Last month, we tested TalkMeUp by asking it to provide us with an unbiased assessment of Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump’s communication effectiveness during the opening statements of the 2024 Presidential Debate on September 10. The results were insightful—even with only a roughly 5-minute sample size—and allowed us to offer context to the factors we measured in their respective approaches to communication and the outcome.

Needless to say, we used the same approach with the Vice Presidential debate between Tim Walz and JD Vance on October 1. Did TalkMeUp hit the nail on the head again? We’d argue that it did. You can see the complete evaluation in this post.

‍

A Few Key Points To Consider With This Communication Effectiveness Analysis

Once again, it’s important to note that we only analyzed the first two minutes of each candidate’s opening statements—not the nearly two-hour back-and-forth. We did this because of the importance of the introduction. Opening remarks give the speaker a golden opportunity to capture the audience’s attention and pull them into the content of one’s talk. As I said about the Presidential debate, you don’t want to fumble away that opportunity. Furthermore, the analysis in both instances was done in a purely unbiased way. 

What you see below is nothing more than an analysis of two approaches to communication at that moment. 

For transparency’s sake, the analysis took into consideration the following metrics:

Empathy — the ability to sense, understand, and respond to other people’s emotions and perspectives

Logical transitions — the words and phrases we use to connect and transition from one idea to the other

Persuasiveness — the influence over your audience’s decision-making and ability to sway them to your perspective

Sentiment — the attitude (positive, negative, or neutral) used to express certain ideas based on word choice and tone

Enthusiasm — the ability to show keen interest, conviction, and passion

Filler words — words used to conceal lapses in thought and preparation

Pacing — the rhythm and speed of speech

Eye contact — a measure of intentions, trustworthiness, and your emotions

Facial expressions — measure the emotional aspects of your message

Gestures — reveal attitude and conviction in your message

JD Vance and Tim Walz effectively represented themselves in this debate. What stood out immediately was how cordial the interactions were compared to Harris and Trump. Rather than slinging insults and comparing crowd sizes at various rallies, they were respectful and showed empathy toward one another. They were open to compromise and mindful of their weaknesses—even if fact-checking still ruffled feathers. In many cases, they seemed intent on addressing larger issues and speaking directly to the audience. 

Their respective TalkMeUp scores reflected this, too. 

Walz earned perfect scores in empathy and pacing. His gestures were on point, and he didn’t use many filler words.

Meanwhile, Vance’s best scores were in gestures, eye contact, empathy, and filler words.

But once again, there were a few key metrics on which they scored extremely low.

‍

Zero Score in Facial Expressions for Walz

Nonverbal communication (expressing sincerity, authenticity, confusion, eagerness, etc.) is critical to effective communication. It’s the metric that stirs the drink, if you will. As the audience, we can tune out word choice and tone of voice, but we can’t tune out nonverbal communication, such as facial expressions. As a result, you must be tuned into what your face communicates as you speak. 

Much like Trump’s score in the first debate, Walz didn’t earn any points in this key metric. The way Walz uses his lips and chin, the edges of his mouth drop down—almost like when we draw a sad face. TalkMeUp described it as a sad look, but I took it as a sign that he was nervous in his first debate. When you’re anxious or upset, people feel that and don’t always hear what you’re saying. You want to be as relaxed as possible and ensure your facial expressions align with your messaging. For Walz, the positivity and enthusiasm were there. He also showed a lot of empathy. And yet, the facial expressions didn’t align, leading to a lower score.

‍

Low Score in Pacing for Vance

Vance’s scores overall were also impressive, but he scored particularly low on pacing (speaking rate). According to the data, he spoke too fast. Perhaps that is the lawyer in him and the training he received in the legal profession. That said, the risk is that the average viewer or audience member may struggle to keep up and would ultimately get lost in the shuffle. Just as speakers experience a certain degree of anxiety, so do listeners. As a result, they start to tune you out. 

Perhaps he spoke a little fast, but it didn’t appear as though he was challenging to follow. 

‍

How Would We Coach Vance and Walz?

From a pure communication effectiveness perspective, I would use these scores to advise Vance that he might want to consider slowing down his delivery rate—even if just a little bit. After all, being more deliberate and a little slower in your pacing ensures your message gets through to everyone.

I would also advise Walz to focus more on his facial expressions and find ways to smile more and relax when the spotlight is pointed directly at him. This was his first VP debate, and these issues may iron themselves out as he does more of them.

‍

The Business World Demands More Effective Communication

Whether you are an organizational leader, an employee working your way up the corporate ladder, or a political candidate with an important message to share with the world, improving your communication effectiveness is essential. This is where tools such as TalkMeUp can help. TalkMeUp gives you and your teams the feedback everyone needs to communicate better — all in real-time. To me, that’s the best feature. You can practice with TalkMeUp repeatedly and track your progress. As you see changes in your communication, others will see you as a leader who speaks passionately and confidently in any setting.

Interested in seeing how TalkMeUp can help you improve your communication skills? Try TalkMeUp for free with no obligation.

‍

About the Author
Ron Placone, Ph.D., is an Associate Teaching Professor Emeritus of Business Management Communication and the Former Faculty Lead and Interim Executive Director for the Accelerate Leadership Center at the Tepper School of Business. Ron teaches a range of communication courses and leadership programs for Tepper students. Ron’s research interests include civility in discourse and fostering individual and team creativity. Previously at Carnegie Mellon, Ron was the Assistant Vice President for Learning & Development. Before joining Carnegie Mellon in 1999, Ron was Vice President and Director of Organizational Development and Communications for Mellon Network Services. Ron has been a consultant, leadership, and communication coach for numerous executives and corporate and not-for-profit organizations. He has consulted in health care, financial services, education, technology, and energy sectors. Ron has a Ph.D. in Rhetoric-English from Carnegie Mellon University.