N※N

How to work with annoying people, according to peer-reviewed science | Fortune

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. -according-to-peer-reviewed-science-fortune.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, September 17th 2025 at 10:16 GMT by Fortune
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

How to Work With Annoying People—According to Peer‑Reviewed Science

When the word “annoying” rolls off the tongue, the instinctive reaction is often to distance yourself, to find a quiet corner, or to draft an exit plan. But for most of us, the workplace is a constant dance of personalities—some of whom we find difficult to tolerate. A recent feature in Fortune (“How to Work With Annoying People, According to Peer‑Reviewed Science”) tackles this very problem head‑on, drawing on a growing body of academic research that turns frustration into a structured, evidence‑based approach.

Below is a comprehensive recap of the article’s key insights, the research that underpins them, and practical tips for turning irritation into opportunity.

1. Why Do People Seem “Annoying”?

The article begins by acknowledging a psychological fact: annoyance is not a fixed trait but a reaction to perceived violations of expectations. A 2022 study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (JPSP) found that when people feel their autonomy is threatened, they’re most likely to label a coworker as annoying. In other words, it’s how we perceive the interaction that matters more than the other person’s actual behavior.

The feature cites this study to frame the rest of the discussion: “Annoying doesn’t mean malicious; it’s a cue that something in the interaction is off‑balance.” The article goes on to note that even the best‑intentioned teammates can inadvertently trigger annoyance if they’re overly critical, chronically late, or constantly interrupting.

2. Four Evidence‑Based Strategies for Dealing With the Annoying

A. Give Them Space—And Your Own

The piece highlights a 2020 experiment in Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes where participants who were allowed to control the pace of a group discussion reported lower annoyance levels. The researchers concluded that perceived autonomy was a major driver of frustration. The article therefore recommends setting clear, respectful boundaries: “If a coworker is a frequent interrupter, it’s okay to say, ‘Can I finish my point before you jump in?’”

B. Use Humor With Caution

Humor is a double‑edged sword, and the article points to a 2018 paper from Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts that shows self‑deprecating humor can reduce perceived hostility, whereas sarcasm often escalates tension. The takeaway: “A light joke about a shared problem—like the eternal mystery of the office printer—can diffuse annoyance if it’s delivered in a non‑confrontational tone.”

C. Frame the Interaction as a Shared Problem

According to a 2021 study in the Academy of Management Journal, framing challenges as joint rather than individual reduces defensive reactions. “If you say, ‘We’re both stuck on this task, let’s brainstorm together,’ the other person is less likely to see the situation as a personal attack,” the article explains.

D. Seek to Understand Their Motivation

The Journal of Applied Psychology published a 2019 study that found people who were perceived as high‑competence and low‑dominance were less annoying because their intentions were clearer. The article advises asking open‑ended questions like, “What’s your thought process on this?” This can shift the dynamic from “my coworker is annoying” to “let’s understand why they act the way they do.”

3. The Role of Cognitive Bias in Annoyance

The article explains that the “negativity bias” makes negative experiences linger longer than positive ones. A 2023 meta‑analysis in Cognitive Psychology found that individuals often remember the “annoying” moments 2–3 times longer than the pleasant ones. The practical implication? “Make a point of recognizing positive contributions before addressing annoyances; it balances the emotional ledger.”

The article also references the “self‑serving bias,” noting that people often blame external factors for annoyances. “When you’re the one who’s annoyed, try to ask yourself if you’re projecting your own stress onto the other person,” the piece advises.

4. Real‑World Applications—Case Studies from Fortune

The article provides three short vignettes, each linked to longer interviews and research papers:

1. The Perpetual Late‑comer – A marketing manager at a Fortune‑500 firm was frustrated by a teammate who arrived late to meetings. After implementing a “no‑late‑policy” and sharing a short written reminder, the manager’s annoyance dropped by 45%, per a 2022 internal survey linked in the article.

2. The Over‑Communicator – A data analyst dealing with a colleague who frequently sent redundant emails. By establishing a “one‑email‑per‑topic” rule (link to the Harvard Business Review article on communication norms), the analyst reported improved focus and reduced irritation.

3. The Micro‑Manager – A project leader who found their assistant’s need for constant check‑ins exhausting. The article cites a 2020 Journal of Management study that recommends delegating autonomy in smaller tasks, which in this case decreased the leader’s annoyance by 30%.

These examples are accompanied by hyperlinks to the original research cited in the Fortune article, providing readers with deeper dives into the data.

5. Practical Take‑Away Checklist

The Fortune piece concludes with a concise, printable checklist:

• Set Clear Boundaries – “What is acceptable? What isn’t?”
• Use Humor Sparingly – “One joke per meeting, no sarcasm.”
• Frame Problems Jointly – “We’re in this together.”
• Ask About Motivations – “Why are you doing this?”
• Remember Positives – “Spot one good thing first.”
• Monitor Your Own Biases – “Am I projecting my stress?”

It also recommends reading the linked study on cognitive biases for those who want to get deeper into the psychology.

6. Bottom Line: Annoyance Is a Signal, Not a Verdict

Ultimately, the article argues that annoyance is a signal that something in the interaction is misaligned. By leveraging research on autonomy, humor, shared framing, and motivation, we can transform irritability into constructive dialogue. The result? A workplace that’s not only more harmonious but also more productive.

Whether you’re a manager juggling a diverse team or an individual who simply wants to survive Monday morning stand‑ups, the science‑backed tactics from Fortune provide a clear roadmap: treat annoyance as a cue, not a verdict, and use evidence‑based strategies to turn friction into progress.