Putting the United Back Into The United States: Kurt Gray of University of North Carolina At Chapel Hill On The 5 Things That Each Of Us Can Do To Help Unite Our Polarized Society
An Interview With Tyler Gallagher
Get Curious — One of the most important psychological shifts people can make is shifting away from a persuasion mindset and towards a curiosity mindset. It’s okay to be surprised by the fact that people have radically different worldviews than us, but instead of reacting by trying to get them to adopt our views, we should try to understand why they are the way they are. Tons of work in psychology shows that, ironically this mindset makes us more persuasive to others, and it helps us more accurately understand one another. People are egocentric, and they like to feel like you think their perspective matters. Being curious about people with different worldviews makes them feel validated. I’ve found that this works in most daily conversations too, if I walk into a conversation curious about their experiences, thoughts, and reactions, I tend to be better liked.
As part of our series about 5 Things That Each Of Us Can Do To Help Unite Our Polarized Society, I had the pleasure of interviewing Kurt Gray.
Dr. Gray is an Associate Professor in Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he directs the Deepest Beliefs Lab and the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding. He is also an Adjunct Associate Professor in Organizational Behavior at the Kenan-Flagler Business School at UNC, where he teaches about organizational ethics and team processes. Dr. Gray received his PhD from Harvard University.
Thank you so much for joining us in this interview series! Before we dive into the main focus of our interview, our readers would love to “get to know you” a bit better. Can you tell us a bit about your childhood backstory?
I mostly grew up in Alberta — Canada’s version of Texas: oil and beef and rodeos — but lived in a lot of different places, due to my mom following opportunities, and my dad getting different posts in the Navy. Moving so much made me realize the obvious differences among people, but also gave me a deep sense of people’s similarities. No matter where people lived or what they believed in, they still shared a basic moral sense, a compassion for others and the internal compass of right and wrong. No matter where you are, people are people.
I spent a lot of my high school nights doing a part-time job, selling newspaper subscriptions door-to-door for the Calgary Herald. My friends and I would pile into a blue van that sat waiting at a KFC next to a train station. The crew chief would drop us off in pairs in neighborhoods around the city and we would try to get people interested in getting the newspaper. Sometimes the weather was beautiful, and sometimes it was so cold that my lips would freeze making it all but impossible to give my spiel. That job taught me to roll with rejection — a key skill for life — as I would hear “no!” over 100 times a night. That job also made me realize the individuality of people. Sometimes we did low-income neighborhoods, sometimes we did high-income neighborhoods, sometimes we did neighborhoods with mostly immigrants, but no matter where we were, there were people who were kind and people who were jerks, and I learned to shrug off the jerks and to be grateful for the kindhearted ones
What or who inspired you to pursue your career? We’d love to hear the story.
I was originally inspired by a high school mentor to be a geophysicist, but after two years in college I realized that I cared more for other people than I did for rocks. I was inspired by the work of Daniel Wegner, a social psychologist to dare to study topics that seemed off-limits to science, like free will. I was thrilled when he accepted me as a graduate student and we studied how people make sense of the minds and morals of other people.
What are some of the most interesting or exciting projects you are working on now? How do you think that might help people?
I’m currently working with a number of bridge building organizations that have “boots on the ground” decreasing affective polarization. It’s fantastic working with the people who are actually changing the world, and I’m especially excited about one project where we are encouraging each side to appreciate and understand when and why the other side might feel threatened. So much of our moral and political behavior is motivated by what we see as dangerous or harmful, so appreciating when other people might feel threatened provides a powerful way to bridge divides.
None of us can achieve success without some help along the way. Was there a particular person who you feel gave you the most help or encouragement to be who you are today? Can you share a story about that?
My wife is a neuroscientist and a professor and understands exactly what I do. I could not have succeeded in my work without her support.
Can you share the funniest or most interesting mistake that occurred to you in the course of your career? What lesson or take away did you learn from that?
I’m not the most attentive to detail, so my career has been a long list of missteps from not paying attention. I’ve submitted job applications with the wrong school bolded at the top, I’ve almost missed talks because I set my alarm for the wrong time, and I’ve prepared the wrong lecture for a class. My lesson is that I need to focus and pay attention — it’s the same thing I tell my kids.
Is there a particular book that made a significant impact on you? Can you share a story or explain why it resonated with you so much?
The book that changed my career path was called “House of Cards: Psychology and Psychotherapy Built on Myth” by Robyn Dawes. Up until that point, I thought psychology was just clinical psychology, and that I had to spend my career helping clients in one-on-one sessions. But this book emphasized the importance of empirical science, both as something that you could do and as something that could help a lot of people. This book also resonated with me because it revealed how many of our common assumptions could be wrong. One example of our faulty assumptions that I study today is how we think people on the other side of the political spectrum are somehow evil or stupid. My work aims to change these assumptions.
Can you share your favorite “Life Lesson Quote”? Why does that resonate with you so much? Do you have a story about how that was relevant in your life or your work?
One day, after writing what I thought was an amazing paper, I gave it to my graduate advisor. He read it and then said –in a very good natured way — “you shouldn’t confuse writing something down with profundity.” I had to laugh. I thought that this was going to be a field changing paper, but it turns out I had to scrap the whole thing. It was a good lesson in humility. There are so many times we think we are right and are impressed with her own cleverness, but it’s good to check that. The same is true with our political beliefs. We are often so convinced that we are right, but it’s good to be humble.
How do you define “Leadership”? Can you explain what you mean or give an example?
Leadership is a narrative. It’s a story we tell about those who shape our thoughts and our lives and the world. Good leaders are those who inspire people to tell inspiring stories about themselves and those around them.
Ok, thank you for all that. Now let’s move to the main focus of our interview. The polarization in our country has become so extreme that families have been torn apart. Erstwhile close friends have not spoken to each other because of strong partisan differences. This is likely a huge topic, but briefly, can you share your view on how this evolved to the boiling point that it’s at now?
Partisan animosity is something that’s kind of in the air these days, and a lot of research has gone into its diagnosis. Frankly, that research is pretty complex. Polarization seems to have a lot of causes, but one of the main catalysts our research team works on is moral misunderstanding. So often, we are baffled by what the other side believes. Perhaps it seems like they’re living in a fundamentally different reality than us. Put simply, their worldview doesn’t make sense. There are several reasons why these misunderstandings have ballooned over time. Our media ecosystem has fractured into partisan sectors, we are talking with the other side less, and our misconceptions about the other side blossom in our insular social circles. Then, when we have an encounter with someone from the other side, communication breaks down because we misunderstand why they hold their beliefs, and they misunderstand why we hold ours. Then, we return to our corners, and it becomes a negative feedback loop.
I have no pretensions about bridging the divide between politicians, or between partisan media outlets. But I’d love to discuss the divide that is occurring between families, co workers, and friends. Do you feel comfortable sharing a story from your experience about how family or friends have become a bit alienated because of the partisan atmosphere?
My stepmom is from Nebraska, and I really cherished visiting my aunts, uncles, and cousins there when I was a kid. But as we got older and America got more polarized, it became harder to find common ground. It was especially hard to find common ground on social media, as arguments erupted about gay rights, taxes, and presidents. It was so strange, because I know each of them are fantastic people who would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it, and yet we were mired in moral disagreement. It is hard to keep in mind that someone is generally a good person if you think they have the wrong view on a particular issue. The problem in America today is that we often don’t have the background that someone else is a good person, and so we are left to assume that people who disagree with us are fundamentally evil, or at least not very smart.
In your opinion, what can be done to bridge the divide that has occurred in families? Can you please share a story or example?
I think the best route to bridging divides is to acknowledge differences but not to dwell on them. When two people have different viewpoints, you can’t pretend that they agree, because pretending creates a weird and inauthentic relationship. At the same time, you don’t have to talk about it at every meal. There are enough joint activities and joint concerns with the family, that you can just focus on the day-to-day things you agree on without getting into politics at every turn.
How about the workplace, what can be done to bridge the partisan divide that has fractured relationships there? Can you please share a story or example?
There are countless stories from the past few years of people becoming alienated from their colleagues. One problem is that work is filled with enough stress already, including worrying about bosses, deadlines, and career progression. In a competitive environment, more competition is poisonous. The way around — or through — political conflict in the workplace is the same way around the stress of the workplace. Think less about achievement and more about learning. In the workplace, learning is about what skills you can take away from your current job. With folks of different political orientations, learning is about asking them questions about why they think something without immediately jumping down their throat. When you ask questions, people ask questions back.
I think one of the causes of our divide comes from the fact that many of us see a political affiliation as the primary way to self identify. But of course there are many other ways to self identify. What do you think can be done to address this?
That’s a great point, and it’s become a big problem. More and more people are leading with their partisan identity in interactions now, and it keeps us segregated in problematic ways. For example, from mid-2016 to mid-2017, the number of women who answered the political affiliation question on eHarmony jumped from 24.6 percent to 68 percent. That’s a big jump! This is especially unfortunate because most of our conceptions about what “they are like” come from stereotypes in our heads. When we go into interactions knowing someone’s political identity right off the bat, we’re less likely to give them a benefit of the doubt. Instead, we’ll see many of their actions through the partisan stereotype lenses we operate with.
One of the contributing factors is that people are less involved with their community than they used to be. They join less groups, attend less services, and host less dinners. This is something sociologists have been discussing for some time now. An America that re-engages in these activities will be more likely to interact with out-partisans just by happenstance. And this is the best way for partisans to get to know the other side. By not knowing they’re getting to know one another, but by developing relationships first. The nice thing about this intervention is that it’s straightforward: go be social with people who share your interests and hobbies! Maybe you like gardening, maybe you’re into sports, maybe you like reading: join a group and you’ll meet a fellow gardener who happens to be a Democrat, a fellow Bears fan who happens to be a Republican, a member of your book club who hasn’t paid much attention to politics. When we put our other identities first, we give ourselves the chance to change the way we think about them.
Much ink has been spilled about how social media companies and partisan media companies continue to make money off creating a split in our society. Sadly the cat is out of the bag and at least in the near term there is no turning back. Social media and partisan media have a vested interest in maintaining the divide, but as individuals none of us benefit by continuing this conflict. What can we do moving forward to not let social media divide us?
I have three recommendations for people looking to use their social media accounts to actually bridge divides!
- Marginalize the caricature artists — Caricature artists use text to exaggerate, mock, and satirize the other side. Outgroup animosity drives engagement on social media, so even when we think we’re debunking claims, we’re probably just contributing to their spread. Instead, it’s more practical to keep scrolling to disincentivize polarizing behavior.
- Reward Good Faith Disagreement — Finding people who respectfully engage with one another on social media can be a tall order. Fortunately, Chris Bail, Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at Duke University, has developed a suite of tools that may help Twitter users encounter this kind of content more frequently. His team at the Polarization Lab created a “bipartisanship leaderboard,” where high-profile people whose tweets appeal to members of both parties are featured.
- Ditch the persuasion mindset — even when we’re trying to have good faith disagreement, we too often have the wrong goals in mind — trying to convince others we’re right. There is ample research showing that trying to persuade others makes us, a) less likely to persuade others and b) less likely to reduce others’ prejudices.
What can we do moving forward to not let partisan media pundits divide us?
It’s tough because few outlets will claim the term “partisan media outlet.” This is representative of a broader trend called “negative partisanship.” People aren’t really that attached to their own party, but they really don’t like the “other” party. “Partisan” gets thrown around like a pejorative by everyone, so it’s really lost its meaning, but in an era defined by negative partisanship, what makes someone (or a media source) into a partisan is less how much they promote the views of one side, and more about how much they derogate the views of the other side. A sizeable portion of political media meets this criterion. If your chosen TV channel, newspaper, or website spends its time focusing primarily on the stupidness, incompetence, or evilness of the other side, it may be worth questioning why that’s the case. The best way we can prevent partisan media outlets from dividing us is by giving them less of our attention. If a media outlet seems to hate what they hate more than they like what they like, they may not be the best source for information.
Sadly we have reached a fevered pitch where it seems that the greatest existential catastrophe that can happen to our country is that “the other side” seizes power. We tend to lose sight of the fact that as a society and as a planet we face more immediate dangers. What can we do to lower the ante a bit and not make every small election cycle a battle for the “very existence of our country”?
This is a very good question and is one that a lot of political scientists are working on. There are several proposed solutions, but it’s unclear to me which ones are the best. One proposal that I like is an initiative called final 5 voting. Final 5 voting has been implemented in several states now, and it gets rid of the party primary, so that extremists in both parties have less of an outsized advantage in elections. This could lower the stakes a little, by making the other side look less appalling to us.
Ok wonderful. Here is the main question of our interview. Can you please share your “5 Steps That Each Of Us Can Take To Proactively Help Heal Our Country”. Kindly share a story or example for each.
Step 1: Get Curious — One of the most important psychological shifts people can make is shifting away from a persuasion mindset and towards a curiosity mindset. It’s okay to be surprised by the fact that people have radically different worldviews than us, but instead of reacting by trying to get them to adopt our views, we should try to understand why they are the way they are. Tons of work in psychology shows that, ironically this mindset makes us more persuasive to others, and it helps us more accurately understand one another. People are egocentric, and they like to feel like you think their perspective matters. Being curious about people with different worldviews makes them feel validated. I’ve found that this works in most daily conversations too, if I walk into a conversation curious about their experiences, thoughts, and reactions, I tend to be better liked.
Step 2. Recognize the Ridiculousness of Stereotypes — There are nearly 70 million people in the country who voted for a different candidate than you. That’s a lot of humans. Let’s start there. People are complicated. There just about as many Registered Republicans in Los Angeles County (1.6 Million) as there are in my entire state of North Carolina (2.1 Million). When we start thinking in terms of these numbers, stereotypes of people and places become harder to swallow. When someone in your social circle makes a broad generalization about people on the other side, gently nudge them to consider how many people they’re referencing. Once we make these connections, we start to see flawed stereotypes being promoted everywhere. There is an entire industry often referred to as “The Outrage Industry” dedicated to presenting the other side as one thing. Watch out for buzzwords that get thrown around loosely like “The Left”, “Trumpers”, “The Woke Mob” that are applied very generally to large numbers of people. There are financial incentives behind these flattening of distinctions.
One of the biggest stereotypes is that “they hate us.” We embrace assumptions of hate because it makes us feel righteous. In conflict, no one likes thinking of themselves as the aggressor. If you are cruel or dismissive towards a political opponent who actually isn’t cruel or dismissive to you, then it means you’re a cruel and dismissive person. You are the instigator of the conflict, and not merely reacting to it. It’s easier to think of ourselves as a victim of political animosity than as perpetrators who spread hate in our conversations and social media accounts. But when psychologists have looked at the data, people dramatically overestimate how much the other side hates them.
Step 3: Don’t launch facts at people, share your experiences — Recent research from the Center for the Science of Moral Understanding (an organization I founded) tested the power of personal experiences (versus facts) to bridge divides. In these studies, participants encountered someone who had an opposing political view, and this person grounded their political beliefs in either personal experience or facts. Those who grounded their beliefs in personal experience were seen as more rational and generally liked more than the fact sharers. But not all personal experiences are equally powerful at fostering respect. Our studies show that experiences of harm — enduring personal suffering or witnessing the suffering of loved ones — are the best at bridging divides. This is because avoiding harm is something everyone can agree on. It’s something we humans have evolved to avoid, so discussing how your beliefs are rooted in a fear of being harmed seems more rational to more people.
Step 4: Commit yourself to seeking out perspectives from the other side that you genuinely respect — If there’s one message from polarization researchers that’s made it into the mainstream conversation it’s that you shouldn’t just listen or read one side’s perspective. While this is good advice in theory, it’s incomplete. When people take that advice, they often listen to the other side that first comes to mind (Fox News, Pod Save America, Breitbart, MSNBC). The problem is that exposing yourself to stereotypes on the other side only reinforces negative views about the other side. Instead, you should follow and listen to pundits, hosts, and politicians from the other side that you genuinely respect. This may take some work. You may not be aware of these people, but I promise you if you search diligently, you’ll find some folks whom you disagree with, but sincerely think they’re earnest and trying to find the truth. This is how I became less polarized myself. I used to superficially listen to perspectives from the other side just to say I do. But every time I’d listen to polarized perspectives from the other side, I’d just get more riled up about how dumb they seemed. I eventually received this advice to find perspectives on the other side that I respect, and a switch began to get flipped for me. I now have a whole suite of folks from the other side that I respect. “The Flip Side” is an organization dedicated to presenting thoughtful perspectives from both the Left and the Right on current events. If you’re looking for a place to start, start with The Flip Side!
Step 5: Become an anti-polarization activist — The organization “More in Common” has shown through some research that most people are not polarized. Most people are in a category that More in Common calls “The Exhausted Majority”. The problem with the exhausted majority is that they’re exhausted by political fights, so they disengage from politics entirely. This has left only polarized people contributing to public discourse, fueling the partisan perception that the other side is filled with extremists. What we need is anti-polarization activists committed to counteracting the perception that everyone is polarized. What we need is for you to pushback publicly against stereotypes. You need to not only be committed to understanding the morality of others, but also convincing others of the power of moral understanding. Ultimately, the anti-polarization movement is a movement just like any other, and what it needs are activists committed to its mission of moral understanding and reversing the trends of hostility. There are also actual organizations with infrastructure dedicated to these sorts of things. You can join these organizations and use your talents and perspective to promote civil disagreement in your community. Some examples of organizations are Braver Angels, More in Common, BridgeUSA.
Simply put, is there anything else we can do to ‘just be nicer to each other’?
I think it’s less about just being nicer, and more about countering misconceptions and reforming our institutions, though kindness can certainly help do that.
We are going through a rough period now. Are you optimistic that this issue can eventually be resolved? Can you explain?
I think it’s likely a situation that gets worse before it gets better, but I am pleased with the growing movement of young people who are fed up with the way our relationships have fractured, and are actually doing work to change these negative trends. I’m seeing this a lot in a course I teach right now called “Moral Understanding”. There’s a real appetite for complicating simplistic narratives. That being said, I think it’s possible that at this time, we just don’t have a common enemy to focus on given the relative peace that we’ve experienced over the last couple decades. There might need to be what Peter Coleman in his book (The Way Out) calls “a large exogenous shock to our system” that shuffles people’s priorities away from demonizing the other side. Not to be fatalistic though, because the growing anti-polarization movement is really encouraging.
If you could tell young people one thing about why they should consider making a positive impact on our society, like you, what would you tell them?
I would say your generation’s task is to mend broken relationships. There are tons of ways that they can do this, but focusing their attention on this problem in multiple domains in their life might help them find some meaning in the role they have to play here.
Is there a person in the world, or in the US, with whom you would like to have a private breakfast or lunch, and why? He or she might just see this, especially if we tag them. 🙂
Some people say “Never meet your heroes,” because it turns out that those you idolize are actually just everyday human beings like yourself. On one hand, that’s comforting and evidence of people shared humanity. On the other hand, sometimes it’s nice to idolize people and keep them at a distance!
How can our readers follow you online?
@kurtjgray on twitter, https://moralunderstanding.substack.com/, https://www.kurtjgray.com/, https://www.moralunderstanding.com/
This was very meaningful, and thank you so much for the time you spent on this interview. We wish you only continued success on your great work!
Putting the United Back Into The United States: Kurt Gray of University of North Carolina At Chapel… was originally published in Authority Magazine on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.