Motivated Reasoning
Motivated reasoning is a theory that originates in cognitive science and social psychology. It describes the ways in which people [often subconsciously] employ biases and heuristics to avoid cognitive dissonance. In other words, they seek out or process information positively if it conforms to prior beliefs and process information negatively if it does not. Denial of global warming or the scientific evidence thereof are important examples of motivated reasoning: people process scientific information about climate shifts to conform to pre-existing feelings and beliefs or to avoid the cognitive discomfort involved in considering significant changes to their lifestyles. Motivated reasoning also occurs in politics when people vote, protest, consume political information or evaluate candidates. These introductory texts cover the theory of motivated reasoning and its impact in politics.
Category 1: Making sense of motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990). The Case for Motivated Reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 108(3): 480-98.
Taber, C.S. and Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated Scepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 50: 755-769.
Kraft, P., Lodge, M., and Taber, C. (2015). Why People "Don't Trust the Evidence": Motivated Reasoning and Scientific Beliefs. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. 658(1): 121-33.
Category 2: Motivated reasoning, partisanship and public opinion.
Redlawsk, D.P. (2002). Hot Cognition or Cool Consideration? Testing the Effects of Motivated Reasoning on Political Decision Making. Journal of Politics, Vol. 64: 1021-1044.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., and Sulloway, F. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 129(3): 339–375.
Lodge, M. and Taber, C.S. (2005). The Automaticity of Affect for Political Leaders, Groups, and Issues: An Experimental Test of the Hot Cognition Hypothesis. Political Psychology, Vol. 26: 455-482.
Gaines, B.J., Kuklinski, J.H., Quirk, P.J., Peyton, B. and Verkuilen, J. (2007). Same Facts, Different Interpretations: Partisan Motivation and Opinion on Iraq. Journal of Politics, Vol.69: 957-974.
Lebo, M.J. and Cassino, D. (2007). The Aggregated Consequences of Motivated Reasoning and the Dynamics of Partisan Presidential Approval. Political Psychology, Vol. 28: 719-746.
Redlawsk, D.P., Civettini, A.J.W. and Emmerson, K.M. (2010) The Affective Tipping Point: Do Motivated Reasoners Ever “Get It”?. Political Psychology, Vol. 31: 563-593.
Bolsen, T., Druckman, J.N., and Cook, F.L. (2013). The Influence of Partisan Motivated Reasoning on Public Opinion. Political Behavior, Vol. 36(2): 235-62.
Leeper, T.J., and Slothuus, R. (2014). Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Public Opinion Formation. Political Psychology, Vol. 35(1): 129-56.
Jilke, S. (2018). Citizen satisfaction under changing political leadership: The role of partisan motivated reasoning. Governance, Vol. 31: 515– 533.
Bisgaard, M. (2019). How Getting the Facts Right Can Fuel Partisan‐Motivated Reasoning. American Journal of Political Science, Vol. 63: 824-839.
Online content
News articles:
Adrian Bardon’s article in The Conversation – ‘Coronavirus responses highlight how humans are hardwired to dismiss facts that don’t fit their worldview.’ (25.06.2020).
Trey Malone’s article in The Conversation – ‘Gluten-sensitive liberals? Investigating the stereotype suggests food fads unite us all.’ (22.11.2019).
Podcasts:
Julie Beck’s podcast for The Atlantic – ‘This Article Won’t Change Your Mind.’ Available here.
The Thinking Clearly podcast series on critical thinking. In particular, episode 17 (‘Motivated Reasoning and Related Topics with Professor Peter Ditto’) and episode 42 (‘False Beliefs in our Democracy-How they Spread and Persist-with Guest Cailin O'Connor’). Available here.