Skip to main content

How much eye contact is just right?

(CNN) — “Look at me when I’m talking to you.”

It’s a request I heard from my mother throughout much of my childhood, and even into my adult life. Somehow, what has always felt like the right amount of eye contact from my end has often been less than for her.

So many of us have been told to look someone in the eye when speaking. But how much eye contact is the appropriate amount when talking or listening to another person?

There’s no rule, but almost always “people look more while listening than when speaking, although looking is hardly ever just a steady stare,” said Judith Hall, social psychologist and University Distinguished Professor of Psychology, Emerita at Northeastern University in Boston, in an email.

That’s because our eyes are constantly moving around in many small ways when talking or listening. And while people generally have a good sense of when eye contact feels like too much or too little as it’s happening, Hall said quantifying the right amount is not possible.

There are, however, some subtleties to consider.

More than a social courtesy

It can feel offensive when you’re having a conversation with someone who is averting their gaze. But making eye contact during conversation has functions that go beyond being polite.

“Eye contact isn’t just a social courtesy; it’s actually a brain-stimulating interaction, and it’s really fundamental to human connection,” said Melissa J. Perry, dean of the College of Public Health at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.

As social beings, humans glean information from others by looking, observing and listening, Perry said. She noted that our brains are “optimized” for seeking out sensory input from others through eye contact and other nonverbal cues, including facial expressions and posture.

“Neurobiologically, the brain is responding to the authenticity and empathy and credibility of the person before the mind is forming an opinion about what they’re saying,” Perry added.

Eye contact also has neurochemical effects within the body, including the release of oxytocin, the neuropeptide that plays a crucial role in social bonding, said Paula Niedenthal, a professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison whose research examines neural, cognitive, social and cultural/societal influences on facial mimicry and eye gaze.

“The initial function of eye contact is to create a social bond with somebody and to generate activation in the reward systems of the brain and the production of oxytocin to make sure that everybody’s gotten involved in this dance and is going to stay there,” Niedenthal added.

In addition to interacting with the brain’s reward system, eye contact is also important for gathering information.

We learn about people’s moods, behavior and many other things by watching them, Hall noted, whether that’s through direct interactions with people or while watching them without their knowledge.

Making eye contact with someone when they’re talking to you doesn’t have to mean staring right into their eyes, she said. Even people who don’t have difficulty hearing tend to lip-read some during conversation, Hall said, in case you’ve noticed yourself watching someone’s mouth as they talk.

More staring isn’t better

When it comes to communicating, more eye contact isn’t always better, Perry cautioned.

“Healthy communication depends on natural intermittent eye contact,” she said. “Too little can suggest uncertainty or disengagement, while too much can feel intimidating or confrontational.”

Averting a gaze during communication can also imply a distance and aloofness, she said, or even a sense of secrecy.

People who consider themselves to be in a dominant position compared with the person they’re talking with have somewhat altered ratios when it comes to how much they make eye contact while speaking and listening, Hall said.

“Their ratio of looking while speaking goes up and their ratio of looking while listening goes down,” she said.

There are also differences between men and women. Women are “well established to gaze at others in conversation more than men do,” said Hall, with the highest levels of gaze during communication occurring in pairs of females, and the lowest among pairs of males.

Cultural differences can also come into play when it comes to what’s considered an acceptable amount of eye contact.

“There is a lot of cultural universality although specific cultures can have their own norms,” Hall said. Ethnic groups can vary when it comes to certain situations involving eye contact, too, such as whether sustained eye contact with a superior while talking is considered paying attention or taken as a lack of deference, she said.

Niedenthal said there’s a “continuum” when it comes to the extent to which eye contact can feel too arousing to different people — another reason there’s no hard and fast rule when it comes to how much eye contact is appropriate in social settings.

People with some neurodevelopmental conditions, such as autism, typically avoid eye contact, Niedenthal said.

“The claim is that for those with autism, the high arousal is aversive. Avoidance is thus an adaptive emotion regulation strategy,” she said, noting that it isn’t the only reason why autism is associated with eye contact avoidance.

If you’re not comfortable with how much someone is looking at you or vice versa, what do you do?

Just being aware of the power of eye contact and other nonverbal forms of communication is a step in the right direction, Perry said.

“It’s far more powerful and impactful than any of us recognize,” she said.

The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.

A ‘ghost ship’ allegedly attacked Ecuadorian boats with bomb-dropping drones. The survivors want answers

(CNN) — Hernán Flores says he remembers the shock he felt when a sudden blast rocked his fishing boat in the Pacific.“We heard the explosion – boom! It was the kind of blast that left my ears ringing. Right then, I felt blood running down me,” he recounted.Flores had captained one of two Ecuadorian fishing crews who say their boats were sunk in an unexplained attack involving small, explosive-laden rotor drones launched by armed foreigners in March.The incidents have been the subject of mounting interest in the United States, with the Washington Post this week reporting that the strikes were carried out as part of a covert CIA program – a claim CNN cannot independently verify. A spokesperson for the CIA told CNN, “We do not have any guidance to offer on this.”CNN spoke to multiple fishermen about the experience and what happened to them next. This is the story through their eyes.‘Dropping the bomb on us’The two fishing crews reported almost identical experiences, though they were attacked separately.Several days into their respective fishing voyages, both said they spotted a mysterious blue ship and drones seemingly following them at a distance. At the time, they said they had no reason to believe they were being targeted, so they carried on with their work.A day or two later, they said their boats were suddenly attacked.Without warning, a pair of drones either dropped explosives or crashed into the boats, hitting La Negra Francisca Duarte II on March 17 and Don Maca on March 26, according to the fishermen.They described the drones as relatively small, measuring roughly the size of a pillow, with rotors in all four corners and a tube hanging from the center, from which explosives are believed to have been dropped.The first drone seemingly detonated after crashing onto the gas tanks of La Negra Francisca, the crew recounted, while the second appears to have dropped an explosive.Hernán Flores, captain of the boat’s 16 crew members, said one drone crashed into the boat, severely injuring the foot of his nephew Jordyn.The flames from one explosion also burned the upper half of another crewmate’s back, according to the crew’s attorney Jorge Chiriboga Dávalos, who shared photos of the injuries.In the attack on Don Maca a few days later, one of the 20 crew members said the first blast hurled him into the air.“I went flying and slammed into a diesel tank that was sitting there,” Jaime Rubén Cervantes Macías recalled. “People were shouting, ‘Drone, drone, drone!’ So, I jumped up quickly to take a look – and it was a drone firing at us, dropping the bomb on us.”His crewmate John Sebastián Palacios said the explosions were so loud they damaged his hearing. Another fisherman said the attack injured his left eye, causing it to lose most of its vision.At some point, both crews said they spotted a different gray aircraft surveilling the situation from above. Hernán Flores described it as a “mini plane” with long wings. A sketch he made depicted the aircraft with a bulbous nose that tapered off toward the body.Flight data suggested the area near the boats’ last recorded locations was being patrolled by a plane registered to a company whose address is listed as a private mailbox at a United Parcel Service store in Richmond, Virginia, according to public records first reported by the New York Times and later verified by CNN.After the purported attacks, both groups abandoned their damaged vessels, boarded smaller auxiliary boats and headed toward the mysterious blue ship in the distance to seek help.When they reached it, armed men on board pointed rifles at them, but then allowed them to board after some of the fishermen said they were injured, they said.The armed men allegedly detained and interrogated the fishermen as soon as they got on. In the second incident, the attackers carried out a few more strikes to sink the Don Maca before leaving the scene with the survivors, Cervantes Macías said.La Negra Francisca was left burning. Hours after that alleged attack, another fishing crew arrived at the site and took videos of the boat in flames, Chiriboga said. The crew logged the burning vessel’s coordinates at 1.591783, -87.741783, which Chiriboga said was about 170 miles off the Galápagos, within Ecuador’s exclusive economic zone.A NOAA satellite detected a fire in that location on March 17 at 3:02 p.m., not long after the first purported strike.English-speaking men on a ‘ghost ship’Upon boarding the blue vessel – which Chiriboga described as a “ghost ship” – survivors of both alleged attacks said the armed men tied them up and put hoods over their heads. The men were White, tall, spoke English, carried rifles, and wore brown camouflaged uniforms – some with a patch of the US flag over their arms, according to several of the fishermen.The blue ship, the fishermen said, resembled a tuna fishing boat but was larger and had a tall wheelhouse toward the front. In the back there was a crane, three large containers and – according to the first group of fishermen – a smaller motorboat.During the purported detention of La Negra Francisca’s crew, Jordyn Flores said he was taken into one of the containers for medical treatment. There, he said he saw a board with images of the drones and their boat. The rest of the crew stayed outside and slept on the deck, Hernán Flores said.Hours after each reported attack, the armed men transferred the crews to a Salvadoran Coast Guard ship in the middle of the sea, telling the guardsmen that the fishermen had been shipwrecked, according to both crews. From there, they were shipped away to El Salvador, hundreds of miles from their home county.El Salvador acknowledged on March 24 that its forces had picked up a group of Ecuadorian fishermen whose descriptions matched those of La Negra Francisca’s crew members. In a statement, its military described the fishermen as shipwreck survivors rescued at sea. It made no mention of a blue ship or Americans. CNN has reached out to the Salvadoran government for more information.As they navigated toward El Salvador, both groups of fishermen said the Salvadoran guardsmen treated them well, giving them food, water and medical care. Asked why they didn’t repatriate them to Ecuador, the Salvadoran guardsmen said their ship wasn’t allowed to enter Ecuadorian waters, according to the fishermen.Both crews reached El Salvador after a week or so. There, they were interviewed by Salvadoran authorities and placed in migration centers and hospitals, where they stayed for several more days before eventually being flown back to Manta, the coastal city from which their boats had departed.What really happened?Who attacked the ships? Why were they detained and handed over to El Salvador? The fishermen still don’t know. Jorge Chiriboga Dávalos, the lawyer for La Negra Francisca’s crew, has said he plans to file a lawsuit in the US against those responsible – once they figure out who that is.Manta has been a focal point in the United States’ fight against organized crime in the region, with the US and Ecuador working closely on security. In early March, the US began unspecified operations to target “designated terrorist organizations” in the South American country, according to the Pentagon.But while the US has acknowledged conducting dozens of lethal attacks on alleged drug-trafficking vessels in the Pacific and Caribbean, the two Ecuadorian boats in question – La Negra Francisca Duarte II and Don Maca – are not among the acknowledged incidents, and the US Defense Department has denied any involvement in their cases. CNN has also reached out to the CIA and the US Drug Enforcement Administration for comment.The fishermen insist they are not traffickers and that they have not been charged with drug-related offenses in Ecuador. Flores also told CNN that an Ecuadorian patrol ship, the LG-30, had inspected La Negra Francisca before the alleged attacks and found no illicit activity. CNN has reached out to the Ecuadorian Navy for more information.“You cannot attack civilian vessels. That is an abuse and that is what we reject because it causes pain and economic harm, since it was their means of work,” Chiriboga said.Another Ecuadorian fishing boat called Fiorella disappeared during a fishing voyage on January 20, along with eight crew members, and is believed to have been attacked as well, according to Fernando Bastias, an attorney with Ecuador’s human rights committee. Two crew members, who had disembarked the boat to look for fish, were away when it disappeared. When they returned to its last known location, they found no trace of it.But Ecuadorian authorities have remained mostly silent about the bizarre incidents. Foreign Minister Gabriela Sommerfeld, in a statement to the media in Quito in April, did not give details and said succinctly that her only role was to coordinate the return of the fishermen when they were in El Salvador.“Countries in Central America, Ecuador and North America are working cooperatively on joint activities. I could not say with certainty what activities the fishermen were carrying out or the situations they are in,” she said. CNN has reached out to the Ecuadorian Navy and its maritime division for more information.The US Embassy in Ecuador referred CNN to the US Southern Command, which was also contacted.‘We’re kind of traumatized’The crews of Don Maca and La Negra Francisca say they’re recovering physically, mentally and financially.Jordyn Flores, whose foot was severely cut, said he struggled to keep up with medical expenses when he was hospitalized.Hernán Flores said he has trouble sleeping and suffers from migraines due to a head injury.John Sebastián Palacios said he and other fishermen are hesitant to return to the ocean because they fear another potential attack.“Psychologically, we’re kind of traumatized,” he told CNN. Don Maca’s owner, Cristhian Mendoza, said the loss of his boat cost him and the crew a source of income.Mendoza, who wasn’t on board during the purported strikes but was constantly communicating with the crew during the voyage, said his main concern is the fishermen’s wellbeing.“The first point is to thank God for those human lives that we managed to rescue,” he said. “The other point is to defend them and seek justice.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story