Conscious Change Skill 35: Cultivate Radical Patience Through the Time Lag of Change

Have you ever been in a heated argument with someone, convinced that you're right, only to have them dig in their heels and refuse to budge? This has happened to me more than once. I know the lesson I’m supposed to get to avoid that scenario, but somehow, I may find myself there yet again.

A PERSONAL ANECDOTE

One of those times I found myself in a no-win debate still causes me to slightly cringe when I remember it. A White friend and I were discussing how to address unconscious biases. She believed that calling people out on their biases was the way to go.

"I think we should confront people when they make biased statements," she said. "They need to understand how their words are impacting others."

I got where she was coming from, but I disagreed. "I think that approach can backfire," I said. "When people feel attacked or shamed, they get defensive and less receptive to change. Research shows that psychological safety is key to fostering change."

My friend pushed back, her voice rising. "What about my feelings? Don't I have the right to express myself? Why should I let someone get away with insulting people – or me, for that matter?"

THE ROLE OF IDENTITY AND EMOTIONS

As we talked, I realized that our conversation was about more than just facts and opinions. It was about identity, emotions, and our perceptions of change. My friend's beliefs were deeply tied to her sense of self as a social justice advocate. When I challenged those beliefs, it felt like a personal attack.

She shared a story about a workshop she'd attended years ago, where she had been pushed to examine her biases. "It was tough to hear," she said, "but I learned from it."

I acknowledged her point, but also highlighted the differences between her experience and the situation we were discussing. She was confronted decades ago when the idea of unconscious bias was very new. Also, as I pointed out to her, she had voluntarily attended that workshop.

The situation back then was different than what happened in today’s era of fatigue and backlash when talking about race and gender. If a White person says something reflecting unconscious bias and then is publicly humiliated, they may agree or they may fume inside – or even out loud. We can’t assume anyone will publicly change their minds.

"That was a different time, and you'd chosen to attend that workshop. It's not the same as being confronted with your biases in a public setting in today’s era of heightened sensitivity." I explained.

Her eyes flickered but she was unmoved. “I have a right to my feelings and to express my feelings,” she declared.

WHY WEREN’T MY WELL-REASONED ARGUMENTS HAVING AN IMPACT? THE ROLE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL REACTANCE

We tend to seek out information that confirms our existing beliefs, a phenomenon known as confirmation bias. This can lead to a kind of "echo chamber" effect, where we're only exposed to views that reinforce our own.

But what happens when we're confronted with contradictory evidence? The person arguing for change appears to assume that people will easily revise their beliefs in light of new information. However, research has shown that the opposite is often true. Instead of change, the pressure may backfire and the person may experience psychological reactance.

Sixty years ago, researcher Jack Brehm first described psychological reactance as a strong emotional reaction that kicks in when we feel our freedom or autonomy is being threatened.¹ When we're backed into a corner and told to believe something we don’t, we often rebel or react against the pressure, rejecting the idea and even arguing against it. Current research has supported reactance as a common human characteristic.  

Without intending to, my well-intended responses to her comments were actually solidifying her beliefs that she had the right to call out and embarrass anyone whose views carried any hint of a racist undertone.

THE LIMITS OF FACTS

As our conversation went on, I suddenly realized that I was inadvertently making things worse. My friend was getting more entrenched in her views, and I was getting frustrated. It was clear that my well-informed facts about how change occurs and the negative effects of public humiliation weren't going to change her mind.

In fact, I was doing to her what I was accusing her of doing to others. I was pushing her to accept my beliefs on the spot without showing any empathy or agreement with any grains of truth in her position.

Yet I was just as fervent in my beliefs as she was. In general, I am more invested in fostering change in others than in being heard at a particular time. I believe if we want people to change, we must know how change occurs – and that if we push people to the point of psychological reactance, we are doing more harm than good. 

In general, I am more than willing to take my time in inspiring others to consider change. I don’t believe I can single-handedly and in one conversation cause people to change their minds.

What’s possible is to stir up their cognitive dissonance – so long after the conversation with me is over, they may reflect on the conversation and in the privacy of their own space, become more willing to consider whether I have a point.

We must have radical patience when encouraging people to change, if we want to stay in relationship with them. They will change on their time, not ours.

I knew all of that and believe it strongly.  Yet in the moment, I wanted my friend to feel the same way!  Right then! On the spot!  Because I said so!

Once I realized the irony – that I was creating psychological reactance in her while arguing against her doing it to others, I mentally turned the dial and started listening to what she had to say.

CHANGING OUR MINDS, CHANGING OTHERS' MINDS

So, how can we overcome our and others’ resistance to changing our/their minds? Here are some takeaways:

1. Take a step back: In our conversation, I could have taken a deep breath and acknowledged my own biases and emotions sooner than I did. Instead, I became hooked in that conversation and had to unhook myself. Once I realized my part in creating the point-counter-point dynamic, I let go of my expectations of how she should respond.
2. Listen actively: In the beginning, I could have done a better job of listening to my friend's concerns and acknowledging her perspective. It’s cringe-worthy for me to remember how I initially shut her down.
3. Focus on understanding and empathy: When my friend shared her story, I could have responded with more empathy and understanding. I could have acknowledged the courage it took for her to confront her own biases.
4. Let go of the need to be right: In the heat of the moment, I could have reminded myself that I didn't need to "win" the argument. I could have viewed the conversation as an opportunity for both of us to learn and grow.
5. Recognize the time lag of change: I wanted her to change her mind right there and then.  When I finally let go of that imperative, and stepped back to allow her to consider or reject what I was saying at her own pace, I preserved the conversation as a conversation, not an argument, and I probably preserved our relationship. 

By acknowledging the psychological forces that drive resistance to changing our minds, we can begin to break free from our own biases and assumptions about how fast change should occur – particularly the change we expect from others. It's not easy, but it's essential for personal growth, critical thinking, and constructive dialogue.

People will change their minds at their own pace. We can’t make them do anything. What we can do is cultivate our own radical patience through the time lag of change.