PART 1: CAN I CHANGE YOUR MIND?

A neuroscience take on influencing others - Part 1.

A neuroscience take on influencing others

Why does it feel impossible to influence another when they hold an opposing view to us, even when we present them with highly credible facts? Why do we prefer holding fast to our long-held beliefs when we're presented with another point of view?

Having completed some neuroscience study, I learned some interesting facts that explain this quandary. The brain's primordial function of keeping us alive and safe hasn't changed much over millennia. Moreover, the brain's sensitivity to social threats can impair our ability to learn new things or be influenced by a new perspective.

Let's start with a relatable example;

Suppose I post a CSIRO study on social media with compelling evidence that the planet is warming. Not surprisingly, it's unlikely to influence the mind of a climate change sceptic. Some would consider this ignorant and irresponsible, but, it has a lot to do with the brain's default position of keeping you alive and safe.

Ask yourself; Do I scroll past or hurriedly dismiss a post on social media that asserts an opposing view to me? Conversely, if I see something that aligns to my values or beliefs, am I more likely to share the post perhaps even before fact-checking the information?

The 'happy neural highway'

We naturally give credence to brain connections we have already laid down and reinforced over time. I call this the happy neural highway. Unless we are particularly curious or open to learning at that moment, our brain's default is to favour the well-travelled highway rather than exerting energy and venturing into uncharted territory.

Millions of pieces of data pour in through our senses every second. The brain efficiently creates order out of the chaos of data coming in. We feel more comfortable inside symmetry and where we can see how everything is connected. When we receive new information, the brain tries to find associations with our current neural circuitry. Quite often if the association is not made, the information is filtered out.

Hardwiring includes deeply held beliefs

However, if we are open and new connections are made, reinforced and repeated, the information is hardwired. The brain pushes the newly wired information down into the long-term memory where there is far more capacity. This keeps the conscious mind as free as possible thus conserving energy and regulating the enormity of the data coming in through our senses.

Our long-term memory stores everything we've ever hardwired, and this includes our beliefs and values. If certain beliefs were embedded over a period of time, information coming into the senses that reinforce them are more favourable to our brain.

There's some truth to the saying; 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks'. This implies the older person has well-travelled highways of thought or behaviour reinforced over more extended periods of time.

The brain is highly sensitive to social threat

Aside from the brain's need to maintain order out of chaos, the limbic system is an important part of the brain that regulates emotion and can have a powerful effect on our ability to process information. The Amygdala, an almond-shaped cluster of neurons, is part of the limbic system. When stimulated by a perceived physical threat, it's responsible for hijacking our conscious mind, stealing glucose and activating hormones to get us ready for fight or flight. When this occurs, our ability to think reduces, even remembering hardwired information is compromised.

Up until recently, the flight or fight response was associated with the brain's perception of a physical threat. Research suggests the same neural circuitry is activated when the brain perceives a threat in one of five social domains. David Rock, Cofounder and CEO of the Neuroleadership Institute provides us with The SCARF® model, which stands for Status, Certainty, Autonomy, Relatedness and Fairness.

Ever had a job interview that didn't go so well because you felt intimidated by the Panel? Chances are your limbic system was aroused by a 'status' threat, causing your heart to race, your legs to go weak and your brain to shut down. With hindsight and the limbic system calm again, you clearly recognise how that interview question should have been answered but while you were in the moment, your mind drew a blank.

This research teaches us to ensure the social environment doesn't leave open opportunities to induce a threat response, particularly if we are learning something new or, looking to influence a change in perspective.

While there are things we can do to influence a change of mind and which I'll cover in my next blog, let's look at the example of our climate change sceptic in light of this information. When being presented with science-based evidence that the planet is warming, three powerful social barriers could render the default brain preference to avoid the information being presented, and stick with the happy neural highway of climate change denial:

1. Loss of Certainty: When our hardwired neural connections are reinforced, it gives the brain certainty and we like that. It activates the 'reward' response in the brain. Studies show we get a dose of dopamine just by consuming information that makes us feel more certain. It's much safer to stick to a well-trodden path where our neural connections have comfortably travelled over time, rather than venture somewhere new and uncertain.

2. Loss of Tribe: Another primordial need is to be associated with a group or tribe. Our need for social connection is an integral driver of behaviour. People naturally like to form 'tribes' where they experience a sense of belonging. From sports teams to organisational silos. Studies show the area of brain circuitry that is activated when being 'left out' is the same as the one for physical pain. Jumping to a new perspective may be perceived as losing a sense of camaraderie or worse, creating enemies.

3. Loss of Status: Many of us draw a sense of personal identity from external concepts. Hierarchy and pecking order has been part of brain evolution over millennia. What's more, is the extent to which we can identify with status and attribute our self-worth. This also includes feeling identified with a belief system. Dispensing of a belief or value could feel like losing a sense of self, rendering us in unsafe and vulnerable territory. Who am I if I'm no longer identified with this belief?

It's not hard to see that the brain's default position is one of safety. The stronger the opposing view, the more these brain behaviours need consideration and navigation.

In my next blog, I'll focus on the brains' reward' circuitry, how you can create a supportive environment to avoid threats, questioning techniques that can shift perspective and how to maximise your chances of influencing others with the brain in mind. Access Part 2 here.

Angeline Wilkes

Neuroleadership Coach

References

David Rock (2006). Quiet Leadership. New York: Harper Business. P1-27.

Katia M Harlie, Pradeep Shenoy, Martin P Paulus. (2013). The influence of emotions on cognitive control: feelings and beliefs—where do they meet?. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 1 (1), Abstract.

Jordan Peterson (2018). 12 Rules for Life -An antidote to chaos. New York: Penguin Books. 1-100.