Hey Reader, is there someone you’ve been kinda avoiding since last Tuesday? It doesn’t matter which party you vote for; politics are some of the most difficult conversations you can have with people.
Maybe your person is your brother-in-law, a neighbor with a yard sign, or a coworker who said something in the break room that made your jaw tighten.
And don’t forget that Thanksgiving is about two weeks away.
Most of us walk into those conversations with one goal: Win. We line up our facts. We wait for the other person to finish (or not) so we can correct them. While they’re talking, we’re drafting our rebuttal.
It almost never works. So what does?
That’s what Guy Itzchakov, Netta Weinstein, Mark Leary, Dvori Saluk, and Moty Amar wanted to find out. So they staged a disagreement and trained members of their research team to listen either moderately well or very well. [1]
When people argued with an excellent listener, they relaxed. They became more open-minded and more willing to think the thorny issue through instead of defending their corner. Their views became less extreme–something that makes it more likely for the two sides to find common ground.
I want you to pay attention to who changed. The listener didn’t argue with or persuade the speaker, and the person who shifted their views was the one being listened to.
A related set of studies went somewhere even more difficult. Itzchakov, Weinstein, Nicole Legate, and Amar asked people to talk about a group they felt a bias against. [2] When the listener was warm, curious, and nonjudgmental, speakers reflected more on their own views and came away a little less prejudiced than those who had talked with an ordinary listener.
Just to be clear though, the effect was modest. Nobody walked out transformed. But it was real, and it happened without anyone arguing back or creating a scene. Which might be nice at Thanksgiving 😉
Why would listening accomplish what arguing often doesn’t?
Well, think about it… when we feel judged, we defend. When we feel heard, we can reflect and respond.
Another study led by Erik Santoro and David Broockman paired strangers from opposite political parties for short video calls. [3] Some pairs talked about why they supported their party or what they disliked about the other party, while other pairs talked about their perfect day.
The perfect-day pairs came away feeling warmer toward the other side. The pairs who talked through their disagreement? No significant change.
Isn’t that interesting? The conversation that helped didn’t touch politics at all. It’s true that the warmth people felt faded with time, so this isn’t a one-time fix. Maybe it’s more like a muscle you have to keep training.
Personally I’ve noticed that once I stop needing to be right, something loosens.
I start thinking about why I feel the need to convince this person. I know what I believe, and their disagreement doesn’t take that away.
And when I let go of winning, I can get curious about why they see things so differently. That’s the heart of what Harry Reis and I call the Listening-to-Learn mindset and the Radical Curiosity mindset in How to Feel Loved.
It’s true, even likely, that you may walk away disagreeing just as much as before. Agreement was never the point. What changes is that you stop seeing a cartoon villain across the table. You start seeing a person.
One caveat. This isn’t about tolerating cruelty. Some conversations aren’t safe, and you don’t owe anyone a seat at your table. But for most ordinary disagreements with people we care about, listening is the better bet than argument.
Try This
Before your next conversation with someone you disagree with, try these four listening strategies:
- Start somewhere else. Ask about their week, what they’re looking forward to, or what’s been hard lately.
- If politics comes up, listen like there’s going to be a quiz tomorrow. Your only job is to understand why they believe what they believe.
- Ask one follow-up before you respond. One that I’ve found helpful is “What worries you most about it?” But there’s a good chance you’ll come up with your own question just from listening.
- Notice the urge to win, and let it pass. You don’t have to convince anyone today; you just need to listen and understand.
My Challenge for You
Pick one person you disagree with and expect to see this month. Try at least one of the steps above. Then reply to this email and tell me how it went. I’d love to hear from you.
Talk soon,
Sonja
P.S. Here’s the research, if you want to go further.
[1] Itzchakov, G., Weinstein, N., Leary, M. R., Saluk, D., & Amar, M. (2023). Listening to understand: The role of high-quality listening on speakers’ attitude depolarization during disagreements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 126(2), 213–239. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000366
[2] Itzchakov, G., Weinstein, N., Legate, N., & Amar, M. (2020). Can high quality listening predict lower speakers’ prejudiced attitudes? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 91, 104022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104022
[3] Santoro, E., & Broockman, D. E. (2022). The promise and pitfalls of cross-partisan conversations for reducing affective polarization: Evidence from randomized experiments. Science Advances, 8(25), eabn5515. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abn5515