognitive tension.[4] Your audience is primed for you to establish context, not for you to read your LinkedIn profile.
What this looks like in practice:
- Open with a scene, a problem, or a provocation - something that creates cognitive engagement
- Establish why your audience should care (the stakes) before establishing why you’re qualified
- Create an open loop early that you’ll close later
The Real “Cocktail” You’re Mixing #
Think about the psychological states you can influence:
- Attention: Are they focused or distracted?
- Anticipation: Are they wondering what comes next?
- Cognitive engagement: Are they actively processing, or passively receiving?
- Memory formation: Are you creating conditions for retention?
There’s one more mechanism worth understanding: neural coupling. Research shows that during effective storytelling, listeners’ brain activity literally synchronizes with the speaker’s. Their neural responses mirror yours - not because of hormone release, but because their brains are engaging in the same cognitive processing you are. When you work through a problem, they work through it with you. When you experience a breakthrough, their brains experience it too. This is why authentic storytelling is so powerful: you can’t fake this kind of synchronization.
These are the mechanisms that make storytelling techniques work. Understanding them gives you more precise control over your presentations.
A Word on Ethics: The Social Media Parallel #
You might recognize these mechanisms from somewhere else: your phone. Doom scrolling works because of the same psychological principles, namely incomplete information, curiosity gaps, and unpredictable rewards that keep you engaged.
Social media platforms have essentially weaponized the Zeigarnik effect. Every post is a cliffhanger leading to the next. Every notification is an open loop demanding closure. The endless scroll exploits your brain’s hatred of incompleteness.
So what’s the difference between ethical speaking and manipulative design?
Intent and resolution. Social media platforms want to trap you in an endless engagement loop with no resolution - the goal is to keep you scrolling forever. As speakers, we use these same mechanisms, but with a different purpose:
- We create tension with the intent to resolve it
- We open loops that we will close
- We capture attention to deliver value, then release it
Think of it this way: A cliffhanger TV episode that resolves in the next episode is good storytelling. An endless series of cliffhangers with no payoff is manipulation. Know the difference.
The mechanisms are neutral. It’s how we use them that matters.
Your presentation should have a beginning, middle, and end. If your audience leaves still wanting more of your specific content, that’s success. If they leave unable to stop checking their notifications, that’s the wrong kind of engagement.
Why Understanding the Mechanisms Matters #
When you understand that you’re managing cognitive tension and predictive processing, you make better choices about information architecture and pacing. You think about where to place key information, how to create anticipation, and when to provide resolution.
You become an architect of attention, a director of cognitive focus, and a memory engineer. And unlike hormone levels, these are things you can actually design for, practice, and improve.
The Bottom Line #
David Phillips is right that storytelling techniques work. He is the man that trained me to be the speaker I am today, and I owe him a huge debt of gratitude. What I’m sharing here is a deeper look at the mechanisms - attention, memory, and cognitive processing - that make these techniques so powerful.
The next time you prepare a presentation, ask yourself:
- Where am I creating cognitive tension?
- What outcome space am I building in my audience’s mind?
- What open loops am I creating and closing?
- When will attention be highest, and what do I want to say then?
These are the questions that matter. And the techniques that answer them work because of how human attention and memory actually function.
Join the Conversation #
What techniques have you found most effective for maintaining audience attention? I’d love to hear what techniques work for you! Please reach out to me or comment on LinkedIn or BlueSky!
References #
[1] Zak, P. J. (2015). “Why inspiring stories make us react: the neuroscience of narrative.” Cerebrum. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4445577/
[2] Yong, E. (2012). “Oxytocin: The hype hormone.” Discover Magazine. https://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2012/07/16/oxytocin-hype-hormone
[3] TED’s official corrections page for Paul Zak’s talk. https://www.ted.com/pages/criticism-updates-paul-zak
[4] Boyd, R. L., et al. (2020). “The narrative arc: Revealing core narrative structures through text analysis.” Science Advances, 6(32). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.aba2196
[5] Multiple studies on suspense and physiological responses. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.558234/full
[6] Lehne, M., et al. (2015). “Reading a suspenseful literary text activates brain areas related to social cognition and predictive inference.” PLoS ONE. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4422438/
[7] Zeigarnik, B. (1927). Original research on incomplete tasks and memory. Overview: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeigarnik_effect
[8] Lehne, M., & Koelsch, S. (2015). “Toward a general psychological model of tension and suspense.” Frontiers in Psychology. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4324075/
[9] Song, H., et al. (2023). “Exploring the Neural Processes behind Narrative Engagement: An EEG Study.” eNeuro, 10(7). https://www.eneuro.org/content/10/7/ENEURO.0484-22.2023
Photo by Alem Sánchez: https://www.pexels.com/photo/margarita-glass-in-shallow-photo-613037/
Note #
You may have heard claims about specific retention percentages (10% of what we read, 80% of what we experience, etc.). These numbers, often attributed to Edgar Dale or William Glasser, are not supported by research and should be avoided despite their widespread repetition in the training industry.