Navigating Difficult Topics Around the Holidays, from the Perspective of Psychology and Neuroscience
Does Thanksgiving feel a little different this year? For many in the United States, this holiday is meant to be one where families come together in a day of feasting and togetherness. However, with Election Day a little more than three weeks prior, Thanksgiving - and other upcoming holidays - can end up being quite politically charged. And this year, emotions may be closer to the surface, and feelings of vulnerability and contention could be on the menu along side the turkey and cranberry sauce.
So, how do you reinforce connection in times when so many Americans are feeling so disconnected from each other ideologically and culturally? And how do you do this while still enforcing important personal boundaries?
Keep your cool, stay prepared
Common wisdom would suggest that you likely already know what you’re getting into ahead of time. If the idea of upcoming family gatherings puts a sinking feeling in your gut, then it may be helpful to think about why you are feeling that way. Is it your Uncle So-and-so, who has a knack for using inappropriate language about others? Or is it just that the turkey is always plain dry after cooking? Or is it the feeling of being caught between two identities?
We know from scientific research that tribalism, or the creation of ingroups versus outgroups, can cause our brains to become more reactive, especially when we (or our groups) feel threatened. Evolutionarily, tribalism aided humans in staying safe and sensing either (real or perceived) danger when it was approaching. In our modern world, tribalism can prevent us from having productive conversations about challenging topics like politics. Additionally, individuals who feel apathetic towards voting or politics may feel that they cannot hold an opinion without “choosing a side”, otherwise they may feel backlash (Javanbakht, 2019; Shapiro, 2016).
Recent survey data from September also suggests that while two-thirds of Americans (67%) said they align with close family members on political issues, 41% reported that they had argued with a family member about a controversial issue recently and 22% noted that conversations around controversial topics produced feelings of anxiousness (APA, 2024).
“It is not surprising that some of us will find ourselves having heated conversations and disagreements on sensitive issues, even with the people we are close to. Sometimes these discussions represent healthy debate, and other times they may cross the line into incivility if emotions flare. The most important thing for our collective mental health is to be mindful of how we are feeling during these tense moments, and to carefully consider the impact these interactions might be having on our important relationships.”
- Marketa M. Wills, M.D., M.B.A.Medical Director and CEO of the American Psychiatric Association
So, how do you get ready?
One way to prepare may be to consider what you will say in advance of the conversation. Take some time to decompress before the holiday, dinner, or event, and remember that gatherings are meant to invoke togetherness and not hostility.
Use visualization techniques to imagine what you will say, and express how you feel in advance of the conversation. Be prepared that some of the viewpoints expressed may be different to your own, and consider whether engaging with certain relatives will produce thoughtful conversation. Additionally, setting some “ground rules” at the beginning of interactions or events may help to encourage open discussion and debate rather than angry back-and-forths. This collaborative and constructive goal-setting (or social contracts) by all parties can become a reference point later on. This is a strategy that Mindbridge uses during all of our training to foster accountability and openness.
Another way to prepare may be to support yourself with credible evidence and unbiased sources to support your opinion when asked. Misinformation and media literacy remain significant challenges to our modern world. Be prepared to offer your own take on a situation, and know why you hold the beliefs that you do.
In addition, before holiday gatherings that may get heated, consider the following: “Am I really listening and hearing the words of others, or am I just waiting for my turn to speak?” Before we say our piece, we must remind ourselves of this agreed-upon “social contract” and intentionally make choices that advance the conversation, not hinder it. On the other hand, if you'd rather not talk about the subject, that’s okay, too; just be prepared to state that. Redirecting the conversation can also be worthwhile when needed - remember that a successful conversation requires all parties to participate willingly.
Remember that the conversation should be productive, not rhetorical
Knowing what the goal of a discussion is is one of the most critical factors when it comes to having an important conversation. At the end of the night, what is it that you want others to take away from your talk? What scientific facts and guidelines should they know after sharing with you?
Do you want them to know that vaccine science is safe, and that vaccine administration is not linked to autism or other neurodivergencies? (DeStefano & Shimabukuro, 2019; Jain et al, 2025; Madsen et al., 2002; Taylor et al., 2014)? Would you like them to take a new perspective on historical systems or inequities that may be currently affecting groups in America?
Starting off the topic with an agreement that respect is the main goal, and that agreeing on a fundamental principle makes for a good starting point. If a foundation of respect cannot be made, then the conversation is more likely to escalate and become an exchange that’s closer to an argument.
Following Up to Provide Effective & Credible Information
After the conversation, be sure to check in and explain why you feel the way that you do. “This conversation is important because…” is a strong statement, because stating outwardly why you hold your own position can provide clarity as well as respect. Another helpful way to share in conversation may be to genuinely ask and consider the source of the information.
When we encounter views we disagree with, the common impulse is to retort back with facts and empirical evidence. However, research suggests this can actually backfire and do little to change attitudes at the dinner-table. Why is this? Typically, a lot of our deeply held political beliefs (especially in recent years) is tied to our core identities. Therefore, a perceived “attack” on one’s political beliefs often is also, in turn, perceived as an attack on the self (Kubin et al., 2021).
What does appear to be impactful in conversation is sharing personal experiences about a political issue to help foster mutual respect, feelings of empathy, and increase the perceived rationality of the storyteller. In a world where initial reactions to conflicting evidence are to reject it as “fake news”, focusing on narratives and personal experience during the holidays is a first step in the right direction of reducing the “us vs them” mentality (Kubin et al., 2021). The “facts” can always be introduced later, but in true Mindbridge fashion - in order to change hearts and minds, we must learn to access them.
Given that many people - 5.17 billion users in fact - use social media (Kemp, 2023) and frequently use these and other mobile device applications / apps to consume their news (Pew Research, 2024), apps can be incredibly helpful for communicating here.
A 2021 study from the Netherlands found that the use of What’s App could facilitate productive and positive discussions amongst students who not only shared links to news articles, but discussed them amongst groups that they had interpersonal relationships with (Vermeer et al., 2021). Interestingly, they found that this was not related to negative emotions. From these data, we know that just dropping a link in your family mobile chat may not change perspectives, but talking about the key facets of the article might.
Remember, talking with others may lead to momentary discomfort, but ultimately, the goal of spending time with others is to feel a sense of belonging and unity. And ultimately, data from Harvard Health suggests that something as simple as practicing gratitude (like many do during the holiday season) can foster positive feelings, help deal with adversity, and build strong interpersonal relationships. One way to reinforce this is by asking all attendees to share one thing they are grateful for about the group/family during the holiday meal or gathering.
Want to learn more and practice these skills?
Join the Mindbridge Institute for Bridging Divides: Supporting Loved Ones Against Harmful Ideologies, a live online course designed to help community members understand the dangers of extremist thinking and offer strategies for engaging in respectful, constructive conversations.
During the 50-minute live session, attendees will explore how extremist beliefs spread, how to identify early warning signs, and how to offer support to loved ones while also challenging harmful ideas.
What You’ll Learn:
Understanding the psychology behind ideological extremism and radicalization
Strategies for fostering respectful dialogue and supporting loved ones
Tools to de-escalate conversations and help loved ones question harmful ideas
How to offer support without alienating your relationships
Sign up now for our session on December 19th, 12PM EST
References
American Psychiatric Association (2024). While Most Americans Align With Close Family Members on Controversial Political Issues, One in Five Report Family Estrangement Based on These Topics.
Bellovary, A.K., Young, N.A. & Goldenberg, A. Left- and Right-Leaning News Organizations Use Negative Emotional Content and Elicit User Engagement Similarly. Affec Sci 2, 391–396 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-021-00046-w
DeStefano, F., & Shimabukuro, T. T. (2019). The MMR Vaccine and Autism. Annual Review of Virology, 6, 585–600. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-virology-092818-015515
Harvard Health (2011). Giving thanks can make you happier. https://www.health.harvard.edu/healthbeat/giving-thanks-can-make-you-happier
Jain, A., Marshall, J., Buikema, A., Bancroft, T., Kelly, J. P., & Newschaffer, C. J. (2015). Autism Occurrence by MMR Vaccine Status Among US Children With Older Siblings With and Without Autism. JAMA, 313(15), 1534–1540. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.3077
Javanbakht, A. (2019). The politics of fear: How it manipulates us to tribalism. The Conversation.
Kemp, S. (2023). Digital 2023 April Global Statshot Report. https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2023-april-global-statshot
Kubin, E., Puryear, C., Schein, C., & Gray, K. (2021). Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(6), e2008389118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2008389118
Madsen, K. M., Hviid, A., Vestergaard, M., Schendel, D., Wohlfahrt, J., Thorsen, P., Olsen, J., & Melbye, M. (2002). A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(19), 1477–1482. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa021134
Mehl, C., & Haidt, J. (2021). How To Have Fun With That Relative Whose Opinions You Can’t Stand This Thanksgiving. TIME. https://time.com/6123239/politics-conversation-thanksgiving/
Pew Research Center. (2024). Social Media and News Fact Sheet. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/
Shapiro, D. (2016). Talking Politics at the Thanksgiving Table. Psychology Today https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/transforming-conflict/201611/talking-politics-the-thanksgiving-table
Taylor, L. E., Swerdfeger, A. L., & Eslick, G. D. (2014). Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies. Vaccine, 32(29), 3623–3629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.085
Vermeer, S. A., Kruikemeier, S., Trilling, D., & De Vreese, C. H. (2021). WhatsApp with politics?! Examining the effects of interpersonal political discussion in instant messaging apps. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 26(2), 410-437.
