Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Dealing with election anxiety? A psychiatrist explains how to channel your fears and break out of tribal thinking.

A person feelign anxiety, peering through an American flag

Resist demonizing the "other" side, writes Javanbakht.

Moor Studio/Getty Images

Javanbakht is an associate professor of psychiatry at Wayne State University.

Instead of excitement about the upcoming election, many of my patients and friends – regardless of political affiliation – report they’re terrified at the thought of the “other side” winning. Democrats tell me they fear Donald Trump will end our democracy; Republicans are afraid Kamala Harris will turn the United States into a socialist society without family values.

Watching the news leaves people from both parties exhausted, sad and scared about the future. Each half of the country is made to believe the other half is stupid, deeply misguided, immoral, dishonest or maliciously plotting to ruin the country they themselves love.

I am a psychiatrist who specializes in treating and researching fear and anxiety. My book, “Afraid: Understanding the Purpose of Fear, and Harnessing the Power of Anxiety,” explores the politics of fear and the role media play in modern anxieties. Scientific insights on fear can provide a helpful perspective on election anxieties and suggest some practical tips on managing politics-related worries.


Human beings are a tribal species

As humans, we have a strong tendency to form group affiliations, whether based on national, ethnic, religious, sports, school or other social connections. People care more strongly for their own group members. Researchers have found that areas of the brain involved in empathy are more active when people see, for example, a member of their own college getting hurt versus someone from a rival college.

Tribal tendencies are not biologically tied to a specific racial, ethnic or national identity. Rather, all people are born with a desire to seek affiliation with the familiar.

Tribalism can strengthen in the face of a perceived external threat. Danger from outside can make you both paranoid about “others” not in your group and more trusting of your tribemates and tribe leaders.

This instinct is not necessarily bad. Tribalism has helped humans survive as a species by fostering the unity necessary to fend off an invading tribe, predators or natural disasters.

Media and leaders play up tribal connections

Leaders and media know how to exploit our tribalism to circle the wagons. They can trigger the tribal tendency in an effort to motivate people to avoid or attack the other side and keep donating, voting and watching their own side’s cable news.

For most media outlets in the U.S., like all corporations, revenue is the top priority. What matters most to them is the number of hours you watch, scroll and click. Science shows that emotions, especially negative ones, grab attention; fear makes people stick around.

Media organizations on both sides of the political spectrum recognize that negative news keeps the audience engaged. Whichever news channel you watch, when was the last time you turned away happy, energized and peaceful? More often you end up feeling the whole world is going down in flames.

During election season, these dynamics intensify as politicians seek cash and votes, and the media capitalizes on the opportunity to sell more ads.

Managing anxiety around political news

You can care about your sanity and your country at the same time. Here are some practical tips:

  • Resist the tribalism trap. Remember that when terrified of the other side, your primitive instincts take over, leaving your critical thinking skills behind. It is impossible for the political leaders and media you identify with to always be right and the other side to always be wrong. Exercise some skepticism, especially when a message encourages fear.
  • Reduce exposure and choose what you consume. Cable news in the U.S. focuses on a few subjects and floods you with unending dramatic political analysis and punditry. Five more hours of news consumption will not add to what you learned in the first hour, but it will add to your emotional exhaustion. My patients who limit media exposure to an hour of their favorite news show feel much better and are still informed. If you can read rather than watch, do so. Be informed, not overwhelmed.
  • Balance your news intake. Don’t get stuck in the limited world view of what your tribe showcases. Tune in to neutral sources, and different views, in your news diet. The boring news sources are often the less emotionally exhausting.
  • Stay open to the positive. When you’re scared, your attention follows, focusing on stimuli relevant to what scares you. This is an evolutionary function that tries to keep you safe by zeroing in on danger. Short-circuit that instinct by intentionally redirecting your attention to positive news. Check out stories about science, health, arts, sports and community service.
  • Experience the real world. What you see shapes what you believe, and that guides your emotions. Break out of any negative news bubble you’re trapped in and engage with the real world. Visit your neighbors and nature. Balance your emotions by engaging with the largely safe and respectful real world.
  • Defy the trap of division. Reject demonization of others. Political beliefs are only one part of any American’s identity. Make an effort to identify common ground outside politics. You can go to the gym, share a meal, talk about art and science, or do yard work with people who hold different political views.
  • Keep up your routines. It is important to maintain the normal life routines, hobbies and social interactions that keep you happy and balanced. Remember that exercise is a great anxiety treatment.
  • Channel the energy. You can succumb to horror, depression or hate – or you can transform that energy into positive political activism, productive conversations and making an effort to learn the facts. Rather than be terrified, choose to be politically passionate.

Remember, this election cycle will pass. Use this time as an opportunity to expand your political knowledge. Be excited about your side, do what you can to support it, go vote. Don’t be afraid.The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

Multi-colored speech bubbles overlapping.

Stanford’s Strengthening Democracy Challenge shows a key way to reduce political violence: reveal that most Americans reject it.

Getty Images, MirageC

In the Aftermath of Assassinations, Let’s Show That Americans Overwhelmingly Disapprove of Political Violence

In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination—and the assassination of Minnesota state legislator Melissa Hortman only three months ago—questions inevitably arise about how to reduce the likelihood of similar heinous actions.

Results from arguably the most important study focused on the U.S. context, the Strengthening Democracy Challenge run by Stanford University, point to one straightforward answer: show people that very few in the other party support political violence. This approach has been shown to reduce support for political violence.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping each other.

Political outrage is rising—but dismissing the other side’s anger deepens division. Learn why taking outrage seriously can bridge America’s partisan divide.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

Taking Outrage Seriously: Understanding the Moral Signals Behind Political Anger

Over the last several weeks, the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard to the nation’s capital to crack down on crime. While those on the right have long been aghast by rioting and disorder in our cities, pressing for greater military intervention to curtail it, progressive residents of D.C. have tirelessly protested the recent militarization of the city.

This recent flashpoint is a microcosm of the reciprocal outrage at the heart of contemporary American public life. From social media posts to street protests to everyday conversations about "the other side," we're witnessing unprecedented levels of political outrage. And as polarization has increased, we’ve stopped even considering the other political party’s concerns, responding instead with amusement and delight. Schadenfreude, or pleasure at someone else’s pain, is now more common than solidarity or empathy across party lines.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two speech bubbles overlapping.

Recent data shows that Americans view members of the opposing political party overly negatively, leading people to avoid political discourse with those who hold different views.

Getty Images, Richard Drury

How To Motivate Americans’ Conversations Across Politics

Introduction

A large body of research shows that Americans hold overly negative distortions of those across the political spectrum. These misperceptions—often referred to as "Perception Gaps"—make civil discourse harder, since few Americans are eager to engage with people they believe are ideologically extreme, interpersonally hostile, or even threatening or inferior. When potential disagreement feels deeply uncomfortable or dangerous, conversations are unlikely to begin.

Correcting these distortions can help reduce barriers to productive dialogue, making Americans more open to political conversations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Divided American flag

Rev. Dr. F. Willis Johnson writes on the serious impacts of "othering" marginalized populations and how, together, we must push back to create a more inclusive and humane society.

Jorge Villalba/Getty Images

New Rules of the Game: Weaponization of Othering

By now, you have probably seen the viral video. Taylor Townsend—Black, bold, unbothered—walks off the court after a bruising match against her white European opponent, Jelena Ostapenko. The post-match glances were sharper than a backhand slice. Next came the unsportsmanlike commentary—about her body, her "attitude," and a not-so-veiled speculation about whether she belonged at this level. To understand America in the Trump Redux era, one only needs to study this exchange.

Ostapenko vs. Townsend is a microcosm of something much bigger: the way anti-democratic, vengeful politics—modeled from the White House on down—have bled into every corner of public life, including sports. Turning “othering” into the new national pastime. Divisive politics has a profound impact on marginalized groups. Neither Ostapenko nor Donald Trump invented this playbook, yet Trump and his sycophants are working to master it. Fueled by a sense of grievance, revenge, and an insatiable appetite for division, he—like Ostapenko—has normalized once somewhat closeted attitudes.

Keep ReadingShow less