Why Do We Always Take the Bait? And How to Stop

We’ve all been there. A family gathering, a group chat, a comment section—and then it happens. Someone drops a deliberately provocative statement, and before we know it, we’re in a heated argument. Maybe it's the proverbial uncle at Thanksgiving, pushing everyone's buttons. Maybe it's an internet troll, a media pundit, or a pop culture figure expertly fishing for outrage.

We know engaging is exactly what they want. Despite recognizing the game, many of us enthusiastically play along.

Why do we take the bait?

Provocateurs are less important than they think

Some people thrive on discord. Certain personality traits, especially those linked to Cluster B personality disorders (such as narcissistic, borderline, histrionic, and antisocial personality disorders), are associated with a tendency to stir up conflict. People with these traits may provoke arguments for control, validation, or amusement.

When asked, “When I get bored at work, I’ll bring up controversial issues just so I can watch others argue,” about 5-10% of respondents report some level of agreement. This holds true across different countries, workplaces and demographic groups. For a small but meaningful subset of people, provocation is a form of entertainment or manipulation.

But let’s not focus too much on them. Let’s focus on our own reactions to them. If we know someone is baiting us, why do we react?

There are two possibilities:

1. We can’t help ourselves. Psychological and social factors trigger automatic responses, overriding our conscious intention to ignore them. These automatic reactions are part of the story, but the importance of them is often overestimated.
2. We want to engage, even if we don’t realize it. We tend to fall into familiar patterns, especially under stress. Conflict, no matter how frustrating, can feel strangely reassuring.

Pulling emotional triggers

Sometimes, reacting to provocation feels involuntary. Anna Freud’s work on defense mechanisms helps explain why. An inflammatory statement can trigger projection (seeing our own insecurities in their words), reaction formation (arguing fiercely to suppress internal discomfort), or displacement (redirecting frustration onto an easy target).

From a neuroscientific perspective, provocation triggers the amygdala, the brain’s emotional alarm system. When we feel attacked, even if it’s not a physical attack our brain defaults to fight-or-flight mode. Even if the "threat" is just an opinion we disagree with, we have similar physiological reactions to perceived threats to our identity, beliefs, or social standing.

Conflict also provides a clear structure: villain vs. hero, oppressor vs. oppressed, right vs. wrong. This binary framing is satisfying because it simplifies complexity and reinforces our sense of control and our understanding of our own place within the conflict.

Cognitive flexibility and positive emotions

Stress narrows our focus and locks us into rigid, familiar thinking—especially in conflict. Broaden-and-Build Theory (Fredrickson, 1998) explains why: positive emotions expand cognitive flexibility, while stress and anger shrink our perspective, making us rely on habitual responses.

Under stress, we default to learned strategies instead of considering alternatives. In heated debates, we often follow the provocateur’s track, fixating on "winning" rather than exploring, shifting, or disengaging.

Disengaging online

Online, disengaging should be easy. We could switch tabs, text a friend, or step outside. But when a strong emotional reaction hits, we get locked in, both cognitively and emotionally. It doesn’t help that the screen is physiologically arousing, and that most social software is designed to amplify cognitive and emotional arousal.

Stress Essential Reads

How Stress May Increase the Risk of Stroke

Well-Being: Be Your Own Superhero

When a strong emotional reaction is triggered, it feels like it demands an immediate reaction which pulls us into a provocateur’s orbit and framing of the situation.

It probably doesn’t stop there. If we repeatedly engage in the same kinds of conflicts, we reinforce those mental pathways. We start rehearsing arguments in our heads, preparing counterpoints even when there’s no immediate debate. Eventually, those preloaded responses spill out onto any willing (or unwilling) conversation partner, regardless of whether the topic is productive or even relevant to the discussion at hand.

In this way, provocation doesn’t just pull us into one argument. It reshapes how we engage with conflict in general, making us more likely to seek out and repeat the same familiar battles.

The 1% rule of the internet

Online, provocateurs don’t need to ensnare everyone. They just need to capture a small, vocal group. The "1% Rule of Internet Culture" suggests that 1% of users create most content, while 90% lurk without posting often or ever. Even if most people ignore provocation, a passionate minority engages, shaping the discourse.

By framing debates and activating predictable arguments, provocateurs with large audiences manipulate opponents into engaging on their terms. They position themselves at the center of the discussion, then steer broader conversations, bringing the focus back to them, on their terms.

Breaking the cycle

How do we stop taking the bait?

1. Recognize the pattern. Ask yourself: Have I had this argument before? Does engaging help me, or just feed the cycle?
2. Pause before reacting. The 90-Second Rule (Jill Bolte Taylor) suggests emotions peak for about 90 seconds. Observe the reaction—let it float by—then decide if it’s worth engaging.
   • Online? Interrupt the process. Log out, close the window, and step away. When you have more options for how to spend your time, do you still want to engage?
3. Redirect attention. Shift the conversation or disengage entirely.
4. Engage strategically. Not all debates are traps. The best time to engage is when people share a common environment and social context. This is hard enough in person, even harder online. If it’s pure provocation, the strongest move is no response.

• Online? Interrupt the process. Log out, close the window, and step away. When you have more options for how to spend your time, do you still want to engage?

The real question isn’t just why others provoke; the important question is why we keep taking the bait. We can’t control others or reshape every debate, but we can control our response. Strengthening our own emotional and cognitive flexibility, we create space for deliberate choices, directing our time and attention where we choose, rather than surrendering them to a provocateur.