cc_bySassenberg, KaiWinter, Kevin2024-08-192024-08-192024https://hohpublica.uni-hohenheim.de/handle/123456789/16069https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241242452Societies are increasingly divided about political issues such as migration or counteracting climate change. This attitudinal polarization is the basis for intergroup conflict and prevents societal progress in addressing pressing challenges. Research on attitude change should provide an answer regarding how people might be persuaded to move away from the extremes to take a moderate stance. However, persuasive communication often most strongly affects those who hold a moderate attitude or are undecided. More importantly, barely any research has explicitly aimed at mitigating extreme attitudes and behavioral tendencies. Addressing this gap, this article summarizes research demonstrating that (different types of) intraindividual conflicts might be a means to mitigate polarized attitudes. Goal conflicts, cognitive conflicts, counterfactual thinking, and paradoxical thinking facilitate cognitive flexibility. This, in turn, seems to initiate the consideration of alternative stances and mitigate the polarization of attitudes. We discuss the limitations of the existing research and the potential of this approach for interventions.engAttitudinal polarizationIntergroup conflictAttitude changePersuasive communicationCognitive flexibilityIntraindividual conflictGoal conflictsParadoxical thinking300Article