The Quiet Art of Changing Minds: The Psychology Behind Countering Radical Beliefs

8 MINUTE READ

When arguing with someone in an extremist group or caught up in conspiracy theories, we might counter with facts and scientific evidence or cite (to us) reliable sources such as mainstream news media, university research, the medical establishment, the laws of physics. But to no avail. Following on from The Dark Side of Belonging: Extremism, Identity and Purpose which was about how some people get drawn into cults and extremist groups, cross-cultural author Yang-May Ooi takes a look at the research on how we might draw such members out from these groups to re-intergrate into society.

The Quiet Art of Changing Minds: The Psychology Behind Countering Radical Beliefs

Many of us have probably found ourselves frustrated and bewildered when talking with someone holding an entrenched belief that, for us, based on emotionally charged bias and prejudice. The views are often extreme, not based on research-based evidence nor any fact but rather a mix of pseudo-science and unverified statements. Some typical areas of heated debate might be Brexit, Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and 15 Minute Cities, To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate, Immigration, Flat vs Globe Earth  … I am sure you can think of more!

Facts Alone Don’t Work  

But our facts and figures and evidence that we might present to them only creates more defensiveness and even stronger commitment to their beliefs.  Studies consistently show that beliefs tied to identity or group loyalty rarely change through argument alone. When someone’s worldview is deeply intertwined with their sense of self or belonging, challenging their beliefs can feel like an attack on their identity and self.

But it is possible to change someone’s mind, no matter how extreme and entrenched their beliefs. It requires a different approach that is based on trust, curiosity, and empathy, according to decades of research psychology, sociology, and counter-extremism. 

Build Trust First 

Before we can even begin to challenge someone’s beliefs, we need to build a foundation of trust. Research by David Broockman and Joshua Kalla on “deep canvassing” shows that respectful, open conversations can change attitudes—even on deeply held beliefs. 

We tend to jump in and argue against something that is clearly wrong, in our view. That is my own instinct, certainly! But the research shows that the key is to go against those instincts and, actually, simply to listen. Ask about their experiences. Be curious about what drew them to these ideas in the first place. Avoid ridicule or humiliation, which only triggers defensiveness. 

When people feel heard and respected, they’re more willing to reconsider their beliefs. Trust creates a safe space for reflection.   

Helping People Question Their Own Beliefs

“Motivational interviewing” is another technique often used in counselling and deradicalisation programs. Instead of telling someone they’re wrong, we need to ask questions that encourage them to reflect themselves on their own beliefs. Questions like, “What originally attracted you to this movement?” or “Have any aspects of it ever bothered you?” can plant seeds of doubt without triggering defensiveness.

The goal is not to impose answers but to guide someone toward their own insights. It’s the start of helping people see the contradictions in their beliefs and consider alternative perspectives.

.

I wonder how this technique could be applied in everyday life. Could we use it in conversations with friends or family members who have fallen into the rabbit hole of conspiracy theories or extreme ideologies? Could it work in the context of political polarization, where people often cling to their beliefs as a form of identity (“identify fusion”).

Separate the Person from the Belief

“Identity fusion” is where an individual’s identity becomes so intertwined with a group or leader that attacking the belief feels like attacking the person.

This explains why ridicule or shaming often backfires. When someone feels their identity is under threat, they are more likely to hold on more strongly to their beliefs rather than reconsider them. The way forward, then, is to separate the person from the belief. Affirm their values, show them they can still belong somewhere else, and highlight shared identities—whether it’s family, profession, or nationality.

For example, we might say: “I know you care deeply about fairness and freedom—that’s something I really respect about you. But I wonder if this movement is actually living up to those values.”

As I outlined in The Dark Side of Belonging, people often join extremist movements to satisfy psychological needs like identity, belonging, and significance. Leaving becomes much easier when there is somewhere else they can go that gives them a similar strong sense of belonging. Often, that new place of belonging could be a renewed connection with their family or the people they love or an identity they can feel proud of. 

This approach helps people see that they can still hold onto their core values, even if they let go of the ideology.  

Encouraging Reflection and Critical Thinking

Another fascinating insight comes from the work of Gordon Pennycook and David Rand, who found that small prompts to think about accuracy can significantly reduce belief in misinformation. Simply asking questions like, “How reliable do you think this source is?” or “What evidence would confirm this claim?” can activate analytical thinking and reduce emotional reactions.

In a world where misinformation spreads like wildfire, encouraging reflection could be an effective antidote. These nudges activate analytical reasoning, making it easier for people to question false claims.  

However, a word of warning – where misinformation might slip through without such questions or prompts, there is the risk of “implied truth” ie. a statement or fact that is not questioned or tagged as “fake news” could gain more credibility by implication of non-questioning/ non-tagging.

The Slow Process of Change

For some people, they emerge from extremist groups in a slow, undramatic way. But this takes time. The process is marked by small doubts, accumulating contradictions, and the emergence of new identities and communities.

According to psychologist John Horgan in his many works, such people may become disillusioned with the group, the leader, or the ideology itself. Life transitions, like becoming a parent or starting a new career, can also trigger shifts in identity. And then there’s the emotional toll of constant anger or conflict, which can lead to burnout and a desire for something different. For those trying to bring such members out of these groups, there is value in reminding them of their love of their families, or opening up their world to other meaningful opportunities outside of the group identity as positive “pull” factors as well as drip-feeding doubt about the group/ ideology/ leader as “push” factors.

What Doesn’t Work  

I was struck by the consistency of the research on what doesn’t work. Research consistently shows that the following strategies often backfire:  

1. Ridicule or shaming: This triggers identity defense and stronger commitment to the belief.  

2. Fact-dumping: Information alone rarely changes identity-based beliefs.  

3. Public confrontation: Debates in front of others increase social pressure to defend the belief.  

These are the actions we tend to see on social media. Those from one side of a political or ideological argument fight those on the other side with all those three tactics – with no avail. The people they are trying to convince only become more entrenched. I, myself, tend to jump straight for one or more of these three approaches when debating with someone who has opposing views to me – as they do, too, to me. 

It’s hard to remember in the moment but essential – that we need to take a step back from our habitual mode of engagement and instead, try some of the other strategies outlined above. Connection rather than confrontation might turn out more rewarding. 

—

Photo: https://pixabay.com/photos/men-communication-friends-drink-6750367/

---