A Surprising Kind of Polarization We Don’t Talk About
How proposed solutions shape our perception of problems.
We talk a lot about polarization on this newsletter and on the podcast. Red vs. blue. Beliefs. Values. Identity.
But what if a big part of polarization isn’t about what we believe—it’s about what we believe deserves our attention?
That’s the argument from behavioral scientists Adrienne Kafka and Troy Campbell, my guests on the latest episode of Outrage Overload. Their research introduces a powerful idea: issue salience polarization.
Their research demonstrates that polarization in society can occur when there are disagreements between political groups about which problems or issues are most important, not just about how to solve those problems. This concept differs from traditional polarization, which usually refers to conflicts over ideological solutions. Kafka and Campbell show that “solution spillover” can happen—when an issue is repeatedly paired with a particular ideological frame, supporters not only disagree about the solution but eventually start to disagree about the issue’s very relevance or importance, causing polarization even on issue salience.
How Solutions Create Division
Here’s the twist: the divisions often don’t start with the problem itself. They start with the proposed solutions.
A few familiar examples:
COVID-19? Broad early agreement—until mask mandates and shutdown policies showed up.
Climate change? Much less controversial before it was framed with sweeping government regulations.
Childhood obesity? Hard to oppose… until Michelle Obama championed school lunch reforms.
The insight:
When people dislike a solution, they begin to doubt the existence or importance of the problem.
That’s solution aversion.
And the flip side?
If people love the solution, they’ll insist the problem is urgent and huge.
That’s solution attraction.
We’re not just debating whether we should wear raincoats; eventually, we disagree about whether it’s even raining.
So What Can We Do?
Kafka and Campbell offer practical guidance—useful whether you’re a policymaker, journalist, activist, or just someone trying to maintain family peace at Thanksgiving:
1️⃣ Offer multiple solutions
If there’s only one option, it’s easy for people to reject the whole issue.
2️⃣ Avoid zero-sum framing
Show that solutions can expand the pie, not redistribute slices.
3️⃣ Get local and build relationships
Local problems often bypass national ideological landmines.
4️⃣ Focus on the “adjacent persuadables”
Forget converting the loudest uncle. Reach the people who are almost with you.
5️⃣ Temper expectations: real change is slow
Polarization didn’t appear overnight—and it won’t disappear overnight either.
The Simplicity Trap
Kafka is now studying what she calls motivated denial of complexity—how we flatten multi-dimensional problems into “good vs. bad” narratives.
Because complexity requires attention.
Attention requires energy.
And outrage gives us shortcuts.
But shortcuts are part of what’s breaking us.
If you find yourself baffled by friends or family who seem to “ignore the obvious,” this episode is for you.
Share it with someone who might appreciate understanding how solutions shape our sense of the problem.
And if you’re enjoying these deep dives, consider forwarding this newsletter to someone trying to make sense of the noise.
Thanks for reading—and for caring about what matters.
—David
Wrapping up NaPodPoMo 2025
Closing in on the end of the 30-day challenge, where we’ve been responding to common audience questions about bridging our divides. It’s not too late to subscribe and listen to selected episodes or the whole series.
https://outrageoverload.net/outrage-science-bites/
New This Week in Outrage Episode!
It’s everything the Outrage Overload podcast is not. It’s not edited. It’s not scripted. It’s lightly researched. It’s David and Lisa talking about this week in outrage, what was in the news, in the memes, and maybe finding some backstory with a humorous (at least to us) twist.