The psychological factors associated with polarization

Developmental psychology experts, such as psychiatrist Pablo Malo Ocejo, author of The Dangers of Morality, note that humans have a natural tendency to divide the world into “us” and “them.” This inclination stems from an anthropological constant: since prehistoric times, we have felt safer and more at ease with people from our own “tribe.”

The society we live in today is much more complex than ancient societies because we have to coexist with diverse groups of people. For many, this presents a challenge, especially for those who are more polarized. These individuals might feel that they can’t date someone who votes for a particular party, that certain newspapers should be avoided because their stance is predictable, or that if someone insults a specific football team, they’re insulting them personally. The ‘others’ are seen not as complex individuals but reduced to a single trait.

Polarization takes these ideas to the extreme, fostering hostility toward anyone who doesn’t share one’s identity or values.

Some people are more prone to psychological polarization due to a combination of individual and social factors, such as rigid cognitive patterns, cognitive biases, identity-shaping experiences during adolescence, pressure from their environments to conform, the need for belonging, and particular personality traits.

This process doesn’t happen overnight but develops gradually. “Polarized thinking” refers to the dichotomous mindset described by Aaron Beck, which categorizes reality in black-and-white terms without recognizing any middle ground.

Experts like Fonagy and Bateman call this lowmentalization thinking, as it’s based on the belief that one’s thoughts and feelings are inherently correct.

Polarized thinking is closely tied to identity formation during adolescence, a critical period when one’s sense of self is often built on ideas that are emotionally charged yet not deeply considered, linked to values, morality, tastes, or ideological opinions. This need for belonging drives the polarization process, where identity is constructed in opposition to others and increasingly relies on having an “enemy.”
 

The development of polarized thinking is closely tied to identity formation during a critical stage like adolescence.

 
While polarized thinking can remain dormant at times, it tends to resurface in moments of political or social tension triggered by emotions such as anger or fear. Even when faced with facts, highly polarized individuals resist changing their views, as their identity intertwines with their beliefs.

Polarized attitudes generally lead to conflict and confrontation. Studies suggest that more polarized individuals tend to be less stable, more insecure, or impulsive, and may lack social cognition or empathy.

According to the Five-Factor Model of personality, proposed by psychologists Lewis Goldberg and Warren Norman, there are five core dimensions of personality:

• openness to experience
• conscientiousness
• extraversion
• agreeableness
• neuroticism

Research like Steven W. Webster’s (1) It’s Personal: The Big Five Personality Traits and Negative Partisan Affect finds that people who score high in agreeableness and extraversion are less likely to polarize. Other studies, such as The Dark Triad Predicts Public Display of Offensive Political Products, suggest that Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy—the “Dark Triad” traits—can contribute to polarization, with psychopathy playing a particular role in extreme political expression.

Even during the most polarized times of an individual’s life since adolescence, reality can sometimes soften beliefs through a process of assimilation, accommodation, and cognitive maturation, as described by Piaget. The current issue is that we are inundated with information that validates our preconceptions, especially on social media, disrupting our cognitive flexibility.

Research by Jay Van Bavel (2) indicates that X usage is linked to this phenomenon. Polarized thinking and behavior can be hard to overcome due to the instant gratification these platforms provide.

People tend to seek content that offers acceptance and validation to escape negative emotional states like anger or worry. Dopamine, a neurotransmitter, drives this attachment to polarized content. When it’s absent, withdrawallike symptoms can occur, increasing screen time and causing a loss of control. This cycle of apparent online safety reduces uncertainty and anxiety, providing a sense of purpose and belonging while minimizing feelings of loneliness.
 

Polarization can have a significant impact on mental health, leading to stress, anxiety, depression, and other emotional issues, and it can drive people to make poor decisions.

 
Polarization can have a significant impact on mental health, leading to stress, anxiety, depression, and other emotional issues. It can result in poor decisions, such as refusing medical treatments that contradict one’s beliefs, thereby putting one’s health at risk.

Emotionally, polarization fosters hostility and anger, correlating with lower well-being and fewer positive emotions. Seeking professional help might be advisable for those experiencing polarization-related emotional problems.

Polarization divides society into opposing groups with conflicting values, making it harder to find common ground. Additionally, it negatively impacts mental health. To address this, political efforts should prioritize unity over division. In today’s climate, moralizing certain societal issues and deepening unnecessary divisions only makes coexistence more difficult.
 

To avoid polarization, it is vital to consciously follow some basic guidelines, particularly when discussing with others.

 
Narratives fueled by distrust and identity insecurity often intensify polarized attitudes. In journalism, promising research, such as Can We Make News Less Polarizing?, (3) explores the possibility of warning labels for polarizing content to prevent it from further dividing readers.

On an individual level, it’s important to recognize that our minds are naturally tribal, and no one is entirely immune to polarization. Resisting polarization, while more challenging for some, demands conscious effort from everyone. This includes practicing active listening, approaching conversations with curiosity and humility, remaining open to new perspectives, regularly questioning personal beliefs, avoiding the urge to change others’ opinions, and fostering a more analytical mindset that prioritizes facts and reason over emotions.

(1) It’s Personal: The Big Five Personality Traits and Negative Partisan Affect
(2) Jay Van Bavel
(3) Can We Make News Less Polarizing