Let go of certainty. The opposite isn’t uncertainty. It’s openness, curiosity and a willingness to embrace paradox, rather than choose up sides. 
Tony Schwartz

A study published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin proposes that when people feel like their loved ones are attentive and supportive, they are more likely to be open-minded, consider multiple perspectives and cope with having contradicting opinions. 

This research was carried out by Dr. Guy Itzchakov, an Assistant Professor at the University of Haifa and Dr. Harry T. Reis, a Professor of Psychology at the University of Rochester. 

Although the world is slowly becoming more polarized, it’s natural to possess conflicting attitudes about a topic. For example, you may love that a Walmart is being built near your house but dislike that it’ll drive out local businesses. 

This is known as attitude ambivalence (AA). The mixed feelings associated with AA can be uncomfortable and threatening to your self-view. These negative feelings motivate people to resolve their conflicting opinions by “picking a side” in order to restore cognitive consistency. 

Unfortunately, in doing so, this can lead to a lack of consideration of opposing beliefs, which may limit your knowledge and understanding of the world around you.  

Dr. Itzchakov and Dr. Reis hypothesized that having loved ones who are supportive and attentive may encourage individuals to be more open-minded and accepting of conflicting beliefs.

The researchers tested the link between open-mindedness and perceived responsiveness (e.g. the perception that others pay attention and support you). They first instructed participants to read a paragraph about genetically modified foods (GMFs). 

Then, participants were asked to indicate whether their attitude towards GMFs was positive or negative, and write a short essay advocating for their opinion. 

Afterwards, participants were assigned to one of three conditions. Participants in the high responsiveness condition were asked to recall two kind things others had done for them in the past week. 

Participants in the low responsiveness condition were asked to recall 10 kind things others had done for them in the past week (note: recalling 10 kind things is much more difficult, which may lead the participants to feel like others don’t really care about them). 

The remaining participants were placed in the control condition and were simply asked to describe the cubicle of a colleague. 

Lastly, the researchers relied on various measures to assess the participant’s open-mindedness, awareness of opposing viewpoints, and intention of exploring opposing viewpoints. 

The results showed that participants in the high responsiveness condition were more likely to report conflicting attitudes (i.e. both positive and negative attitudes) about GMFs, compared to the other conditions. This suggests that these participants were more likely to consider multiple perspectives on the topic. 

Participants in the high responsiveness condition were also more likely to explore opposing viewpoints and tolerate their own conflicting attitudes towards GMFs. 

However, since having highly supportive and attentive loved ones can make people happier, the researchers explored whether these positive feelings accounted for the results mentioned above, or if there was some other underlying process at play. 

The procedure of the next experiment was identical to the previous one, except that the control condition was dropped. Recall, the participants were asked to read about GMFs and write about their opinions, followed by writing either two or 10 kind things others had done for them in the past week.

The researchers then measured the participant’s need for cognition (NFC) and need for cognitive closure (NFCC). People with a high NFC tend to engage in effortful thinking and are hypothesized to be more open-minded. On the other hand, people with a high NFCC tend to seek out straightforward answers and struggle with accepting uncertainty or ambiguity.  

Much like the previous experiment, participants in the high responsiveness condition were more open-minded. They were significantly more likely to report conflicting attitudes towards GMFs and were less likely to be certain that their attitude was correct. 

The researchers also found that participants in both conditions reported similar levels of positive and negative feelings. This means that an increase in positive feelings can’t explain the relationship between open-mindedness and having supportive and attentive loved ones. 

Following these results, the researchers wanted to examine whether fluctuations in perceived support and attention from others would be associated with fluctuations in open-mindedness.  

Participants in this experiment were instructed to write about a conflict they encountered at work and how it may have affected their working relationship. Participants were asked to indicate their thoughts and feelings towards the same conflict once every three days for 12 days. 

As expected, fluctuations in perceived support and attention from their colleague predicted fluctuations in open-mindedness. In turn, fluctuations in open-mindedness predicted fluctuations in the participant’s belief that their attitudes were correct as well as their desire to explore conflicting viewpoints. 

Overall, the researchers were able to support their hypothesis that when people feel like their loved ones or colleagues pay attention and support them, they’re more likely to be open-minded and accepting of personal conflicting attitudes and opposing beliefs held by others