Combating polarization with open communication

In highly polarized situations, open communication is the only way to truly reach others. This applies even to people who believe in conspiracy theories. This has been demonstrated by a new study from the University of Stuttgart, published in the British Journal of Political Science.

Simon Stocker and his co-authors found that an open mode of communication can have a depolarizing effect. An open mode of discussion is neither a debate nor is it aimed at finding common ground. “It’s about expressing your opinion on an issue without being directly confronted with counterarguments or pressured to find a compromise,” explains Simon Stocker, a former research assistant at the University of Stuttgart’s Institute for Social Sciences, who is now joining the City of Stuttgart in the field of personnel and social statistics.

Confrontational or even collaborative modes of communication, by contrast, are less effective in promoting depolarization or shifts in opinion, particularly when positions are deeply entrenched.

The research team drew these conclusions from two population surveys on the COVID-19 pandemic involving around 4,000 participants. Participants in an initial sub-study in Germany were asked to weigh up individual freedom against health protection. In a second sample survey in Austria, respondents were asked about their position on the introduction of compulsory vaccination. Depending on the mode of communication – confrontational, open, or collaborative – participants’ willingness to reflect deeply, offer constructive input, or reconsider their opinions varied. 

Participants in the Austrian portion of the study showed greater polarization in their opinions: 69.5 percent held firm convictions, compared to about 37 percent in the German sample. “The results suggest that in highly polarized contexts, confronting participants with opposing views and encouraging them to seek common ground can be counterproductive,” says Stocker. “This is apparently perceived as a challenge to one’s own position.” Only an open mode of communication – marked by genuine questions and free from demands – can foster productive discussion under such polarized conditions, even among participants who endorse conspiracy theories.

There is no single ideal recipe for depolarization. “Productive communication that encourages deep reflection, constructive suggestions, and depolarization is usually a mosaic of different communication modes,” says Professor André Bächtiger, head of the Institute for Social Sciences and co-author of the study.

About the publication
Simon Stocker, André Bächtiger, Bernhard Kittel und Marco Steenbergen, 2025. Deepening, Bridging and Moving Minds in Stressful Times. British Journal of Political Science, DOI:10.1017/S0007123425100562.