The Ecosystem Challenge:

The Psychology behind your social media world and how you can grow. Part 1 of a two part blog.

Welcome to 2026. We're already deep into February, pitchers and catchers have reported to Spring Training, and if you're anything like me, you're not feeling great about the energy in our country any more than you did a couple months — or a couple years — ago.

I've never been a big New Year's resolution guy. For whatever reason. And we're past that deadline now anyway. But like most of us, I do love telling other people what they should do, so here's my challenge to you for 2026:

Examine and expand your information ecosystem.

Gently. Gradually. Just open the door a little and take in something new.

We all have a sense of our "stuckness" as a country. We all feel the polarization, the hostility, the inability to have conversations about so many topics. There are a lot of reasons for this. It just simply isn't... simple. I like to explore these subjects primarily from a relational lens — how all of this affects our mental and emotional health and, ultimately, our relationships.

Friends you have a hard time understanding? Relatives you can't help but argue with? Thinking the other side has gone crazy? I got you. But we have to start by acknowledging the ecosystems we're in and how and why they work.

Ecosystems are like any relationship. If you're going to spend a lot of time in one, you ought to be mindful. It should not only be enjoyable, but trustworthy — and it should make you a better person.

Examine What You're In

It's commonly discussed how social media platforms track and code our interactions. Our clicks. Our views. Our searches. All with the purpose of keeping us on the platform. This is accomplished through tried and true marketing methods designed to trigger your emotional responses, especially fear. News articles and posts highlight stories with trigger words, all aiming to get a reaction out of you — and the algorithms learn exactly what it takes to get you to click.

But there's another internal drive being triggered here, and it's one we don't talk about nearly enough: our need for belonging.

It's not only that we have fears. It's that others have them too. Our fears, coded through searches and clicks, lead us to validating voices telling us we're not alone — that our fears are real, legitimate or not. This is the entrance to an ecosystem that is more than happy to keep you right there.

Now, this isn't always a bad thing. Belonging helps us feel safe. Groups can provide security.

Communities have been built around this sense of security since the beginning of time. And we know from attachment theory that security and a felt sense of safety actually promote learning and growth. That validation, however small, is powerful. Your brain says “I'm not the only one that sees this threat. Others see it too. I'm not alone, and there's strength in numbers.”

And like most things attachment, this is a subcortical process — automatic and largely outside our awareness. It's fast.

The problem is that growth isn't the goal of most online ecosystems. Profit is. The burden is on us to monitor the sources of our information and take note of how these ecosystems actually work.

Slow It Down

One of the best things you can do is slow down the process so your awareness can catch up.

Expanding the information input in your brain — challenging your thinking even just a little with a different perspective or an altered viewpoint — will slow things down. Think of it as putting speed bumps on the road to slow down the traffic. For God's sake, there are kids in this neighborhood.

When it comes to news sources, try reading. (If you're here right now, you're off to a good start.) If I want to get an emotional reaction out of you, the quickest way is to engage as many sensory channels as possible — powerful images, well-delivered lines, striking graphics. That's what video and TV news are built for. Reading slows that process down. Listening to podcasts is better too.

Watch for the trigger words, whether spoken or in print. Words designed to activate your core attachment system — your protections against threats to your wellbeing, to who you are as a person, to what you believe. Right now, some of the most popular hits are around hate. The message of "They hate you" in all its forms will absolutely capture your attention. War language, where your community, your beliefs, or your way of life are under attack, is a classic — with "us versus them" framing that pressures you to choose a side and protect.

Be especially cautious when the "attacking party" is a large, generalized group given a nefarious agenda. That will trigger the attachment needs for security hard. And watch for the shaming talk. "They want you to think..." followed by something bad about you — like "you're racist" or "you're wrong for..." — goes right after your sense of self. Our internal working models of self and others, as we say in the biz, is the primary target for getting a reaction.

Hold Your Sources to a Standard

Next, examine your sources and hold them accountable. Like boyfriends and girlfriends, if you're going to spend a lot of time with them, you want to trust them — and you'll have questions if you find you can't.

So where and how are you getting your news and views?

This is my defense of real journalism.

As a long, historical, and critical profession for democracy, journalism excels when it's grounded in a process that upholds standards. Like scientific research (and boyfriends and girlfriends), none is greater than reliability and validity. Your opinion, or how far right or left you speak from, doesn't matter if you can present evidence reliably and consistently over time and that evidence can be validated independently. Like relationships, trust is earned over time and doesn't necessarily require perfection.

Honest research sometimes challenges our sense of security, as it should.  Data scientist Joshua Doss has an excellent defense of research where he reminds us that good research isn’t trying to prove you right but is actually done to test your hypothesis and prove it wrong.  It forces your hypothesis (or possible point) through the rigors of a scientific process.  If you want security, you need a stress test.  That is not a comfortable process.

How's the Conversation?

Speaking of boyfriends and girlfriends — how's the conversation?

Within our information ecosystems, another factor I examine under the process microscope is dialogue. Point and counterpoint, pros and cons — those are great. But how are they exchanged? How do people with differing views actually talk to each other? Is their aim to "own" someone, to win, to shut down? And how do they view each other? That's a critical question, because you will internalize how they view the other side as a reflection of how they view you.

I have tremendous respect for, and genuinely enjoy, podcasts and articles where people with differing views and from different parties engage respectfully — or even as collegial friends. At their best, they try to find common ground from which to build. They try to learn from each other.

There's a difference in the goals between dialogue and debate. Both have their purpose. But dialogue can bring us together.

When you talk with a family member or someone you care about, do you want to debate them — or would you rather actually talk? How do you want them to see you?

If the conversation matters, it deserves to be slow, respectful, and considerate. Even — especially — when it's hard. Ultimately, we want connection. Collaboration. Community. That takes work!

Tips on how? Stay tuned for part 2.

---

Dr. Max is a Marriage and Family Therapist and the founder of Pacifica Group and Conexa. He writes about mental health, relationships, politics, and culture through a relational lens grounded in attachment theory. You can find more of his writing [here].