Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Another Symptom of Growing Isolation


A recent study found that people spoke fewer words a day in 2019 than in 2005.


In Europe in the 1700s, coffeehouses were sources of coffee, but also conversation. As the MIT psychologist Sherry Turkle points out in her 2016 book, Reclaiming Conversation, many people went to coffeehouses specifically to have rich, deep, sometimes even confrontational discussions: She quotes the British essayist and politician Joseph Addison, who wrote in 1714, “I have taken a particular Care never to be of the same Opinion with the Man I conversed with.”




Contrast this with how, some 300 years later, I engage with my local coffeehouse, Starbucks. I open the app at home and order a latte, then whirl my Honda through the drive-through and collect my drink from an employee, who says, “Have a nice day.” No conversation—just caffeine.

This new way of obtaining java is part of why, according to a recent study published in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science, people now are talking less and less. For the study, the psychologists Valeria Pfeifer, of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and Matthias Mehl, of the University of Arizona, analyzed data from thousands of participants in the United States, Mexico, Australia, and Europe. The subjects carried around a device that randomly recorded sound bites of their speech throughout the day. In 2005, when the studies began, the average number of words that each participant spoke in a day was 16,632; in 2019, when the research concluded, the average was 11,900. Each year, the participants spoke about 338 fewer words a day than they did in the previous year, amounting to a decline of about 28 percent over the entire time period.

From what I can tell, two main reasons seem to be driving this gradual silencing. The first is that conversation requires, at the very least, the presence of another person. But during the study period, people almost everywhere spent more and more time alone—a trend that only accelerated after the study ended, as the pandemic drove millions of people into further isolation. One major paper found that from 2003 to 2019, the portion of free time that Americans spent alone grew from about 44 to about 49 percent—which may sound like a small increase until you consider that the study excludes time spent working, sleeping, and grooming. In 2006, 21 percent of respondents to a survey in 21 European countries said they got together daily with friends; by 2022, the number was just 12 percent.


The other big factor is the rise of digital communication, such as texting and social media, as well as online shopping, ordering, and many, many other -ings. A generation ago, many of the tasks of daily life required conversations: with the grocery-store cashier, the receptionist at the doctor’s office, the host at the neighborhood restaurant. But today, Pfeifer told me, “you can reserve a table using an app as opposed to calling the restaurant.” She added, “The conversations you have with strangers or maybe people that you don’t know as well—the opportunities for those just seem to have declined a lot in recent years.” Opportunities for speaking with people one does know have also declined, as people tend to send a text or DM instead of calling a friend on the phone. (Indeed, when Pfeifer and Mehl analyzed their data by age group, they found that people under the age of 25, who presumably text more because of their well-known aversion to phone calls, had lost even more words a year than those over 25.)



Whatever the reasons for the decline of talking, it could have negative consequences for mental health. Turkle said that, unlike texting or emailing, face-to-face conversation builds empathy: “We experience the emotion of conversation from within our bodies.” In her book, she points to a study in which researchers compared college friends who communicated face-to-face, and by videochat, audio chat, and online instant messaging. “In-person conversation led to the most emotional connection,” she writes, “and online messaging led to the least.”

Even the loss of relatively shallow conversations can be harmful. Gillian Sandstrom, a psychologist at the University of Sussex and the author of Once Upon a Stranger, studies “weak ties,” or the people we talk with casually throughout the day. She has found that although these interactions might seem meaningless, they boost our sense of well-being, making us feel part of something bigger, even if we’re just buying milk or chatting with a colleague at the office coffee maker. And when we have fewer of these exchanges, we miss them: A recent study published in the journal Science, for example, found that remote workers spent more time alone each workday and also experienced more mental distress than in-person workers. The effects were especially pronounced if the remote worker also lived solo. Talking less can also create a self-reinforcing cycle. When we don’t practice having small interactions, Sandstrom told me, “then we feel more anxious, and then we don’t want to do it.” But these casual interactions sometimes lead to big, important relationships: “How will I find my best friend that I don’t know that I have if I’m too nervous to talk to people?”


Whatever the reasons for the decline of talking, it could have negative consequences for mental health. Turkle said that, unlike texting or emailing, face-to-face conversation builds empathy: “We experience the emotion of conversation from within our bodies.” In her book, she points to a study in which researchers compared college friends who communicated face-to-face, and by videochat, audio chat, and online instant messaging. “In-person conversation led to the most emotional connection,” she writes, “and online messaging led to the least.”

Even the loss of relatively shallow conversations can be harmful. Gillian Sandstrom, a psychologist at the University of Sussex and the author of Once Upon a Stranger, studies “weak ties,” or the people we talk with casually throughout the day. She has found that although these interactions might seem meaningless, they boost our sense of well-being, making us feel part of something bigger, even if we’re just buying milk or chatting with a colleague at the office coffee maker. And when we have fewer of these exchanges, we miss them: A recent study published in the journal Science, for example, found that remote workers spent more time alone each workday and also experienced more mental distress than in-person workers. The effects were especially pronounced if the remote worker also lived solo. Talking less can also create a self-reinforcing cycle. When we don’t practice having small interactions, Sandstrom told me, “then we feel more anxious, and then we don’t want to do it.” But these casual interactions sometimes lead to big, important relationships: “How will I find my best friend that I don’t know that I have if I’m too nervous to talk to people?”

Declines in speech are also a problem, Pfeifer said, because talking exercises the brain differently than texting does. When you have a conversation, your working memory has to retain both what the other person is telling you and what you’re planning to say in response. An in-person discussion is even more complicated: You also have to monitor your body posture and facial expressions so that you react appropriately to what the other person says. When you’re talking face-to-face, you can’t mutter “what the hell” while you type out “sounds great!” Plus, Pfeifer said, in a verbal conversation, you can’t edit or read back what was said, which means you organize your thoughts differently or perhaps try out some ideas you’re not willing to chisel in stone quite yet.

When conversation skills get rusty, other cognitive processes might erode, too, Pfeifer told me. Many people struggle with their attention span, she said, and that could be partly because we don’t have as many chances as we once did to try to follow along as someone tells a lengthy, complicated story. When so much communication happens digitally, she said, “we’re essentially outsourcing a lot of the way our brain works into a device.”

When I use the Starbucks app and similar shortcuts, it’s typically because I don’t want to face the uncomfortable spontaneity of other humans. What if they say something weird—or I do? But, considering this research, I might let more of my own clumsy comments fly and be more receptive to the ones that come my way. I’d rather say something weird, I think, than not say anything at all.




'Hidden' harm as ASIC finds mortgage borrowers miss out on millions in offset savings

AI Is Replacing Customer Service Jobs at CBA, Microsoft, Uber


 


 'Hidden' harm as ASIC finds mortgage borrowers miss out on millions in offset savings


In short:

Millions of Australians use offset accounts to reduce interest costs on their mortgage, but the corporate regulator says some banks are not delivering the savings as promised.

ASIC found Australian banks paid more than $55 million in compensation to customers in just two years, for failures with mortgage offset accounts.

What's next?

The regulator said several banks had begun remediation and it would monitor their fixes, provide individual feedback and consider further regulatory action



Banks charged mortgage holders $55m in extra interest after offset account errors, Asic finds 

Banks charged mortgage holders $55m in extra interest after offset account errors, Asic finds Australian banks ‘not getting the basics right’, regulator says after review of more than 200,000 home loans 



Bank errors adding thousands in interset and years to home loans

Bank glitches are costing mortgage holders thousands in unnecessary interest and adding years to their home loans. Here’s how to audit yours.

Joanna Mather

A number of the nation’s biggest banks have been caught shortchanging the millions of Australians with $349.1 billion sitting in offset accounts.

Administrative errors mean customers are unknowingly paying thousands of dollars in extra interest and adding years to the life of a loan.

Are you paying thousands more on your mortgage than you should be? Bethany Rae

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission reviewed 204,000 loans settled between March and August last year with eight banks – AMP Bank, ANZ, CBA, CUA (Great Southern Bank), HSBC, ING, Macquarie, and Westpac.

It found that offset accounts are marketed to customers as a simple way to save on mortgage interest over the life of a home loan, but some banks are failing to deliver on what they promise.

The breadth of the problem is demonstrated in the following figures: between September 1, 2023 and August 31, 2025, banks paid more than $55 million in customer compensation for offset account failures. More payouts are expected.


“This highlights the significant impact these failures can have on customers and raises concerns about whether banks are consistently delivering the expected benefits of offset accounts to their customers,” the report says.

ASIC says almost 3.3 million Australian households have a home loan, while research from the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) shows that about 40 per cent of Australian mortgage holders use a mortgage offset account.

The scourge of unlinked accounts

Unlinked accounts are the biggest problem. This is where the bank opens the account or leaves money in it but fails to tie it to the home loan.

The ASIC report says this is the primary driver of financial harm.

In one example cited in the report, a couple – James and Mia – paid $3000 in additional interest in a year after their bank failed to correctly link an offset account containing $50,000 to their $750,000 home loan.

The ASIC report notes that had this mistake gone unnoticed for the 30-year-life of the loan, the couple would have paid $230,000 in extra interest and taken four additional years to pay off the loan.

Four other ways banks get it wrong

There are several other scenarios where “linking” goes wrong.

  1. Linked to the wrong account: A customer with multiple property loans might have their offset attached to Loan A (e.g. a low-rate fixed loan) instead of loan B (a high-rate variable loan). This can cut their savings.
  2. Not opened at all: In some cases banks accepted a request for an offset account and took fees but didn’t open the account.
  3. Delayed linking: Sometimes banks link the account but took weeks or months after settlement to do so, denying customers of the interest savings.
  4. Linked but interest not calculated correctly: Some accounts were shown as linked in the system, but glitches at the back end meant interest reductions weren’t applied to the balance. Importantly the review did not assess how banks calculated interest.

In one example included in the report, a bank worker unlinked a home loan and offset account. Again the customer noticed higher than expected interest charges and made a formal complaint. The bank error cost $3500 extra in one month alone.

In a third example, four customers refinanced their loans internally with the same bank, but the company’s systems couldn’t automatically relink offset accounts to a new loan number.

A manual process was required but the bank failed to tell the customers. Two of the customers overpaid interest of more than $17,000 before the error was caught.

Why and when do things go wrong

The ASIC report identifies changes during the life of the loan – “in life” changes – as the primary culprits for errors. Examples of these changes include: switching from a variable to fixed rate; refinancing internally; changing loan products.

The ‘invisibility factor’

ASIC calls out a massive “invisibility” factor. Unlike the overcharging of a direct debit or listing of an incorrect rate of interest, mistakes involving offset accounts can be difficult to detect.

The monthly repayments on a loan stay the same, which means errors can remain hidden for years.

Plus, customers don’t always see important offset account details in their bank’s mobile app, the report says.

“When customers cannot easily check whether an offset account is linked or saving interest, they may be unable to identify problems and, therefore, unable to raise them with their bank.

“This matters even more when banks struggle to find offset account failures themselves. Without clear, accessible information, customers can overpay interest without realising.”

What excellent service looks like

Best practice by one bank is identified in the ASIC report. The unnamed bank provides an offset dashboard in its mobile app and online banking website that displays key details, including which offset accounts are linked; which home loan they are linked to; and, the interest saved over the financial year.

A three-step check to perform today

  1. Check your bank created the offset account following your initial request
  2. Confirm the offset is linked to the correct home loan if you have split loans or multiple properties
  3. Check your interest calculations accurately reflect the reduced balance of your loan as per how much has been offset
 joined the AFR as an education reporter in 2008. She spent four years in the Canberra press gallery before becoming superannuation reporter in 2016, deputy news director in 2021 and wealth editor in 2023. Connect with Joanna on Twitter. Email Joanna at jmather@afr.


Meet the senior CBA exec who started his career as a bank teller

Aaron Bergstrum, the premier banking state manager for Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia, started from a role directly serving customers.



By all accounts, it took Aaron Bergstrum a few months to settle into his studies at university.

Bergstrum, state manager for Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia for premier banking at Commonwealth Bank, first enrolled in sports science. The course involved too much anatomy, so he quit after a semester and switched to a business and finance degree. The content was fine, but after three months Bergstrum realised full-time university life was not for him.

“I tried for three months, and I couldn’t do it,” recalls Bergstrum, who is today named one of the BOSS Young Executives for 2026.

Now in its 23rd year, the BOSS Young Executives program recognises emerging leaders aged 35 or younger who demonstrate leadership in the community and business, and who have a strong track record in people and thought leadership.

“I tried the sleep-in, the two-minute noodles, the hanging out on campus, and sitting on the grass for a few hours in between lectures, but it just wasn’t me.

“I’m one of these people that when I’ve got a spare moment, I feel like it’s got to be filled with something productive. [University] just wasn’t intense enough for me. I found more passion being a young person in a real grown-ups world, still keeping my cogs going at night-time, but during the day actually be with professionals and learning how to be an adult,” Bergstrum says.

So Bergstrum, who grew up in Brisbane with his parents and sister, got himself a job in the local Westpac branch and continued his university studies at night, later undertaking an executive MBA at Queensland University of Technology the same way. Within a year of joining Westpac, Bergstrum knew he wanted to go a lot further in financial services.

“I could see the value that you could actually add to a client.”

As a kid, Bergstrum says he would have been a “nightmare” for his parents, given his propensity to get bored. Much of his childhood was filled with sport, including athletics, where he competed in national hurdling competitions. Athletics involved intense training – he was doing so alongside Olympians such as Sally Pearson – but that chapter came crashing down when he was about 19 and his coach forced him to choose between hurdles and banking and university. Bergstrum quit the next day.

Luckily Bergstrum, who is married with two young children and whose go-to sport these days is doing triathlons, loved branch life, which he says taught him a lot about work ethic, respect and kindness, and attention to detail.

“Kindness goes a long way. Everyone’s got something going on in their personal life that you can’t take for granted. Treat everyone with care and respect.” To this day, Bergstrum argues it is critical for anyone in the customer service industry to gain frontline experience.

Working his way up

The 2026 BOSS Young Executive spent 13 years at Westpac, much of it in branches. After his role as a teller, Bergstrum held positions as a personal banker, business banker, home finance lender, bank manager and leader of bank managers.

He moved to CBA a year ago. He wasn’t looking to change jobs, but the challenge was too good to reject. CBA’s premier banking division supports the lender’s affluent customers, and CBA wanted to expand the division and provide more one-on-one relationship banking services.

“It was exciting. It was a transformational job. They [needed] someone to help scale up and transform this business and add value to the culture and the employee sentiment, and that’s a challenge I really wanted. [It had a] balance of strategy, people and risk.”

Bergstrum has about 100 people in his team.

Asked about the career advice he has treasured, Bergstrum says: “Work harder than everybody else, treat everybody with care and respect, and be patient.

“You’ve got to work really, really hard. You can’t turn up to game day and expect to play better than everybody else if you haven’t trained harder than everybody else.”

He concedes the patience part comes less easily.

So how does an executive who is so prone to getting bored relax?

“My family’s my relaxation. That’s always something that I’m grappling with, to make sure that I have an equal balance between family and work. The love I have for my job and the business will never be beaten by the love I’ve got for my family.”

Fortunately, family life involves sport in the form of coaching and refereeing his son’s Australian Football Rules team.