WE have all experienced it – engaging in a discussion where new information or an opposing viewpoint makes us feel like doubling down on our beliefs rather than reconsidering them. This phenomenon, known as the backfire effect, occurs when people react
to contradictory information by holding more firmly to their existing beliefs.
The backfire effect can create a barrier to constructive dialogue, fostering defensiveness and preventing us from learning, evolving and understanding each other. With complex social issues on the rise, understanding the backfire effect and learning how to counteract it is essential to creating productive and respectful conversations.
The backfire effect is most common in debates involving personal values or issues closely tied to identity, such as opinions on social, environmental or political matters.
For example, in Malaysia, discussions on humane stray management or environmental policy can often spark passionate debates where each side becomes more rooted in their stance.
Recognising when the backfire effect is influencing a conversation can help us redirect it, moving from argument to dialogue and creating spaces for understanding and potential solutions.
At its core, the backfire effect is rooted in psychological defensiveness. When people’s beliefs are challenged, particularly on issues they are deeply invested in, it can feel like a threat to their sense of self.
Psychologists suggest that this is because we tend to intertwine certain beliefs with our identity, making it difficult to separate disagreement with an idea from a personal attack. This effect is more pronounced when discussing issues tied to social identity, politics or moral values.
Additionally, the fear of admitting error can make us cling to our views. If we have championed a particular idea or belief, admitting that we may have been mistaken can be uncomfortable. The backfire effect is a subconscious way of defending against this discomfort by rejecting new information and doubling down on previous beliefs.
Techniques for engaging in constructive debates
Understanding the backfire effect is the first step towards overcoming it, but real progress requires adopting strategies that can help us and others engage in more open, constructive discussions.
Here are several techniques to help foster productive dialogue,
reduce defensiveness and encourage open-mindedness:
Lead with curiosity, not conviction
Entering a conversation with a desire to understand rather than persuade is essential. Leading with curiosity helps set a collaborative tone, showing others that you are genuinely interested in their perspective.
For example, if someone disagrees with humane stray management practices like trap-neuter-release (TNR), you may start by saying, “I’m interested in your view – what experiences shape your opinion on this?”
This approach can disarm defensiveness and invite the person to share their experiences, making them more likely to reciprocate by considering your perspective.
Share stories, not just statistics
Facts and figures are essential but they often fail to connect emotionally. To counter the backfire effect, try sharing personal stories or experiences instead of relying solely on statistics.
For instance, in conversations about environmental policy, instead of only quoting data about pollution or deforestation, share a personal story about how environmental changes have affected your community or family. Stories humanise issues, making it easier for others to empathise and consider different viewpoints.
Emphasise shared goals and values
Even when opinions differ, finding common ground can help make the conversation more collaborative. For instance, both sides of a debate on environmental policies may share the same goal – a cleaner environment and a better quality of life – but disagree on how to achieve it.
By highlighting these shared values, you shift the conversation from an “us vs them” dynamics to a joint problem-solving approach. Statements like “we both want what is best for future generations; we just have different ideas about how to get there” can help bridge divides and reduce defensiveness.
Introduce new information gradually
Presenting too much information at once can make people feel overwhelmed, triggering a defensive response. Instead, offer new ideas or evidence in small, manageable pieces.
For example, if discussing environmental laws, introduce one or two key points rather than a long list of statistics. Gradual information- sharing allows individuals to process new perspectives without feeling pressured to accept them immediately, which can reduce the likelihood of the backfire effect.
Reframe disagreements as learning opportunities
Changing the way you frame a discussion can help mitigate defensiveness. Rather than seeing a debate as a “battle” to be won, approach it as a chance to learn.
This mindset shift encourages openness and reduces the need for defensiveness. When someone feels that a discussion is about sharing knowledge rather than proving a point, they are more likely to listen and engage constructively.
Know when to step back
Not every debate will lead to agreement, and that is okay. If a discussion becomes heated or begins to feel unproductive, it may be time to disengage respectfully.
Try phrases like, “I appreciate hearing your perspective, and I think we may have to agree to disagree for now. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.”
This approach allows both parties to leave
the conversation without feeling pressured, preserving the relationship for future discussions.
In Malaysia, topics like stray animal management and environmental policies are prime examples of where the backfire effect
often arises.
On one side, many advocate for humane and sustainable stray management practices, such as TNR, which can reduce stray populations over time. Others, however, may believe in stricter measures, fearing that strays could pose health or safety risks.
In such debates, the backfire effect can quickly escalate, with both sides becoming more entrenched as they try to defend their views.
To move forward constructively, a focus on shared goals – like safer communities and reduced stray populations – can shift the conversation from debate to dialogue.
In Malaysia, environmental policies are at a crossroads, often sparking strong opinions due to their impact across different economic levels.
Stricter policies aimed at protecting natural resources are crucial, yet they also raise concerns about their potential economic burden on lower-income communities, who may rely heavily on resource-based jobs.
Balancing the urgent need for environmental protection with the livelihoods of these communities is complex but essential.
A sustainable path forward lies in building
a common ground around shared values – a commitment to a clean, healthy environment alongside economic stability for all. This inclusive approach can help foster productive dialogue and more resilient, equitable policies.
Ultimately, overcoming the backfire effect requires us to approach conversations with empathy, open-mindedness and a willingness to understand where others are coming from.
Constructive debates are less about changing someone’s mind on the spot and more about creating a space where learning and growth are possible.
By leading with curiosity, sharing personal stories and finding common ground, we
can transform difficult conversations into opportunities for connection and progress.
Dr Praveena is a certified
mental health and awareness practitioner specialising in narcissistic abuse recovery.
Comments: letters@thesundaily.com
