Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists Create Equation For a Perfect Handshake

samzenpus posted more than 4 years ago | from the thank-you-science dept.

Idle 144

Hugh Pickens writes "Discover Magazine reports that despite the average person shaking hands nearly 15,000 times in a lifetime, one in five (19 per cent) admit they hate the act of the handshake and are unsure how to do it properly, regularly making a handshake faux pas such as having sweaty palms, squeezing too hard or holding on too long while over half the population (56 per cent) say they have been on the receiving end of an unpleasant handshake experience in the past month alone. But help is at hand as scientists have developed a mathematical equation for the perfect handshake taking into account the twelve primary measures needed to convey respect and trust to the recipient. The research was performed at the behest of Chevrolet as part of a handshake training guide for its staff and is meant to offer peace of mind and reassurance to its customers. A full guide to the perfect handshake is available on Flickr."

cancel ×

144 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Reminiscent of Alan Moore's "The Bowing Machine" (2, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034218)

Reminds me of a little known story by Alan Moore with art by Mark Beyer called The Bowing Machine [livejournal.com] except it's not a comic ...

The Seinfeld formula (3, Interesting)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034270)

The Seinfeld episode that delved into the handshake protocol gave me the best advice I could need when it comes to a good handshake. Reach in, grab firmly, give one pump and two shakes, let go.

Re:The Seinfeld formula (5, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034458)

Reach in, grab firmly, give one pump and two shakes, let go.

I tried that but none of the women in my life found it to be particularly satisfying ;)

Re:The Seinfeld formula (1)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034832)

Hey, that was my move!

Re:The Seinfeld formula (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035336)

Then you must not be doing it well. If it's taking a long time to please her then you just aren't doing it right.

If its hot, passionate, and she feels properly taken then you won't have to make any special efforts and hold out. She'll finish as fast or faster than you will.

Re:The Seinfeld formula (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035926)

I was only being a wiseass, but if you want to interpret my comment literally I don't know too many women that would feel "properly taken" after a single thrust.....

I do agree with what you are trying to convey in a broader sense though.

Re:The Seinfeld formula (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036436)

It's okay Shakrai, lots of guy have the same problem you do.

Re:The Seinfeld formula (4, Funny)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035056)

Wait, that's the same advice I was given about how to use the urinal...

Re:The Seinfeld formula (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33036738)

Two shakes is unsanitary, though. You need to do three.

Just don't do more than three, because that's playing with it.

First rule (2, Insightful)

ceraphis (1611217) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034332)

Wipe your sweaty hands off both before the handshake AND without the person seeing you. It's still unpleasant IMHO if you see a guy wipe his sweaty hands off right before shaking hands with you. (unless he/she was just eating lunch or something and thus is expected not to have the most clean hands in the world)

Re:First rule (1)

Psychofreak (17440) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034602)

So..if I am greasy under the hood of the car, you WANT the greasy handshake?

Should I add more grime like I do if you happen to be an uninvited person peddling religion?

Phil

Re:First rule (1)

ceraphis (1611217) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035180)

Oh by all means add more grime to uninvited persons. But notice I said "eating lunch or something" where I meant the greasy/dirty hands from an arbitrary activity, for example eating lunch or greasy car activity.

Re:First rule (3, Interesting)

nomorecwrd (1193329) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035252)

Here in Chile, at least, people with greasy hands usually offers you the arm. (excusing themselves for the dirty hands)

Re:First rule (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035276)

I actually appreciate you wiping sweaty hands before a handshake. The reason to not let me see it is that you've revealed that you are nervous to me.

Maybe that is good, maybe it is bad, depends on the circumstance.

Bunk, I say (3, Informative)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034428)

Nothing in here about actual grip strength. I'd think that a 'guide' would tell you how hard is too hard, etc.

Also, as a person with huge hands, I can tell you that size matters a lot in terms of too much/too little grip.

Re:Bunk, I say (2, Funny)

Shoeler (180797) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034604)

Also, as a person with huge hands, I can tell you that size matters a lot in terms of too much/too little grip.

Oh I see what you did there. Clever.

Re:Bunk, I say (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034684)

lol

Don't read too much into that, though. Most of my best skills aren't helped by the size you're thinking of at all. ;)

Re:Bunk, I say (2, Funny)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034800)

Shoeler and BobMcD, please get a room!

Re:Bunk, I say (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034846)

"I could teach you, but I'd have to charge..."

what? (1)

ph0rk (118461) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035096)

You mean the default isn't grip as strong as you possibly can?

Re:what? (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036454)

I'm guessing handshake technique is like handjob technique - there's nothing worse than the other person gripping as tightly as they can and pumping for all they're worth. You just want to say... you're doing it wrong.

Re:Bunk, I say (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035574)

And when they squeeze too hard, you say:

I'd hate to be your cock, wanker.

Re:Bunk, I say (1)

BeardedChimp (1416531) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036590)

Yep, this has all the hallmarks of a pr stunt. It was discovered by 'scientists' at the behest of Chevrolet. This is no different than the formula that shows how famous someone is, or the most depressing day of the year.

Ben Goldacre has written quite a few articles debunking them in the past. Here is a few choice quotes [badscience.net]

Now the fact is that Cliff Arnall’s equations are stupid, and some fail even to make mathematical sense on their own terms. His equation for the perfect long weekend is a case in point. It is “(C x R x ZZ) / ((Tt + D) x St) + (P x Pr) >400 (Tt = travel time; D = delays; C = time spent on cultural activities; R = time spent relaxing; ZZ = time spent sleeping; St = time spent in a state of stress; P = time spent packing; Pr = time spent in preparation).

I give you Cary Cooper, professor of organisational psychology and health at the University of Lancaster, in the Evening Standard. "Psychologists claim to have developed a mathematical formula, [(V x P x R) + A] x (VFM), which allows them to grade the nation's sporting triumphs. And they have produced a highly contentious 'top 10' covering everything from England's World Cup win in 1966 to the Ashes triumph over Australia last year." Can they be serious? "The people behind the equation boast that it's 'the first ever scientific equation that reveals just how good a game of sport has been to watch'.

Hollywood beauty, Jessica Alba, is ‘strutterly’ desirable – she has the sexiest ever walk, according to new research revealed today by Veet. Veet, the hair removal expert, has teamed up with mathematicians at Cambridge University to reveal a ratio to work out who has the hottest walk, and the Fantastic Four star clocked up the top score, thanks to her luscious legs and curvy frame.

Etc. etc. ad nauseum. Slashdot should not be providing advertising for companies which further distort the public's understanding of science.

Re:Bunk, I say (1)

auLucifer (1371577) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036640)

Handshakes are much more complicated then just strength and what the 'flickr' image covers (the formula does have mention of strength (s) is strength "(1= weak; 5=strong) 3;") especially depending on which country you're in. A good rule of thumb is to squeeze firmly and if they squeeze stronger you just try to match. If you squeeze stronger then them then it's all sorts of body language issues/power plays. There are different ways to hold the hand depending on the image you want to portray and if you shake someones hand vigourously, as suggested, in Australia you'll either come across like an over-excited dog or you'll just wear the other person out and you'll lose face. Alan Pease has a book simply called "Body Language" (I can't find it on amazon easily unfortunately) that covers hand shakes in great detail

Next up: (1)

ITBurnout (1845712) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034448)

A noogie research grant!

Your Bailout Money Hard at Work! (3, Insightful)

cashman73 (855518) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034466)

Seeing as how this came out of Chevrolet, a GM division, it's good to see that they put all that federal bailout money to good use!

Re:Your Bailout Money Hard at Work! (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035044)

It is far more cost effective to make your salesmen as good a conmen as possible than it is to build reliable cars people want to buy.

Re:Your Bailout Money Hard at Work! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035732)

Even better is the news today that GM is buying a "sub-prime" auto loan company. Using federal bailout money to buy a company that's not going to be covered by the recent 'finance overhaul' bill.

'perfect' handshake requires only eye contact (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33034490)

meanwhile (why more touching will get you nowhere presently); the corepirate nazi illuminati is always hunting that patch of red on almost everyones' neck. if they cannot find yours (greed, fear ego etc...) then you can go starve. that's their (slippery/slimy) 'platform' now. see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisocial_personality_disorder

never a better time to consult with/trust in our creators. the lights are coming up rapidly all over now. see you there?

greed, fear & ego (in any order) are unprecedented evile's primary weapons. those, along with deception & coercion, helps most of us remain (unwittingly?) dependent on its' life0cidal hired goons' agenda. most of our dwindling resources are being squandered on the 'wars', & continuation of the billionerrors stock markup FraUD/pyramid schemes. nobody ever mentions the real long term costs of those debacles in both life & any notion of prosperity for us, or our children. not to mention the abuse of the consciences of those of us who still have one, & the terminal damage to our atmosphere (see also: manufactured 'weather', hot etc...). see you on the other side of it? the lights are coming up all over now. the fairytail is winding down now. let your conscience be your guide. you can be more helpful than you might have imagined. we now have some choices. meanwhile; don't forget to get a little more oxygen on your brain, & look up in the sky from time to time, starting early in the day. there's lots going on up there.

"The current rate of extinction is around 10 to 100 times the usual background level, and has been elevated above the background level since the Pleistocene. The current extinction rate is more rapid than in any other extinction event in earth history, and 50% of species could be extinct by the end of this century. While the role of humans is unclear in the longer-term extinction pattern, it is clear that factors such as deforestation, habitat destruction, hunting, the introduction of non-native species, pollution and climate change have reduced biodiversity profoundly.' (wiki)

"I think the bottom line is, what kind of a world do you want to leave for your children," Andrew Smith, a professor in the Arizona State University School of Life Sciences, said in a telephone interview. "How impoverished we would be if we lost 25 percent of the world's mammals," said Smith, one of more than 100 co-authors of the report. "Within our lifetime hundreds of species could be lost as a result of our own actions, a frightening sign of what is happening to the ecosystems where they live," added Julia Marton-Lefevre, IUCN director general. "We must now set clear targets for the future to reverse this trend to ensure that our enduring legacy is not to wipe out many of our closest relatives."--

"The wealth of the universe is for me. Every thing is explicable and practical for me .... I am defeated all the time; yet to victory I am born." --emerson

no need to confuse 'religion' with being a spiritual being. our soul purpose here is to care for one another. failing that, we're simply passing through (excess baggage) being distracted/consumed by the guaranteed to fail illusionary trappings of man'kind'. & recently (about 10,000 years ago) it was determined that hoarding & excess by a few, resulted in negative consequences for all.

consult with/trust in your creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." )one does not need to agree whois in charge to grasp the notion that there may be some assistance available to us(

boeing, boeing, gone.

Re:'perfect' handshake requires only eye contact (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034596)

Sure, but wouldn't it be easier to deal with if you ALSO had a pretty sweet handshake?

Well you see (2, Funny)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034506)

American tax dollars at work. Because it's very important to have a perfect handshake when you work for a company that needs a government bailout to stay afloat after bankruptcy.

Re:Well you see (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034858)

Because it's very important to have a perfect handshake when you work for a company that needs a government bailout to stay afloat after paying off the unions.

FTFY

Re:Well you see (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035062)

No unions held a gun to their heads when the exec signed those deals. They made their bed and should have been forced to lay in it. No union worker decided they should make cars people did not want to buy, the failings of GM have been management failures.

Re:Well you see (1)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035214)

They made their bed and the taxpayers were forced to lay in it

FTFY

Re:Well you see (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035560)

I agree that is what happened, but GM should have been left to die. They made these decisions they should have dealt with them.

Re:Well you see (2, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035954)

They should have been compelled to go through Chapter 11 without the White House interfering with the bankruptcy code and picking winners and losers. The bankruptcy code has a clearly defined pecking order but the White House apparently decided that rule of law wasn't the way to go.....

Re:Well you see (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035240)

Typical finger-pointing bullshit. Management: whine whine whine it's the union's fault. Labor: whine whine whine it's management's fault. Reality: You all fucking suck.

Re:Well you see (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035578)

They might all suck, but management makes the decisions. The buck stops there.

Scientists are calling it... (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034510)

Scientists are calling it, "the fist bump" and are quoted as saying "it's just much harded to fuck up". Fox News reports increased popularity of "Terrorist Fist Jabbing" [youtube.com]

Re:Scientists are calling it... (2, Informative)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035222)

There is nothing worse than the fist bump. I promise you, everyone you fist bump hates it and the office is the last place you should it.

Re:Scientists are calling it... (1)

gilleain (1310105) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035348)

There is nothing worse than the fist bump. I promise you, everyone you fist bump hates it and the office is the last place you should it.

Furthermore, there is this rule to follow with regards to fist bumps: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/3/7/ [penny-arcade.com]

I don't get it (1)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034574)

Rule #1
Shake it three times and you're playing with it.

What??
</sarcasm symbol>

Re:I don't get it (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035200)

The rule says shake it MORE than three times. A triple shake is legal.

Perfect Handshake (Advanced Professionals Only) (5, Funny)

boneclinkz (1284458) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034588)

1) Grip firmly with right hand.

2) Take one step in so that faces are around 12 inches apart.

3) Make eye contact (hold position until this happens).

4) Once eye contact is made, firmly grab person's forearm with your left hand.

5) Slide left hand up and down person's forearm, from wrist to elbow, twice, while maintaining eye contact.

6) Wink with left eye.

7) Break eye contact, let go.

Define firmly (1)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035018)

What is "firm"?

Occasionally, you get these asshats who squeeze as hard as they can - you know they're faking it because they're an office worker and they're not built like Arnold when he was young. It's like WTF are they trying to prove?

You usually find them in you places: sales and HR.

Re:Define firmly (1)

boneclinkz (1284458) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035146)

I would say "firm" is the type of grip you would use whilst hanging from a single piece of scaffolding at the top of the Sears tower.

Re:Perfect Handshake (Advanced Professionals Only) (1)

BudAaron (1231468) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036194)

8. Duck!

Re:Perfect Handshake (Advanced Professionals Only) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33036262)

I think you are describing the "double Dutch rudder".

This is the future... (1)

Titan1080 (1328519) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034598)

In a world where personal interaction between people is becoming less and less common, we may be seeing more of these 'crucial guides and studies' to social interaction... Assuming civilization continues as it is; which is not a very smart assumption, IMHO.

looks like the etiquette books don't need updating (2, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034616)

Despite all that science, the advice in that flickr summary are basically the same as the advice and diagrams in the section of Business Etiquette for Dummies [amazon.com] on handshakes.

(Don't ask me how I know that there's a Business Etiquette for Dummies, and that it has a section on handshakes.)

Too hard vs Too light (1)

Thyamine (531612) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034618)

Sure getting your hand crushed is no fun, but personally I'd rather a good firm handshake than those things where people offer you their fingers and you get some weird loose wrist/finger handshake thing. I try and give a good handshake and instead feel like somehow I violated them. And I mean, the parole officer said I'm not supposed to do that type of thing anymore. You know with the violating. I mean TMI.

Re:Too hard vs Too light (2, Insightful)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035184)

Agreed. A handshake is body language that can tell you if someone is nervous, uncomfortable, or even confident.

A firm dry handshake without need for pants wiping after a job interview can say a lot about the person's confidence level. That's useful information depending on how you intend to treat them after hire.

Re:Too hard vs Too light (3, Insightful)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035316)

What irks the hell out of me is someone who grabs the hand too fast without getting skin-to-skin contact between each others' thumb-and-index webspace. I end up with some idiot who's got hold of my fingers only. Those are the clowns that get the do over and instructions on proper handshaking, usually punctuated with something like, "Slow down, idiot!"

Re:Too hard vs Too light (2, Interesting)

Kozz (7764) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035562)

What irks the hell out of me is someone who grabs the hand too fast without getting skin-to-skin contact between each others' thumb-and-index webspace. I end up with some idiot who's got hold of my fingers only. Those are the clowns that get the do over and instructions on proper handshaking, usually punctuated with something like, "Slow down, idiot!"

There you go... that's my number-one pet peeve: grabbing my four extended fingers, leaving my thumb waving in the air? Wtf? I'd think that in any culture, the very least you want to do is have a symmetric handshake. I try my best to make the handshake symmetrical, firm but not crushing. I've had people grab only my fingers, other guys seemingly oblivious that they've crushed my knuckles such that I cannot return the grasp, and then the folks who offer their hand like it's a fresh pork chop, a piece of meat with no life in it whatsoever.

I think it'd be more instructive to write up all the handshake mistakes people make.

Re:Too hard vs Too light (3, Interesting)

Quirkz (1206400) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035924)

I am apparently one of those poor saps who can either make eye contact, or watch where my hand is going, but not both. Generally I figure it's better to make eye contact and flub the handshake a little than stare at the person's hand. So I sometimes (maybe 20% of the time) end up either too short (just fingers) or too far (kind of jamming the webbing together awkwardly). I try to adjust if possible, but sometimes the other person already has you in their grip, and it's just better to go with it.

I've always hoped it wasn't just me, and that at least half of the blame for mis-coordinating the hand position lies with the other person, but maybe it's just me.

At least one thing I do know is I've got the pressure in a moderate middle ground . I've had enough that are too hard or too soft (one gal I met recently took soft to an extreme by extending her hand and then not moving her fingers at all -- it wasn't a soft squeeze, it was literally nonexistent) to know what the right pressure feels like.

I was hoping maybe this study would venture into some of the silly complicated extra convolutions people put in their handshakes. Mostly seems to be a phenomenon of younger guys trying to be hip, who have some ridiculous five-part ritual. Grab, slap, wiggle, fist, waggle some finger, whatever it is. I watch people around me going through the whole procedure like they know what the other person is about to do, but I've always felt sort of colorblind or tone deaf as far as those gestures go. Can anyone explain to me how the hell I'm supposed to know it's "grab, smash elbow, bump chest, slap back twice" this time, and next time it'll be "grab hand, clasp forearm, do the hokey pokey"?

Re:Too hard vs Too light (1)

steelfood (895457) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036720)

Watch the hand until the moment you grab it. Then quickly look back up at the person. If you do it quickly enough, nobody'd notice that you're not making eye contact while grabbing their hand.

"Science" (2, Funny)

DIplomatic (1759914) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034652)

Yes.... I completely concur with this post being tagged 'Science.' (alt+U0161)

Neal Stephenson in Snow Crash (3, Funny)

at10u8 (179705) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034670)

He posited execs who had embedded goniometers to ensure that each bow to a Japanese business partner reached the appropriate level. This looks ripe for similar treatment.

Wow, 19 per cent? (3, Interesting)

teumesmo (1217442) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034672)

That's quite impressive, if 19 per cent go so far as to hate it, at least double that must find it irksome, another large percentage is indifferent to it, I wonder who are the freaks who actually think it useful, or go so far as to enjoy it.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (2, Interesting)

feepness (543479) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034856)

I wonder who are the freaks who actually think it useful, or go so far as to enjoy it.

The ones who are worried about you pulling a weapon on them.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (2, Insightful)

luckyXIII (698285) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036552)

Which is why, despite being right-handed, I regularly practice drawing with my left hand.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (2, Insightful)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035124)

I find a handshake useful. You shouldn't read too much into it. But a wet handshake or a wipe on the pants indicates nervousness.

A weak handshake indicates the person either has a low opinion of you or whatever business you are conducting. That might mean they disagree or it might mean they don't give a shit.

A firm handshake suggests the person is comfortable with you and takes whatever business is at hand seriously. For instance, after a Foosball battle in the office it is habit to go for a firm handshake afterward to indicate mutual respect for a game well played.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035208)

You shouldn't read too much into it.

Agreed.

A wet handshake or a wipe on the pants indicates...
A weak handshake indicates...
A firm handshake suggests...

Oh wait. You meant a different kind of not reading too much into it than I thought.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035414)

Apparently, you see I meant "you shouldn't read too much into it" and you apparently read "it means absolutely nothing."

I appreciate your honestly in admitting your mistake though. It suggests character so I might friend you but I'm not going to read too much into it and offer you my daughter.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (1)

mooingyak (720677) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035554)

It suggests character so I might friend you but I'm not going to read too much into it and offer you my daughter.

Okay, points for saying "up yours" with style.

But more to the point, my own observations (anecdotal! I know) have been that most people just shake hands the same way all the time, basically the way they were sort of taught to as kids. It sounded like you were taking that position at the beginning and then took a 180 and described what all the handshakes meant. So I'll give my own counter list of the same:

A wet handshake indicates that someone perspires at a lower temperature than others.
A weak handshake indicates that someone hates physical contact with others.
A firm handshake suggests your dad coached football.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33036688)

It's simpler than you're picturing. A firm handshake is the sign of a man. It's how you recognize the men that were raised right, and who are more likely to act like men in their dealings with you.

It sounds frivolous, but it's not. Spend a few years watching out for it; you'll be surprised how strong the correlation is.

Re:Wow, 19 per cent? (1)

Smauler (915644) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036614)

A weak handshake indicates the person either has a low opinion of you or whatever business you are conducting. That might mean they disagree or it might mean they don't give a shit.

So wrong - there are loads of people who don't like unnecessary bodily contact with other men, and thus are automatically reluctant. I'm not fussed really, but I know people who are, and judging them by their handshake is simple minded and shortsighted.

For what culture? (3, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034694)

Even in the U.S.A., handshake length differs. When you go to another country, some grab your hand and pump for the entire conversation in a ritual beat, using it as emphasis while they talk, others never shake hands at all.

My procedure: (3, Funny)

rev_sanchez (691443) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034710)

Step 1: Wipe my hand on pants discreetly so as to verify dryness. A sweaty hand is a gross hand.
Step 2: Make a quick glance to verify that the person you'll be shaking with has a standard 5 fingered hand. I'll shake a stump, hook, plastic hand, or sub-5 finger hand, flipper what-have-you but you want to know about this going into the shake and not in the middle of the first pump.
Step 3: Grasp their hand or hand-like appendage firmly, shake about twice, and release whatever they've stuck out at you.

sim city 4 (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33034716)

sounds like something that would flash across
your sim screen :P

How about we stop doing it completely. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33034762)

It's a rather silly archaic convention.

'ooo. a human i have not met before. come. let us touch each other'.

It kinda gives me the creeps all around. No matter how it's done. Cuz who the hell knows where his hand was 5 minutes ago.. Down his pants, finger up the nose, in his girlfriends pants? His boyfriends?

I just don't want to have that kind of contact with what comes down to complete strangers. Which is pretty much who you're shaking hands with anyway. People who know each other don't do it that often.

and the funny solution is... (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035430)

to go even more archaic and switch to the various forms of bowing
(bonus points if you
1 are even partly oriental
2 regularly have your hands covered in "stuff"
3 are in a skill where you "can't risk" being on the receiving end of a crusher handshake)

The only perfect handshake (3, Funny)

Ivan Stepaniuk (1569563) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034782)

> syn seq=X
< syn ack=X+1 seq=Y
> ack=Y+1 seq=X+1
> DATA

The handshake isnt the confusing part (1)

Alarindris (1253418) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034786)

The confusing part is whether or not the other person is going to actually shake your hand or do that stupid palm slide and then bump knuckles thing. It's ok if it's a friend or something and you know it's coming, but strangers/new acquaintances do this to me all the time.

I have actually started making people start over and actually shake hands properly.

"No, put out your hand. Good. Now, the webs of our thumbs meet like this and then we shake. This is what we call 'shaking hands'."

Re:The handshake isnt the confusing part (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035332)

I have actually started making people start over and actually shake hands properly.

Seriously?

So using your specific empty gesture of greeting is more important than making a moderately amiable first impression with a total stranger?

Wow. Just... wow.

Do you correct others in other forms of etiquette as well? If I'm at McDonalds and fail to hold out my right pinkie finger while snarfing my Big Mac, might I expect the honour of a public correction from Your Highness?

Re:The handshake isnt the confusing part (1)

jdoverholt (1229898) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035426)

+1 funny (why don't I ever get any mod points anymore?)

Re:The handshake isnt the confusing part (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035664)

I have actually started making people start over and actually shake hands properly.

And you wonder why nobody wants to shake your hand...

Fixed that for you (1)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034828)

"Scientists" (some professor) have "developed" (thrown together a bunch of bullshit about) a "mathematical" (numbers make math!) "equation" (brackets and operations make an equation!) for the "perfect handshake" (in their sole opinion) taking into account the "twelve primary measures" (which they came up with after a one hour brainstorming session) needed to convey "respect and trust" (or at least the illusion of it, in order to sell cars) to the recipient.

Seriously, dry your hands if you can, don't grip too hard or too soft, and look 'em in the eyes. Done. But why not add some bureaucracy to the process?

"Johnson, you're two points shy on your grip rating! No raise this month!"

Re:Fixed that for you (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035016)

Yeah, but I wouldn't put it that way. There is nothing worse than a weak handshake. You'd have to be trying to squeeze too hard, a good handshake is a firm one that speaks of commitment.

Depends on your goal (2, Funny)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034836)

It really depends on your goal

1. Lick you palm. Make sure it is really slimy.
2. Grab their hand with both of yours so they can't get away. Preferably from behind.
3. Shake good and strong, bringing your hand above your head and down to your knees.
4. Release while at maximum height.
5. Rub you hand on your pants leg for at least 10 seconds.

OK, you will now be excused from shaking anyone elses hand. Forever.

Waste of Time (1)

casings (257363) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034842)

Who the fuck thinks trying to assign an equation to something subjective is a good use of time?

That person is a moron.

Uh oh ... (1)

psbrogna (611644) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034930)

Has anybody checked that this it's not patented? I'd hate to have to the pay licensing costs retroactively cause I've been throwing 'em around pretty liberally.

Squeezing too hard? (1)

shaitand (626655) | more than 4 years ago | (#33034980)

Is this really a problem? Outside of trying to wound a good handshake is a firm one. There is nothing worse than a weak handshake.

ONE STEP CLOSER TO THE PERFECT BLOW JOB! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035028)

I smell Nobel price here... or maybe an impeachment

bad science (1)

cretog8 (144589) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035042)

Ben Goldacre talks about these "equation for the perfect X" stories which turn up regularly: formula for fame [badscience.net] , equation for a neckline [badscience.net] , perfect "wiggle" [badscience.net] , a particularly bad propagator [badscience.net] .

It's bullshit non-science to generate publicity.

I'm surprised.... (1)

Eightbitgnosis (1571875) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035118)

I would have though they might try to patent their new "perfect handshake" technology

Secret Handshakes (1)

dcollins (135727) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035292)

Of course, this overlooks organizations or fraternities that purposefully use a non-median handshake as a method of identification.

Like, maybe I'm a professional wrestler or something.

Re:Secret Handshakes (2, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035746)

Like, maybe I'm a professional wrestler or something.

Posting on Slashdot? Somehow, I doubt that. :-P

The perfect handshake (4, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035296)

The real trick to the perfect handshake is getting the hand properly pureed before you add the other ingredients.

Re:The perfect handshake (2, Funny)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035438)

It's also important to properly wash the hand, and remove the fingernails and bone unless your customer asks for "chunky".

Often forgotten is the use of a GOOD blender, and freezing the bowl beforehand to maintain proper temperature throughout the process.

Missing these steps makes the handshake weak and clammy rather than the firm, decisive, bold statement it is supposed to make.

If you really need your handshake to stand out, add some cayenne pepper and bing cherries. People love a bold handshake that promises a fruitful relationship, with just a hint of sweetness.

All those perfect "X" equations are bunk (1)

aepervius (535155) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035380)

They are there only to allow more print/ads/whatever to be sold. That sort of article should go in IDLE. That is about as stupid as the perfect day, perfect ice, perfect whatever equation. They are all made up.

Stop giving credibility to this corporate PR (2, Interesting)

bw-sf (937673) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035408)

Chevrolet bribed some ethics-free academics to come up with a fake equation for publicity purposes. The academics took the money and invented a stupid equation per spec. Then Chevrolet issued a press release, and gullible media outlets obligingly reprinted it and discussed it. A victory for Chevrolet's marketing department, a defeat for academic integrity and sensible journalism. Don't be part of these scams.

I hate you more than the whole worlddddddddd (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035452)

You make me touch your hands for stupid reasons.

NOT like a rock (1)

CeruleanDragon (101334) | more than 4 years ago | (#33035472)

So Chevy has discovered that some things should not be "like a rock".

When you shake someone's hand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33035786)

You're touching everything that everyone who has ever shaken that hand has touched.

why bowing is better (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33036116)

sweatiness, firmness, number of shakes not an issue.

So THATs where our bailout dollars went... (1)

172pilot (913197) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036178)

Only Chevy, after taking our bailout dollars and closing thousands of dealerships at the expense of tens of thousands of jobs would spend money to have SCIENTISTS try to quantify in a math formula, what constitutes a perfect handshake... Your tax dollars at work.. or rather NOT at work.. What a waste of money and time.

It's a medical condition (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33036412)

I have hyperhidrosis. There is nothing I can do to prevent a sweaty handshake. I despise the whole protocol of handshaking.

It's all a matter of protocol (1)

falken0905 (624713) | more than 4 years ago | (#33036606)

ACK/NAK
XON/XOFF
CTS/DTS
DTR/DSR
You don't need a fancy formula for any of those.
Of course, not everyone is a serial handshaker.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>