Replace statements with questions in familiar territory
Wherever you would normally state a conclusion, form it as a genuine question instead.
Key takeaways
- What it is: Wherever you would normally state a conclusion, form it as a genuine question instead.
- Why it works: Statements close inquiry; questions keep it open. In familiar territory, confidence converts naturally into assertions, which forecloses the perception of alternatives. Replacing statements with genuine questions — not rhetorical ones — preserves the possibility that reality is not quite what expertise predicts. This is close to what epistemologists call calibrated uncertainty and what scientists call a null hypothesis.
- Evidence: Backed by observational / correlational evidence.
- Avoid: Using rhetorical questions that contain the answer ("Don’t you think X is obvious?") — these perform uncertainty without experiencing it.
Why it works
Statements close inquiry; questions keep it open. In familiar territory, confidence converts naturally into assertions, which forecloses the perception of alternatives. Replacing statements with genuine questions — not rhetorical ones — preserves the possibility that reality is not quite what expertise predicts. This is close to what epistemologists call calibrated uncertainty and what scientists call a null hypothesis.
How to do it
- 1When you catch yourself about to say "this is how X works," pause and reframe: "Is this how X works?"
- 2Let the question sit for 30 seconds before answering it, looking for evidence that could disconfirm.
- 3In team settings, offer your confident view as "I notice I’m assuming X — does that hold?"
- 4Practice this weekly in one domain where your expertise is highest.
What the evidence says
ObservationalActively open-minded thinking — the disposition to question one’s own conclusions — is predictive of better epistemic outcomes and less susceptibility to cognitive bias. The question-replacing-statement technique is a practical delivery of this disposition.
Honest caveat: Actively open-minded thinking is a stable trait correlated with outcomes; whether practicing question-framing increases it is plausible but not directly studied.
- — Baron (2019), Actively Open-Minded Thinking in Politics, Cognition
Common mistake
Using rhetorical questions that contain the answer ("Don’t you think X is obvious?") — these perform uncertainty without experiencing it.
IX Coach reflects your stated assumptions back as open questions during check-ins, preventing the coaching from simply confirming your existing mental models.
Practice this with IX Coach →