Ambivalence
Holding two opposing feelings at the exact same time.
Ambivalence is holding two opposing feelings at the exact same time. Both are real, and neither cancels the other. The chest holds both lift and weight. It is uncomfortable, yet honest, because many situations warrant mixed responses.
Two true things can be true at once
Ambivalence is treated in our culture as indecision. Sometimes it is something better. It is the recognition that the situation genuinely contains two opposite truths. You love the job and you want to leave it. You miss them and you are relieved they are gone. The mind wants to resolve the tension by picking one. Resist this. Allow both. The ambivalence is more accurate than any single resolution would be. Holding two truths at once is an adult skill. It does not mean you cannot decide. It means you decide with your eyes open, knowing what you are also giving up. This is how grown-ups choose.
"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."
— F. Scott Fitzgerald
Ambivalence has a distinctive body signature of suspended dual presence. The chest holds both lift and weight at the same time. The body cannot commit fully to either response because both pulls are real. There is often a particular kind of stuckness as the system tries and fails to resolve the contradiction. Movement may be hesitant or jerky. The face often shows neither clear approach nor clear withdrawal but something in between. Sustained ambivalence can produce particular kinds of fatigue, since the system is doing the work of maintaining two responses simultaneously rather than committing to either one.
Ambivalence has been studied extensively in social psychology, particularly through research on attitude structure. Kaplan's foundational work distinguished ambivalence from neutral indifference by showing that they predict different behaviours and have different underlying structures (Kaplan, 1972). More recent research by van Harreveld and colleagues has examined the affective, behavioural, and cognitive consequences of holding ambivalent attitudes (van Harreveld, Nohlen, & Schneider, 2015). The research has shown that ambivalence is genuinely uncomfortable, often more so than holding straightforward negative attitudes, and produces particular patterns of decision avoidance and information seeking.
Ambivalence arises through specific conditions involving objects, people, or situations that genuinely have features producing opposing responses. Common patterns include:
Ambivalence is often more honest than premature resolution and benefits from being held rather than rushed past. The following help.
Allow both responses to be real
The cultural pressure to resolve mixed feelings often produces premature commitment to one side, which usually produces inaccurate responses to genuinely complex situations. Allowing both responses to be felt as real, without rushing to pick one, often produces more accurate engagement with the actual complexity of the situation.
Distinguish ambivalence about objects from ambivalence about decisions
Some ambivalence is about how to feel about something (the object is genuinely complex). Some is about what to do (the decision has competing considerations). The two warrant different responses: ambivalence about objects often does not require resolution; ambivalence about decisions may require eventual commitment even when full resolution is impossible. Distinguishing the two often clarifies what is being asked of you.
Notice when you are forced to commit
Some contexts force commitment even when ambivalence is appropriate. Deadlines, social pressures, and life circumstances sometimes require action despite mixed feelings. Recognising that the commitment is being forced rather than expressing actual resolution often helps. The action may be required; the ambivalence can remain real underneath.
Watch for false resolution
Strong cultural pressure exists to feel one way about complex things. This pressure often produces false resolution: surface commitment to one side while the other response continues operating beneath. False resolution typically produces worse outcomes than honest ambivalence because the suppressed response leaks out in ways that the conscious mind does not predict. Honest ambivalence is usually more sustainable than false resolution.
If ambivalence has become permanent paralysis
Sustained ambivalence that prevents action across many areas, particularly when accompanied by significant distress, may signal underlying patterns that warrant attention. Some clinical conditions produce persistent ambivalence as a feature, including certain anxiety patterns and obsessive-compulsive presentations. Therapeutic support is appropriate when ambivalence has stopped being honest engagement with complexity and has become disabling.
"Ambivalence and neutral indifference look similar on simple measures but produce very different behaviour. Ambivalence involves strong feeling on both sides; indifference involves weak feeling overall. The two warrant different responses."
— A summary of Kaplan's distinction in attitude research
What is ambivalence?
Ambivalence is holding two opposing feelings at the exact same time. Both are real. Neither cancels the other. The body carries a particular kind of suspended quality, unable to commit fully in either direction because both pulls are present. Ambivalence specifically refers to the simultaneous holding of opposing feelings about the same object, where both feelings are genuinely felt rather than alternating. The simultaneity is essential. Quickly alternating between positive and negative feelings is not ambivalence; ambivalence is holding both at once without one cancelling the other.
Where do people feel ambivalence in the body?
Ambivalence has a distinctive signature of suspended dual presence. The chest holds both lift and weight at the same time. The body cannot commit fully to either response because both pulls are real. There is often a particular kind of stuckness as the system tries and fails to resolve the contradiction. Movement may be hesitant or jerky. The face often shows neither clear approach nor clear withdrawal but something in between. Sustained ambivalence can produce particular kinds of fatigue.
Is being ambivalent the same as not caring?
No, and research has specifically distinguished the two. Kaplan's foundational work in attitude research showed that ambivalence and neutral indifference look similar on simple measures but produce very different behaviour. Ambivalence involves strong feeling on both sides; indifference involves weak feeling overall. The two predict different things: ambivalence produces decision avoidance and discomfort; indifference produces simple disengagement. The distinction matters significantly because the appropriate responses differ.
How do you resolve ambivalence?
Often ambivalence does not need resolution; it accurately reflects the actual complexity of the situation. The pressure to resolve mixed feelings often produces premature commitment to one side, which typically produces inaccurate responses to genuinely complex situations. Allowing both responses to be felt as real, without rushing to pick one, often produces more accurate engagement with the actual complexity. Some ambivalence is about how to feel about something (often does not require resolution); some is about what to do (may require eventual commitment even when full resolution is impossible). Distinguishing the two often clarifies what is being asked of you.
When is ambivalence a problem?
Ambivalence becomes a problem when it has stopped being honest engagement with complexity and has become disabling. Sustained ambivalence that prevents action across many areas, particularly when accompanied by significant distress, may signal underlying patterns that warrant attention. Some clinical conditions produce persistent ambivalence as a feature, including certain anxiety patterns and obsessive-compulsive presentations. The work of therapy can help when ambivalence has become a sustained pattern that prevents engagement with life rather than honest response to genuine complexity.
- Kaplan, K. J. (1972). On the ambivalence-indifference problem in attitude theory and measurement: A suggested modification of the semantic differential technique. Psychological Bulletin, 77(5), 361–372. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/h0032590
- van Harreveld, F., Nohlen, H. U., & Schneider, I. K. (2015). The ABC of ambivalence: Affective, behavioral, and cognitive consequences of attitudinal conflict. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 285–324. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0065260115000064
Ambivalence sits in the cognitive family as one of its more sustainably uncomfortable states. It overlaps with cognitive dissonance when the conflict is between beliefs, with conflict when external situations are involved, with mixed feelings as the broader category, and with what social psychology research treats as a meaningfully distinct attitude structure with its own behavioural consequences.
See where ambivalence sits among the other 402 emotions.
Open Ambivalence on the wheel